On 1/28/06, Matt Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/27/06, Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com wrote:
That beiing so, I'd gently suggest that the Foundation *must* get involved in this. Deletion is a mess and the various deletion-related forums have become a law unto themselves. We can't do anything, arbcom is scared to do so, and so outside action is required.
Personally, it's not so much /scared/ as concerned it is outside the arbcom's jurisdiction/mandate. The arbitration committee has not considered content disputes within its remit, for one thing. Behaviour and adherence to policy ARE, but I think it would require an actual, specific case to be brought before the arbcom.
Agreed. There have been tentative advances on this front, for instance in the recently concluded webcomics case where two issues were addressed: attempts to alter deletion policy without discussion, and alienating newcomers by smearing them as trolls and ridiculing them.
There have been some cases of editors using the laudable principle that the debate is not a vote as a kind of two-by-four with which to browbeat people who make too-brief statements. While it is desirable to have a good debate, this is not facilitated by having some participants haranguing others in this manner.
References to specific items in the undeletion policy are almost absent from the Deletion Review page, and some of the statements that are there go directly against the principles of the undeletion policy. A notice by me informing editors that I am temporarily undeleting pages that are subject to good faith nominations for undeletion has been removed twice on the pretext that my notice "wasn't discussed". There is in short a palpably abusive atmosphere in these forums. at least one such undeleted article has been deleted as "improperly undeleted." The presumption of bad faith is the norm.