On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 3:07 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Ian Woollard wrote:
Yes, but some of those really bad articles will become good articles
if you spend enough time on them.
Deletion short-circuits that.
In a perfect world, with perfect AFDs it
Ryan Delaney wrote:
I'm still not seeing the connection, but I'll try one last time. It
sounds like you're saying that discussion of deletion process
distracts us from working on building new, better articles on topics
that we already have, and that we shouldn't worry too much about
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
I wasn't saying we shouldn't discuss deletion process: I think in fact
we should probably look at why PROD is underused. I think that having
the deleted articles off the site (unless you're an admin) does
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 6:41 AM, Ryan Delaney ryan.dela...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, now you've given me another guess: The problem with PWD is that it's
wrong to have deleted material available for people to look at because that
would encourage them to look at deleted content rather than undeleted
Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Deletion is good because it totally dispenses with junk.
Parsing... Destruction = [qualitative superlative] because
[destruction] [completely destroys] [things that need destroying].
Please let us all pledge to henceforth refrain from employing circular
Ryan Delaney wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
Now that's a lovely perennial idea. There's no point in hard deleting any
article save to protect private information in the history. You can pure
wiki delete; or even pure wiki delete and protect
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 2:32 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Ryan Delaney wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com
wrote:
Now that's a lovely perennial idea. There's no point in hard deleting
any
article save to protect
Ryan Delaney wrote:
I'm having trouble following your meaning, I think because I'm not
familiar with how you are using rationalisation. Can you explain a
bit more please?
Wiktionary meaning (3) for rationalization is
A reorganization of a company or organization in order to improve its
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Ryan Delaney wrote:
I'm having trouble following your meaning, I think because I'm not
familiar with how you are using rationalisation. Can you explain a
bit more please?
Wiktionary meaning (3) for
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
Now that's a lovely perennial idea. There's no point in hard deleting any
article save to protect private information in the history. You can pure
wiki delete; or even pure wiki delete and protect the blank page; but
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:46 AM, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote:
I do not consider that trivial. The deletion of improvable articles
because the small number of participants at AfD who are interested
and willing to rescue them is one of the reasons for people losing the
interest
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 8:46 AM, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote:
Come join the talk at deletion review if you think its so easy to
restore articles. People cant even se ethem to work on without asking
an administrator. (though there are some, including myself, who will
always
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
I gave up. Eventually I came across a controversial topic that
particularly interested me, where I had the background to understand
the sources and where my research radically changed my mind. So I
started working on it, I even bought a pile of books about it (on
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Gwern Branwen wrote:
Charles Matthews wrote
Counterfactually, suppose you had a team of universal researchers you
could assign to work on articles. What relative weight would you give to
various types of
On 10/3/09, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, there is one in there that strikes me as valid: the shield-mate
one. I know I've read about the idea before in multiple contexts, and
there's the obvious historical example of the Sacred Band. I don't know if
it's *correct*, and it
Come join the talk at deletion review if you think its so easy to
restore articles. People cant even se ethem to work on without asking
an administrator. (though there are some, including myself, who will
always userify for a good faith editor).
I think it's more likely that of the 20, not 1,
David Goodman wrote:
The deletion of improvable articles
because the small number of participants at AfD who are interested
and willing to rescue them is one of the reasons for people losing the
interest in Wikipedia.
Counterfactually, suppose you had a team of universal researchers you
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
David Goodman wrote:
The deletion of improvable articles
because the small number of participants at AfD who are interested
and willing to rescue them is one of the reasons for people losing the
interest
18 matches
Mail list logo
