On 1/21/06, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/21/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
The discussion should not proceed to deletion until those
proposing
deletion have diligently investigated all alternatives. *NO
ONUS SHOULD BE PLACED ON THOSE OPPOSING DELETION*. It should be for
those proposing that the article, category, article template or other
encyclopedia component, should be deleted, to show by due diligence
that the item cannot be reorganised in a fruitful manner.
You appear to be asking them to prove a negative. That is generaly
considered to be imposible (outside maths).
If that is impossible then why are so many voting to delete articles?
Besides, the proposal is to have them prove that a positive did not
occur within a limited (but extendable) timeframe. Sortof how the
Americans failed to prove that there is weapons of mass destruction in
Iraq, but managed to prove that they couldn't find any during
200304-200601.
--
mvh Björn