OK, so DRV *is* broken - WikiEN-l

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

OK, so DRV is broken

older

Re: [WikiEN-l] User:Virgin United...

Re: [WikiEN-l] Slight adjustment...

Guy Chapman aka JzG

28 Dec 2006 28 Dec '06

10:14 a.m.

We deleted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_big-bust_models_and_performers due to sourcing issues. It was overturned at DRV without the sourcing issues ever being addressed. It was relisted and speedy kept. It still has sourcing issues. What is "big"? Where is the external source that defines "big"? What sources are used to include the individuals concerned? No sources are cited. The lead of the article is original research and the contents is "phwooooar! look at the tits on that!" It is always dispiriting when an article that reduces the average quality of the project is kept in this way... Guy (JzG) -- http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG

Show replies by date

Steve Bennett

28 Dec 28 Dec

10:35 a.m.

On 12/28/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:

...

It is always dispiriting when an article that reduces the average quality of the project is kept in this way...

It was one of our top few most popular pages by page views. Steve

Guy Chapman aka JzG

11:19 a.m.

On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 21:35:10 +1100, "Steve Bennett" <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

It was one of our top few most popular pages by page views.

Largely due to being linked from many tens of porn bios. Guy (JzG) -- http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG

Andrew Gray

11:33 a.m.

On 28/12/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:

...

On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 21:35:10 +1100, "Steve Bennett" <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

It was one of our top few most popular pages by page views.

Largely due to being linked from many tens of porn bios.

My theory was that the sheer number of names made it a very popular search result, and the inbound links made it a desirable target... but I dunno. (It's a pity we can't see where those readers were coming from or if they stayed around) -- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk

Guy Chapman aka JzG

12:08 p.m.

On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:33:44 +0000, "Andrew Gray" <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

It's a pity we can't see where those readers were coming from or if they stayed around

I expect that when recess was over they went back to class... Guy (JzG) -- http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG

Matthew Brown

10:48 a.m.

On 12/28/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:

...

It is always dispiriting when an article that reduces the average quality of the project is kept in this way...

Popularity trumps policy, it seems. The flaw of DRV in both directions; things people want deleted get deleted regardless of worth, things people want kept get kept even if they should be gone. On the other hand, there's crap on Wikipedia that far exceeds this. -Matt

Jeff Raymond

1:29 p.m.

Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:

...

Considering how many articles who's deletions are endorsed at DRV that obviously meet our standards, I'm having an awfully hard time shedding a tear over this one, especially when you and I both know that it can be sourced well with some effort. -Jeff -- Name: Jeff Raymond E-mail: jeff.raymond(a)internationalhouseofbacon.com WWW: http://www.internationalhouseofbacon.com IM: badlydrawnjeff Quote: "As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else." - Sen. Rick Santorum on the war in Iraq.

Guy Chapman aka JzG

3:54 p.m.

On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 08:29:30 -0500, Jeff Raymond <jeff.raymond(a)internationalhouseofbacon.com> wrote:

...

A pity the effort has been devoted instead to arguing for its retention despite its not meeting our standards, then. I await with baited breath the reliable external source for "big" in this context. Guy (JzG) -- http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG

Jeff Raymond

3:58 p.m.

Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:

...

On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 08:29:30 -0500, Jeff Raymond <jeff.raymond(a)internationalhouseofbacon.com> wrote:

A pity the effort has been devoted instead to arguing for its retention despite its not meeting our standards, then. I await with baited breath the reliable external source for "big" in this context.

I do strongly suggest being militant about it. AnonEMouse knows a lot about the porn articles, he might have some input as to sourcing it. -Jeff -- Name: Jeff Raymond E-mail: jeff.raymond(a)internationalhouseofbacon.com WWW: http://www.internationalhouseofbacon.com IM: badlydrawnjeff Quote: "As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else." - Sen. Rick Santorum on the war in Iraq.

Matthew Brown

29 Dec 29 Dec

12:35 p.m.

On 12/28/06, Jeff Raymond <jeff.raymond(a)internationalhouseofbacon.com> wrote:

...

Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:

A pity the effort has been devoted instead to arguing for its retention despite its not meeting our standards, then. I await with baited breath the reliable external source for "big" in this context.

