[WikiEN-l] And you thought Pokémon was trivial...

Sat Jun 24 02:19:22 UTC 2006

maru dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com> wrote:  On 6/23/06, Steve Bennett  wrote:
> This is where the divide seems to hit. Those who work in the
> Foundation Office, and receive complaints from the outside world, tend
> to have a harsher view of things, arguing that all unsourced
> statements about living people, for instance, should be immediately
> removed. Those who do a lot of editing without hearing from the
> outside world tend to find this position untenable and impractical.
> Worse, they (we?) tend to just ignore it, since the number of people
> advocating it is tiny, and they haven't really made much significant
> noise about it yet.
>
> I'm yet to see any meaningful common ground found between these
> positions, but I'm optimistic we can find a solution.
>
> Steve

>>There's plenty of common ground- this is an immediatist/eventualist
>>split, after all, and we all know that one day the Immediate moment
>>will have become the eventual. (In other words, as time passes and
>>articles improve, this issue will become less and less important until
>>it only makes sense in rare individual articles). ~maru

  That actually sounds feasible. I would advocate that spoilers be  removed from all articles save for ones that had not been fully  released to the public, such as a video game in development. I really  only think that's when it wouldn't be silly. - Zero 

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Next-gen email? Have it all with the  all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.