Through ignorance, through weakness, through its own deliberate fault...? ;)
Interestingly enough, though, Blacketer wasn't the one who removed the "consistency" comment he was the one who added it in the first place. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Cameron&diff=242271726&oldi d=242266826 The DM allege that he "tried to remove a reference to the Tories having a 'consistent' lead in the polls." In actual fact, he merely replaced it with a more relevant one and you'll never guess which news outlet it was that he cited. Make what you will of Blacketer's account juggling, but to my mind there isn't even a case for arguing non-neutral editing here. To borrow WP:COI, I can hardly see that advancing outside interests was more important than advancing the aims of Wikipedia in this case. But hey, caveat lector, right..? H On 08 June 2009 at 13:41, FT2 [[email protected]] wrote: > To be fair on that last point, they hear we "resolve disputes" and > they know there are hundreds of disputes a week. They just don't > have the awareness AC doesn't solve 99% of them :) > > FT2 _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
