5 ms·
How can it be considered not arcane when it contains gems like "Wikipedia:Be bold" and "Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point". In other wor
by yongjik 8y ago
How can it be considered not arcane when it contains gems like "Wikipedia:Be bold" and "Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point".
In other words, when I'm skirting a rule, I'm "being bold". When you claim your edit did not violate some rule any more than my edit did, you're "disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point".
If these issues are resolved by reasonable folks, it may still work, but Wikipedia is not a democracy and issues are frequently not resolved by reasonable folks.
- cooper12 8y agoWhat is nuance and actually reading what these titles say? It's all written out for you and there's no contradiction. Also, no one actually uses the disrupt point like that.
- hexane360 8y ago>It's all written out for you >no one actually uses the disrupt point like that. You're using institutional knowledge here, not something that's obvious straight from the text. This is exactly the point GP is making.
- cooper12 8y agoNope, I'm saying they fabricated their own scenario that none of the documentation actually backs up. Maybe you should read it too.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]