[WikiEN-l] Turn off AfD

Sat Dec 10 13:16:56 UTC 2005

On 12/9/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> Pottercast/PotterCast (and podcasts in general)
Hmm, I couldn't find the article (guess it's been deleted), but I did
find a mention of it in the New York Post.  I don't think this article
should have been deleted, and in fact I think it's kind of obvious
that it should have at least been kept as a redirect.  Turning it into
a redirect wouldn't have required AFD or a speedy deletion criterion.

> Forums and Blogs
I assume you don't mean [[Forums and Blogs]], so I'm really not sure
where you're coming from.  But I also think maybe we miscommunicated
over what I was disputing.  You suggested that there were articles
which "everyone agrees should be deleted" but which there could be no
speedy deletion criteria to cover.  Your first example was of
something which I think pretty much everyone would agree should be a
redirect.  This one, well, it doesn't seem to be an article at all.

> Bands (C-Moon - German, is it vanity or not?)
User:Zordrac certainly doesn't seem to think so.  But I'd say the
article meets a speedy deletion criterion I'd like to see established
- it contains no references to verify the information in it.

> Schools (examples shouldn't be needed for this one), although I have
> to admit discussion is pretty much growing on this. I'm sure this will
> eventually lead to notability guidelines.
>
Yeah, you don't have my support to delete any schools, and I think a
lot of people would agree with me.  I think what will happen
eventually here is that schools will not be eligible for deletion due
to notability.

> All these could be covered by some number statistic and notability
> guidelines, but a quick test to easily determine its deletion
> worthiness is much harder. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to find one,
> though.

Well, the only one which I agree should be deleted fails a quick and
easy test - it contains no external references.

Anthony