An article rescued simply by changing its subject

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

An article rescued simply by changing its subject

Tony Sidaway-3
Seth Ravin was deleted a second time eventually.  I did a history
undelete and started a rewrite that simply changed the subject to
TomorrowNow, one of Mr Ravin's more notable companies.  I dropped more
material than I added but augmented the article with enough references
to make sure it makes [[WP:CORP]].  Then I moved the article over the
deleted Seth Ravin article, undeleted the history to comply with GFDL,
and hey presto, the article we would have had if someone had simply
done this in the first place without all the fuss and bother of a
deletion nomination, a deletion review and a second deletion
nomination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TomorrowNow
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: An article rescued simply by changing its subject

Sean Barrett-2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tony Sidaway stated for the record:

> Seth Ravin was deleted a second time eventually.  I did a history
> undelete and started a rewrite that simply changed the subject to
> TomorrowNow, one of Mr Ravin's more notable companies.  I dropped more
> material than I added but augmented the article with enough references
> to make sure it makes [[WP:CORP]].  Then I moved the article over the
> deleted Seth Ravin article, undeleted the history to comply with GFDL,
> and hey presto, the article we would have had if someone had simply
> done this in the first place without all the fuss and bother of a
> deletion nomination, a deletion review and a second deletion
> nomination.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TomorrowNow

Yeah, sure, Tony, but you're being very inconsiderate here.  Think of
all the people who wouldn't have been able to go to sleep with that warm
glow of satisfaction that only comes from a day spent deleting other
people's work.

- --
 Sean Barrett     | Anything not worth doing is not worth doing well.
 [hidden email] |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFD1OitMAt1wyd9d+URAifaAJ0aPH/fs528C9FPb14ig5nz61S85ACbBpMn
LRfnyzr7JehK0+7zGcyd0HU=
=IaIP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: An article rescued simply by changing its subject

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Tony Sidaway-3
Sean Barrett wrote:
>Tony Sidaway stated for the record:

>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TomorrowNow

>Yeah, sure, Tony, but you're being very inconsiderate here.  Think of
>all the people who wouldn't have been able to go to sleep with that warm
>glow of satisfaction that only comes from a day spent deleting other
>people's work.


That's a terribly negative way of looking at it. The most
inconsiderate thing is that there is no process to do what Tony did,
so therefore the restoration was OUT OF PROCESS! This is an
unforgivable offence to the community (all praise) and Tony should
probably be blocked again for the effrontery. Or RFCed again. Or
something.


- d.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: An article rescued simply by changing its subject

John Lee-5
In reply to this post by Sean Barrett-2
Sean Barrett wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Tony Sidaway stated for the record:
>
>  
>
>>Seth Ravin was deleted a second time eventually.  I did a history
>>undelete and started a rewrite that simply changed the subject to
>>TomorrowNow, one of Mr Ravin's more notable companies.  I dropped more
>>material than I added but augmented the article with enough references
>>to make sure it makes [[WP:CORP]].  Then I moved the article over the
>>deleted Seth Ravin article, undeleted the history to comply with GFDL,
>>and hey presto, the article we would have had if someone had simply
>>done this in the first place without all the fuss and bother of a
>>deletion nomination, a deletion review and a second deletion
>>nomination.
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TomorrowNow
>>    
>>
>
>Yeah, sure, Tony, but you're being very inconsiderate here.  Think of
>all the people who wouldn't have been able to go to sleep with that warm
>glow of satisfaction that only comes from a day spent deleting other
>people's work.
>
>- --
> Sean Barrett     | Anything not worth doing is not worth doing well.
> [hidden email] |
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
>Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>iD8DBQFD1OitMAt1wyd9d+URAifaAJ0aPH/fs528C9FPb14ig5nz61S85ACbBpMn
>LRfnyzr7JehK0+7zGcyd0HU=
>=IaIP
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>  
>
This sort of sarcasm isn't very conducive to the tense atmosphere
regarding AfD, regardless of how moronic the *fD denizens are. (Full
disclosure: Yes, I am the guy who went "to sleep with that warm glow of
satisfaction" that came from deleting [[Seth Ravin]]. Seriously.
[[TomorrowNow]] is a valid subject; its CEO plainly isn't.)

