The tone on Wikipedia seems to be degenerating.
Not that I'm surprised VfD is a nest of hornets. I've thought it a bad
idea from the start.
It's also disturbing that pages that aren't offensive or illegal are
being listed on VfD. There is *no need* to delete stub entries. We have
methods of indicating them as stubs, which is much more constructive
than simply deleting them.
RickK wrote:
No, no, no, no, no! Kill that obnoxious Cleanup proposal. It's
impossible to
understand, and unworkable.
RickK
> user_Jamesday <user_Jamesday(a)myrealbox.com> wrote:
> To cut the traffic on VfD, list on Cleanup for two weeks first if it
isn't
actually harmful (offensive or
> illegal, not tasteless or dictionary) to have it
around for that
time. And tell the most prominent creators
> it's been listed there for more work so they
can do that work if
they want to.
> This gives time for the debates to start and
maybe finish before
things arrive at VfD. Also time for the
> people who are inclined to work on articles to do
that before they
use the more time-consuming VfD process.
> Would be nice not to see newbies getting educated
instead of listed
on VfD an hour afer starting work on a
> page as well.
> Once those steps have halved the demand for VfD
there won't be a
need to cut the time things stay there.
> Cleanup might need to switch to one page per day
of the week but
that's less painful there because there's
> no deadline.