On 12/9/05, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/9/05, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 12/9/05, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/9/05, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
I'm not suggesting giving admins more responsibilities.
Anthony
Expanding speedy is doing exactly that.
geni
You're really going to have to explain this one. It is the communities responsibility to expand the criteria for speedy deletion, not the admins. What responsibility am I suggesting giving admins that they didn't have before?
I suppose we're adding a new ability for admins, the ability to delete [whatever is defined in the new speedy deletion criterion]. But even that isn't a responsibility.
So, can you try explaining what you're saying a little better? I really don't understand. (Phil's point is valid too, sometimes it is a good idea to give admins certain responsibilities, but in this case I don't even see what the new responsibility is.)
Anthony
The areas which you expand into involve more subjective descission. Of course this could largely be delt with by knocking out orphans. Go through AFD sometime and look at the correlation between unanimiuos deletes and orphans. -- geni
I never said which areas I would expand to. I'd suggest looking at what articles "everyone agrees should be deleted" and then coming up with objective criteria to describe them. Surely this can be done, and while it might take a while to come up with good criteria, that's a one time job which will save countless hours of time wasted on AfD in the future.
Of course, a "unanimous delete" on AFD is not necessarily an article which "everyone agrees should be deleted", it's merely one that everyone who hasn't gotten frustrated with AFD agrees should be deleted. There's no subjective decision that has to be made to delete "obvious band vanity". After all, the fact that it's "band vanity" is "obvious".
Anthony