On 10/17/05, Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/17/05, Poor, Edmund W Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com wrote:
"function of VFU is to undelete articles that have been processed properly but shouldn't have been deleted"
Huh? What kind of process can be followed properly, yet produce an incorrect result?
An imperfect one.
The AfD process is supposed to determine which articles are deletable. Sometimes even though it's followed completely it ends up deleting perfectly good articles. This is predictable and is why we have an undeletion policy. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
As long as you depend on the opinion and input of real people, the deletion process is going to be flawed. All Wikipedia processes have processes to undo bad or wrong decisions.
I think content arguments on VFU should be documented in policy. Not only should it be possible to reverse bad admin actions but also uninformed votes.
Undeletion should be an option for: 1) Deletion debates with unexplained and possible sheep votes. 2) If additional info comes to light.
Who's going to suggest these and perhaps some other options in policy? Hopefully, some detailed situations will be acceptable for those who think VFU is only about process.
--Mgm