Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/PMWed, 17 Dec 2008 22:14:44 +00002008-12-17T22:14:44+00:001014vUTC 39

False edit summary?
Dan Geist (User:DCGeist) would like me to apologize for calling "rv test(?), baseless alteration" at WP:NFCC a false edit summary. His deletion was the same deletion he made 3 times previously in a little more than 24 hours, and the text he deleted is some text that has been present most of the time since July 2007, and even during the few months that that text hasn't been present, people have followed it at IFD largely without noticing that it was missing. Can long-standing text be considered a "test"? His edit came one minute after "Blathnaid (Talk | contribs | block) (Undid revision 258633878 by 77.28.163.49 (talk) -- Text removed without a reason)"; wouldn't a reasonable person think that a "test" referred to the speculative edit, rather than to the established text?

I don't blame Dan for thinking I'm trying to punch him in the nose here, but that really isn't my intent; the result I really would like to see is that he not get blocked. Talking things out would be good; page protection would be less good, but I'm about to ask for advice over at WP:AN, and I'll consider it. Either of those options would be a lot better than blocking Dan Geist just to try to keep some reasonable (but not oppressive) stability on a policy page. I just want people to talk about why the contested phrase is or isn't a good idea, rather than giving us endless variations on the phrase "I have consensus". As some of you know, a lot was said on this topic in April and also back in the summer of 2007; we don't need to see every word, but if Dan or anyone else would like to change the text, a summary of the argument would be preferable to 4 deletions in a little over 24 hours. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 21:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)