[WikiEN-l] editorial oversight, re: afd, fac, etc.

[geni]

On 1/13/07, K P <kpbotany at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The AfD for Rock climbing is just the most outrageous of recent nominations
> that contributes to the impression that AfD is broken
>
> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rock_climbing
>

AFD appeared to work fine the article was kept.

>
> I don't think it's broken, but it is out of control, essentially this was
> nominated for deletion because the OR should be removed and that would leave
> a stub, yet being a stub is not a criterion for deletion. There are many
> such AfDs without valid reasons for deletion, for fairly basic articles--the
> guidelines for proposing AfD are pretty much  ignored by a number of editors
> who appear to stroll Wikipedia looking for things they can nominate  because
> the article rubs them the wrong way for some reason.  That Wikipedia got to
> the point where it considered Rock climbing for deletion, even if it was
> speedy kept, may be an indicator of concern--maybe it was prank, though.
>

It is quite hard to come up with a system that prevents stuff from
being nominated for deletion that doesn't create other problems. The
odd completely flawed listing isn't much of a problem.


-- 
geni