Matthew Brown wrote: I have long held the belief that Wikipedia tends to get things right eventually, and in general, even if one or two specific articles get improperly deleted in the immediate term. As long as we can hold off sweeping mass deletions and remain open to contributions from the general public I think that'll continue to be true, because people will continue to write about the things that they're interested in. Here's hoping.

It's always going to fluctuate, and those who want coverage of things that interest them are always going to have to fight for it. It's the nature of the system that there are no stable decisions. See for example the deletion of Wikinfo on the 6th try after 1 previous no consensus and 4 previous keeps , including the strong recommendation of the closer at the 5th afd that it not be nominated again, and the amazingly strong consensus against overturning the now final delete from the 6th Afd at the ongoing Deletion review. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/200… Those who want stability must stick to print, and resist the temptation to buy new editions. On 7/28/08, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen(a)shaw.ca> wrote: -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG