On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Ken Arromdee <arromdee(a)rahul.net> wrote:
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.
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.
It is, however, a rationale heard from David Gerard.
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/htdig/wikien-l/2007-December/087538.html
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
We already do have in a way quality warnings, all the editorial
warnings at the top of articles in a way say this article is still in
progress. (those that say more sources needed, copyedit needed, etc).
We also rank articles by "quality" when wikiprojects do their article
classes. In theory an "A" class article is better then a "B" class
article, etc.