On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Gregory Maxwell <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 10:34 AM, stevertigo <[email protected]> wrote: >> Sounds like just more strategic deletionist excusism. There is no >> excuse for anyone giving to destruction a higher value than they do to >> creation. >> >> So now that things are wrapping up, don't forget to hand out some >> merit badges to the 'winners.' Ostensibly, there is a deletionist who >> stands out from the pack, for whom a specially branded Trout Award >> will do just fine. > > WereSpielChequers could have expressed his concerns a bit better here. > > It seems that, under the guise of this project, some people are > intentionally writing very low quality articles and then rules-lawyering > over the specific speedy deletion category names: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASeb_az86556&action=historysubmit&diff=325921044&oldid=325918976 > > There can be a fine line between probing the boundary of new user treatment > and a breaching experiment.
I disagree that this rose to the level of a breaching experiment. However - it was intended as an experiment, not a way to pick on individual new page patrollers. And ended up being perceived as the latter, rightly or wrongly. And that wasn't a good thing. The lessons and changes to flow out of this (I hope...) need to be structural and community, not individual and personal and inquisitorial. -- -george william herbert [email protected] _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
