2010/1/21 Emily Monroe <[email protected]>: >> We're historically prone to having people (especially at CSD) assume >> that an earlier deletion is itself a strong black mark - if an >> article was deleted earlier, there must have been a good reason for >> it, they figure. > > If, on NPP, I find that an article has been recreated, it's usually > either a newbie or a troll (usually an incredibly persistent newbie) > copy and pasting *the exact same article* and hitting publish. It's > usually a speedily-deleted article. Just a possible explanation for > that assumption.
I'm not saying it's not often warranted - I've done delete-then-delete-then-delete-again a few times myself - but I have had conversations like this in the past: * Hi, you deleted X decent article, why? * It was a recreation of a previously deleted article * ...but that article shouldn't have been CSDed in the first place * yes, but it was a recreation, and ... [lather, rinse, repeat] Getting rid of bad, problematic articles is, on balance, probably a limited good. Making it less daunting to replace them with improved articles - making the end result an *unarguable* good - is something we should be actively looking out for. -- - Andrew Gray [email protected] _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
