Roberto Alfonso wrote:
Interestingly, this reminds me of a quote in Daniel Terdiman's article about his entry's AFD:
<<I asked a friend, Business 2.0 magazine senior editor Chris Taylor, about his Wikipedia entry, which was created in 2005 when he wrote about Wikipedia for Time magazine.
"It didn't take long to realize why the entry had been made--and the timing, right after my authorship of the first Time story on Wikipedia, made sense," Taylor said. "So after the initial feelings of flattery and suspicion, I was like, Oh, OK, this is my 'reward' from the Wiki geeks. I wrote about their baby, so I've arrived.">>
http://news.com.com/To+delete+Wikipedia+entry+or+not+to+delete+-+page+2/2100...
That would be a cynical way of looking at it. There's no core policy issue at stake, the reason for deletion was a poor one. We're just responding to public criticism by taking a token step in the right direction.
-- Tim Starling