On May 14, 2006, at 1:45 PM, Keith Old wrote:
Heh, ok, but by "what's the lesson", I mean, in what way, if any, should Wikipedia consider changing its policies considering there is now such a big payoff for people adding vanity information.
*shrug* Just need to enforce CSD more stringently, that's all.
Vanity isn't a valid grounds for deletion at any level let alone speedy deletion.
Vanity isn't, but non-notable biography is, as is patent nonsense. If John Q. Highschoolstudent writes a vanity page, it'll say (in general terms) one of the following:
1. John Q. Highschoolstudent is on the track team and plays a mean game of Halo. 2. John Q. Highschoolstudent won the NBA Slam Dunk Competition in 2006.
1 is non-notable bio, 2 is patent nonsense. Those two CSD's alone are the vanity fork--almost all vanity articles will fall within at least one of tehm.
The criteria for speedy deletion limit the capacity of admins to unilaterally delete articles without proper process which in my view is a good thing. As someone who looks at speedy deletion articles on a daily basis, the criteria for speedy deletion are not as well understood by many people who nominate articles.
Likewise, as someone with much speedy deletion experience, if it wasn't for the loose construction of CSD used by admins on a daily basis, our deletion processes would be even more backlogged than they are now.
In general, our policies are strong enough to keep out articles without merit once we become aware of them.
That was my point as well.