On 12/13/05, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
On 12/13/05, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Absolutely. Starting an unreferenced article is discourteous
However, that is not an argument for deletion of unreferenced articles.
I think it is a good part of the argument. It's the part that says
you don't have a *right* to have your articles kept if they are
unreferenced.
That's an odd way of putting it. No editor has rights beyond copyright
and the GFDL. The question is whether it's appropriate to delete
articles solely because the deleting administrator cannot be bothered
to expand them and, for reasons that escape me, cannot leave expansion
to someone else.
The other half of the argument is which would be better for Wikipedia.
I think we can take it as read that it isn't better for Wikipedia to
delete articles without good reason. A wiki is always a work in
progress, and most articles on Wikipedia are unreferenced. This
doesn't make them useless and certainly doesn't mean that
administrators should delete them without ever making any attempt to
expand them and without ever discussing their deletion on AfD.