When I'm using the term listcruft it is not intended to offend the
author. Look at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of PS2 DVD9
On 5/1/06, Sam Pointon <free.condiments(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 01/05/06, Steve Bennett <stevage(a)gmail.com>
On 01/05/06, Matt Brown <morven(a)gmail.com>
On *fD, <foo>cruft is shorthand for
'articles about <foo> that are
below my personal notability threshold'. Thus its application is
generally tautological and only serves to denigrate the subject
And/or discredit the person using the term. It really is a pretty
offensive term, but I don't know if most people using it realise that.
Some people use 'cruft' (me, for example) in the original sense - it's
the word for that dust and fluff you pull out from under furniture. It
is, outside of Wikipedia, most commonly applied to badly written and
messy programming. Back in Wiki context, the term (when used in this
sense, at least) makes no assertion of notability, but rather suggests
that the article is in need of a major rewrite and/or cleanup.
So 'listcruft' implies a poorly-written list, probably in need of a
loving Wikipedian to take it in and foster it back to full health.
However, some 'cruft' is beyond redemption, and the best remedy for
that is a brand new stub to take its place.
Can you tell I don't regularly take part in AfDs?
WikiEN-l mailing list
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
[[User:Computerjoe]] on en, fr, de, simple, Meta and Commons.