> 2009/3/4 Dominic <[email protected]> > >> Sue Gardner wrote: >> > I am just clarifying - "default to delete unless consensus to keep" >> would >> be >> > a change from current state, right? >> >> In terms of policy, "default to delete" is the current state for BLPs. >> To be more exact, the important bit is: "If there is no rough consensus >> and the page is not a BLP describing a relatively unknown person, the >> page is kept and is again subject to normal editing, merging or >> redirecting as appropriate." However, that is at least somewhat new >> (several months old, I think), and I am not certain how universally >> administrators apply it at this point. The relevant policy is at >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:DP#Deletion_discussion> >> >> > I'm confused. Doesn't the current (English) policy say "if there's no > consensus ... the page is kept." So, default to _keep_, rather than > default > to delete...? > > It's only the English policy, so I realize it's not necessarily > representative/reflective of any of the other language versions, > regardless. But in general, my understanding is that "default to keep" > is > more-or-less standard practice Wikipedia-wide (as much as all language > versions can be said to have a standard practice), and the English policy > seems to support that. > > Recapping this piece of the thread: It seems to me that "default to > delete" > is not widely considered satisfactory, if it is interpreted to mean an > automatic or near-automatic deletion upon request. Human judgment needs > to > be applied. > > Erik had proposed that articles which meet these three criteria be > deleted > upon request: 1) they are not balanced and complete, 2) the subject is > only > marginally notable, and 3) the subject wants the article deleted. This > would > shift the bar towards a more deletionist stance for BLPs, but would > preserve > articles which are either complete and balanced, _or_ which are about > people > who are clearly self-evidently notable. > > Assuming there is some consensus about what clearly self-evidently > notable > means, or that some consensus could be created ..... does that proposal > make > sense to people here?
Yes, however, the key words are "Human judgment needs to be applied." Fred _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
