On 6/22/06, Andrew Gray <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I sound like I'm attacking a strawman here, but I
honestly
don't think I've seen a good reason why people think this tool is
dangerous. Please, someone, give me a scenario where this could be
used badly, where the ability to expunge deleted revisions is somehow
harmful in a way that a public log would prevent...
Person A vandalizes a biographical article, replacing believable
claims to notability with unbelievable ones. Person B, not realizing
that the article was vandalized, lists it for deletion. Person C
reverts the vandalism. Person A's edit is vanished.
At this point, to anyone looking through the article history, it
appears that person B is attacking the subject of the article, trying
to get that article deleted.
--
Mark
[[User:Carnildo]]