The coordinated attempts seem to be going in both directions. If one group of people can join to delete articles without all of them necessarily even reading them, others can do similarly to keep them. At present the process is set to favor the deletors. Perhaps some of the people objecting to efforts to support articles want to continue it that way. The keepers are not disrupting the process, they are trying for equal treatment.
The first step in reform would be to not merely permit but require fair notice to all groups and individuals interested in an article--notice before the discussion even begins, to minimize the effect of immediate pile-on deletes. The second would be to make repeated attempts at deletion symmetrical with repeated attempts to re-insert: to require prior permission from a separate process for a second AfD after a keep.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Charlotte Webb charlottethewebb@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/10/08, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoekstra@gmail.com wrote:
It is just that a coordinated effort to change the outcome of a handful AfD's is disruping the process of AfD...
Can you think of a process more sorely in need of coordinated disruption?
—C.W.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l