[WikiEN-l] CSD A7

[James Hare]

Not to mention it could easily get gamed -- imagine if there's five people
interested in some band from Deluth no one cares about, except those five
people that manage to get the article saved (at least from speedy deletion).
System gamed.

We should do what we already do -- speedy delete those that fail to even
assert notability, and PROD those that are non-notable despite assertion. If
the PROD is removed, then AFD is necessary simply because it makes us look
good. Assume good faith across the board.

On 12/26/06, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It seems to me that CSD A7 (the no assertion of notability one) is
> > grossly overused by many people, including me.  Most editors simply
> > use it as though it read "blatantly non-notable", and while this is
> > probably a good thing (it prevents a vast waste of time at AfD), it
> > seems somewhat dishonest.  Would it not be better, therefore, either
> > to alter it so that it did read like that, or to add another criterion
> > for people to use instead?  I would suggest that a possibly way of
> > determining "gross non-notability" would be to say that if the creator
> > is unable to pursuade, say, four or five editors in good standing
> > (>50-100 edits, no blocks in the last week or so) to vouch for the
> > article, it can be speedied.  The only real disadvantage I see in this
> > is that it could create a somewhat cliqueish appearance to new users.
> >
> > What do people think?
>
> I agree, A7 is often misused. I think cases of articles that assert an
> obviously invalid reason for notability should go through PROD. Your
> idea would be more complicated for no good reason.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>