[WikiEN-l] Meanwhile, AfD grinds on

[Michael Turley]

On 10/13/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/13/05, Anthony DiPierro <wikispam at inbox.org> wrote:
> > On 10/12/05, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 10/13/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Since the VfD was voted on and closed properly according to procedure
> > > > VfU is unlikely to help.
> > >
> > > In practice no, but VFU *should* undelete pages on the basis that
> > > Wikipedia is better with them than without. It's in the undeletion
> > > policy; the fact that there's a strong resistance to actually
> > > implementing the undeletion policy is saddening.
> >
> >
> > That's certainly the way it used to be, but this changed at some point:
> > "This process should *not* be used simply because you disagree with a
> > deletion debate's reasoning — only if you think the debate was interpreted
> > incorrectly by the closer. This page is about *process*, not content." Not
> > sure who added that, and whether or not there was a vote to completely
> > change the undeletion process, but that's right at the top of the page now.
> >
> > Recreations of deleted pages without a VfU are
> > > > speediable
> > >
> > > Recreation of pages deleted *under the deletion policy* (which does
> > > actually apply here).
> >
> >
> > One reason not to improve an article while it's under a VfD debate, unless
> > you are sure it's going to win. I've seen a number of times when articles
> > were improved significantly after most people voted, they were deleted based
> > on those old votes, and now that newly improved content was speediable.
> >
> Isn't that an easy VFU candidate.
> "This article improved significantly during its time on AFD but ended
> up deleted based on old votes." Such requests are easily undeleted.
>
> Try to get such articles undeleted first and see if VFU is really as
> ineffective as you think.

I've monitored VFU for a while, and participated occasionally, but
mostly, it's become a self validation tool where AfD delete voters
gather and pat each other on the back for doing the "right thing"
where no consideration of anything other than the AfD process itself
is permitted.  If you didn't see the AfD nomination in the first
place, well, that's just too bad, they say.  It no longer matters
whether the content is useful or valuable anymore, it's all about
"enforcing" the "consensus" of the few regulars at AfD.  Anyone who's
looked at it with a critical eye knows this already.  If AfD needs a
"dynamite enema", VFU may be the proper insertion point.

Even simply asking for the content of a deleted article gets you
suspicious eye from some with "petty AfD enforcement" attitudes.

--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused