[WikiEN-l] Merge vs. Keep/Delete

Sat Oct 8 03:42:39 UTC 2005

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Michael Snow wrote:
> Tony Sidaway wrote:
> 
>> I wonder if we could agree to change policy to permit an administrator to
>> "speedy redirect" a merge candidate and close an AfD where notability
>> is the
>> sole or principal reason given for deletion, or no reason is given. This
>> would be a good way of ensuring that the possibility of merging
>> articles was
>> not unreasonably neglected. An article could always be renominated if
>> good
>> faith attempts to merge had failed.
>>  
>>
> I endorse that, although I don't see why the authority to
> merge-and-redirect should be limited to administrators. I've always
> found the resistance to merges puzzling. It's almost as bad as the
> polarizing notion that deletion debates orbit the twin suns of Keep and
> Delete, which are the only possible outcomes, and a "vote" to merge is
> in reality to be reinterpreted as a vote for one of these binary stars
> (which one depends on who's arguing). An argument for a merge is just
> that, and in these cases it's often by far the best solution.
> 

Merge-and-redirect often *does* require admin attention, because the
"proper procedure" is to perform a history merge, isn't it?

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ0dAL7MAAH8MeUlWAQhQPQf+JUqu3Qc3jfeggXPZRpgwEeqL2DNy4KcJ
y02ec0wcwwWE641GWdIzv4uBVZHufJAj3pqyTZyaccYxbUp9VinKzttZL9Y8ssno
jDUrPUZtTIRpN9i9y4Yv+z/CPV4C3TQ9tuZb9CAQs4k7njIgWylKN+VSDtMTfybW
wlu+0OItFOPRScOBX5IqRHtaE6zZAegwYYagzYj9G+tGhsgF+UQRTm9+7yi+uhvQ
wihn9Cv81ExPF8LvX85a10htDF3OZKYQiBaR3IW3hwmx9fnyHBPIWBB0ybyTrTfF
p7SJ+Lk6krR9VFqNREyqpFleZqPkwhX5RnFFRxKNa7Z74NzUzT9jog==
=Zn+p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----