"MacGyverMagic/Mgm" wrote
All excellent suggestions, but keep in mind that nominating something for deletion is already a strenuous process for a lot of people. We have to make sure it's still manageable to do so for a newbie.
I would say that we do not have to make it manageable for a newbie. If they're that much of a newbie they have no business putting forward things to be deleted. If you feel otherwise, then why?
- d.
David Gerard wrote:
"MacGyverMagic/Mgm" wrote
All excellent suggestions, but keep in mind that nominating something for deletion is already a strenuous process for a lot of people. We have to make sure it's still manageable to do so for a newbie.
I would say that we do not have to make it manageable for a newbie. If they're that much of a newbie they have no business putting forward things to be deleted. If you feel otherwise, then why?
I second this suggestion. In addition, make enabling of it linked to the enabling of the "move page" featured; those who were around when the latter became restricted should more or less understand what this implies.
"David Gerard" wrote
I would say that we do not have to make it manageable for a newbie. If
they're that much of a newbie they have no business putting forward things to be deleted.
Certainly one of the current problems with AfD is what to make of users who have been on WP for all of, say, 48 hours, and reckon that they have an eye for articles they think should not be in the encyclopedia.
I would, however, prefer that the method be user-friendly. It should just test a little whether someone has a clue. See other posts of mine.
Charles
On 11/16/05, charles matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
"David Gerard" wrote
I would say that we do not have to make it manageable for a newbie. If
they're that much of a newbie they have no business putting forward things to be deleted.
Certainly one of the current problems with AfD is what to make of users who have been on WP for all of, say, 48 hours, and reckon that they have an eye for articles they think should not be in the encyclopedia.
I would, however, prefer that the method be user-friendly. It should just test a little whether someone has a clue. See other posts of mine.
Charles
There's enough newbies who find deleteable articles with no idea what to do about it. If we don't allow them to AFD it, we should offer them an alternative to bring it to our attention. Maybe I should've said user-friendly, though.
--Mgm
From: "charles matthews" charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com
Certainly one of the current problems with AfD is what to make of users who have been on WP for all of, say, 48 hours, and reckon that they have an eye for articles they think should not be in the encyclopedia.
And one the main problems AfD is meant to address is how to handle the articles created by users who have been on WP for all of 10 minutes and reckon that they have an eye for articles they think *should* be in the encyclopedia.
Jay.
"JAY JG" wrote
From: "charles matthews" charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com
Certainly one of the current problems with AfD is what to make of users who have been on WP for all of, say, 48 hours, and reckon that they have an eye for articles they think should not be in the encyclopedia.
And one the main problems AfD is meant to address is how to handle the articles created by users who have been on WP for all of 10 minutes and reckon that they have an eye for articles they think *should* be in the encyclopedia.
I don't give the symmetry much credence. It's good if bad articles are caught quickly, and deleted if they _really_ can't be cleaned up and salvaged. But it is unlikely that substandard articles, by their mere existence, will cause the offence that attempts to delete articles on valid but 'obscure' topics can. The potential damage to the community of erring is asymmetric here.
Charles
On 16/11/05, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
"MacGyverMagic/Mgm" wrote
All excellent suggestions, but keep in mind that nominating something for deletion is already a strenuous process for a lot of people. We have to make sure it's still manageable to do so for a newbie.
I would say that we do not have to make it manageable for a newbie. If they're that much of a newbie they have no business putting forward things to be deleted. If you feel otherwise, then why?
According to Kate's Tool, my first edit was at 2004-10-30 20:41:47. At 2004-10-31 03:15:18 - all of six hours later - I tagged a page for VfD, and then another one that evening. (I think I'd gone to play with random pages and found something needing deleted)
I doubt this sort of thing is that unusual...
On the other hand, I managed it fine, so presumably adding to VfD was a bit less confusing then.
-- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk