[WikiEN-l] A narrower concept of boldness

[Ray Saintonge]

Tony Sidaway wrote:

>On 6/7/07, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>Be bold has always been about articles right back to the first edits
>>in the recorded history.
>>    
>>
>That simply isn't true.  You cited the earliest version on the talk
>page and even that referred to "be bold in updating pages".  There is
>a lot of sense to saying "be bold, but don't be reckless" and then
>explaining how important it is to get template edits right.
>
>Ironically the only effect of this artificial distinction  is that old
>timers like us will buzz around just editing policy pages, templates,
>process pages and whatnot whenever we see something that needs to be
>fixed, and the poor newbies will be left sitting around scratching
>their heads and wondering why we're allowed to get away with it.
>Spreading that kind of ignorance really wouldn't be good for
>Wikipedia.
>
There are a lot of old timers that don't spend a lot of time writing aor 
editing policies.  They don't have time to deal with the mind fucking 
experience of arguing with policy hawks.  The practical approach for 
them is to wait until they are personally affected by the policy in 
question before participating in the discussion.

Ec