From: William Pietri <william(a)scissor.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] A narrower concept of boldness
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 08:53:59 -0700
David Goodman wrote:
As for BOLD, I have never seen it cited for good
ends; most good
editing doesn't need it. [...] Personally I'd rather
remove it from the guidelines altogether [...]
I think its failures are loud but its successes quiet. It was very
important to me starting out, and I use it a lot in encouraging
non-participants to join us. Coming across this giant enterprise, it's
easy for cautious or shy people to not make changes or to just make
quiet suggestions on the talk page. We want those people to just jump in
and participate, even though it's scary for them.
Of course, the [[Dunning-Kruger effect]] means that [[WP:BOLD]] will
never be an unmixed good.
William
BOLD is completely necessary.I'm always amazed how many people get stuck in
a mentality of "Must...discuss...everything...on..talk page...before...I fix
the grammar". I rather feel like wanting to block them for a couple of hours
with the block summary "It's a wiki, damnit"...but that would probably be
excessively bold.
Moreschi
_________________________________________________________________
Win tickets to the sold out Live Earth concert!