[WikiEN-l] Why Turn of AFD?

Sat Dec 10 20:57:11 UTC 2005

MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:

> Why delete an entire process to deal with user's personal actions and
> feelings? Going on a process deactivation rampage isn't going to do
> the job.

Because all process is instruction creep until proven otherwise, and can
still become it. You realise of course that the process of actually
changing deletion policy is utterly bogged down because no-one trusts
anyone else's suggestions to be in good faith.

"user's personal actions and feelings" because the process has an
atmosphere of assumption of bad faith. A deletion policy is a good
thing; this one sucks by its results - driving knowledgeable people off
Wikipedia, assumption of bad faith to all outsiders to the deletion
process, unnecessary forking from Wikipedia (Comixpedia), etc.

> Exactly how is keeping deletable stuff around for 2 weeks or longer a
> good thing? The longer you leave it the easier it is for people to
> muck up and let it slip through. I'm not talking about a deletion
> rampage, I'm talking about stuff that everyone already agrees on
> should be deleted.

Did you see Tony Sidaway's email giving the actual numbers? AFD creates
angst way out of proportion to its actual effects on the article base.

> Two, we need to place to discuss the stuff before
> deleting possibly contentious articles. Turning it off will spark
> deletions regular users didn't have a say in. It takes away the place
> it should be discussed at.

If you want to delete something, what's wrong with taking long enough to
get it right? Five days is not enough. People who can't be fucked to
tell the article creator are manifestly not taking sufficient care, but
try adding that to deletion policy and see how far you get.

- d.