On Dec 20, 2007 12:14 PM, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
joshua.zelinsky@yale.edu wrote:
Yes, at this point inclusionism is dead and eventualism is a heresy. If enough editors try and get WP:EPISODE's guideline status removed then one could go DRV all of these. I'm about to go on vacation and haven't been willing to attempt to do so in the past because of lack of success but if enough people actually agree with me there's no need not to try. This is really destroying a lot of content and the GFDL issue pointed out by Derksen doesn't help matters at all (although that's more easily corretable)
I rarely get involved in policy disputes, but this does seem like a hill worth dying on - I've done some more looking around and the amount of material being removed in this particular purge is enormous. It also seems to be heavily driven by just a handful of editors - the same usernames keep popping up in the histories. I guess it's been gotten away with so far because there hasn't actually been deleting going on for the most part, just redirecting.
I notice now that an arbitration case has been filed on this subject; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Episodes_and_characters. Haven't had time to read through it all yet.
I'm going to go on vacation in a few days myself, unfortunately, but I'll still have net access. Anyone more policy-savvy than I have suggestions on how I should go about tossing my hat into this fight?
The fuck? I find it absolutely crazy how some deletionists are taking deletionism far beyond what many original deletionists ever envisioned. I see no reason at all why we cannot have articles on episodes of notable television shows, provided they are referenced and contain more information than can be gleaned from a [[List of X episodes]]. This is completely insane and fucktarded - episodes of TV shows are not inherently non-notable.
Johnleemk