Please go meta, folks. I am not trying to argue about this specific Wiki article.
If you have more examples of such one-sided reversion that can make us think there’s a wider, deeper or more extensive problem here than a single reverted edit, then you ought give us those further examples.
If not, if what happened with this article is the only thing that motivates your complaint, and the only example you have for wrongdoing—then you most definitely should be arguing about this specific Wiki article, and not trying to make the issue into something bigger than it is.
The Wiki main page says, “The wiki about rationality that anyone who is logged in can edit”.
The Wiki’s User Guide also says “please think carefully before making the summaries longer” and also “The default workflow for putting content on this wiki is as follows
Idea for posting → write post on the blog
Notice something generally accepted on LW without a wiki page → write wiki page ”
Apparently that is a lie.
From a single reverted article into accusations of villainy. I’m rather losing interest now.
If you have more examples of such one-sided reversion that can make us think there’s a wider, deeper or more extensive problem here than a single reverted edit, then you ought give us those further examples.
If not, if what happened with this article is the only thing that motivates your complaint, and the only example you have for wrongdoing—then you most definitely should be arguing about this specific Wiki article, and not trying to make the issue into something bigger than it is.
The Wiki’s User Guide also says “please think carefully before making the summaries longer” and also “The default workflow for putting content on this wiki is as follows
Idea for posting → write post on the blog
Notice something generally accepted on LW without a wiki page → write wiki page ”
From a single reverted article into accusations of villainy. I’m rather losing interest now.