By saying Only 91 edits. This is first to this namespace I was attempting to
insert fact without opinion.
On 5/2/06, Joe Anderson <computerjoe.mailinglist(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
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(a)gawab.com> wrote:
Kelly Martin wrote:
On 5/2/06, Joe Anderson
<computerjoe.mailinglist(a)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"?
Kelly
What if what Joe took "cruft" to mean what you just said? After all,
isn't that what it *does* mean? Why the stigmatism?
John
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--
Joe Anderson
[[User:Computerjoe]] on en, fr, de, simple, Meta and Commons.
--
Joe Anderson
[[User:Computerjoe]] on en, fr, de, simple, Meta and Commons.