Re: An experience with Wikipedia
Reminds me of another revert I suffered — the Chuck-a-Luck article included a section about two computer variants involving three-sided and nine-sided "dice", but a quick web search revealed that the only other published information was the inserter's own web site (to which, of course, the section gave a link). So I deleted it on the grounds of the rule "Wikipedia is not for things you made up one day" — only to be reverted on the grounds that "I had removed information", by a self-important twit who didn't bother to check what I had removed, nor why (he didn't even read the edit summary). (So I just redid the deletion, reiterating that the deleted section was non-notable self-promotion; and it was the other editor who got in trouble for the incident, not I.)
Biting the hand that feeds IT
