Tony Sidaway wrote:
What worries me here is that we patently *don't*. Should we ever block an editor who's clearly demonstrating good faith, is not violating any policy of Wikipedia, but isn't complying absolutely 100% with all the guidelines? Of course not, you say, that's absurd, we'd never do such a thing. But this is precisely what was done to Maoririder twice within one week of his arriving here. Why does it happen? What unacknowledged bit of vindictiveness existing in the human spirit enabled this to be done by people who told themselves that they were doing so for the best of motives?
Newpages/RC patrol fatigue. Which may not be an excuse, though it seems to be the reason.
I have every sympathy with those valiant souls who hold back the barrage of truly shoot-on-sight crap we get. You've done both, you *know* what I mean. (Speaking as a broad inclusionist myself, maybe 20-30% of new stuff needs to die immediately, and I think everyone of inclusionist leanings really needs to do a bit of newpages and RC patrol. Sunday evening US time is a fantastic time for really good bad examples.)
OTOH, the general standard goes overboard at times - any one-sentence stub even on a subject eminently worthy of coverage tends to get shot on sight for being a single sentence, even though that's not a Candidate for Speedy Deletion. I'm not sure what to do about this, and I'm reluctant to criticise those on the front lines too strongly.
- d.