Think about it this way...
In English Wikipedia's pool of 1.5 million articles, would Wikipedia really be better if it kept an article about an association that no authority in that field cared to do a bit of research about?
On 11/29/06, Silas Snider swsnider@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I'm mildly sorry for taking the shortcut of asking the list about
things I
could figure out by wading through the insanely complicated policy
pages,
but here goes-- if you think a page that went through the AfD process
was
wrongly deleted, what is the proper action?
How wrong is it for an admin to undelete a page?
It is a cardinal sin. If a page is deleted as a result of *fD it MUST
go
through DRV - despite the fact that "Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy", undeletion can only be done if the correct forms are filled out in triplicate, lost, found again... (I can't remember the rest of how that goes, but you end up having your house bulldozed).
In addition, DRV is the place where people comment, not on the merits of
the
deletion, but on whether the deletion was "in process" or "out of
process".
It doesn't matter if the article was about [[World War II]] and the discussion only involved three people would voted delete on the grounds
of
"never heard of it", DRV is supposed to comment on process, not merits
of
deletion (you'll be told "that's what *fD is for, and you should have commented when you had the chance).
<snip />
Wait... I went and read our policy on undeletion ([[WP:UNDEL]]) , and it definitely lists "If the article has been wrongly deleted (i.e. that Wikipedia would be a better encyclopedia with the article restored). " as a valid reason for undeletion (in fact, as the first reason). Given that we 'know' that DRV is only for process auditing, I looked farther down... behold! there is a section entitled "To request that a page (or image) be restored", except that this section only tells you to list the page on DRV... Catch -22 anyone?
Either we need to change WP:UNDEL to conform to current practice, or we need to give quite a few people a cluebat beating.
Sincerely, Silas Snider
--
Silas Snider is a proud member of the Association of Wikipedians Who Dislike Making Broad Judgements About the Worthiness of a General Category of Article, and Who Are In Favor of the Deletion of Some Particularly Bad Articles, but That Doesn't Mean They are Deletionist (AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTD) , and the Harmonious Editing Club of Wikipedia.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l