[WikiEN-l] Pakistani politicians and systemic bias

[charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com]

"John Lee" wrote
 
> But recall, in this case, how would you salvage the article's content? What
> useful article could be made out of the content contributed? 

I don't accept the framing. As far as I'm concerned, a deletion is an assertion that the topic is unwelcome. In other words that no useful stub can be made. Not that _no useful stub can be made out of the words on the page_. I'm sure we used to be better at this. 

> As I said, in this
> case we aren't working to establish whether we deserve an article on this
> particular topic, but whether this particular article as it stands would be
> a useful article at all (or could be made into one), assuming this topic
> should be covered. In this case, reading the original revision, I don't see
> how we could salvage it.

You are working with the narrow version of "salvage", basically copy-editing only. That is why I think the approach shown is blinkered. That is why I think systemic bias is the background. As I say, we used to be better at welcoming new articles as prompts to create something.

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam