On 12/11/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
I agree, DRV is making it quite hard to get valid stuff undeleted, but if one allows just two people to agree on stuff like this I expect a lot of deletion wars. Addressing people ignoring the need to undelete when new evidence is presented in DRV seems more useful to me. Have you got any particular case in mind?
Not just one case. I take issue with the general tenor of discussion on DRV, which contrary to the undeletion policy actively discounts and, with considerable success, attempts to disenfranchise views on the acceptability of the article content. Sometimes I've seen a statement along the lines of "I don't think this should have been deleted, but the AfD was within process so we cannot undelete it."
I have attempted several times to quote the undeletion policy "Article wrongly deleted (ie that Wikipedia would be a better encyclopedia with the article restored)", but the clique on that page does not recognise the undeletion policy and reverts any such edits, claiming that there is no consensus for them. There are false claims in templates on the page to the effect that this isn't the place to go if you disagree with an AfD result--which is utter nonsense. In short, the undeletion policy is being actively traduced by DRV.