> I'm quite active at speedy deletion and often decline > overenthusiastic tags, but I would disagree with making it > compulsory to improve a good faith article one tags for deletion > (though I'd be happy with something that encourages this).
I suggested this mostly for public relation reasons. "Well, we tried to improve it ourselves, but it still doesn't meet our standards. Sorry, but the article has to be deleted." > I also think that many of our speedy tags and templates should be > rewritten to be less bitey and more welcoming. While it shouldn't say "Welcome to Wikipedia!" for obvious (to me) reasons, I agree wholeheartedly. Emily On Sep 18, 2009, at 5:04 PM, WereSpielChequers wrote: > I'm quite active at speedy deletion and often decline overenthusiastic > tags, but I would disagree with making it compulsory to improve a good > faith article one tags for deletion (though I'd be happy with > something that encourages this). > > Bad faith I take as attack pages, vandalism and hoaxes > > But other stuff that merits speedy deletion ranges from > autobiographies to biographies of pet guinea pigs. I count myself as > quite inclusionist but I really don't see the point of trying to > improve everything before its deleted. And even though there is a > proposal on the strategy wiki to allow autobiographies > http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:People_should_be_allowed_to_create_autobiographies > , I think most people would accept that very few household pets are > important or significant outside their own kennel, fishtank or stick > insect vivarium. > > Where I do think we can improve things is in giving guidance to over > enthusiastic new page patrollers, and in insisting that authors be > informed. I agree it would be overkill to template someone 12 times in > an hour to tell them that not one member of their pub's football team > merited an article. But it does concern me at CSD when I spot that the > author of a good faith article has a redlinked talkpage. > > I also think that many of our speedy tags and templates should be > rewritten to be less bitey and more welcoming. > > WereSpielChequers > >> >> Maybe we can make up a rule that says "Unless the page was obvisouly >> written in bad faith, you have to improve upon it before tagging it >> for speedy or prod deletion. Otherwise, your nomination will be >> rejected." >> >> Emily > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
