| Revision as of 01:11, 28 December 2004 editDori (talk | contribs)9,615 edits →Was this vandalism?← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:55, 28 December 2004 edit undoTa bu shi da yu (talk | contribs)32,902 edits →Was this vandalism?Next edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| :It's not vandalism IMO, but it is against the 3RR ] | ] 01:11, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC) | :It's not vandalism IMO, but it is against the 3RR ] | ] 01:11, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC) | ||
| :I think the gesture was very nice, but I also think that they need to be told (gently) that breaking the 3RR is definitely frowned upon, and that we try to keep the templates to a minimum because there is not much real estate on the front page. I don't think it was vandalism. - ] 02:55, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:55, 28 December 2004
A vandal is a person who deliberately damages property, information etc. Vandalism is the act of damaging the property, information etc.
Was this vandalism?
Template:WikipediaSister, including on the Main Page, was recently editted to include a Christmas message/advert for a project. While the person that did it could claim the be bold rule I think that the lack of discussion and repeated reversion could be seen as a kind of vandalism. Yes, it was quite appropriate but, at least in it's rather ugly form, it should not have been done. I can see both sides of the argument - anyone got any views? violet/riga (t) 14:36, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I think the gesture was very nice, but I also think that they need to be told (gently) that breaking the 3RR is definitely frowned upon, and that we try to keep the templates to a minimum because there is not much real estate on the front page. I don't think it was vandalism. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:55, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)