We actuallyin practice have quite a high bar on such things. Can you find a
stable BLP article (ie one that has survived or would survive AFD) on a
"notable vandal of a major website"? Zero to very few. A number of "famous
for just being famous" AFD's are deleted, too.
FT2
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 5:52 AM, Ken Arromdee <arromdee(a)rahul.net> wrote:
> Misuse
doesnt get celebrated, no matter the nobility of its motive in
> the performance art world, by simply creating drama in its wake. Too
> abusable if so. (Article creation on a vandal if they manage to
> vandalize wp enough to get media comment, anyone?)
That sounds very much like applying special standards to protect us that
nobody else gets. An incident involving someone causing trouble somewhere
else will get an article in Wikipedia. We don't listen to complaints that
the incident should go unreported because reporting it encourages people to
cause trouble in other sites. Why, then, should we do this when it might
encourage people to cause trouble in Wikipedia?
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l