[WikiEN-l] Using Wikipedia unlikely to result in collapse of knowledge

[Thomas Dalton]

2008/10/7 Ken Arromdee <arromdee at rahul.net>:
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> > Is this the same David Gerard that not only spearheaded
>> > the drive but even personally removed spoiler warnings...
>> There is a big difference between a quality warning and a spoiler warning.
>
> Yeah, spoiler warnings are easy to delete by not-technically-but-pretty-much-
> automated methods.
>
> Wasn't one of the rationales for taking out spoiler warnings that it was
> original research to decide that something is a spoiler?  Wouldn't it be
> original research to determine something's quality too?

That's not a rationale I heard. Most people seemed to be arguing in
terms of it being unencyclopaedic. I think the key difference is that
a spoiler warning is permanent, a quality warning is temporary and
just shows that an article is a work-in-progress.