On 10/12/05, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote: I feel exactly the same: I've monitored RC patrollers and doing that only gave me more confidence in their general ability to good judgements. While I wouldn't wish to criticise these essential front-liners, perhaps guidance is in order (and this takes us right back to my original proposal). Usually the RC patrollers are the first to notice a new editor, especially an unusual one. I regret using the A-word. It was ill-judged and surely gave needless offence. But there are people who show competence, skill, willingness, courtesy, charm and everything else we'd expect of a good Wikipedia editor, who nevertheless don't respond with quite the immediate comprehension and conformity that is appropriate when a dozen or so people come to them with precisely the same reasonable complaint--even where reluctance is shown, and defensiveness, this is all part of a well worn game the rules of which most of us know: a token resistance, a complaint or two, and then conformity. There are people who don't untuit those rules, they have to simulate that processing with their cognitive functions, which are sometimes quite formidable but don't process information as quickly or as reliably as instinctive thought. Their behavior may sometimes seem inappropriate. And, as you say, there are articles that get deleted for no other reason than the first person who encounters them thinks a single sentence cannot possibly convey meaningful information. Poppycock. RC patrol needs guidance. This is the sharp end, not only in the fight to keep the wiki healthy, but in recruiting the new editors who will take our place when we move on to other things. We must expend thought on coming up with guidelines, or etiquette, for greeting new editors. Seat-of-pants methods have perhaps outlived their usefulness.