[WikiEN-l] Banality threshold

[Thomas Dalton]

On 29/09/2007, charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com
<charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> This is a new thread to discuss CSD A7.
>
> The Category for Speedy Deletion A7 is a menace. It is far too open to misuse. It should be replaced by something with far less discretion.
>
> My question is: we need a banality threshold, but which one? We do need articles speedied if they are without redeeming interest. A7 is broken, and builds on the idea that notability (another broken idea) and its "assertion" can be properly judged by individuals.
>
> What is there that can be put in its place? How can we better characterise "run-of-the-mill" ?

There is very little discretion involved in A7, as long as it is done
correctly. Any assertion of notability is enough to save an article,
however much you may disagree with it. The only case where I can see
issues is when the assertion is in the form of a statistic ("This web
comic gets 17 hits a day."), is that an assertion of notability, or
not? Perhaps some guidance on what to do with cases like that would be
good, but otherwise, I see no problem.