On 1/20/06, Sean Barrett sean@epoptic.org wrote:
-----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 Deletions of unpublished garage bands can continue just as they do today.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?
So no action against those who vote to keep stuff that should be deleted? Remeber a keep vote is worth more than a delete vot on AFD.
-- geni