1,516
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 10:
Line 10: + +
Debate:Does altering the record of debate in a wiki 'Encyclopedia' render the entire thing a farce? (view source)
Revision as of 15:38, June 13, 2008
, 15:38, June 13, 2008→Yes
::Yes, deleting comments, editing comments after posting them, and removing whole sections is disingenuous. Debates are meant to bring out different view points and everything needs to be displayed to accurately allow other users to decide who to side with. When you start editing history, key points can be left out or forgotten. And, to the annoyance of some editors here who pull out the "talk page is a castle" line, when debates are deleted, topics are brought up multiple times because there's no record of them already happening. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 16:02, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
::Yes, deleting comments, editing comments after posting them, and removing whole sections is disingenuous. Debates are meant to bring out different view points and everything needs to be displayed to accurately allow other users to decide who to side with. When you start editing history, key points can be left out or forgotten. And, to the annoyance of some editors here who pull out the "talk page is a castle" line, when debates are deleted, topics are brought up multiple times because there's no record of them already happening. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 16:02, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
:::If it's wrong, why are there numerous instances in any given week of Sysops editing out comments on article Talk pages based on them being "nonsense", "liberal fluff" or "talk pollution", when the only problem with the content is that the deleting person didn't like it. Delete vandalism, sure, but I can easily produce a list of recent incidences where comments that don't support the conservative viewpoint were removed from talk pages because they hit the mark a little too well, and were censored instead of being refuted. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 11:38, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
==No==
==No==