[Wikipedia-l] Sysop status

[koyaanisqatsi at nupedia.com]

good points, all.  Should we reconsider/clarify/expand on the policy?

kq

Lee wrote:
>I'm probably a major offender here, so I'd like to argue that perhaps 
>the policy needs to be changed or clarified.  First, articles that 
>have no content or history should be deletable with less formality.  
>What we want to prevent is the loss of content.
>
>Secondly, Wikipedia is dynamic in nature, and I don't think we should 
>play by the same rules as static websites in terms of keeping old 
>links alive.  Certainly in some cases it's warranted; if someone 
>moves "James Earl Carter" to "Jimmy Carter", and the old one has been 
>around for a long time (not just a few days), then it's reasonable to 
>expect that there may be external links to it and there's no reason 
>not to leave the redirect.  But if it is, say, a misspelling, I'd 
>rather just delete it.  We are under no obligation to keep our 
>mistakes around forever, and if someone links to it and finds it 
>broken, we have done him a service by forcing him to correct it.
>Likewise, if someone creates a page and I think it needs a different 
>title, if I catch that error within a day or two and move it, I'll 
>just delete the old title.  There's not point in cluttering the 
>database with a redirect that's just a mistake, and hasn't been 
>around long enough to accumulate links.
>
>And finally, anything outside encyclopedia namespace should be more 
>freely deletable as well.  Anyone who links to a talk page deserves 
>what he gets.
>
>
>
>
>
>[Wikipedia-l]
>To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
>http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l