At 09:22 PM 11/27/03 +0100, Ralesk wrote:
Robert Graham Merkel wrote:
Hmmm. As I understood it, a ban was just that, a ban. No wiggle room. Doesn't that imply that any contributions from a banned individual should be deleted on the spot, and not reinstated? If people want to argue that a particular user should be unbanned, that's another issue.
I would personally consider that at least disturbing, but more like appalling, if, say, there was a contributor that /contributed/ some nice articles, say, to things related to early quantum physics, Wolfgang Pauli etc. on the, say, Hungarian wikipedia, but for other contributions that were inappropriate and the warnings about those being ignored they had got banned, then even the actually useful and worthwile articles would have to be deleted, just because the person is incapable of, say, keep themselves on the NPOV fence in regards of religion or something.
That would be disturbing, if it was our policy.
The actual policy is that if someone is banned--and that doesn't happen very often--anything they sneak onto the site *after the ban* will be reverted. Material contributed pre-ban is treated just like anything else on the Wikipedia: that is, it may be edited and rewritten, or left alone, depending on content and who happens to look at it.