User:Flatcurve: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
[[User:Flatcurve|Flatcurve]] ([[User talk:Flatcurve|talk]]) 21:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC) |
[[User:Flatcurve|Flatcurve]] ([[User talk:Flatcurve|talk]]) 21:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC) |
||
== [[Vandalism]] == |
|||
''Taken from the Wikipedia page on [[Vandalism]]:'' |
|||
<blockquote> |
|||
Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not [[vandalism]]. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not considered [[vandalism]]. For example, adding a personal opinion to an article once is not [[vandalism]] — it's just not helpful, and should be removed or restated. Not all [[vandalism]] is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes [[vandalism]]. Careful attention needs to be given to whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well intended, or outright [[vandalism]]. |
|||
</blockquote> |
|||
So I ask you, oh wise one from Oxford, is a misguided decision to revert a redirect still considered tantamount to vandalism? It was an honest mistake and you saw fit to sling accusations of misdeeds. You'll never become an admin that way. [[User:Flatcurve|Flatcurve]] ([[User talk:Flatcurve|talk]]) 23:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 23:30, 25 July 2008
Boners
This user totally wants to make his entire life about Wikipedia because he has nothing better to contribute to society.
Flatcurve (talk) 21:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Taken from the Wikipedia page on Vandalism:
Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not considered vandalism. For example, adding a personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism — it's just not helpful, and should be removed or restated. Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism. Careful attention needs to be given to whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well intended, or outright vandalism.
So I ask you, oh wise one from Oxford, is a misguided decision to revert a redirect still considered tantamount to vandalism? It was an honest mistake and you saw fit to sling accusations of misdeeds. You'll never become an admin that way. Flatcurve (talk) 23:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)