On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Ken Arromdee <arromdee(a)rahul.net> wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
It seems that, under the guise of this project,
some people are
intentionally writing very low quality articles and then rules-lawyering
over the specific speedy deletion category names:
I'd argue that tagging something for speedy deletion when it doesn't
actually
fit the criteria is itself a form of rules lawyering.
Actually, it's the other way around. Deliberately writing a bad article that
should be deleted, but doesn't technically fit the CSD due to some loophole,
sounds like the definition of disruption to make a point. I'd have to see a
test case to say that for sure.
- causa sui
- causa sui