Snowspinner at gmail.com
Mon Oct 9 22:47:22 UTC 2006
On Oct 9, 2006, at 5:10 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> Unilateral deletions are performed hundreds of times a month by
> Wikipedia Admins on the basis of their own judgement. Perhaps I
> shouldn't find it shocking that some [[troll (Internet)|opportunist]]
> found it useful take advantage of Danny's high profile in order to
> play out a little bit of performance art.
Since we're apparently dispensing with civility here, get off your
soapbox and engage reality. Any unilateral speedy deletion that went
against three AfDs would be overturned in a heartbeat, and you know
it. Which is as it should be.
> It is unfortunate and uncharacteristic to see you equate the elevation
> of experienced judgement and consideration over strict policy
> conformance with a lack of deference to the community.
Yes, because it's certainly not like the community has expressed
their opinion on this. Three times.
> It appears to me that in this thread we have seen numerous complaints
> about HOW this was carried out masquerade as complaints about what was
> done... The reality is that the claim that the deletion was clearly
> inappropriate can not be supported by fact: no answer was given to the
> point that we lack articles on the numerous similar devices which have
> an equal claim of notoriety, nor has our oh so violated community
> bothered to even write a section on this oh so notable product in the
> article it was later redirected to.
Yes. Because clearly the lack of other articles on a topic is
evidence of something. That is, after all, why we've done away with
article creation - since there are no substantial holes in our coverage.
> Perhaps our mere colocation on the project like the castaways in my
> example makes us, by definition, a community. But if that is really
> the destiny of the English Wikipedia community then it is a failure by
> my standards... and I hope such an end would be a failure by all of
> your standards as well.
While I agree with you about the deterioration of the en community,
this is a downright stupid issue to try to hijack into this
consideration. Danny crossed a line that's important on a topic that
is far from a clear case (As evidenced by the fact that three AfDs
passed with a vote to keep). That's bad.
More information about the WikiEN-l