Articles are not "uncontroversially encyclopedic" when they being brought up
for deletion because of their lack of encyclopedic content or nature. A
taskforce improving articles that don't have an AFD nomination would be more
in line with your flawed vision of what the project constitutes. But when
the project extensively mentions comabting what they see as unnecessary
deletions in its intro and includes a direct link to AFD, then it's not a
resource for improving articles that need help the most, but a project for
making sure borderline articles get kept. That's inclusioism.
On 7/13/07, Philip Sandifer <snowspinner(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm willing to practice euthanasia on them
I'm willing to block you for being disruptive if you delete an
article on a notable topic that could have been improved just to
oppose people trying to fix them.
-Phil
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l