On 9/13/05, Kelly Martin <kelly.lynn.martin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Oh please no.
Name anything that could harm wikipedia that doean't get
delt with as a speedy or a copyvio.
Deleting encyclopedic articles harms the encyclopedia. Just because a
"consensus" of professional deletionists decide that some article or
another isn't "notable" doesn't make it unencyclopedic. See
Snowspinner's post that started this iteration of this discussion.
That's the attitude I'm talking about. If anything gets deleted,
blamed on deletimonists, whether involved or not. I said wrongly
deleted stuff should be put on VFU more. It's easy to complain and say
it won't work because of deletionists without trying. VFU gets a
disproportionate amount of visitors from AFD, not because deletionism
is rampant, but because there's so much drivel being deleted that
doesn't deserve to be resurrected.
Deleting encyclopedic articles harms Wikipedia, that's true. But
keeping unencyclopedic ones hurts Wikipedia too. Inclusionists are on
the other extreme end of the spectrum and just as wrong.