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

Tue Jan 9 16:43:33 UTC 2007

As for what I find,
I only look on speedy or prod for things that I can quickly spot as
possible without opening them: anything that sounds like real science,
any corporate name I recognize, any research organization name I
recognize, anything that looks like a non-UK/US author or scientist.
These arent many, and I open 20 and get maybe 5 a day worth keeping.
The problem is the personal names I do not recognize. If I have time
to do them, I find another 5/day . Of these 10, usually 1 is absurd
enough that I keep a record of it--the time someone tried to delete
JISC (the major UK interuniversity consortium) or
James Bonner, the very famous biologist, with 3 honorary degrees and a
chair at an ivy.  If people with other backgrounds looked, and every
one was checked by an intelligent person, I think about 10% would be
worth keeping or at least discussing in AfD.

I remove the tag, make a quick fix, say so, and try to notify the main
or only editor. There's an automatic template for the purpose, and the
person placing the delete is supposed to notify the author--they do
about half the time. I add a line or two  of suggestions beyond the
template

For both speedy and prod, anyone other than the author can remove the
tag, and say so with a reason on the edit summary and the talk page.
That automatically stops the process. It is not necessary to be an
admin.

The problems are that: 90% are 1-line autobios or bios of one's
girlfriend or paragraphs naming the teachers in their elementary
school; 5% are long meaningless autobio; 5% are worth thinking about.

As for automatic criteria, it isnt even safe to delete the 1-liners
because some are a start  for a person worth doing. I prefer
intelligent humans. All US/UK villages even have long been entered
from the census returns. Same could be done elsewhere.

I am not concerned about AfDs. Once something is there, it gets at
least a few people.
I haven't kept track, but I think most are rightly decided.  There's
about 100 discussions a day. Join those 1 or 2 you think you could
really help. Learn the language that works, be realistic, avoid lost
causes, and earn respect from the others.

I do not think structural change is hopeless; but we shoudn't wait for
it. Direct action is the way.  WP like most large organizations is run
by a very small number of the members, but, unlike most, anyone with
time to particpate can join in that number. --David G.

On 1/8/07, Steve <subsume at gmail.com> wrote:
> Good. Thank you.
>
> I'm outlining it for brevity:
>
> 1) Bookmark and check [[Category:Candidates for speedy deletion]] regularly.
> Make it part of that hour or so per day when you're aimlessly clicking
> around the internet.
>
> 2) Even though you shouldn't have to, source to the point of compensation.
>
> 3) Call for back-up. Deletionists routinely summon their cheerleaders when
> things aren't going their way. Do the same.
>
> 4) Structural change -- fuggetaboutit.
>
> -S
>
> I am curious. About how many articles per day/week do you salvage from
> speedy del, David?
>
> On 1/8/07, David Goodman <dgoodmanny at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, there is a very definite tendency for deletion of anything about
> > a non UK/US person or institution, or an academic, or a classical
> > musician, or someone or something not recent enough to have material
> > on Google. The reason given is always "notability not asserted" and
> > people are actually marking for deletion anything which does not
> > literally countain the word "notability" in the first paragraph. This
> > is worst in speedy, because there are only a few hours at most to
> > review tthe listed items, and there's an ongoing discussion on the
> > talk page of WP:CSD.
> >
> > Ways to deal with it are well known, but I'm outlining it for clarity.
> > More people must to make the very considerable effort of reviewing at
> > least some of the deletions.  For speedys, they're at
> > [[Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion]]. Twice a day is not too
> > often.  Then there's  [[Category:Proposed deletion]] every few days is
> > enough, and similarly at AfD. You'll see me there-- I'm DGG.
> >
> > AfD is the easy part, because if an article gets to AfD, there are
> > enough people watching to speak up, and enough time to improve the
> > article.
> >
> > I'm not hopeful on structural change, because no structural change can
> > stand up to people wantonly ignoring the meaning of the rules.  But WP
> > is after all a cooperatively edited project, and individual people
> > joining in can make a difference.  To return to the original posting,
> > if a number of other people familiar with Indian material support
> > worthy articles, it will work.
> >
> > For individual articles, the way to do it is to put in a clearly
> > sufficient number of citations. from printed works. (accompanied by
> > English translations if necessary). I've found that specific citations
> > from peer-reviewed journals do help, if they are at all pertinent. So
> > do Ph.d. theses and even Masters theses.
> >
> > The other specific tactic some like-minded people are using is to
> > write the article on their user page, and invite comment individually
> > from people likely to be active in AfD.
> > Format does matter.
> >
> > -- David Goodman
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1/8/07, Steve <subsume at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > My are these slopes slippery this time of year. And me without my sled.
> > >
> > > -S
> > >
> > > On 1/8/07, Andre Engels <andreengels at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's a big hypothetical - if he had been born there, how much and
> > what
> > > > would he have written? Having somehting un-notable may not be a grave
> > > > error,
> > > > but having thousands of un-notable things clogs Wikipedia, makes
> > > > fact-checking harder and opens the doors wide to usage of Wikipedia
> > for
> > > > advertisement.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

-- 
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.