On Saturday 12 November 2005 08:27 am, Tony Sidaway wrote:
On 11/11/05, Jason Y. Lee <jylee(a)cs.ucr.edu>
wrote:
Since when it has become standard to keep
articles and delete recreations
on sight? Whatever happen to the philosophy we had on allowing an
article to be deleted so that someone with the proper knowledge can
properly write the introduction of the article?
That's a poor argument for deletion. If an article is rubbish, you
don't have to delete its history to produce a rewrite.
Unfortunately, too many incorrectly view deletion as a debate over the content
of the article rather than the worthiness of the article for inclusion. The
deletion policy page explicitly states that "Article needs improvement",
"Article needs a *lot* of improvement", etc. are problems that are not valid
reasons for deletion, but the deletionists conveniently ignore this book of
their Bible.
If an article is completely without a shred of correct information, but the
subject itself is worthy of inclusion, then the article can always be blanked
to remove the anti-content; but listing something for deletion is a statement
that the subject itself is unworthy.
--
Kurt Weber
<kmw(a)armory.com>