Well, not quite right up there with Rock Climbing, but it's nice to see the popular culture go up for the axe every once in a while. Although, we probably want to be careful, because folks may think it's a scientist and stamp their "delete" without looking.
Today, Ja Rule was nominated for deletion because, "There are no references or sources to back up any of the information in the article."
I still think it should be deleted, at least all content that is not referenced, after all, he may be a hoax.
KP
On 02/09/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
Well, not quite right up there with Rock Climbing, but it's nice to see the popular culture go up for the axe every once in a while. Although, we probably want to be careful, because folks may think it's a scientist and stamp their "delete" without looking.
Today, Ja Rule was nominated for deletion because, "There are no references or sources to back up any of the information in the article."
I still think it should be deleted, at least all content that is not referenced, after all, he may be a hoax.
KP
Can't we community sanction stupid Afds? Two snows in 1 month gets you a "ban" in refering an afd? or at least we can actually mention that the proposer has been snowed a couple of times in a month? sourcing a massive artist shouldn't be a problem but to use afd, mmmmm can i get my list out of all the people i hate an start nominating and hope afd is so bogged down that a few actually get deleted?
it sucks
On 02/09/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
Today, Ja Rule was nominated for deletion because, "There are no references or sources to back up any of the information in the article."
I still think it should be deleted, at least all content that is not referenced, after all, he may be a hoax.
Ha.
On 9/2/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com wrote:
Can't we community sanction stupid Afds?
Penalizing people for "being stupid" is an interesting approach. Tell us more. We could make a list of all the stupid people can be, and accord penalties for each... :-\
-stevertigo
On 9/2/07, stevertigo stvrtg@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/09/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
Today, Ja Rule was nominated for deletion because, "There are no references or sources to back up any of the information in the article."
I still think it should be deleted, at least all content that is not referenced, after all, he may be a hoax.
Ha.
On 9/2/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com wrote:
Can't we community sanction stupid Afds?
Penalizing people for "being stupid" is an interesting approach. Tell us more. We could make a list of all the stupid people can be, and accord penalties for each... :-\
-stevertigo
In all fairness this is one of the few times I've seen anyone make a monumental mistake in a nomination and realize it, but that wouldn't have made the post any fun. Still it would taken less of his time to realize that Ja Rule is a bit too well known to be nominated for deletion for being non-notable, than it took to prepare the AfD.
But, still, no penalties for people smart enough to realize when they've acted stupidly. And, Steve, I think it would be too long for a list.
KP
K P wrote:
On 9/2/07, stevertigo stvrtg@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/09/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
Today, Ja Rule was nominated for deletion because, "There are no references or sources to back up any of the information in the article."
I still think it should be deleted, at least all content that is not referenced, after all, he may be a hoax.
Ha.
On 9/2/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com wrote:
Can't we community sanction stupid Afds?
Penalizing people for "being stupid" is an interesting approach. Tell us more. We could make a list of all the stupid people can be, and accord penalties for each... :-\
-stevertigo
In all fairness this is one of the few times I've seen anyone make a monumental mistake in a nomination and realize it, but that wouldn't have made the post any fun. Still it would taken less of his time to realize that Ja Rule is a bit too well known to be nominated for deletion for being non-notable, than it took to prepare the AfD.
But, still, no penalties for people smart enough to realize when they've acted stupidly. And, Steve, I think it would be too long for a list.
KP
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[[List of stupid things]], maybe? (Anyone actually creating that gets a troutwhack, especially since it'll be 50 gigabytes long and still far from completion.)
Also, I fail to see how the occasional poor decision in nominating for AfD leads people to yell that it's broken. The AfD quite correctly attracted tons of keep opinions and was correctly snowballed as such. Looks like AfD worked just fine right there, a page that shouldn't have been deleted was never in danger of it.
That being said, lack of sourcing -is- a serious issue. I had to remove a whole section from that article about "Disputes". Musician or not, it is a BLP, and we can't just have unsourced stuff about legal problems and the like in there.
On 9/2/07, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
K P wrote:
On 9/2/07, stevertigo stvrtg@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/09/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
Today, Ja Rule was nominated for deletion because, "There are no references or sources to back up any of the information in the article."
I still think it should be deleted, at least all content that is not referenced, after all, he may be a hoax.
Ha.
On 9/2/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com wrote:
Can't we community sanction stupid Afds?
Penalizing people for "being stupid" is an interesting approach. Tell us more. We could make a list of all the stupid people can be, and accord penalties for each... :-\
-stevertigo
In all fairness this is one of the few times I've seen anyone make a monumental mistake in a nomination and realize it, but that wouldn't have made the post any fun. Still it would taken less of his time to realize that Ja Rule is a bit too well known to be nominated for deletion for being non-notable, than it took to prepare the AfD.
But, still, no penalties for people smart enough to realize when they've acted stupidly. And, Steve, I think it would be too long for a list.
KP
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[[List of stupid things]], maybe? (Anyone actually creating that gets a troutwhack, especially since it'll be 50 gigabytes long and still far from completion.)
Also, I fail to see how the occasional poor decision in nominating for AfD leads people to yell that it's broken. The AfD quite correctly attracted tons of keep opinions and was correctly snowballed as such. Looks like AfD worked just fine right there, a page that shouldn't have been deleted was never in danger of it.
That being said, lack of sourcing -is- a serious issue. I had to remove a whole section from that article about "Disputes". Musician or not, it is a BLP, and we can't just have unsourced stuff about legal problems and the like in there.
But what was more important, removing the improper material from a BLP or nominating it for deletion? In my opinion, cleaning up a BLP.
