keep at em..:)
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Jim Andrews <j...@vispo.com> wrote: > > Bearcat is clearly a "deletionist". They are a real problem, and not just > > for well-referenced notable articles about art. They are convinced (and > > convince each other) that they are making Wikipedia better by removing > > articles based not so much on technicalities as on ostentatious ignorance > > of Wikipedia's own stated aims and criteria. They are wrong. > > > > - Rob. > > Given our discussion, I determined to give trying to get that article on > wikipedia another go. And I find that the article has been undeleted, now, > which is good. Though there is no indication who undeleted it in the > 'history' section. No history of the deletions at all, actually. > > I see it has been worked on by several people, now. Including the ding bat > deletionist who deleted it three or four times, three of which were for bad > reasons. > > They added internal links and categories. > > I hadn't checked on it in a couple of months, was getting tired of the > stupid deletions for bad reasons. > > My account had also been deleted. Had to recreate it today. > > ja > http://vispo.com > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > -- glimpsecontrol.com baiowulf.com
<<attachment: bookmark.png>>
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
