I was just reviewing VfU and the main thrust of Anthony's reason for posting a whole list of things there was because he couldn't see what had been deleted/couldn't transfer it his fork.
Things might be more comfortable for all of us if we granted Anthony rights to view deleted articles. In practice this would mean giving Anthony admin rights and Anthony making a promise not to use them except for the purpose of viewing/copying deleted material (*). The promise could be enforced by the prospect of instant deadminship if breached.
It would seem to be the advantage of Anthony (who would be better equipped to make McFly what he wants to be) and those who don't like Anthony's behaviour on VfU (he wouldn't need to do it anymore).
Any cons?
Pete/Pcb21
(*) This of course assumes that a full RfAdminship would fail to gain consensus in this case. There is no doubt in my mind this would be the case.
Charles Matthews wrote:
Pete/Pcb21 wrote
.In practice this would mean giving Anthony admin rights ...
You joke, sir.
Well, an alternative way to accomplish the same thing would be a software change to either
a) create a separate class of user with power to view deleted articles, or b) allow all logged-in users to view deleted pages.
I don't like b) but I believe the user rights management system is being improved in 1.4, so a) might actually be no big deal.
However I do tend to look for solutions that don't require a software solution as they are frequently are a time bottlenock.
All admin decisions are logged and with the exception of image deletion easily reversible, so your fears may be misplaced.
Any cons?
IMHO the correct approach is to ignore him, here as elsewhere.
If we did this, there would be less for you to ignore :).
Charles
Pete
Charles Matthews wrote:
Pete/Pcb21 wrote
.In practice this would mean giving Anthony admin rights ...
You joke, sir.
Any cons?
IMHO the correct approach is to ignore him, here as elsewhere.
Anthony has argued his position calmly, coherently, and persuasively - and taken care to respect and fairly represent the other point of view in the process.
I agree with a large proportion of what he has said - and I find myself reassessing my own views on where the line should be for inclusion.
I'm not sure whether you are suggesting we should ignore Anthony because you have a personal dislike of him, or because you dislike his arguments - but either way it's a poor response that's not likely to help the discussion, or Wikipedia, in any way.
--sannse
sannse wrote
I'm not sure whether you are suggesting we should ignore Anthony because you have a personal dislike of him, or because you dislike his arguments
- but either way it's a poor response that's not likely to help the
discussion, or Wikipedia, in any way.
Oh, just adequate experience of those who seem to have time on their hands to quibble, as he does.
Charles