Talk:Majid Khan v. George W. Bush

explanation
Another contributor redirected this article to the Majid Khan (Guantanamo captive 10020). They left the following edit summary: redirecting to article on petitioner--this article was just general context already provided therein, and a list of mundane court filings lacking any context or secondary source analysis

I know there is a WP:BOLD. But it seems to me some volunteers interpret it too broadly. I've added some additional material, which I believe addresses the quality control volunteers concerns. But I can't help wondering whether the overall benefit of the project would be best served by a greater willingness to be collegial, and discuss concerns, prior to editing.

I can't remember when I read WP:BOLD. I think it would have been in my first 1000 edits, sometime in my first six months. At the time I thought it was addressed at complete newbies, potential contributors less experienced than I was then, to give them the courage to make their first couple of contributions.

I've read the Bold, revert, discuss essay. I don't agree with it. It seemed to me that the advice in that essay was ill-advised -- likely to trigger animosity, and possibly a temptation to engage in edit warring.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 10:40, 21 October 2009 (UTC)