[WikiEN-l] Meanwhile, AfD grinds on

[Keith Old]

Why would it be a redirect to his college especially as that article may
contain nothing relevant to his work and as academics often leave their
university to work elsewhere. If it had been merged, where is the
appropriate place to merge it?

AfD is a human institution and as such is not perfect. The way that it will
work best is with the active participation of Wikipedians.

On 10/17/05, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/16/05, Travis Mason-Bushman <travis at gpsports-eng.com> wrote:
> >When you have 150
> > AFD noms per day, it is absurd to suggest that there is some sort of
> > obligation to explain votes, especially when so many nominations are
> > uncontested junk.
>
> "Uncontested" != "junk"
>
> We just had an uncontested deletion of an article, and VFU was about
> to treat the application for undeletion with its usual feckless "the
> process was followed so keep deleted" idiocy.
>
> Yes, people who think that an article *must* be deleted *should* be
> required to explain why.
>
> Every single time.
>
> Why is this a problem?
>
> If this professor Wolters really had been such an inconsequential
> fellow, the article should have been redirect to the article about his
> college. If he was more important but still not for an article of his
> own then the article could have been merged.
>
> Why are we going around deleting articles like this? Why are people
> seriously suggesting that we're doing it in such numbers that nobody
> need even give a reason any more? That's utterly bonkers.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>