On 18 May 2012 12:25, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]> wrote: > On 18 May 2012 12:12, Charles Matthews <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On 18 May 2012 08:59, Gordon Joly <[email protected]> wrote: >>>. But my question is what is the granularity >>> of articles? Some places, buildings, streets are merged and some stand on >>> their own. Some are deleted since they do not meet the current standards for >>> "significance". >> >> But that's how it works. Because people get het up in discussions, it >> tends to be forgotten that a deletion is only supposed to have effect >> for 6 months. > > A deletion has effect for as long as concensus remains the same. There > are some vague guidelines on how long to wait between deletion > debates, but if there is a good reason to think consensus will have > changed (eg. due to new sources being published), then I'm not aware > of any rules saying you have to wait 6 months before you can re-create > the article.
Obviously not, if the prominence of the topic suddenly changes because it's in the news. My point was that there is nothing inherent in a topic that makes it worth an article, and you have to go case-by-case. By the way "vague guidelines" are good. Charles _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list [email protected] http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
