On 7/18/07, Ken Arromdee <arromdee(a)rahul.net> wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, John Lee wrote:
Yep. My main fear is that this process becomes a
haven for goldfarmers
who
want to rack up their edit/delete/tag count
without reading the
articles.
The last thing we ought to be encouraging is a
templated mechanical
process
that does not look at the individual
circumstances of every article.
I knew I should have waited a few posts before making sarcastic
comparisons to
the deletion of spoiler warnings.
You're assuming I supported the mechanical process of mass spoiler warning
removals. I think spoiler warnings are a bad idea, but I recognise that
their usefulness depends on the circumstances.
As an aside, your sarcastic comparisons may be misplaced considering that if
you dispute the removal of a spoiler warning, you can add it back, while
undoing deletions (without causing a wheel war/desysopings) is a
significantly harder and lengthier process.
Johnleemk