[WikiEN-l] Article Rescue Squadron: Combat medics urgently needed

[SJ]

This is a great initiative.  I've run across a few excellent articles
that were deleted -- by finding them through google searches and web
links, and discovering the target article was gone -- because they had
"only N ghits" and were on prod for 3 days --- or worse, rewritten
with more information and deleted speedily as recreations.

There should be a clear exception in the speedy policy on recreations
that exempts anything that is an attempt to improve on an article
deleted for lack of sources or non-notability.

SJ

On 7/13/07, Ben Yates <bluephonic at gmail.com> wrote:
> Exactly -- this is not an inclusionist project (and certainly not a
> "radically inclusionist" one); it has nothing to say about what topics
> should be included and what should not.  It is about improving
> articles about topics that are uncontroversially encyclopedic and
> includable because lately some people have been deleting them.
>
> See Andrew Lih on the topic (and you don't see him pissed off very
> often): http://www.andrewlih.com/blog/2007/07/10/unwanted-new-articles-in-wikipedia/
>
> On 7/13/07, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> > Steven Walling wrote:
> > > generally, it seems to be a project built to do what user:Alasnohn has been
> > > doing for high school AFDs; dredging up a large amount of references from
> > > non-independent sources and local sports coverage to try and salvage
> > > articles that, because they are nn and useless except as draws for student
> > > vandals, were unsourced previously and rightly nominated for deletion.
> > >
> > > On 7/13/07, Pedro Sanchez <pdsanchez at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> It's yet another army-fantasy like project (think of countervandalism
> > >> unit). But it's a good place where they can gather the terminal
> > >> patients so we can go and help them die in peace instead of
> > >> lenghtening their suffering instead of looking them by ourselves.
> > >> Thank you for that
> >
> > What heaping boatload of bad faith you guys are assuming.
> >
> > The described purpose of the project is not "keep everything at all
> > costs!", it's "make things that might be deleted due to bad quality into
> > things that will be kept due to good quality." It explicitly limits
> > itself to topics where the _topic_ is a valid one to have an article on.
> > Is this not a worthy goal?
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Ben Yates
> Wikipedia blog - http://wikip.blogspot.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


-- 
++SJ