On Saturday 12 November 2005 08:27 am, Tony Sidaway wrote:
On 11/11/05, Jason Y. Lee jylee@cs.ucr.edu wrote:
Since when it has become standard to keep articles and delete recreations on sight? Whatever happen to the philosophy we had on allowing an article to be deleted so that someone with the proper knowledge can properly write the introduction of the article?
That's a poor argument for deletion. If an article is rubbish, you don't have to delete its history to produce a rewrite.
Unfortunately, too many incorrectly view deletion as a debate over the content of the article rather than the worthiness of the article for inclusion. The deletion policy page explicitly states that "Article needs improvement", "Article needs a *lot* of improvement", etc. are problems that are not valid reasons for deletion, but the deletionists conveniently ignore this book of their Bible.
If an article is completely without a shred of correct information, but the subject itself is worthy of inclusion, then the article can always be blanked to remove the anti-content; but listing something for deletion is a statement that the subject itself is unworthy.