I see what you are saying now, and I agree. Asking every editor to check every article to that level of detail is not feasible. The amount of checking done should be determined by the reason for the edit. Still, even if you spot a typo and go and correct it, I would still check you aren't helping to "legitimise" a previous run of vandalism edits. Always worth checking the recent history no matter what edit you are making.

Carcharoth

On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 2:34 AM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:

Of course I agree with you Carcharoth.  When you revert vandalism, you should make sure you're not reverting to previous vandalism.

But what was asked was "what if you are reverting to *incorrect* information".  That's not the same as reverting vandalism.  We cannot expect each vandalism reverter to know whether George Bush was born in Texas or Maine.

Simple vandalism is one thing.  Reverting to "This drug is used to treat diabetes" is a quite different animal.  I'm sure you would agree.

If we expect *each and every* vandal reverter to suddenly also be an expert in that article, than we're going to be facing a big problem.  There simply aren't that many experts to handle the vandals.  I hope you can see this point.

Will Johnson

---

An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221322948x1201367184/aol?redir=http...; bcd=MayExcfooterNO62) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l