On 9/29/07, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 29/09/2007, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
In an effort to hold back the tide of goldfarming
speedy-tagging, I've
been going to these page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Importance_or_significance_not_assert…
and removing clearly bogus speedy tags, and
leaving a commenter on the
tagger's page something like:
==Clearly erroneous A7==
The speedy criteria are hard and don't stretch - please take more care
with these. (This is becoming a matter of
[
http://www.andrewlih.com/blog/2007/09/10/two-million-english-wikipedia-arti…
public] [
http://www.andrewlih.com/blog/2007/07/10/unwanted-new-articles-in-wikipedia/
> concern] and PR problems, so a few people are looking at all CSDs and
> particularly A7s lately.) Thanks! - ~~~~
I dunno, from my experience, the most abused tag was the one for no context
- it seemed to be used as an IDONTLIKEIT or IDONTUNDERSTANDIT or a "too
short" tag, regardless of whether the article gave sufficient context. As
just one example, I once saw a two-sentence stub on a mayor of New York City
being tagged for speedy deletion on the grounds that it gave insufficient
context, even though it was pretty damn clear what the article was about.
From my experience, idiots abusing this tag would
probably be an equal, if
not greater, problem.
Johnleemk