"Michael Pruden" <mikepru...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:515438.44185...@web32604.mail.mud.yahoo.com... ...pigeonholed (i.e. as an inclusionist or a deletionist when they are actually in the middle).
Merjists are both, and they do not need to participate in any AfD discussion, because the articles they redirect do not actually get deleted. IOW, any user can undo a merj, because both articles exist: Seeing the history for the deleted articles is only a matter of either writing or finding ?redirect=no. So, in a way, they are also neither, because deleted material should appear at the redirection destination, so I guess they are net inclusionists. This is of course only applicable to notable articles that are longstanding synonyms or close cousins. I think it is also possible to be a pre-emptive, deletionistic merjist and prevent new articles from being created when their content already exists, elsewhere, under a synonym. I tried doing some of that in [[recent changes#requested articles]], and I was chastized for some of it -- did not hit the best mark, I suppose. _______ http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/WP_CRYSTAL.HTM written from the merjist POV. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
