daniwo59@aol.com wrote:

I still contend that we should not just be randomly removing material that isnt sourced. We should not be working on the assumption that the material is inaccurate. Rather than removing material, ask for sources or find people to help source it. I want us to start with the assumption that the material is good, unless proven otherwise, not that it is bad, unless proven good. Just removing people's good-faith edits is not improving wikipedia either.

Is it possible for you to include some kind of distinguishing feature between your email and the email you are replying to? This makes it easier to tell the two apart. Also, your emails do not appear to be including the In-Reply-To header, which is used in my email client to thread messages (which means your messages appear to be a new thread). Is it possible for you to fix this?

I'm not randomly removing material - it's only material which I do not think is necessarily correct or is inaccurate (and therefore should not be in the article). I make a habit of asking the person who added it to cite a source for their claims.

I disagree that removing good-faith edits is not improving Wikipedia. Removing good-faith edits which are obviously wrong and are due to ignorance on the behalf of the person who added them is improving Wikipedia, because inaccurate material is being removed. We should be more concerned about removing good edits than good-faith edits.

Chris