daniwo59(a)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