On 11/03/2008, David Goodman <dgoodmanny(a)gmail.com> wrote:
At least for what I can do best, when I see someone
asserted to be a
notable author without any evidence, I look. Depending on what I find,
I act to keep or delete. I follow the evidence: I've done 2 searches
for things at AfD in the last 2 days, where people were !voting both
ways without any basis but their intuition--in each case I looked
properly, found nothing really adequate, laid out what I did find,
and said delete or weak delete. Only when I find enough for a keep,
do I say keep.
I should point out, by the way, that although I consider AFD's culture
severely problematic - the siege mentality and consequent
newbie-biting having become so bad as to make international press - I
fully understand how it got that way. Anyone who thinks they're an
"inclusionist" - go do Special:Newpages patrol for a while. It's a
firehose of sewage. Over 50% of new articles are shot on sight, and
they fully deserve it. Most of what hits AFD deserves to die as
quickly as possible too. Oh dear Lord it's awful. No wonder some
editors seem to go on mad rampages with a machete through the article
space.
- d.