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: An article rescued simply by changing its subject

John Lee-5
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
David Gerard wrote:

>Sean Barrett wrote:
>  
>
>>Tony Sidaway stated for the record:
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TomorrowNow
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>Yeah, sure, Tony, but you're being very inconsiderate here.  Think of
>>all the people who wouldn't have been able to go to sleep with that warm
>>glow of satisfaction that only comes from a day spent deleting other
>>people's work.
>>    
>>
>
>
>That's a terribly negative way of looking at it. The most
>inconsiderate thing is that there is no process to do what Tony did,
>so therefore the restoration was OUT OF PROCESS! This is an
>unforgivable offence to the community (all praise) and Tony should
>probably be blocked again for the effrontery. Or RFCed again. Or
>something.
>
>
>- d.
>  
>
Not when the closing AfD admin encouraged him to commit this out of
process act. :-p

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: An article rescued simply by changing its subject

Tony Sidaway-3
In reply to this post by John Lee-5
On 1/23/06, John Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Seriously.
> [[TomorrowNow]] is a valid subject; its CEO plainly isn't.)
>


You know a couple of days ago we were discussing this kind of thing on
wikien-l and there was this feeling that if there were crap AfDs we
should be prepared to discuss what to do about the article in the
broader sense, not just deleting it.  I accordingly closed the AfD and
invited all interested parties to discuss what to do about the
article.

Somebody re-opened the AfD, some more people voted delete and it was
closed as a delete.  While annoying, this obviously wasn't the end of
the thing precisely because there was so much agreement that the
company is important and so much material in the deleted revisions.

Oh sure there were a couple of odd moments.  A history undeletion that
I made was speedied, the Seth Ravin page was protected from
recreation, and so on.  I was accused of all kinds of crimes against
process (good!) Minor stuff.  But the solution was easy to implement,
the new version took only a small amount of research and rewriting,
and I'm reasonably proud of the result.

Yes, I'm satisfied with the end result.  But you will notice that I
had to fight *against* encrustations of process every single step of
the way.  An attempt to implement good ideas suggest here was
rebutted, the AfD was closed without due notice being taken of the
feeling that the company was important enough for an article, and a
straightforward history undeletion was nearly capsized.  All because
the process has been fetishized and the use of thought deterred and
marginalized.  One chap even put a note on my take page suggesting
"you're angling for another undeletion".  As if this was a *bad* thing
in the circumstances!  Of course I was anglng for undeletion!  We do
not delete good material from the encyclopedia.

But the problem is that I had to do it.  There is no process to
support what I did,  the process that we have deters it, and many of
those committed to that process actually think people shouldn't be
allowed to do it and are probably abusing their editing and
administrator powers when they do.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: An article rescued simply by changing its subject

Alphax (Wikipedia email)
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
David Gerard wrote:

> Sean Barrett wrote:
>
>>Tony Sidaway stated for the record:
>
>
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TomorrowNow
>
>
>>Yeah, sure, Tony, but you're being very inconsiderate here.  Think of
>>all the people who wouldn't have been able to go to sleep with that warm
>>glow of satisfaction that only comes from a day spent deleting other
>>people's work.
>
>
>
> That's a terribly negative way of looking at it. The most
> inconsiderate thing is that there is no process to do what Tony did,
> so therefore the restoration was OUT OF PROCESS! This is an
> unforgivable offence to the community (all praise) and Tony should
> probably be blocked again for the effrontery. Or RFCed again. Or
> something.
>
>
Tony & David for Deletion Coordinators?

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

signature.asc (568 bytes) Download Attachment