Bill: Contact play is more general than attachment, isn't it? (It's been a long time since I have read Wilcox.) Oh, I see that the problem is more serious. Attachment is an alias for the contact play page. Contact play is a term coined by Bruce Wilcox for his theories. It really should not be used for attachment.
More generally, why the WME? It seems to me that a good bit has been lost in the editing.
Dieter: Back to discussion mode on parent pages, I have noticed. Do you really want all definitions and sources of advice to be signed? I don't like conflicting opinions on one page, especially if they are there since a long time. Neither do I like a conglomerate of redundant advice where you have to check people's level before you can decide whose advice to pick. Look, if you don't like it, revert it. I don't want to explain every single effort of mine.
Bill: Actually, I do not like discussion on parent pages. I do not know what should have been done to edit this particular page, but I do think that a WME is worth some discussion, in general. I did not mean any disrespect for you or your efforts.
As for unsigned advice, I do think that it is inappropriate. For instance, on the new page about attachment for sabaki, I signed it because, first, it is *only* my opinion. I am not an authority. Second, it is *my* opinion. It seems that Charles and I disagree somewhat about the value and proper use of attachments. That's only natural. We are both amateurs. Let the reader judge. Knowing the source helps.
Dieter: I didn't feel disrespected. Only the human feeling that a job done should remain done. OK, a little discussion on the WME then:
Bill: My main problem, at first glance, was the loss of material. I could not tell where it had gone, and that gave me the sense that a good deal had been lost in the editing. I do agree with the idea of moving out material to other pages. That is one of the beauties of hypertext. However, the hypertext links have not been provided.