[WikiEN-l] I better shut up (was vfd RFC)

[Phroziac]

With the PWDS, they wouldn't show up as existing.
Why can't we just redirect ones that aren't encyclopedic to something
live WP:VAIN for vanity pages?

On 8/5/05, Ben E. <bratsche1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't know if this is a totally acceptable choice. Some articles are
> simply not appropriate for the encyclopedia (borderline spam comes to mind,
> and articles with an inherent POV also could be used as an example). Keeping
> inappropriate blank articles would seem almost as an endorsement that we
> want the subject material in Wikipedia. Also, wouldn't these articles
> artificially inflate the total article count?
>  Ben/Bratsche
> 
>  On 8/5/05, Dan Grey <dangrey at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Heh, y'know we could do the pure wiki deletion thing right now,
> > without the links-going-red thing. I've not checked but I bet a lot of
> > VfD candidates don't have many incoming links.
> >
> > The only problem with articles that could need deletion, I believe, is
> > the chance of them showing up in searches. Diskspace etc doesn't
> > matter. To stop stuff getting searched whenever the index is updated,
> > is just to blank the article.
> >
> > We could delete VfD again and do this right now. Debates about
> > blanking held on talk pages. We could put a blank articles make links
> > red thing in later.
> >
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > PS: "More likely, the tagged articles
> > would just get forgotten and dropped into the abyss, I think" - not if
> > they had a category on them and we had a DPL.
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Bratsche-It means "viola!"
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> 


-- 
signature