Guy Chapman aka JzG
guy.chapman at spamcop.net
Wed May 3 19:31:19 UTC 2006
On Wed, 03 May 2006 22:04:50 +1000, you wrote:
>For many people, nominating an article is no different from "voting" to delete.
This is true. In my case, I will nominate if there is a speedy
tag/untag war going on. In these cases I will have no opinion at all.
I usually remember to say so, I don't want a nom to count as a delete
vote. I rarely vote on my own nominations.
>I've been sporadically trying, along with several others, over the
>past few months to lift the quality of AfD nominations (the AfD
>nomination I link above, I would consider a minimum standard). An
>article nominated for deletion on the grounds of non-notability, for
>example, should include the reasons the nominator believes the article
>is non-notable, any steps he took to verify this (check history for
>number of editors, check "what links here", check Google, and so on),
>relevant policy if any, and so on. What it should *not* include is
>any bolded recommendation ("'''Delete''' NN"), insults, or the word
A worthy initiative. One problem is that there is such a torrent of
spam, vanity and other nonsense that it is hard to spot the difference
between these and genuine-but-bad articles on valid subjects. PROD
was a good idea to try to separate out the crud, but of course the
most blatant spam is often what people will wage the fiercest wars to
keep. The tone of discussion on music articles has improved markedly
since speedy A7 was extended to bands, most of the really vacuous
garage bands never make it to AfD now. But we're never going to fix
the problem with AfD without reducing the queues to manageable levels.
Maybe that means separate queues per subject area.
More information about the WikiEN-l