[WikiEN-l] Re: Proper response to "crap" AfD nominations

Fri Sep 30 10:02:15 UTC 2005

> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Crap vfd nominations
>
> I have speedy kept the following vfd nominations, and been threatened
> with a block:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/ 
> Freehold_Circle
> "Here is another nn traffic circle. Roadcruft. Delete --JAranda | yeah
> 02:40, 28 September 2005 (UTC)"
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/ 
> Laurelton_Circle
> "I don't normally get into the road wars on AfD, but this is a former
> traffic circle, now converted to a traffic light. Its notability  
> derives
> from the notability of the history of the traffic light. Delete. Chick
> Bowen 21:36, 26 September 2005 (UTC)"
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/ 
> Flemington_Circle
> "This is one of three traffic circles in Flemington, New Jersey, a
> village of 4000 people. Pilatus 18:34, 29 September 2005 (UTC)"
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/ 
> White_Horse_Circle
> "Oh cmon its a traffic circle nn Delete --Aranda56 01:26, 22 September
> 2005 (UTC)"
>
> What the fuck is with people?

If a nomination is crap, explain why in the AfD. If your explanations  
are convincing, people will vote to keep. If nominators notice that  
their nomination has been buried by a near-unanimous string of keeps,  
they'll be embarrassed and stop making problematical nominations.  
This procedure has the great advantage in that it works and that it  
does not making people angry thereby provoking counter-responses  
directed at your manner rather than at the merit of the topic.

In _any_ AfD discussion, it is much more helpful to address the  
_particular_ article under discussion than to pass blanket judgments  
on an entire class of articles. Nominations that say "oh cmon its a  
traffic circle" and "roadcruft" are not helpful. Neither are  
responses that say "all traffic circles are notable." Even if you  
believe that all traffic circles should be deleted or that all  
traffic circles should be kept, neither of these extremes is a widely  
held opinion and repetitive, strident assertions of these general  
principles are not going to create a consensus. (Neither do  
repetitive, strident assertions that there _is_ consensus in areas  
where there actually is not).

When nominating a traffic circle, give reasons why _this particular_  
traffic circle shouldn't be kept. Two of the nominations mentioned  
above do this, although not in a very coherent way. When arguing that  
an article on a traffic circle should be kept, say why _this  
particular_ traffic circle is worth keeping. Is the article  
particularly good? Do traffic reports in the city reference it?

The reason for doing this has nothing to do with The Principle Of The  
Thing. The reason for doing it is that these techniques _work_.

(Another technique that works for keeping articles is to improve them  
a bit _before_ entering the nomination discussion).

--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/