We actuallyin practice have quite a high bar on such things. Can you find a stable BLP article (ie one that has survived or would survive AFD) on a "notable vandal of a major website"? Zero to very few. A number of "famous for just being famous" AFD's are deleted, too.
FT2 On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 5:52 AM, Ken Arromdee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Misuse doesnt get celebrated, no matter the nobility of its motive in > > > the performance art world, by simply creating drama in its wake. Too > > > abusable if so. (Article creation on a vandal if they manage to > > > vandalize wp enough to get media comment, anyone?) > > That sounds very much like applying special standards to protect us that > nobody else gets. An incident involving someone causing trouble somewhere > else will get an article in Wikipedia. We don't listen to complaints that > the incident should go unreported because reporting it encourages people to > cause trouble in other sites. Why, then, should we do this when it might > encourage people to cause trouble in Wikipedia? > > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
