On 9/12/05, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
Had you done it a month ago... but people may be resistant to a second major upheaval in a couple of weeks, given the mutterings about the last one.
Excellent point. I agree completely. Even the most extreme inclusionists should recognize the fact that the deletionists are also trying in earnest to improve Wikipedia. Taking away something that many of them certainly see as <u>a primary tool in their toolbox</u> for improving Wikipedia for a month is not very considerate of their feelings.
Some form of "consensus to remove bad articles" is a vital organ to Wikipedia. Poison cannot be safely removed from a body by removing a vital organ. Something less extreme than suspending AfD/VfD is in order.
I never tire of explaining, again and again, at various times, my own views regarding certain articles worth keeping. I do this mainly because people who fully understand each others' motives seldom hold long term grudges.
I suggest we consider adding an optional "hidden from casual browsers" flag to Wikipedia article records, so that we would have a two level deletion system: complete crap gets speedied, bad articles get deleted as usual, good articles get kept as usual, and questionable articles are shuffled off to limbo where they can be further developed before being put back into the main articlespace. (I'm not even sure how much I like this idea myself, but thought I'd throw it out there.)