[WikiEN-l] AfD should be Arguments for Deletion

[Keith Old]

In that case, I will oppose it strongly.
 I am not opposed to the removal of things that are clearly of little note
but any process should be open and accountable.
 One man's cruft is often another man's interest and should not be removed
without due process.
 Regards
  *Keith*

 On 10/24/05, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
> Brian Haws wrote:
>
> >Martin Richards <Martin at velocitymanager.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>Just kidding, I never get involved with AFD at the moment as a >>kind
> of
> >>>silent protest at the silly way it functions. I do think the idea, or
> >>some
> >>>variant of it is great, and will go a long way to fixing this. However,
> >>I think the "Uncontested deletions"
> >>>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_reform/Proposals/Uncontested_deletions
> >>>is good too, some hybrid of the two ideas may be a really good
> >>solution.
> >>>
> >>>
> >I think the uncontested deletions proposal has a lot of potential as a
> stand alone way to funnel off easy and obvious deletion canidates from AFD.
> I'd like to hear more opinions about it on it's talk page..
> >
> >
> It will clearly be more efficient. AFD fails because it broadcasts the
> fact that an article is proposed for deletion. By confining the
> deletion discussion to the page itself (and its talk page, of course) it
> will limit interference by inclusionists who do not recognize the value
> of removing cruft from Wikipedia.
>
> Ec
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>