[Wikipedia-l] Entries for deletion.... issues from the Third World

[Steve]

As I see it, an "original research" / "nonverifiable" witchhunt started last
year. I think there is far too much "Wikipedia Caselaw" justifying removal
of content for mere suspicion.

I'm glad as well, and surprised this topic picked up so much steam!  I hope
the result is a few practical, actionable process changes to afd/speedy.

One thing I caught a lot of flak for was deleting votes that contained
absolutely no logic or even comment. My reasoning for this was based on
WP:LAW that explained the voting process isn't about a headcount, but about
reaching consensus. What consensus was such a voter attempting to reach?
(except, of course, technical consensus via majority rule).

-S


On 1/9/07, Robert Brockway <rbrockway at opentrend.net> wrote:
>
> I'm glad this topic has come up for discussion.  IMHO the entire deletion
> process (including speedy deletion) needs to come up for review.  It's too
> easy for articles to come up for AfD.
>
> It was interesting to sit in a Greater Toronto Area Linux User Group
> meeting recently and hear people list many (IMHO) reasonable articles that
> had been deleted.  This was a spontaneous discussion.  I bet if so many
> people in Toronto are concerned about the deletion process that we aren't
> alone.
>
> Rob
>