On 4/20/06, jkelly@fas.harvard.edu jkelly@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
"Delerium",
In regards to:
[Erik] didn't revert Danny's edits or wheel war. Danny stubbed and protected the page; Erik noted that he was willing to give Danny the benefit of the doubt on stubbing, but that the protection was contrary to the protection policy (a correct observation), so unprotected the page but left it stubbed. It is quite acceptable and even encouraged to unprotect pages that have been inappropriately protected.
While we're engaging in this critique of Danny's response, it might make sense to ask whether or not Danny, and the other office people, are aware that there exists some large segment of the admin population who regard it as routine to undo other admin actions without discussion because they were "out of process", or "obviously wrong", or whatever. Can we imagine the possibility that some people might interpret that as inexplicable, or even hostile, interference, if they aren't used to this?
Jkelly
You are suggesting that there are admins on wikipedia who are not aware that stuff done on wikipedia may be undone?
-- geni