Or, both camps could assume good faith and relax a bit, each not thinking that the "other guys" are a bunch of deranged encyclopedia-haters who want to destroy everything in an orgy of deletion and/or garage band stubs. :) A lot of people are currently disagreeing over what sorts of articles merit inclusion in Wikipedia, but it's not like most of those people think Wikipedia's going to go down in flames if the "wrong" standards are picked. At least, they shouldn't. Wikipedia is more resistant than that.
Well ten out of ten for bring posertive. People have been kicking the idea of deleteion refome for a while. it hasn't happened becuase we haven't yet completely exausted the option of doing nothing. untill that time happens of it's own accord rather than trying to force it there is very little chance indeed of getting a consensus.
Are there no inclusionist admins who would go on "deletion log patrol" if such a thing became common?
have you any idea how dull that would be? it's not like there is a shortage of other boring admin tasks.
Would you worry about a corresponding problem of unchecked undeletion?
not really since it is much less common so it would be a lot less effort to cheack. Pluss everyone can see when something is undeleted.
As one possible alternative, the "pure wiki deletion" method of simply blanking pages would make it a lot easier to double-check and revert by non-admins.
See WP:CP for why that isn't even legal.