On 10/24/05, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/24/05, Anthony DiPierro wikispam@inbox.org wrote:
So deletion is the only solution to something that is low quality? I
would
think making it higher quality would also suffice.
yeah but I think we have fairly firmly established that that isn't happening.
Articles aren't getting better? I disagree.
Not at all. I'm an inclusionist, and I'd much rather have better articles
than more articles. However 1) I think deletion is a waste of time that could be better spent improving articles, and 2) I don't think the two
are
mutually exclusive, I think you can have more articles *and* better articles. So please, if you're not an inclusionist, don't speak for us. That's
called
a strawman argument.
1)I can delete stuff at a rate of more than once a second
Speedy delete, maybe, but the current deletion process is too permanent to allow any admin to speedy delete any article for any reason. If you allowed editors to view deleted articles that might be a solution, but until then it isn't.
2)Errr that isn't happening.
I disagree.
3)It's called Reductio ad absurdum. The logical endpoint of the inclusionist position is to include everything.
Huh? Is the logical endpoint of the deletionist position to delete everything?