On Feb 1, 2008, at 6:39 PM, Steven Walling wrote:
Get over it. Nobility has been being used as
(effective) policy for
many
months, if not years.
It's been used. I've yet to see any evidence of its effectiveness, and
particularly no evidence that it is meaningfully superior to a general
policy of deleting based on qualitative rather than quantitative
judgments.
Of course deleting any article is going to get
emotional, people are invested in article's they write. But that
level of
emotion doesn't negate the fact that we just simply can't include
every
possible topic under the sun and still produce an accurate and
reliable
encyclopedia. Space is not the issue, quality is. The breadth has to
stop
somewhere, so we can get to depth.
Anybody who claims that the deploying of notability on AfD has a thing
to do with assessing the quality of articles is lying to you.
And the WP:V addition is a fabulous idea. I've
always operated that
way, and
it is (to me) the core reason we need notability: we can't be
accurate on a
subject if there aren't reliable sources available. If accuracy is
literally
impossible, then we shouldn't have an article on it.
Deleting poorly sourced articles that cannot be improved is not a bad
idea. Enshrining the idea that we must do so on the level of policy,
however, is a terrible idea.
-Phil