User:Geofferybard/Vandalism is a bad word

VISITOR INPUT WELCOME: Generally the preferred etiquette would be to comment here corrected link to follow inline edits, if that is easier, are ok if not combative, and I suggest making them bold or alternate color. Bard गीता 22:51, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

DISCLAIMER
 DRAFT 

This essay is not intended as policy. It will be parse to remove any potential copyviols if applicable. I gratefully acknowledge those wikipedians who have developed the basics upon which this essay is based. Bard गीता 23:01, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Preface: Why the term "vandalism" should be replaced
The vandals were a tribe which corresponds to some European ethnic groups. They were in conflict with Rome and since Rome has written much of recorded history its' interpretation predominates in the literature. The vandals were, however, a tribe with a history and a righteousness of its own which is presented in an unfair light by applying the name of that tribe to a criminal act. There is a reflection of the bias of Roman authority and Roman worldview. Furthermore, a more scientific basis is established by modifying the term into something more reflective of a dispassionate analysis.

Proposed alternative terms
This essay discusses alternative terms. The list of terms discussed follows:
 * Intentional Malicious Editing (IME)
 * Intentional Editing Destructiveness (IED).

== Pro and con of first alternative: IME

There may on some wikis in some places at some times also be IED conducted by persons with administrative privilege, which would be classified as IAD, Intentional Administrative Destructiveness. Some former wikipedians allege that they have been harassed and such instances may involve IAD. This essay is restricted to the broader question of IED.

Proposed new terminology: Intentional malicious editing
I have observed quite a bit of administrative activity that was distorted by POV or by highly ambitious goals coupled with callous disregard for other people's views and feelings.