[WikiEN-l] Banality threshold

[geni]

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.

You can replace it with whatever you like won't have any effect on
admin actions they will just find some other rational. CSD is for the
most part descriptive rather than prescriptive.


> My question is: we need a banality threshold, but which one? We do need articles >speedied if they are without redeeming interest.

"interest" is not a deletion or keeping criteria.

>A7 is broken, and builds on the idea that notability (another broken
idea) and its >"assertion" can be properly judged by individuals.

For the most part it can. Sure you get a few errors but given the
numbers involved there will always be an issue with that.

> What is there that can be put in its place? How can we better characterise >"run-of-the-mill" ?

Really doesn't matter. Admins will continue to delete that class of
articles whatever you call it.

-- 
geni