Board Thread:Support Requests - Community Management/@comment-75.128.47.18-20160802232127/@comment-24473195-20160822113027

Wikia Staff have said that the presence of the "remove" feature is the same as the ability to blank a page: just because you "technically can" does not imply it is necessarily okay to do so.

That applies to anything in a wiki, and again is in agreement with the terms of use (TOU). To put it in simpler terms as long as the TOU is respected:


 * 1) Person A can do action A
 * 2) Person B can undo action A
 * 3) Special Person C can prevent & revert actions by Person A & B
 * 4) Special Person D can prevent & revert actions by Person A & B & C

This is the pattern in any wiki and happens quite frequently. Local guidelines cannot in any way to prevent actions of those persons (A, B, C, and D). Unless wikia staff intervenes.

The later quotes all fall in line with that. While one can use made up guidelines and call them rules and use that as "justification" when forcing their point of view it doesn't necessarily prove anything either. One well researched concept that applies here is Argumentum_ad_populum.

There is a difference between a technical right, and a social right. Most people in this thread seem to be concerned with the social one. There is also a technical Mediawiki limit (and many other limits) to how much content can be in a wiki page (talk page) which renders those strange made up rules irrelevant.

So the first answer to the OP remains accurate. It seems that debating on whether "social rights" trump technical rights is something best left to philosophers and maybe lawyers.

Future readers and the OP have all the information needed to make up their mind so I'll refrain from responding any further.