On 28/05/07, Daniel R. Tobias <dan(a)tobias.name>
wrote:
But, then, I've also developed some doubts
about your own judgment
given your activity on this list last week, when you developed out of
whole cloth an entirely bizarre interpretation of [[WP:BLP]] that
held that this policy could be used as a Harry-Potter-esque magical
incantation by any admin in order to take unilateral action that
would not be permitted to be questioned, debated, reversed, or
subjected to any sort of process or consensus save the unlikely
possibility of a full-blown ArbCom case. The fact that nothing in
the actual wording of the policy itself even hinted at this
interpretation didn't faze you one bit, though you later backed down
after a storm of controversy here.
What on earth? It's been practice since WP:BLP was instituted.
Of course it hasn't been. WP:BLP allows admins to ignore certain usual
rules, but it doesn't prohibit any sort of questioning or reversal of
those actions if other editors feel they were incorrect. If I go and
delete large sections of [[George W. Bush]] citing WP:BLP, then it does
not require a full-blown ArbCom case to reverse me.
-Mark