[WikiEN-l] Deletion suggestion

Tue Sep 13 10:30:33 UTC 2005

While I appreciate people are trying to think of ways to improve a process 
which they perceive as deficient, that process and others not involving a 
central process open to all users would end up working very inconsistently 
with articles being deleted or not at the whim of which admin comes through 
at a particular time.

Let us look at an article about a person who is notable in Australia but not 
elsewhere (for example) which is in a poor state. Editor A comes and tags 
the article for deletion. Editor B comes through and deletes it. Neither 
editor is aware of the significance of the person in Australia and the 
article is deleted.

If it was listed on articles for deletion, an editor or editors from 
Australia could argue for its retention and improve it meaning we have a 
better article. 

Apart from that, I suspect that the undeletion process will become unclogged 
with many accusations of editors/admins acting in bad faith.

I will flag now that I will not vote for any proposal unless that I am 
pretty sure that it will improve the system. I will not vote for any 
proposal which removes the deletion process from the scrutiny of ordinary 
users.

Keith

aka Capitalistroadster

On 9/13/05, Worldtraveller <wikipedia at world-traveller.org> wrote:
> 
> So how about scrapping afd/vfd and replacing with a system whereby an
> editor may tag an article with a 'candidate for deletion' tag and provide
> a rationale. Admins can patrol the resulting category, assess each case,
> delete as necessary. If someone disagrees with the deletion, they can
> either contact the admin who deleted to ask them to review their decision,
> or if they want wider community input there's vfu (which could be renamed
> afu?)
> 
> This seems to me to have the following advantages:
> 1. It would de-centralise the process if people mainly contact the
> deleting admin to query deletions. This would avoid a giant page of bad
> feeling.
> 2. An article on vfd might only attract 4-5 votes, which is not enough to
> really determine community consensus and so much is kept that probably
> should be deleted when things end with 'no consensus'. However, if things
> were deleted more quickly and restorations requested on vfu, the vfu
> decision would result in restoration if there was a clear consensus to
> include. If an article does not attract sufficient community input to
> determine consensus then it would remain deleted.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> WT
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>