I can't see a reason why credit is taken away from voluntary helpers at this event... I'm sure these Residents invested a lot of time and work, so having their name on the page should be a way to say thank you. Removing them is... harsh... from my point of view. So I ask for a revert of the edit(s).
Greetz, Lynch (talk|contribs) 10:52, 6 August 2008 (PDT)
- This is the second time Everett Linden has made a "content removal" edit without utilising the edit summary field.1
- That edit was of course reverted,2 as the information removed was accurate and since Everett had not included a reason for the removal in the edit summary there did not appear to be any reason for the information to be removed.
- SignpostMarv Martin 14:59, 6 August 2008 (PDT)
- Edit summaries are good practice on potentially contraversial edits, as they speed up dispute resolution with regard to whether or not said controversial edit should be retained or reverted. Without an edit summary, it is generally assumed that if there is no (apparent) reason for an edit being made, that there is conversely no reason why a controversial edit should not be immediately reverted.
- With both Zai and myself being veterans of the Wikipedia, we are defaulting to the spirit of Wikipedia's Three-revert rule- though 3RR generally refers to "within a 24 hour period", in this case it refers to the same information being removed by the same person.
- There is also the fear of reprisals for reverting a Linden's edit, seeing that Everett has previously blocked 2 other Residents for reasons apparently relating to the SL5B article.3
- It is important to note that if it wasn't a Linden Lab Employee who made the edit (without apparent reason) I have no doubt that neither of us would hesitate to immediately revert the edit.
- SignpostMarv Martin 15:14, 6 August 2008 (PDT)
- What Marv wrote is what I would have written in case I'd be more fluent in English ^_^ *signs Marv's post too* Lynch (talk|contribs) 15:25, 6 August 2008 (PDT)
- This strikes me as nothing short of vandalism, not only is credit being removed, but the changes have affected the rest of the page because of the removal of a layout tag. I dedicated a lot of time to SL5B even taking time away from my degree to help things get along near the launch. This is how I'm repaid? Quite frankly this is nothing but the biggest insult I could face. It's like having the Lindens say that my work wasn't appreciated and are shoving it in my face, Everett should represent the entire Linden Lab team and not his own interests. Pyrii Akula 15:36, 6 August 2008 (PDT)
I would be interested to know why Trinity's name was removed. I know she was co-director with someone, was it Dawn? And neither one shows. That hardly seems fair, especially given the number of hours they both put into the event, regardless of the positions they held. Just because someone does something that upsets some people doesn't remove the fact that they held the position for some time. Are we changing history?
You might want to put Dusty's name under infrastructure since she had so much input into what happened at the event.
Shoshana Epsilon 16:22, 6 August 2008 (PDT)
Altering Historical Record
With Everett's most recent edits, coupled with the edit summary supplied in the sysop lock that took place after this discussion, Everett appears to intentionally attempting to alter historical record of SL5B
SignpostMarv Martin 16:38, 7 August 2008 (PDT)
Oddity of block
So, where does it begin? Where do I go to participate in SL5B? Isn't there an agenda for the first week? Only the second one? Isn't there a starting point or central hub to visit first? This wiki entry presumes that we know what SL5B is.. what am I missing?