On 9/13/05, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
So instead you want to give more power to admins? Wikipedia descisions are not made by professional professional deletionists. Most seem to be made by random peopel who just happened to find out about the deleteion listing. As for your claim "Deleting encyclopedic articles harms the encyclopedia" it can only be true if you assume that survival of the fitest type evolution does not apply to wikis.
I'm simply suggesting that admins should be more willing to use judgment in making the decision deletions they are already empowered to make. This isn't about giving new powers to admins, it's about expecting admins to exercise their existing powers with judgment and discretion instead of mechanically.
AFD is swarming with professional deletionists, and many deleted articles were deleted with input mainly from editors whose main contribution to Wikipedia is to vote to delete things. I question whether this group of individuals fairly represents the Wikipedia community, and therefore whether AFD actually arrives at community consensus, except in obvious cases, and therefore call for admins to exercise their judgment in evaluting AFDs for whether they reflect true consensus, and also for admins to feel free to boldly undelete articles that were clearly deleted in a manner which harms the encyclopedia.
I know that it has become popular to grill admin candidates on their criteria for "consensus" at AFD, and candidates who fail to meet the standard that the deletionists have established as "reasonable" get dogpiled with oppose votes. Frankly, I'm worried about this emergent mob mentality, which I think is encouraged by having a caste of professional deletionists, which is itself a consequence of having a centralized deletion mechanism.
Kelly