From: Alphax
<alphasigmax(a)gmail.com>
But yes, splitting it up would probably not fix anything. SO how about
called it "articles for merging"?
That would be un-helpful, since the majority of intentions and outcomes
are for deletion. Yes, sometimes the consensus is for merging the
article, but that's not the most typical outcome. Neologisms, original
research, rants, advertisements, pet theories, bands that are planning
to record their first CD any day now, [[List of flags featuring one or
more stars and the colors red, blue, and white]] etc. don't qualify
under Speedy deletion rules, but still have no place in an encyclopedia.
Now I understand why people leave so quickly...
A: "This article should be deleted."
B: "But it's verifiable!"
A: "It's non-notable and unencyplodic."
C: "There are no notability policies! It's verifiable and isn't original
research!"
A: "Have read the article? We don't need an article on this! It has no
place in a general purpsose encyclopedia!"
D: "JIMBO SEZ: Wiki is not paper, so it can stay."
A: "ARRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
--
Alphax | /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards