I'm mildly sorry for taking the shortcut of asking the list about things I could figure out by wading through the insanely complicated policy pages, but here goes-- if you think a page that went through the AfD process was wrongly deleted, what is the proper action?
How wrong is it for an admin to undelete a page?
Also, are we trying to get rid of all "list" pages?
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I'm mildly sorry for taking the shortcut of asking the list about things I could figure out by wading through the insanely complicated policy pages, but here goes-- if you think a page that went through the AfD process was wrongly deleted, what is the proper action?
How wrong is it for an admin to undelete a page?
Also, are we trying to get rid of all "list" pages?
1) [[WP:DRV]]
2) Outside of process, it's not so good.
3) Not that I'm aware of.
-humblefool
On 11/29/06, David Ashby humble.fool@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I'm mildly sorry for taking the shortcut of asking the list about things
I
could figure out by wading through the insanely complicated policy
pages,
but here goes-- if you think a page that went through the AfD process
was
wrongly deleted, what is the proper action?
How wrong is it for an admin to undelete a page?
Also, are we trying to get rid of all "list" pages?
[[WP:DRV]]
Outside of process, it's not so good.
Not that I'm aware of.
Minor followup:
As I understand it...
Undeleting outside process depends somewhat on what it was deleted by; if it was AFDed, then DRV; if it was speedied I've seen people just put them back (with the usual "please contact the removing admin to inform them about your good reason" etc caveat), but DRV works too. If it was PRODed, then I don't know; most of those seem to uncontroversially stay dead. DRV is almost certainly never the wrong answer, but under some circumstances may not be required.
On 29/11/06, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
Undeleting outside process depends somewhat on what it was deleted by; if it was AFDed, then DRV; if it was speedied I've seen people just put them back (with the usual "please contact the removing admin to inform them about your good reason" etc caveat), but DRV works too. If it was PRODed, then I don't know; most of those seem to uncontroversially stay dead. DRV is almost certainly never the wrong answer, but under some circumstances may not be required.
An admin can just undelete a PROD, but it's a good idea to then fix whatever the reason for the PROD was. Also, someone may then put it on AFD. But AFDing is by no means obligatory.
- d.
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I'm mildly sorry for taking the shortcut of asking the list about things I could figure out by wading through the insanely complicated policy pages, but here goes-- if you think a page that went through the AfD process was wrongly deleted, what is the proper action?
How wrong is it for an admin to undelete a page?
It is a cardinal sin. If a page is deleted as a result of *fD it MUST go through DRV - despite the fact that "Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy", undeletion can only be done if the correct forms are filled out in triplicate, lost, found again... (I can't remember the rest of how that goes, but you end up having your house bulldozed).
In addition, DRV is the place where people comment, not on the merits of the deletion, but on whether the deletion was "in process" or "out of process". It doesn't matter if the article was about [[World War II]] and the discussion only involved three people would voted delete on the grounds of "never heard of it", DRV is supposed to comment on process, not merits of deletion (you'll be told "that's what *fD is for, and you should have commented when you had the chance).
Also, are we trying to get rid of all "list" pages?
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 11/29/06, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I'm mildly sorry for taking the shortcut of asking the list about things
I
could figure out by wading through the insanely complicated policy
pages,
but here goes-- if you think a page that went through the AfD process
was
wrongly deleted, what is the proper action?
How wrong is it for an admin to undelete a page?
It is a cardinal sin. If a page is deleted as a result of *fD it MUST go through DRV - despite the fact that "Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy", undeletion can only be done if the correct forms are filled out in triplicate, lost, found again... (I can't remember the rest of how that goes, but you end up having your house bulldozed).
In addition, DRV is the place where people comment, not on the merits of the deletion, but on whether the deletion was "in process" or "out of process". It doesn't matter if the article was about [[World War II]] and the discussion only involved three people would voted delete on the grounds of "never heard of it", DRV is supposed to comment on process, not merits of deletion (you'll be told "that's what *fD is for, and you should have commented when you had the chance).
That's total bullshit.
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
That's total bullshit.
Alas, it's only a slight exaggeration of procedure-as-normal.
However, I suspect that you meant bullshit as in 'I believe you, but it's ludicrous' rather than 'I don't believe it' ...
-Matt
On 11/29/06, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
That's total bullshit.
Alas, it's only a slight exaggeration of procedure-as-normal.
However, I suspect that you meant bullshit as in 'I believe you, but it's ludicrous' rather than 'I don't believe it' ...
I thought I saw a tongue in cheek there, too...
On 11/29/06, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
That's total bullshit.
Alas, it's only a slight exaggeration of procedure-as-normal.
However, I suspect that you meant bullshit as in 'I believe you, but it's ludicrous' rather than 'I don't believe it' ...
Yup.
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
That's total bullshit.
And yet strangely causes less trouble than other systems we have experimented with.
On 11/29/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
That's total bullshit.
And yet strangely causes less trouble than other systems we have experimented with.
One of the biggest problems with our deletion system is that the amount of crap is so overwhelming that those who regularly participate in the system get jaded and are sometimes unable to recognise the situations where an exception should be made.
I suspect this is likely to follow over into any other system we manage to devise; you can't change people as easily as procedure.
-Matt
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:00:13 -0800, "Matthew Brown" morven@gmail.com wrote:
One of the biggest problems with our deletion system is that the amount of crap is so overwhelming that those who regularly participate in the system get jaded and are sometimes unable to recognise the situations where an exception should be made.
How true those words are, even today.
And those exceptions then become a stick with which to beat them.
Guy (JzG)
On 11/29/06, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I'm mildly sorry for taking the shortcut of asking the list about things I could figure out by wading through the insanely complicated policy pages, but here goes-- if you think a page that went through the AfD process was wrongly deleted, what is the proper action?