I do strongly suggest being militant about it. AnonEMouse knows a lot about the porn articles, he might have some input as to sourcing it.

I'd guess a good plan to source such a list would be to find an authoritative source - e.g. a trade journal - listing publications that cater to this market. One could then define the list as being 'models who have appeared in publications classified as 'big bust' in Adult Industry Journal', or something like that. Of course, equivalents would have to be found in other worldwide markets, but I would imagine that similar things can be found elsewhere. -Matt

Guy Chapman aka JzG

5:14 p.m.

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 04:35:44 -0800, "Matthew Brown" <morven(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

That would be perfectly acceptable. What we had was a group of editors getting together to decide that these women had big tits, then, on being challenged, deciding on an arbitrary definition of big based on what they thought was big, and then using the invariably unreliable self-reported data from the women themselves to judge inclusion. That is problematic on many levels. Guy (JzG) -- http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG

xaosflux

9:48 p.m.

Last I checked, DRV is NOT AFD part2, and should not be involved with content based decisions, just proceedural / consensus measuring ones. xaosflux ----- Original Message ----- From: "Guy Chapman aka JzG" <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> To: <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org> Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 5:14 AM Subject: [WikiEN-l] OK, so DRV *is* broken

...

<snip> Guy (JzG)

Silas Snider

10:11 p.m.

Well, actually, if you look at WP:UNDEL, the policy actually states that undeletions may be requested if you think Wikipedia would be better off with the article than without it, which seems quite content based to me. The page that is specified as the place to put undeletion requests for all of the listed reasons is WP:DRV, so I think that DRV is actually supposed to consider content-based reasons for undeletion. Sincerely, Silas Snider On 12/29/06, xaosflux <xaosflux(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

<snip> Guy (JzG) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Silas Snider is a proud member of the Association of Wikipedians Who Dislike Making Broad Judgements About the Worthiness of a General Category of Article, and Who Are In Favor of the Deletion of Some Particularly Bad Articles, but That Doesn't Mean They are Deletionist (AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTD) , and the Harmonious Editing Club of Wikipedia. --------------------------------------------------------------------------

David Gerard

10:52 p.m.

On 29/12/06, xaosflux <xaosflux(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Last I checked, DRV is NOT AFD part2, and should not be involved with content based decisions, just proceedural / consensus measuring ones.

No, that's completely and insanely wrong. It is indeed supposed to review the decision and discussion and content and everything. - d.

xaosflux

30 Dec 30 Dec

12:46 a.m.

Ok, I retract that, was a little overstated. Although I've seen way to many items brought to DRV in the past just to have another go at them (generally in the case of xfd's ended in Keep). ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Gerard" <dgerard(a)gmail.com> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org> Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 5:52 PM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] OK, so DRV *is* broken

...

On 29/12/06, xaosflux <xaosflux(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Last I checked, DRV is NOT AFD part2, and should not be involved with content based decisions, just proceedural / consensus measuring ones.

No, that's completely and insanely wrong. It is indeed supposed to review the decision and discussion and content and everything. - d. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

David Gerard

12:54 a.m.

On 30/12/06, xaosflux <xaosflux(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Ok, I retract that, was a little overstated. Although I've seen way to many items brought to DRV in the past just to have another go at them (generally in the case of xfd's ended in Keep).

Yeah. The trouble with DRV is it has regulars, who end up forming a virtual committee. Committees often fail to scale with editors and articles. The overworked regulars (who are bothering with this because they care) see lots of stupid and get understandably terse with it. They then tweak process to make the process page easier for themselves - formalised systems, local jargon and so forth. This unintentionally excludes outsiders from the pages. Many express open suspicion of outsiders, who are perceived as not knowing how the process works. Regulars lose sight of the big picture and begin to conflate the process with the project and will defend the process at the expense of arguable damage to the project. I'm not sure of an easy approach to solving this. - d.

6351

days inactive

6353

days old

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

15 comments

8 participants

tags (0)

participants (8)

Andrew Gray
David Gerard
Guy Chapman aka JzG
Jeff Raymond
Matthew Brown
Silas Snider
Steve Bennett
xaosflux