Talk:Zine Guide

From ZineWiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
What do you think of [http://zinewiki.com/zinewiki/index.php?title=Zine_Guide&diff=next&oldid=12264 this partial blanking of Zine Guide article]? --[[User:EarthFurst|EarthFurst]] 02:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
What do you think of [http://zinewiki.com/zinewiki/index.php?title=Zine_Guide&diff=next&oldid=12264 this partial blanking of Zine Guide article]? --[[User:EarthFurst|EarthFurst]] 02:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
-
: it seems like the editor of the zine did the editing. I don't know anything about the situation that was written about in the article, but I do know that the policy of zine wiki has been that if a zine editor doesn't feel comfortable with what's written about them, they can edit it. There is, of course, a limit to what can be edited: it what's written is widely historical fact that's been written about in many places, then editing it on Zine Wiki isn't going to change those facts, and it would be good to include them if they are relevant to zines/ the zine community. And an editor can't come along and delete their zine just because they no longer like it. Once it has been for sale or trade through the mail, it's in the public domain, and its existence can be recorded and reported on. I think that's why it should be ok for someone to take off any comments they don't like, because our purpose isn't to review the zines, it's simply to document and record their existence. I hope that answers your question! Let me ask you, what's your opinion? [[User:InvisibleFriend|InvisibleFriend]] 10:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
+
: it seems like the editor of the zine did the editing. I don't know anything about the situation that was written about in the article, but I do know that the policy of zine wiki has been that if a zine editor doesn't feel comfortable with what's written about them, they can edit it. There is, of course, a limit to what can be edited: if what's written is widely historical fact that's been written about in many places, then editing it on Zine Wiki isn't going to change those facts, and it would be good to include them if they are relevant to zines/ the zine community. And an editor can't come along and delete their zine just because they no longer like it. Once it has been for sale or trade through the mail, it's in the public domain, and its existence can be recorded and reported on. I think that's why it should be ok for someone to take off any comments they don't like, because our purpose isn't to review the zines, it's simply to document and record their existence. I hope that answers your question! Let me ask you, what's your opinion? [[User:InvisibleFriend|InvisibleFriend]] 10:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:18, 19 December 2011

What do you think of this partial blanking of Zine Guide article? --EarthFurst 02:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

it seems like the editor of the zine did the editing. I don't know anything about the situation that was written about in the article, but I do know that the policy of zine wiki has been that if a zine editor doesn't feel comfortable with what's written about them, they can edit it. There is, of course, a limit to what can be edited: if what's written is widely historical fact that's been written about in many places, then editing it on Zine Wiki isn't going to change those facts, and it would be good to include them if they are relevant to zines/ the zine community. And an editor can't come along and delete their zine just because they no longer like it. Once it has been for sale or trade through the mail, it's in the public domain, and its existence can be recorded and reported on. I think that's why it should be ok for someone to take off any comments they don't like, because our purpose isn't to review the zines, it's simply to document and record their existence. I hope that answers your question! Let me ask you, what's your opinion? InvisibleFriend 10:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Personal tools