deletion process bites newcomers.
Come on, I've been a Wikipedian since February last year and I still
don't know the speedy deletion criteria. Do you expect a newcomer to
know them?
Chen Liping is among Singapore's top actresses. In terms of fame,
success, etc. she is probably only matched by Zoe Tay and Fann Wong.
The last time I read her article, it mentioned that she had won
several awards, and I added a sentence about her starring in the movie
The Best Bet. Was this an insufficient assertion of notability, that
the article was speedied?
2007/4/13, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net>et>:
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
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l