[WikiEN-l] Reliable sources— some of these babies are ugly

[stevertigo]

Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Well, I was keeping various things in mind. In our very own inane
> jargon, WP:BOLD is qualified by "Often it is easier to see that
> something is not right rather than to know exactly what /would/ be
> right", which is something of a plea for measured responses, and WP:BRD
> with "In a way, you're actively provoking another person with an edit
> they may (strongly) disagree on [...]". I actually don't see that the
> issue under discussion is a new type of issue. There is a new type of
> context, which is what I hoped to be addressing.

BRD: Read "mitgated but still adversarial editing cycle" (see
[[WP:PX]] bottom entry). As much as I agree with the issue, Jimbo's
BOLD action appears to have been a shock to the systems of a great
number of people who had all this time thought that seriously bold
actions required consensus-first. Wikimedia.

Hopefully Jimbo will soon write up his views as a formal argument and
then in discussion we can weigh their validity. Just how arguments are
weighed afterward is the interesting "context" as you put it.

-SC