[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia's destiny

Mon Feb 27 15:45:59 UTC 2006

BJörn Lindqvist wrote:

>>If people refused to AfD anything they didn't know anything about (who
>>can really say they know anything about my local garage band?), we would
>>be deleting a lot less crap, if less good articles. It's all a question
>>of trading off false positives for false negatives. I have rarely seen
>>    
>>
>
>It used to be that way. It was always considered better to keep a
>crappy article than to delete a good one. The deletion policy used to
>read "In case of doubt *don't delete*"
>  
>
AFAIK it still does. It doesn't say "In case of doubt don't nominate for 
deletion".

>  
>
>>an ignorance-based debate that didn't end up getting closed as a keep,
>>or being overturned by DRV.
>>    
>>
>
>So you admit the existance of ignorance-based debates on AFD? :)
>Sounds like a good reason to get rid of the whole thing. The ignorance
>is time-consuming, even for those who do not wish to get involved in
>the ignorance debates.
>  
>
Wikipedia is full of editors generally ignorant in anything other than a 
few fields. Any decision involving community input would necessarily 
involve a lot of ignorance. If you can find something that cuts out 
community input with creating excessive elitism, or permits community 
input but avoids ignorance, feel free to put forth a proposal. Until 
then, I'll presume that this is the best we can do. A wiki is about 
letting people make mistakes (whether by fucking up an edit or fucking 
up a deletion nom), in the knowledge that others will correct them later on.

John