Message: 5 Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:01:51 +0000 From: "Tomos at Wikipedia" wiki_tomos@hotmail.com Subject: [Wikitech-l] Update to gfdl copyright notice needed To: wikitech-l@wikipedia.org Message-ID: LAW14-F15eD0WeOnFl000017101@hotmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Regarding Brion's point that there should be a good policy or monitoring system of deletion/undeletion - I think that's right. But I am not sure if all wikipedias became tolerant of unilateral deletion by admins. Have en., fr. and eo. all gone through that kind of change?
We practice unilateral deletion less than on the en. This is cultural I think. We are just less bold. This is also true for editing. Many editors explain they will make change in the talk page first, or contact the main editor when there is one. And many are quite disturbed when one remove some text from an article without previous warning. This is often seen as bad manners. I understood this is similar on ja. When one notice a bad new article, he either lists it on votes for deletion, or just blank it (so it can be noticed later on by an admin in the special:short pages). Questionable articles are very rarely deleted on sight...except by me I guess :-)
Still, unilateral deletions were practiced a couple of time, related to edit wars mostly.
For one, admins on Japanese wikipedia don't delete pages uniliterally. Stubs, testing (like "Hi there!"), pure junks (like falkjdslkjas) are turned to blank, but people don't list them on Votes for Deletion unless the page titles are really meaningless. There was once a discussion that we might start deleting these stuff, but the idea was to create an expedite process for those limited types of pages to be deleted, not uniliteral deletion.
I support deletion of junk pages for the following reason : as long as an article does not exist, the reader may see it in the link (red for example). He may click on it to create it, but if he only is a reader, he will not spent connexion time accessing to it (once he understood the system). If you keep the junk article, the link indicate there is an article. When the reader click on the link, he spends time just to access an empty article. He will be then disappointed. Not good for image :-)
ant
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org