If an article is deleted unfairly or out of process, is it more reasonable to amend fundamental policies, or would it be much simpler and easier to just take the matter to deletion review?
[[WP:DRV]] is happily available for such claims.
-Luna
On 11/20/06, Zoney zoney.ie@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/11/06, Dan Collins en.wp.st47@gmail.com wrote:
pfft. we need a7, that's how we get rid of the myspace teens and the wanna-be-a-big-businesses. Do you have an example of an article that was "unfairly" deleted? If it's used improperly, remove the tag. Either way, the admin won't delete it if it isn't really nn.
-- ST47 Editor, en.wikipedia
And using it to delete an article about a student society at a University? OK, certainly a debatable article for inclusion in Wikipedia, but the mere fact of its attachment to a clearly notable University should be reason enough not to have a speedy deletion under A7.
Much more an AFD candidate if there is suggestion that it is too trivial to include on Wikipedia. For example (as opposite arguements to deletion in a debate), there are clearly student societies that should have a page; e.g. those that are historic, notable in themselves (not just because of the Uni), very relevant to notable people who were members (with it being relevant to their career/fame).
Now I have only given the example of a student society. With A7 as it is, there is clearly leeway for a host of articles to be deleted, whose deletion should instead be debated (even if it clearly establishes that said article can be deleted, or more probably, merged).
Zoney
-- ~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds... _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l