On 26/12/06, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 1) A recently created article about a newly
appointed bishop in the Church
> of Norway was nominated by a self-described "disiplined deletionist" for
> speedy deletion.
Non-notability is not a reason for speedy deletion,
only non-assertion
of notability. Assuming the article said he was a bishop, I think that
is an assertion of notability. Deciding whether or not it's a good
enough assertion is a job for AfD.
Unfortunately, there's no rule that will prevent really stupid
deletion nominations. And speedy is for obvious rubbish.
AFDs are at least slower than speedy. I have *occasionally*
speedy-kept an AFDed article when it's obvious to the knowledgeable on
the subject that the nomination was ignorant at best, though even then
I'll typically say "unless anyone substantially objects by tomorrow
I'll speedy-keep this" just to be sure (since the article certainly
wouldn't be deleted by the next day otherwise). A sort of "bend all
rules within reason to check they're still flexible enough to be
sensible" approach. No-one's gotten drastically upset with it yet.
- d.