User:Geofferybard/Vandalism is a bad word
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | This user page or section is in a state of significant expansion or restructuring. You are welcome to assist in its construction by editing it as well. If this user page has not been edited in several days, please remove this template. If you are the editor who added this template and you are actively editing, please be sure to replace this template with {{in use}} during the active editing session. Click on the link for template parameters to use.
This page was last edited by Geofferybard (talk | contribs) 13 years ago. (Update timer) |
VISITOR INPUT WELCOME: Generally the preferred etiquette would be to comment here corrected link to follow inline edits, if that is easier, are ok if not combative, and I suggest making them bold or alternate color.
Bard गीता 22:51, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
DISCLAIMER
[edit]DRAFT
This essay is not intended as policy. It will be parse to remove any potential copyviols if applicable. I gratefully acknowledge those wikipedians who have developed the basics upon which this essay is based. Bard गीता 23:01, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
DRAFT
[edit]Preface: Why the term "vandalism" should be replaced
[edit]The vandals were a tribe which corresponds to some European ethnic groups. They were in conflict with Rome and since Rome has written much of recorded history its' interpretation predominates in the literature. The vandals were, however, a tribe with a history and a righteousness of its own which is presented in an unfair light by applying the name of that tribe to a criminal act. There is a reflection of the bias of Roman authority and Roman worldview. Furthermore, a more scientific basis is established by modifying the term into something more reflective of a dispassionate analysis.
Proposed alternative terms
[edit]This essay discusses alternative terms. The list of terms discussed follows:
- Intentional Malicious Editing (IME)
- Intentional Editing Destructiveness (IED).
== Pro and con of first alternative: IME
There may on some wikis in some places at some times also be IED conducted by persons with administrative privilege, which would be classified as IAD, Intentional Administrative Destructiveness. Some former wikipedians allege that they have been harassed and such instances may involve IAD. This essay is restricted to the broader question of IED.
Proposed new terminology: Intentional malicious editing
[edit]I have observed quite a bit of administrative activity that was distorted by POV or by highly ambitious goals coupled with callous disregard for other people's views and feelings.