Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote: <snip>
Is vandalism a significant problem on Wikipdeia? Yes. Is reversion of valid blanking by accounts newly registered to fix a problem, but without the knowledge to comment, request help elsewhere, or include an edit summary, a significant problem on Wikipedia? We have, to date, one example. Let's try to maintain a sense of proportion, shall we?
"We have, to date, one example".
We have, /that we can remember/, one example. How many other examples have been raised in the past, nobody can remember. How many other incidences there have been, nobody knows. I somewhat suspect that none of the current admins care, either, because they're all too busy making themselves feel big and important and patting each other on the back for making the most mouse-button-clicks in an hour. Never mind the actual intent, it's the number of button clicks that count!
Bear in mind that I actually take the time to userfy egregious vanity from single purpose accounts if the username matches the subject, because in the end newbies *do* matter, but demanding that every vandalism edit be accompanied by the planting of a shrubbery on the user's Talk page does not seem to be based on any realistic assessment of the problem.
You make it sound like we're asking you to chop down the tallest tree in the forest with a herring. We're not. We're asking you to use a little bit of Common Sense. How on earth is someone meant to defend themselves if they don't even know the crime that they've been charged with? How on earth is a newbie meant to learn that there are certain things they're not supposed to be doing something if nobody ever tells them?