[Wikipedia-l] How would you deal with this problem?

[Ray Saintonge]

Larry Sanger wrote:

>Suppose I were to have written an article on something I know a little
>about, but which I am very far from being an expert--digital cameras, say.
>Then someone who were more of an expert were to came along and said,
>"Look, this article is totally garbage.  You didn't get half of the stuff
>right," and then replaced it with something that was better-informed, I'd
>like to think that I would totally understand.  Moreover, if the person
>took the time to go through, line by line, what was wrong with my article,
>I would probably be abjectly apologetic.
>
This is an interesting example.  In the main it expresses a logical 
approach to a situation, but it gets off the track in two respects.  The 
phrase "totally garbage" is unnecesary to the expert's critical comments 
even if he finds little of value in your contributions; there are many 
people whose sensitivities are such that they would see none of the 
posting after that phrase.  The second problem would lie in your feeling 
that you need to be "abjectly apologetic".  When you wrote about digital 
cameras in the first place, you, in good faith, produced the best 
article that you could under the circumstances; there's no cause for 
apology in that.

Eclecticology