[Wikipedia-l] Re: Re: Careless image deletion : a minor outrage

[Gerard Meijssen]

Alfio Puglisi wrote:

>To make #2 work, you need to have two separate deletion tools: one for
>legally-required deletion, and one for generic deletion.
>
>Alfio
>
>On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Mark Williamson wrote:
>
>  
>
Hoi,
Given the amount of work that is in need of doing, I think it is a waste 
of time to discuss it further. When something needs deleling and it is, 
creating a backdoor to see it anyway is for  normal use not necessary. 
Creating two methods violates the KISS principle.

Thanks,
    GerardM

>>Please reread #2.
>>
>>
>>On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:48:06 +0800, Andrew Lih <andrew.lih at gmail.com> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:02:22 -0700, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>1) Since this is a technical issue (isn't it?) shouldn't it have been
>>>>put up for a vote on meta rather than en:?
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Not really a technical issue. The most prominent of the "no" votes
>>>cited legal issues. Anthere put it best:
>>>
>>>"Many of the articles deleted are deleted for a very good reason. Some
>>>because they are copyright violations or libel. These must stay non
>>>visible for obvious legal reasons."
>>>
>>>-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)
>>>