Bryan Derksen wrote:
geni wrote:
/Temp exists for such purposes. Outright blanking is pretty much garenteeded to be reverted.
Weird, I agreed with everything Geni just wrote. :) Requiring an article to be rewritten from the ground up when there's nothing actually _wrong_ with it, or at least nothing that a little editing can't fix, is silly.
And I agree with you.
Ideally neither, of course - if the subject is tossing about legal threats and such a temporary blanking might be in order while that gets sorted out (_not_ temporary deletion - deletion is not a good way to "store" material out of sight for later use, as I've ranted about previously). But it must be dealt with in a timely manner and explained thoroughly and transparently to the people working on the article itself. A while back I restored Harlan Ellison's article several months after Jimbo had blanked it because there'd been no indication of any work being done on the dispute with Ellison since that time, not even after I asked for an update on Jimbo's talk page. I don't think it'd be appropriate to block me for taking such action today.
Agreed completely.
The best thing to happen upon _any_ WP:OFFICE action is a quick swarm of good editors, particularly those with no prior interest in the subject. That hasn't always happened in the past, partly because there was no obvious WP:OFFICE tag/template to draw people's attention to it.
--Jimbo