On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:25 AM, MZMcBride z@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.