On 6/10/07, David Mestel david.mestel@gmail.com wrote:
Except that since there seem to be more articles requiring improvement than there are people willing or able to devote time to improving them, the question is not "would we want the article if it were improved?", but "do we think that the article in its current state is beneficial to the quality of the encyclopedia?".
I'd say the key question is closer to "do we think that the article in its current state is beneficial to the job of writing an encyclopedia". Wikipedia is, after all, a continual work in progress.
On 10/06/07, Charlotte Webb charlottethewebb@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/10/07, The Mangoe the.mangoe@gmail.com wrote:
Since it isn't, it gets put through AfD to force someone to put up a real reason. I don't think there's anything wrong with this, other than people write this kind of article in the first place instead of providing the notability themselves.
If you have been nominating, for deletion, articles which you believe could (or even should) be improved rather than deleted, please cease and desist right now.
—C.W.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-- David _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l