On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Ian Woollard ian.wooll...@gmail.com wrote:
Another issue that admins are quite prone to (along with many seasoned
editors) is that they tend to get *really* overprotective of articles.
Very true, and I suspect most people will get all protective of an
article
Matthew Brown wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Ian Woollard
ian.wooll...@gmail.com wrote:
Another issue that admins are quite prone to (along with many
seasoned editors) is that they tend to get *really* overprotective
of articles.
Very true, and I suspect most people will get all
Matthew Brown wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Ian Woollard ian.wooll...@gmail.com wrote:
Another issue that admins are quite prone to (along with many seasoned
editors) is that they tend to get *really* overprotective of articles.
Very true, and I suspect most people will
Charles Matthews wrote:
Andrew Gray wrote:
Would it be useful at this point to have some idea of how other
projects do it? I know some have a normal deadminning process, but
I'm not sure how this works - do some have a request-based system,
some have regular reconfirmation, what?
Look again at those messages. The succeed in sounded cold, formal, and
sent by a computer without human intervention--which is just what
twinkle etc. make it so easy to do. They talk too much about
complicated rules, and they sound more defensive than helpful.
I almost never use them, except
Agree 100% with David (DGG) here. On the other hand, a careful
combination of templates with personalised messages can also work. See
this essay here for more on this type of approach:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ArielGold/Etiquette2
Carcharoth
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 7:47 PM, David
Carcharoth wrote:
Agree 100% with David (DGG) here. On the other hand, a careful
combination of templates with personalised messages can also work.
See
this essay here for more on this type of approach:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ArielGold/Etiquette2
I totally agree with this; it's
