On 13/09/05, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
No, AfD doesn't have "discussions", it has simple majority votes. PWDS would force *discussion* over voting, as the power to delete/undelete would belong to everyone, therefore everyone would have to agree on a course of action :-).
AfD emphatically _does_ have discussions. They are _not_ majority votes. If they are being closed as such by some, then fry those who are closing incorrectly. Wikipedia works by consensus. Moving the discussion to the talk page does precisely nothing to alter that. AfD is _not_ a majority vote. (Incidentally, just to dispel a popular myth, in the English language, vote != majority vote. I do distinguish between them.)
Even if you say it twice, it doesn't change reality - AfD is a voting page.
So I ask this:
- What do we hope to gain by introducing PWDS?
- How do we handle the vandals who will blank a page (as many already
do for vandalism) then to claim "but I was deleting the article"?
1.See everything I've written and the above link 2. Any deletion blanking would still have to be justified on the talk page as per the Deletion policy, and also indicated in the edit summary - if not, it would simply be reverted as vandalism.
- OK, I'll take a slightly different tack. Administrators are given
the power to delete articles because they are trusted. People know that they will not go and delete a little out-of-the-way page. But what is to stop a vandal or a troll from doing that? We are given no level of safety against this behaviour.
And that's different from vandals blanking pages as they already do, how?
Dan