Talk:Adoption/Adoptism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Adoptism
Anonymous editor hijacked the "Adoptism" section to add a bunch of anti-adoption POV. I have reverted just that section to the last version before the POVandalism. Danlovejoy 05:22, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
Dan. Here is Wikipedia's definition of vandalism.
"Vandalism is any addition, deletion, or change to content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of the encyclopedia (such as swearing, deleting letters to make innappropriate words, etc.) (see also Wikipedia:Newbie experiment). The most common type of vandalism is the replacement of existing text with obscenities, namecalling, or other wholly irrelevant content.
Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Apparent bad-faith edits that do not make their bad-faith nature inarguably explicit are not considered vandalism at Wikipedia.
Committing vandalism is a violation of Wikipedia policy; it needs to be spotted, and then dealt with – if you cannot deal with it yourself, you can seek help from others.
A 2002 study by IBM found that most Wikipedia vandalism is reverted within five minutes. (See official results) A breaching experiment in September 2005 [1] similarly resulted in patent nonsense being reverted in five minutes.
Sometimes an update might look like vandalism. Careful attention needs to be given to whether the new data or information is right or whether it is vandalism."
Adding content you may personally disagree with is not vandalsim. From what I have read, you have been deleting good faith efforts to add to the Wikipedia.
