David Gerard wrote: > 2009/3/4 KillerChihuahua <pu...@killerchihuahua.com>: > > >> I cannot stress enough how strongly I agree with this assessment. If >> NPOV, V, and RS were followed - as they should be by normally >> intelligent adults wishing to write good articles - BLP isn't even >> needed at all. I support BLP existing, although I've seen it misused a >> good bit - but IMO it wouldn't hurt a bit if someone IAR'd and gutted a >> lot of the other policies that have grown up like weeds over the last >> couple of years. More will only make matters worse. >> > > > Not quite - the important difference with BLPs is that we cannot be > eventualist (start with an awful article and let it improve with time) > - we do not have the luxury of eventualism. With BLPs, we must be > immediatist - we must not have a live version that violates the > content rules. > > > - d. > Quite right - I should have been more clear on that. -kc-
_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
