Ok, so you're saying that undeletion doesn't need oversight, but crap
deletion does? Aren't crap deletions supposed to be shot down by the
community just as well-reasoned BOLD undeletions are supported?
SCZenz
On 1/23/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/23/06, SCZenz <sczenz(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The reason for what you call process-fetishism is
letting all editors
feel that they have a voice in deletion rather than just a few admins.
I know we can't overdo it, but the goal is laudable.
Afd gives all a hand in the process. After I've done a resurrection
it's a doddle to tag it for deletion (which sometimes I do anyhow as a
matter of form). The response is usually very highly supportive. See
for instance the results of the second AfDs of Tally and SuperOffice.
The near-unanimous vote to keep in each case is not untypical of my
resurrections.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l