How wrong is it for an admin to undelete a page?
It is a cardinal sin. If a page is deleted as a result of *fD it MUST go through DRV - despite the fact that "Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy", undeletion can only be done if the correct forms are filled out in triplicate, lost, found again... (I can't remember the rest of how that goes, but you end up having your house bulldozed).
In addition, DRV is the place where people comment, not on the merits of the deletion, but on whether the deletion was "in process" or "out of process". It doesn't matter if the article was about [[World War II]] and the discussion only involved three people would voted delete on the grounds of "never heard of it", DRV is supposed to comment on process, not merits of deletion (you'll be told "that's what *fD is for, and you should have commented when you had the chance).
<snip />
Wait... I went and read our policy on undeletion ([[WP:UNDEL]]) , and it definitely lists "If the article has been wrongly deleted (i.e. that Wikipedia would be a better encyclopedia with the article restored). " as a valid reason for undeletion (in fact, as the first reason). Given that we 'know' that DRV is only for process auditing, I looked farther down... behold! there is a section entitled "To request that a page (or image) be restored", except that this section only tells you to list the page on DRV... Catch -22 anyone?
Either we need to change WP:UNDEL to conform to current practice, or we need to give quite a few people a cluebat beating.
Sincerely, Silas Snider
Think about it this way...
In English Wikipedia's pool of 1.5 million articles, would Wikipedia really be better if it kept an article about an association that no authority in that field cared to do a bit of research about?
On 11/29/06, Silas Snider swsnider@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I'm mildly sorry for taking the shortcut of asking the list about
things I
could figure out by wading through the insanely complicated policy
pages,
but here goes-- if you think a page that went through the AfD process
was
wrongly deleted, what is the proper action?
How wrong is it for an admin to undelete a page?
It is a cardinal sin. If a page is deleted as a result of *fD it MUST
go
through DRV - despite the fact that "Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy", undeletion can only be done if the correct forms are filled out in triplicate, lost, found again... (I can't remember the rest of how that goes, but you end up having your house bulldozed).
In addition, DRV is the place where people comment, not on the merits of
the
deletion, but on whether the deletion was "in process" or "out of
process".
It doesn't matter if the article was about [[World War II]] and the discussion only involved three people would voted delete on the grounds
of
"never heard of it", DRV is supposed to comment on process, not merits
of
deletion (you'll be told "that's what *fD is for, and you should have commented when you had the chance).
<snip />
Wait... I went and read our policy on undeletion ([[WP:UNDEL]]) , and it definitely lists "If the article has been wrongly deleted (i.e. that Wikipedia would be a better encyclopedia with the article restored). " as a valid reason for undeletion (in fact, as the first reason). Given that we 'know' that DRV is only for process auditing, I looked farther down... behold! there is a section entitled "To request that a page (or image) be restored", except that this section only tells you to list the page on DRV... Catch -22 anyone?
Either we need to change WP:UNDEL to conform to current practice, or we need to give quite a few people a cluebat beating.
Sincerely, Silas Snider
--
Silas Snider is a proud member of the Association of Wikipedians Who Dislike Making Broad Judgements About the Worthiness of a General Category of Article, and Who Are In Favor of the Deletion of Some Particularly Bad Articles, but That Doesn't Mean They are Deletionist (AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTD) , and the Harmonious Editing Club of Wikipedia.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 11/29/06, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote:
In addition, DRV is the place where people comment, not on the merits of the deletion, but on whether the deletion was "in process" or "out of process".
Unless of course one is advocating maintaining deletion. Then it doesn't matter if the deletion was "out of process".
Anthony
On 11/29/06, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I'm mildly sorry for taking the shortcut of asking the list about things
I
could figure out by wading through the insanely complicated policy
pages,
but here goes-- if you think a page that went through the AfD process
was
wrongly deleted, what is the proper action?
How wrong is it for an admin to undelete a page?
It is a cardinal sin. If a page is deleted as a result of *fD it MUST go through DRV - despite the fact that "Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy", undeletion can only be done if the correct forms are filled out in triplicate, lost, found again... (I can't remember the rest of how that goes, but you end up having your house bulldozed).
In addition, DRV is the place where people comment, not on the merits of the deletion, but on whether the deletion was "in process" or "out of process". It doesn't matter if the article was about [[World War II]] and the discussion only involved three people would voted delete on the grounds of "never heard of it", DRV is supposed to comment on process, not merits of deletion (you'll be told "that's what *fD is for, and you should have commented when you had the chance).
If people say they "never heard of it", the closing admin should've ignored those comments and "votes". If that didn't happen then it was out of process. So the merit of the deletion and the process or at least interconnected.
Mgm
On 11/29/06, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I'm mildly sorry for taking the shortcut of asking the list about things
I
could figure out by wading through the insanely complicated policy
pages,
but here goes-- if you think a page that went through the AfD process
was
wrongly deleted, what is the proper action?
How wrong is it for an admin to undelete a page?
It is a cardinal sin. If a page is deleted as a result of *fD it MUST go through DRV - despite the fact that "Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy", undeletion can only be done if the correct forms are filled out in triplicate, lost, found again... (I can't remember the rest of how that goes, but you end up having your house bulldozed).
In addition, DRV is the place where people comment, not on the merits of the deletion, but on whether the deletion was "in process" or "out of process". It doesn't matter if the article was about [[World War II]] and the discussion only involved three people would voted delete on the grounds of "never heard of it", DRV is supposed to comment on process, not merits of deletion (you'll be told "that's what *fD is for, and you should have commented when you had the chance).
Also, are we trying to get rid of all "list" pages?
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Not totally true. if you have evidence that wasn't brought up in the *fD, you're allowed to make a DRV.