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

Sat Jan 21 00:36:21 UTC 2006

--- Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:

[snip]
> Let's develop a similar procedure here.  If someone
> sees a deletion
> nomination where deletion could obviously be avoided
> if a merge or
> redirect were to be negotiated, then that person
> should remove the AfD
> tag and start a discussion on the talk page about
> that alternative
> action.  The discussion should not proceed to
> deletion until those
> proposing deletion have diligently investigated all
> alternatives. *NO
> ONUS SHOULD BE PLACED ON THOSE OPPOSING DELETION*. 
> It should be  for
> those proposing that the article, category, article
> template or other
> encyclopedia component, should be deleted, to show
> by due diligence
> that the item cannot be reorganised in a fruitful
> manner.

Damn, that sounds too much like _work_.

That's probably part of the problem with AfD: People
don't want to expend the effort to do any sort of
research. That's also probably part of the reason any
suggested reforms get shot down in a ball of flames
(mixing my metaphors here, I believe); most of them
require more work than AfD.

-Hermione1980

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 