--- "Lauri Love (nsh)" lauri.love@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 15:28:02 -0800 (PST), Rick giantsrick13@yahoo.com wrote:
But that's not what's being proposed here. What's being proposed is, if anybody coming into the discussion thinks that the reason for the listing isn't acceptable, they can just delete it from the
VfD
page. Why not just let it run its course, and
vote
Keep? Because radical inclusionists are afraid
they'd
lose the vote. ~~~~
I don't think that whether we have an article on a subject or not should be decided by <s>popularity contest</s>mere majority/plurality voting. Should there not be visible and comprehensible principles that decide what is encyclopedic and what isn't? I don't think anyone (at least with any support) is proposing that people everyone should get a VfD veto, which is what your post implied, but rather that we don't let adding to the VfD page be something that can be done on a whim. If popularity was any measure, we'd have a million articles on celebrity trivia (_not a bad thing in itself_) and no articles in obscure areas of mathematics, or history.
-nsh
The proposal is that anybody can come along and remove a VfD listing if they disagree with the lister's reasons for listing. We have lots of people (SimonP for instance, who began all of this) who think that "non-encylopedic" or "non-notable" are not acceptable reasons for listing articles. But yet many, many, many of the articles on VfD are listed for those very reasons, and many, many, many of them pass consensus vote. This is an end-run by SimonP and the people who hold the opinions he holds, to set their, and only their, approval on VfD.
I believe it was SimonP himself (forgive me if I'm wrong) who, in his position as sysop, was making personal opinions on whether or not articles which HAD consensus to be deleted, should remain in the encyclopedia solely because HE did not believe that the reason for listing was valid, even though there were sufficient votes for removing the article. Instead, he was deleting the completed votes without deleting the articles in question.
RickK
__________________________________ Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday! Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web http://birthday.yahoo.com/netrospective/
Rick wrote:
This is an end-run by SimonP and the people who hold the opinions he holds, to set their, and only their, approval on VfD.
I proposed this, and I have no idea who the hell this SimonP is. If you're going to condemn the proposer of this, please refer to something I've actually done or said.
I believe it was SimonP himself (forgive me if I'm wrong) who, in his position as sysop, was making personal opinions on whether or not articles which HAD consensus to be deleted, should remain in the encyclopedia solely because HE did not believe that the reason for listing was valid, even though there were sufficient votes for removing the article. Instead, he was deleting the completed votes without deleting the articles in question.
Which is why the nominations that shouldn't have been there in the first place shouldn't have been run through the page.
Is the [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy]] actually of any importance, or is it purely decorative?
- d.