[Wikipedia-l] Entries getting delete...

[Ray Saintonge]

Maury Markowitz wrote:

>>Despite the objections raised from time to time about this, I fail to
>>see the issue. I think it boils down to the generic mistrust of all
>>administrators that certain people who are not administrators seem to
>>harbour.
>>    
>>
>
>I've been a contributer to the wiki for five years and an admin for three or 
>four. I object to this sort of behavor, and it has nothing to do with 
>"generic mistrust of all administrators". 
>
It has everything to do with generic mistrust of administrators because 
it is what creates it.  These people who go ahead and delete things 
following no counsel but there own, and without any effort to correct 
the situation produce an atmosphere where no-one feels certain what an 
admin will delete next.  If we were confident that they were restraining 
themselves to deleting pure vandalism nobody would become concerned.  
Instead their laziness and impatience to have a high quota of deleted 
garbage prevents them from doing minimal searches or trying to start a 
dialogue with the contributor woh was likely acting in good faith.  I 
can't stress enough that it's likely the leading cause of generic 
mistrust of administrators.

>Ok, here's my suggestions:
>
>In cases where tagging may result in an article, or significant portions of 
>it, being removed for reasons other than vandalism or similar, the tagger 
>must:
>
>1) place a note on the editor's talk page saying the article has been tagged
>2) place a note (NOT templated) on the article talk page explaining what the 
>problem is. "failed notability" is not good enough
>
>Any tags placed that fail to meet these can be summarily deleted. If they 
>are not removed, at the admin's leisure, they are _not_actionable_ until 
>someone DOES meet these criterion or does remove them. Additionally, 
>incorrect tags, prods on NPOV or notability for instance, should be 
>summarily removed. These would fix the vast majority of cases I come across.
>
That sounds good, though it is probably less important when only 
significant portions of an article are deleted.  At least then the 
deleted material is easily available through the article's history.

These lazy admins should be treated in the same way they treat 
contributors.  Persistent refusal to treat users with respect should be 
grounds to initiate a request to de-admin.

Ec