[WikiEN-l] Meanwhile, AfD grinds on

[Anthony DiPierro]

On 10/17/05, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/17/05, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
> > "Uncontested" != "junk"
> >
>
> However it does mean that for five days no one who visted the article
> thought it was worth keeping


> Why are we going around deleting articles like this?
>
> Becuase aprently no one cares about them.

 No one who "visted the article" in 5 days is not equivalent to "no one",
even "aprently". Even then, there are usually people who "vist" articles who
don't know how to vote, don't care to vote, or aren't allowed to vote.

> 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.
>
> Time use of course it would be fairly trival to create with {{agree}}
> (argee with nominator) so if comments were really required it wouldn't
> do any good.

 That would imply that the nominator actually gave a reason, though. If
that's true, and the person making the comment actually does his/her own
check to see if the nominator was correct, then yeah, I guess that fact is
useful.
 But if all the nominator has come up with is the circular argument that the
article should be deleted because it isn't notable, then saying that you
agree with such a vacuous statement is meaningless.

--
> geni

 Anthony