[WikiEN-l] Re: Re: Lauritsen speedy deletion??

[geni]

On 11/21/05, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
> "geni" <geniice at gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f80608430511201957t789f8ce7y9c255459d19565a4 at mail.gmail.com...
> > On 11/21/05, Philip Sandifer
> > <snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Nov 20, 2005, at 10:45 PM, geni wrote:
> > > > Well going through the critiria for articles:
> > > > 3.no reason to have a limit on that one(a link is a link)
> > > I would say that 3 should have, if not 24 hours, at least some lag,
> > > if only because people start articles in different ways.
> > They can recreate it. I can't think of any reason to start an article
> > by just putting up a link and if they do it's hardly a hudge amount of
> > work that has been lost.
>
> Would they then not run the risk of having their article tagged for Speedy
> Deletion on the grounds of "recreating an article which was already
> deleted"?
>

I don't think that is a speedy criteria.

> Why should people have to jump through hoops simply to avoid impolite people
> tromping all over perfectly good articles-in-progress?
> --
> Phil
> [[en:User:Phil Boswell]]

It is harldy jumping though a hoop to ask a person to at least create
a substub. If I can't tell something from spam I suggest we have a
problem.

--
geni