[WikiEN-l] Rampant Deletionism

[Anthere]

From: "The Cunctator" 

>The removal of any guidelines for inclusion on vfd (including the most
>important one: when in doubt, don't delete) is criminal.

>So is the separation of guidelines for "regular" people and for
>administrators.

>So is the "merge and delete" attitude. Merging entries into big messes
>under general titles is much, much worse for the long term health of
>Wikipedia than having many entries with specific titles.

>So is the "kill all ephemera" rampage, since presuming that we know now
>what will be considered ephemera 10, 20, and 1000 years from now is
>pathetically presumptive, especially considering there are NO SPACE
>LIMITATIONS on Wikipedia.

>So is the obvious takeover of the VfD page by a horde of deletionists.
>Once upon a time one vote against deletion was enough to stop deletion.
>And that is all it should take.

Once upon a time, pages could not be deleted by anyone but Jimbo and Larry
Once upon a time, every user had a voice for or against deletion, not only respected old hands (with at least xx days of presence, and at least nn number of major edits)
Once upon a time, a "regular" user could ask for the undeletion of an article and see his request respectfully and generously temporarily acknowledged
Once upon a time, it was also possible for a sysop to undelete articles upon someone asking to see the content, this without being repeatedly outed
Once upon a time, things were decided per consensus, not per democracy 50% + 1 voice (undeletion rule)
Once upon a time, there were not so many rules that makes en looks like a french administration
Once upon a time, users did not need to be sysops to dare weeding wikipedia
Once upon a time, users dared weed wikipedia without fear of being said all the time their weeding does not follow the rules
Once upon a time, a rule was not so much carved in stone that it could not be challenged
Once upon a time, it was easier :-)
 
>So is, imho, the renewed assault on the sep. 11 pages, but I guess
>that's to be expected, since the argument "some people put so much work
>into carefully researching the reports on the lives of the people killed
>that day and creating entries for them, and we can't be bothered to do
>the same for other people who have been killed, so we should delete all
>the entries" will never die.

Some people said they would not make donations, because there was no reason their donation would be used to support the existence of the 9/11 memorial :-((
Some people suggested wikipedia memorial should also welcome all the iraki victims for npov :-((((
At least, this is not deletionism
 
Today, I am negative, tomorrow, I will be positive :-)




---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20031106/17f30741/attachment.htm