Tony Sidaway wrote:
On 6/14/07, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
I'm hopeful. Once we've seen the back of that article, I'll begin to consider that Wikipedia has come of age.
Seems more like giving up on the Wikipedia process entirely. What else will we decide we "can't be trusted" to write articles about next? And will that decision be made in the same haphazard back-channel way this one is being made in?
It was an open discussion followed by almost certainly the most comprehensively documented close we have ever seen. You can see the comments the closer made as he considered each point. The result is on deletion review but seems to be holding up very well indeed.
What I'm talking about here is not just the AfD result on its own, but the rush to go _beyond_ it and turn the "merge" result into an outright deletion.
Why is it that seven other Wikipedias are apparently "trustworthy" enough to have articles about Daniel Brandt but the English Wikipedia can't have anything more than a redirect, if that? What if we were to translate one of those other articles and put it here on en?