On 10/19/06, Matt R matt_crypto@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
--- "Alphax (Wikipedia email)" alphasigmax@gmail.com wrote:
Matt R wrote:
--- "Alphax (Wikipedia email)" alphasigmax@gmail.com wrote:
And the other /other/ take-home message is that if you're going to revert someone, and they revert back, discuss it with them! I'm sick
and
tired of finding user accounts with many many contributions which
were
all reverted as "vandalism", and yet there is nothing on their talk
page.
Discussing is good practice in most situations, but I think in this
type of
instance the onus is on the blanker to provide some reason. If a new
user
blanks an article without explanation, the odds are overwhelming that
it's
vandalism (or a test, or whatever). Just revert; it's simply not worth
the
time
to drop a note with such odds. Moreover, it's very likely is that
someone
with
a genuine reason to blank the article will communicate his reason very
shortly
thereafter (did that happen in this case?)
If by "send a private email to the contact address of last resort" you mean "communicate their reason", well, yeah. Not the most effective method, though; it would have been far better if the person who reverted had left a simple {{blanking}} on their talk page:
Even better, of course, would have been for the person to have used (say) the edit summary box to give some indication of why they were blanking an encyclopedia article. I really do feel that the onus is on them to give some reason for their drastic action, which is otherwise indistinguishable from hundreds of similar acts of vandalism a day.
Yes, because every new user can instantly find without any trouble at all every one of our miscellaneous and contradictory policies, procedures, and history on every bit of trivial drama that's ever occurred on Wikipedia, and know exactly what they should be doing and how to go about doing it.
You do realize how completely stupid you sound, right?
This is a textbook example of watching wikipedians ignore AGF and not bother to communicate with someone. I suggested all new accounts should receive the welcome message planted on the new username's talk page, rather than waiting for another editor to do it and I mean it.
For chrissakes, people, we need to give new editors the tools and information and make it EASIER for them to join in. Instead, what do we do? We have a bunch of semi-secret policies and procedures hiding everywhere, we speak in code, half the supposed "policies" are just something some boob with no life came up with in order to justify his powers anyways, our dispute resolution system is a joke, and AGF has been thrown down the shitter in favor of Admins Rule All.