michael west wrote:
If we are going to label ourselves, I would call
myself an "Inclusionist
with reservations". The problem with all out inclusionism is that if you
are going to defend an article in Afd is that to prove its worth keeping one
has to get out and source and rewrite sections.
There is no such thing as an "all out inclusionism", but it serves
demonization better to put forth the myth that there is such a thing.
It makes attacking inclusionism much easier. I think that most of us
who identify with inclusionism have the kind of reservations that you
express, built on respect for those who work in subject areas that we
know nothing about.
Most articles are never going to become featured
articles or for that matter
Good Articles. Keeping articles on every High School (or this weeks small
Afd purge on British University Students' Unions) means that in order to
keep them from the cull they have to be sourced and updated.
And that takes time and careful research. The sources are there, but
nobody will ever be able to do a good job at it when a large number of
articles are under the deletionist gun at the same time.
I have sympathy witha lot of new editors who think
that there articles
should be included. Many of them provide sources from local newspapers but
its hard to defend them at Afd.
Not everyone accepts local newspapers as valid
sources, but when the
importance of an article is primarily local they may be the only valid
source.
Ec