On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:25 AM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:
No, it really isn't a legitimate concern. It
wasn't a legitimate concern
when the "AbuseFilter" was enabled and every user had a public "abuse
log".
And with that feature came the ability to tag edits. We now mark edits with
generally inflammatory remarks that are impossible to have removed. Naming
wasn't a concern when file description pages were all prefixed with
"Image:". It wasn't a concern when RevDelete was enabled (first for
oversighters, then for everyone else). RevDelete doesn't apply to just
revisions, and the user rights associated with it could not have been more
confusingly named if someone had tried deliberately.
Contradiction aside, I think that what you've proven here is that
under no circumstances should any engineer be permitted to name
anything. We should institute this as a rule in Wikimedia development
in general.
--
Andrew Garrett
http://werdn.us/