[Wikipedia-l] Deletions

[The Cunctator]

On 9/23/02 12:02 PM, "Khendon" <jason at jasonandali.org.uk> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 02:49:01PM +0100, tarquin wrote:
>>> I just don't have time to monitor the deletion police. I did
>>> notice a proposed deletion of [[poverty]] a dismal article about a dismal
>>> subject, which I thought rather unwise. It would seem on obvious candidate
>>> for editing and addition of more substantial material rather than
>>> deletion. 
>> I objected to the deletion proposal for [[poverty]].
>> It was a lousy, pathetic stub, but it's a serious topic which Wikipedia
>> should cover.
>> Deleting that stub only puts off the day when we write an article on it.
> 
> I'm not convinced it works that way, inexperienced wikipedian that I am.
> Speaking personally, if I notice a "full" link then I'll likely as not
> pass over it. If I notice an "empty" link then I'm much more likely to
> consider whether I could write an article on the subject.

It's certainly the case that different people work different ways. That's
why this is an issue. If deletions were revertible this would be much less
of an issue. That way people who wished to could delete what they consider
useless stubs and those that don't consider them useless could undelete
them. (And that should be the end of it; no deletion wars--one veto and the
issue is dead.) Of course there are still many problems with that.

Another suggestion: Automatic [[Mark this page a poor stub]], to give people
an obvious option other than putting poor stubs on Votes for deletion or
deleting them.