There WAS an attack, Stan. Did you miss it?.
It was a unilaterial, sustained, and deliberate attempt to flout the naming conventions that we have already discussed and agreed on long since. One particular "contributor" (who, needless to add, has no known track record of adding to the fauna articles) went on a one-man revert rampage, even stooping to cut & paste page moves. This went on for several hours and succeeded only in wasting a great deal of the time of genuine contributors. (Not just me.) It took the combined efforts of several Wikipedians to restore the sometimes quite ugly hacks.
We have long since decided on naming conventions for birds and mammals. The question is what are we doing with reptiles, fish, and other taxa? The sooner that is decided on, the sooner we can stop wasting time on jaw-jaw and get on with improving the 'pedia without distraction and without fear of having to re-do masses of stuff.
And without a repetition of Monday's vandalisim, I trust.
Tannin
On 6/4/03 2:39 PM, "Tony Wilson" list@redhill.net.au wrote:
There WAS an attack, Stan. Did you miss it?.
It was a unilaterial, sustained, and deliberate attempt to flout the naming conventions that we have already discussed and agreed on long since. One particular "contributor" (who, needless to add, has no known track record of adding to the fauna articles) went on a one-man revert rampage, even stooping to cut & paste page moves. This went on for several hours and succeeded only in wasting a great deal of the time of genuine contributors. (Not just me.) It took the combined efforts of several Wikipedians to restore the sometimes quite ugly hacks.
We have long since decided on naming conventions for birds and mammals. The question is what are we doing with reptiles, fish, and other taxa? The sooner that is decided on, the sooner we can stop wasting time on jaw-jaw and get on with improving the 'pedia without distraction and without fear of having to re-do masses of stuff.
Hooray! Thank goodness for your decisive command and warm attitude.
Tony Wilson wrote:
There WAS an attack, Stan. Did you miss it?.
I wouldn't call changing a bunch of articles an attack, unless the edit summary said something "fix egregious mistakes by Tannin the idiot" or something like that. All I see in, say, [[Panda]] is "correcting capitals" which to me sounds like honest disagreement.
Now I don't think that what Eclecticology did was very smart; it would have been better to fill up talk pages with whining until you screamed for mercy and gave in. :-) As they say, "never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity". (Not that I'm saying Eclectocology is stupid in general, far from it, but the collective IQ of Wikipedia editors is much higher than any of us can muster individually, which is why we prefer to work together instead of at odds.)
Stan