Message: 5
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:01:51 +0000
From: "Tomos at Wikipedia" <wiki_tomos(a)hotmail.com>
Subject: [Wikitech-l] Update to gfdl copyright notice
needed
To: wikitech-l(a)wikipedia.org
Message-ID: <LAW14-F15eD0WeOnFl000017101(a)hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Regarding Brion's point that there should be a
good
policy or monitoring system of deletion/undeletion -
I think that's right. But I am not sure if all
wikipedias became tolerant of unilateral deletion by
admins. Have en., fr. and eo. all gone through that
kind of change?
We practice unilateral deletion less than on the en.
This is cultural I think. We are just less bold. This
is also true for editing. Many editors explain they
will make change in the talk page first, or contact
the main editor when there is one. And many are quite
disturbed when one remove some text from an article
without previous warning. This is often seen as bad
manners. I understood this is similar on ja.
When one notice a bad new article, he either lists it
on votes for deletion, or just blank it (so it can be
noticed later on by an admin in the special:short
pages). Questionable articles are very rarely deleted
on sight...except by me I guess :-)
Still, unilateral deletions were practiced a couple of
time, related to edit wars mostly.
For one, admins on Japanese wikipedia don't delete
pages uniliterally.
Stubs, testing (like "Hi there!"), pure junks (like
falkjdslkjas) are turned to blank, but people don't
list them on Votes for Deletion unless the
page titles are really meaningless. There was once a
discussion that we might start deleting these stuff,
but the idea was to create an expedite process
for those limited types of pages to be deleted, not
uniliteral deletion.
I support deletion of junk pages for the following
reason : as long as an article does not exist, the
reader may see it in the link (red for example). He
may click on it to create it, but if he only is a
reader, he will not spent connexion time accessing to
it (once he understood the system).
If you keep the junk article, the link indicate there
is an article. When the reader click on the link, he
spends time just to access an empty article. He will
be then disappointed. Not good for image :-)
ant
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com