[WikiEN-l] A narrower concept of boldness

[Ray Saintonge]

Mark Gallagher wrote:

>"Be bold!" was written for that newbie, and that user.  In the world of 
>our friend, and other editors who would interfere with WP:BOLD, it is 
>more difficult for a Broken Telephone process wonk to pass through the 
>eye of a needle than for a helpful newbie to summon up the courage to 
>improve our encyclopaedia.  That's a grim world, and I want no part of it.
>
>"Be bold!" is a worthy, nay sacred, guideline, and it is not to be 
>trifled or tampered with.  Shame be upon those who would ignore it, 
>twist it, misuse it, dilute it, ruin it, in the name of improving our 
>encyclopaedia!
>
Well said.  The most recent interchange about WP:BOLD left me 
concerned.  Somehow we have drifted from "Be bold," to "Be bold in 
editing," to "Be bold in editing articles."

While the first migration may have had some sense to it, the second one 
takes it too far.  Policies relating to blocking people or taking other 
quasi-disciplinary steps may very well follow from the "Code-of-conduct" 
pillar; they are not about editing.  "Be bold" derives from the no firm 
rules pillar.  I take exception to the limitation that would restrict 
being bold on templates or categories.

I do recognize that some caution may be needed when editing templates; 
changes to templates can be just as damaging as the templates 
themselves.  Most of these have attained a level of geekishness that 
make them incomprehensible to normal people.  But when that complexity 
is used as a tool to establish an unchangeable vision then it has gone 
beyond what we are trying to do.  It makes a certain Point of View 
implicit.  When that happens there is all the more reason to be bold in 
editing the template.

Restricting boldness in categories is even less warranted.  Lumping 
categories in the same breath with templates appears to give them a 
technical aura beyond their reality.  How one person categorizes things 
is as reflective of that person's world view as the way he edits.  Being 
bold here is warranted, because it allows us to make new connections 
beween ideas.  It is misleading to lump categories with templates. 
Categories are not likely to have the same technical consequences  as 
templates.

Ec