[WikiEN-l] MUD history dissolving into the waters of time

[Michel Vuijlsteke]

2009/1/10 Fred Bauder <fredbaud at fairpoint.net>

> "Wikipedia editors should really have enough knowledge about their
> subject matter to make choices based on good judgement rather than strict
> adherence to flawed guidelines. Any guideline, law or contract doesn't
> absolve one from using one's brain — these things are just frameworks for
> handling worst-case scenarios better.
>
> http://www.unwesen.de/articles/wikipedia_on_mud_history
>
> This is what is frustrating to me. Although I am not recognized expert on
> MUDs, I know enough that the decision made is obviously wrong, while
> those making the decision seem entirely innocent of the subject.
>

Oh, we shouldn't worry that there's a hole in Wikipedia MUD coverage where
Threshold used to be -- from the AfD:


   - *KEEP*. Read all other MUDs in category, Threshold is definitely most
   notable of them all with the most independent press coverage. [...]
   - *Comment* WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS>,
      for one; we'll get to deleting those other MUD articles in due
time, if it's
      merited. [...]


I don't know know about any of you, but when the first thing on the closing
admin's talk page is "I have deleted over 1,700 pages on Wikipedia, through
C:CSD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C:CSD> and
WP:AFD<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AFD>.
A very small percentage of that, 2-3%, have been listed at deletion
review<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:DRV>,
and only a handful have been overturned -- and not a single one has been
because of "corruption" or bad
faith<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AGF>.",
I get a really bad feeling.

Michel