On Nov 8, 2007 1:47 PM, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
John Lee wrote:
Ah, this is where we have to agree to disagree then. Over time I think
I've
become much more inclusionist than I used to be, but fundamentally, I
see
nothing wrong with deleting useless content; to me, it's the same thing
as
removing useless content from an existing article. If the article is useless, and I can't write a better one which the topic deserves, then
there
is nothing wrong with deleting the article.
One difference is that the deleted content from a retained article is still available through the article's history, though it might take some digging to find it. This is not the case with deleted articles. The flaw here is the highly personalized approach to uselessness. What ever happened to the argument, "If I can't write a better article, maybe someone else can."
What would you propose we do with this: "Chaudhury was a good man from Gujrat Pakistan having distinguished son Shujat. Shujat having God gifted qualities espacially in speaking. No one can imagin what he is speaking, people only relize about his lips." These kinds of articles are often concerning good, worthwhile subjects, but don't contain any material of use for building upon. We're better off red-linking the article to make it clear we still need something written on the subject, IMO.
Johnleemk