[WikiEN-l] Another AfD example -- a serious proposal to fix it

[Sean Barrett]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

David Gerard stated for the record:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
> 
>>I do not know the exact solution to this problem, but this is part of an
>>ongoing problem with have *most particularly with bios of living people
>>and existing companies*.  "I haven't heard of this" seems to be an
>>instant excuse for "non-notable" and "AfD", which is offensive to the
>>subjects, when the real approach should be _at a bare minimum_ and
>>effort at dialogue with other editors *before* jumping to a "vote".
> 
> Jumping into VFD discussions with a reference to this email? Though
> let's see how many times the obnoxious have to be hit over the head
> with this before someone decides it's "spamming" and blocks them!
> 
> You see what I mean when I say that AFD/DRV consider themselves worlds
> unto themselves, and bitterly resist anything perceived as outside
> interference, i.e. the rest of the Wikipedia infrastructure.

Many of us have been saying for a long time that the *fD gangs are doing
active and hard-to-repair damage to the reputation of this encyclopedia.
 Of course, every time we do, the reply is an accusation that we are
mindless inclusionist, and no serious discussion can be held.

Well, here's a serious proposal to encourage discussion:

I propose <sigh> yet another level of bureaucracy -- a Deletion Review
Board (which would have nothing whatsoever to do with the useless
WP:VfU).  The Review Board would be empowered to penalize those who
nominate and those who vote support such egregiously careless and
/damaging/ deletions.  Deletions of unpublished garage bands can
continue just as they do today.

The penalties would be limited, perhaps to simply to "time-outs" of
various lengths -- prohibitions from participating in any *fD process --
and would primarily serve as a way of getting the attention of the
offenders that /they are damaging the encyclopedia/ with their
thoughtless assumptions of bad faith and personal attacks.  Any offenses
too great for that level of penalty would be dealt with by the ArbComm.

I would appreciate discussion of this suggestion, particularly by Jimbo
and my fellow ArbCommies.  Starting question: should we bash on it here,
or take it to a Meta page?

- --
 Sean Barrett     | The last thing I want to do is hurt
 sean at epoptic.org | you. But it's still on the list.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFD0Rj1MAt1wyd9d+URAraZAJ9Gw4gFI3T6XXu3t7G1AjuPtC3BKgCePy/w
y8W431jTSrZBH5UUr6ETo+A=
=yxLa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----