Ray Saintonge wrote:
Steven Walling wrote:
I think that a presumption of no AFD deletion for
the same policy reason is
a great idea, but not across the board. If someone brings up an AFD for a
new reason, it should be eligible. But definitely not for the exact same
reason infinitely. That's the problem that is going on as we speak for
Conservapedia. Some new user is disregarding the results of the previous
three or four AFD's and is once again saying it doesn't meet the
qualifications for inclusion that were exactly the same as the AFD's that
resulted in Keep. Preventing AFD's on the same policy might also work to
make nominators be more clear about referring to policy in their reasoning
for deletion. - VanTucky
You underestimate how resourceful determined people can be when they are
looking for new excuses to delete something. If there are multiple
reasons for deleting something the proposers should put them all on the
table right from the beginning, and not dragging the community painfully
through a one-by-one seriues of excuses.
Ec
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I'd generally tend more to say "Anyone who cannot accept that
consensus
could conceivably change on anything, any day, and that no decisions are
final, probably is working on the wrong project." Don't necessarily like
that sometimes, but I really don't see it being changed or
[[Wikipedia:Binding decisions]] getting made into policy anytime very soon.
That being said, I -would- like to see previous discussions on a matter
considered when someone starts a new one. If strong consensus was
already at one point reached on something, no one's saying you -can't-
overturn it-but you'll need an even stronger consensus that it hasn't
worked and it's time to change or overturn. If no consensus forms with
the new discussion, the status quo is left intact.
(Of course, this presumes we don't go with Slim/Tony's well-intentioned
but truly awful "All Wikipedians are equal, but some are more equal than
others" proposal.)