pcb21 at yahoo.com
Tue May 2 16:15:22 UTC 2006
Jargon such as "-cruft" and "nn" is not helpful for newbies.
I think what gets peoples backs up more than that is the sight of 7 or 8
people all writing the same thing (*'''Strong delete'''. NN listcruft ~~~~)
on nomination after nomination. We get the message after three, ok!
----- Original Message ----
From: Joe Anderson <computerjoe.mailinglist at googlemail.com>
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
Sent: Tuesday, 2 May, 2006 5:08:07 PM
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Cruft
John, Not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia due to limited scope of
interest is pretty much what I thought it meant.
On 5/2/06, John Lee <johnleemk at gawab.com> wrote:
> Kelly Martin wrote:
> >On 5/2/06, Joe Anderson <computerjoe.mailinglist at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>I accept that some may see it as uncivil, but I for one do not.
> >In my opinion calling content contributed in good faith by our valued
> >contributors "cruft" is incivil. It sends the clear message that
> >their contributions, and by extension themselves, are valueless. Why
> >can't you just say "Not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia due
> >to limited scope of interest"?
> What if what Joe took "cruft" to mean what you just said? After all,
> isn't that what it *does* mean? Why the stigmatism?
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
[[User:Computerjoe]] on en, fr, de, simple, Meta and Commons.
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
More information about the WikiEN-l