Two of the recent nominations were as I mentioned before, DAVID CREWS and the one with the absurdly long name, both made a little extra work for people because the nominators couldn't have been bothered to at least move them to a correct name and speedy the absurd spellings or titles.
And, it's not an occasional poor decisions, there are poor decisions all of the time, every day on AfD, nominations because an article hasn't been edited in 2 months or something, nominations because an academic isn't as notable as a pokeman card, and when the nominator can bother to follow it for all this time, but can't spend a second to clean it up.
I think you should be required to tag and do the minimum clean-up if you can't be bothered to check to see if the subject is notable, at the very least.
I also wonder if allowing people to nominate in in the first 30 days or so is such a good idea. I personally think all these people who join and start AfDing right away are simply sock puppets.
KP
And, it's not an occasional poor decisions, there are poor decisions all of the time, every day on AfD, nominations because an article hasn't been edited in 2 months or something, nominations because an academic isn't as notable as a pokeman card, and when the nominator can bother to follow it for all this time, but can't spend a second to clean it up.
Try nomination on a university because it "doesn't assert notability" on for size. From the "but X cannot be speedily deleted", I'm rather glad the nominator is not an administrator...
KTC
WPedians are human, even administrators. There are very few processes depending on people that work with more than 95% accuracy--especially when judgment is involved. Given that, bad examples will always be forthcoming.
As a first approach I ask just 3 things: 1/ that we try to ensure our error rate for rejection is 5%, not 20%. 2/ that we have a more flexible and accessible process for detecting, reviewing and correcting mistakes, and use it more frequently and with greater participation. 3/ that those who insist on acting against policy but instead as they wish policy would be, do not become, or remain, administrators.
On 9/5/07, Kwan Ting Chan ktc@ktchan.info wrote:
And, it's not an occasional poor decisions, there are poor decisions all of the time, every day on AfD, nominations because an article hasn't been edited in 2 months or something, nominations because an academic isn't as notable as a pokeman card, and when the nominator can bother to follow it for all this time, but can't spend a second to clean it up.
Try nomination on a university because it "doesn't assert notability" on for size. From the "but X cannot be speedily deleted", I'm rather glad the nominator is not an administrator...
KTC
-- Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 02/09/07, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
[[List of stupid things]], maybe? (Anyone actually creating that gets a troutwhack, especially since it'll be 50 gigabytes long and still far from completion.)
{{dynamiclist}}...
On 9/2/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/09/07, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
[[List of stupid things]], maybe? (Anyone actually creating that gets a troutwhack, especially since it'll be 50 gigabytes long and still far from completion.)
{{dynamiclist}}...
Then could I nominate it for deletion on the grounds that it was largely incomplete and unlikely to be completed? I've seen that one used successfully, rather recently, too.
KP
On 9/2/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/2/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/09/07, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
[[List of stupid things]], maybe? (Anyone actually creating that gets a troutwhack, especially since it'll be 50 gigabytes long and still far from completion.)
{{dynamiclist}}...
Then could I nominate it for deletion on the grounds that it was largely incomplete and unlikely to be completed? I've seen that one used successfully, rather recently, too.
michael west wrote:
On 02/09/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
Today, Ja Rule was nominated for deletion because, "There are no references or sources to back up any of the information in the article."
Can't we community sanction stupid Afds?
Hmmm... That makes me tempted to build an AfD scorekeeper bot and a service that lets you easily check rankings. Sort of like eBay feedback percentages. Unless one exists already?
William
On 9/2/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com wrote:
Can't we community sanction stupid Afds? Two snows in 1 month gets you a "ban" in refering an afd?
If that is to be retroactive, I eagerly await JzG's return in 2012.
—C.W.
Charlotte Webb wrote:
On 9/2/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com wrote:
Can't we community sanction stupid Afds? Two snows in 1 month gets you a "ban" in refering an afd?
If that is to be retroactive, I eagerly await JzG's return in 2012.
Having too formulaic a guideline probably wouldn't be a good idea, but _some_ means of limiting AfD nominations by "vexatious litigants" would be really nice.
At the moment, I'm sighing at a guy who nominated every article relating to a particular major role-playing game system in one massive group AfD. That AfD was quite rightly snowed, but since some of the articles did look iffy the AfD was closed without prejudice. So he's now apparently systematically renominating every article individually with the same "NN" argument for each. He really should have got the clue from the result of the first AfD that that's not the right approach.
I know that ultimately the wiki way will prevail, but it's so spirit-sapping in the meantime...
On 9/6/07, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
Charlotte Webb wrote:
On 9/2/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com wrote:
Can't we community sanction stupid Afds? Two snows in 1 month gets you a "ban" in refering an afd?
If that is to be retroactive, I eagerly await JzG's return in 2012.
Having too formulaic a guideline probably wouldn't be a good idea, but _some_ means of limiting AfD nominations by "vexatious litigants" would be really nice.
Failing that, could we at least prevent such articles from being "speedied"... Hmm.
—C.W.
On 9/2/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
Today, Ja Rule was nominated for deletion because, "There are no references or sources to back up any of the information in the article."
Might be another reason.
"Jam Master Jay records". An article the nominator created was nominated for deletion on Sept 1st.
He nominated "Ja Rule" on Sept 2nd.
Can you say "WP:POINT"?
On 9/3/07, Ron Ritzman ritzman@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/2/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
Today, Ja Rule was nominated for deletion because, "There are no references or sources to back up any of the information in the article."
Might be another reason.
"Jam Master Jay records". An article the nominator created was nominated for deletion on Sept 1st.
He nominated "Ja Rule" on Sept 2nd.
Can you say "WP:POINT"?
Bad me. I've been checking that lately and finding that to be the case on many of these AfDs--it's a rather pointed place.
KP