[WikiEN-l] Another AfD example -- a serious proposal to fix it

Fri Jan 20 20:38:09 UTC 2006

This would be a kangaroo court waiting to happen.

We should of course do more to encourage research before someone submits
something for deletion.  However, people have different research skills,
different access to resources for doing so, and differing opinions on where
to set the bar for inclusion.  So this "review board" would either confine
itself to the worst offenses (like the guy who put up [[Jean-Luc Picard]]
for deletion), which can be covered by normal admins and WP:POINT anyway, or
have a chilling effect on WP by essentially criminalizing differences of
opinion.

Submitting an article to AfD really should be no big deal.  Things that
shouldn't be deleted get nominated, but that doesn't mean the sky is
falling.  Just vote keep and get on with editing.

On 1/20/06, Sean Barrett <sean at epoptic.org> wrote:
>
> I propose <sigh> yet another level of bureaucracy -- a Deletion Review
> Board (which would have nothing whatsoever to do with the useless
> WP:VfU).  The Review Board would be empowered to penalize those who
> nominate and those who vote support such egregiously careless and
> /damaging/ deletions.  Deletions of unpublished garage bands can
> continue just as they do today.
>
> The penalties would be limited, perhaps to simply to "time-outs" of
> various lengths -- prohibitions from participating in any *fD process --
> and would primarily serve as a way of getting the attention of the
> offenders that /they are damaging the encyclopedia/ with their
> thoughtless assumptions of bad faith and personal attacks.  Any offenses
> too great for that level of penalty would be dealt with by the ArbComm.
>
>