[WikiEN-l] Administrator coup / mass deletions

[Charles Matthews]

Ryan Delaney wrote:

<snip>
> But this is an argument that inclusionists always make to anyone who
> tries to delete an article that is missing something crucial -- they
> put the burden on other people, rather than themselves. 
<snip>

Yes, there's something to this line of argument. Why are PRODs not being 
used to clean up "very neglected BLPs"? Presumably because (i) the PROD 
would fail, but (ii) the failure, either as a take-down of the tagging 
or an admin rejection, would not result in a clean-up of the article. 
So, while we are discussing processes and mechanisms, how to put the 
onus on someone who untags a BLP that has been prodded to make an 
improvement in sourcing (when the concern is poor referencing)?

I think no one has yet mentioned that a bot is reminding some of us (no 
way to know how far this has got) that we have in the past created BLPs 
that have remained unreferenced. If this bot has now done a full pass, 
it would explain to some extent why these deletions are happening. 
(Could be a complete coincidence, but I doubt it.)

It might be technically possible to have a BLP-PROD (one of the ideas 
being kicked around) such that the untaggers were logged, and prompted 
later in the case that there were still no references. In any case we do 
need to get off the OMG track to thinking about tweaking current methods.

Charles