[WikiEN-l] VfD is imperfect

[Daniel P.B.Smith]

There's a need for VfD or something like it.

1) Some have argued that most of the actual deletions need not be and 
in most cases should not be actual page deletions. They can, for 
example, often be redirects. The thing, is that it doesn't matter 
whether the disposition is a very ruthless edit, making the page into a 
redirect, or deleting the page. The issue is that casual observer who 
is not a subject expert, but is a savvy Wikipedian, looks at a page and 
thinks "this looks like obvious garbage that probably ought to go." 
When a page is to be effectively deleted and you're NOT absolutely 
sure, there needs to be a place to take it to where a few other 
eyeballs can look at it, where there is a high probability of getting a 
few comments and where things take place in a well-defined time frame.

2) In my subjective opinion, it seems to me that some of the criticism 
that is ostensible being directed at the VfD process is, in reality, 
directed against individuals. That may be well be a misperception, but 
it is my perception.

3) There is such a thing as a VfD regular. VfD regulars have developed 
a clubby atmosphere. VfD regulars have developed a very unfortunate 
tendency to talk as if they were in an executive session where the 
author was absent when in fact the author of the article has been all 
but invited to the meeting. Frank and jocular expressions of disgust at 
repetitive situations are common. These have reached the point of being 
Bad Things, and I think the Dartmouth affair and its aftermath show it. 
So many people now enjoy piling on to anything Dartmouth that an 
article about the wildlife of Dart'''moor''' was recently mentioned in 
an "Oh, no, not another" context by someone who apparently couldn't be 
bothered to look up Dartmoor in Wikipedia, on the Web, in a dictionary 
or atlas, or anywhere else.

4) In theory, it seems to me, 95% of what's done in VfD could be done 
by putting a note on the talk page of, say, [[The Law of Success]] 
saying "I'm think this article is garbage and I'm going to make it into 
#REDIRECT [[Napoleon Hill]]." The problem is that people really do 
watch and respond to VfD postings, whereas article Talk pages on 
garbage articles are not being tracked and do not get the benefit of 
many eyes.

5) VfD does generate serious discussions. In many cases they are 
thoughtful discussions. The outcome is rarely predictable and the 
effect in many cases is beneficial.

VfD has problems. To say "It's broken" is overstating the case, and 
figuring out what need to be done to improve it is not trivial or 
obvious, since a lot of the sturm and drang is the result of genuine 
differences in opinion about what the content of Wikipedia ought to be.

--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/