Jimmy Wales wrote:
I think I'm going to have to take a serious look at AfD, because if it is this far broken, there's something seriously seriously worse about it than I thought.
Well, uh, yeah, that's what I've been saying for a year ;-)
I suggest first going to and participating in [[WT:AFD]], outlining the problems and asking for AFD regulars to come up with in-house solutions.
- d.
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of David Gerard
Jimmy Wales wrote:
I think I'm going to have to take a serious look at AfD,
because if it
is this far broken, there's something seriously seriously
worse about
it than I thought.
Well, uh, yeah, that's what I've been saying for a year ;-)
And not just once or twice, or as a mild aside, neither...
Peter (Skyring)
On 2/23/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I think I'm going to have to take a serious look at AfD, because if it is this far broken, there's something seriously seriously worse about it than I thought.
Well, uh, yeah, that's what I've been saying for a year ;-)
I suggest first going to and participating in [[WT:AFD]], outlining the problems and asking for AFD regulars to come up with in-house solutions.
I was going to suggest some text like the following at the top of deletion policy:
The priorities for participants in Articles for Deletion are as follows, '''in this order''': #Removing articles harmful to Wikipedia and its goals, such as copyright violations and libellous material. #Improving badly-written articles on suitable topics, to produce articles worthy of inclusion. #Keeping all articles on suitable topics #Removing articles whose topics are not notable enough or otherwise suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. #Following deletion process with good faith and civility.
...followed by some examples of conflicting priorities, and how it's ok to occasionally violate policy when it is clear what the best end result would be.
Steve