| Revision as of 21:48, 3 June 2006 editTrödel (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers21,484 edits reply re intro← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:43, 4 June 2006 edit undoChuck Marean (talk | contribs)3,882 edits →reply from Chuck MareanNext edit → | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| :The bots are absolutely necessary - the vandalism was so much worse before they were in use - and the edits per day has about doubled. <font color="#06C">]</font> 21:48, 3 June 2006 (UTC) | :The bots are absolutely necessary - the vandalism was so much worse before they were in use - and the edits per day has about doubled. <font color="#06C">]</font> 21:48, 3 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| It seems to me users tend to select-all-delete when they start using a sandbox, so it seems | |||
| to me the directions should be on a totally separate page than the sandbox itself. This would | |||
| be more in the spirit of Misplaced Pages as I understand it. After all, any valid edit would be felt by any author to be vandalism.--] 17:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:43, 4 June 2006
Messages
reply from Chuck Marean
Well, it does mention sandbox. That's true. However, computers can't read so those bots seem to be a bad idea.--Chuck Marean 01:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC) User talk
- The bots are absolutely necessary - the vandalism was so much worse before they were in use - and the edits per day has about doubled. Trödel 21:48, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me users tend to select-all-delete when they start using a sandbox, so it seems to me the directions should be on a totally separate page than the sandbox itself. This would be more in the spirit of Misplaced Pages as I understand it. After all, any valid edit would be felt by any author to be vandalism.--Chuck Marean 17:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)