Dealing with crap deletion nominations

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
52 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

Tony Sidaway-3
On 1/23/06, SCZenz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'd suggest that end-running the forum because you disagree with its
> current regular users is an error.  We need to hash out disagreements
> about how things are to be run, even if it's difficult, not form
> separate warring fiefdoms.

Oh even if we had a working process, this wouldn't limit the scope of
action of individual administrators and editors.  The processes are
only supposed to be there to make things easier; let's not fetishize
them as an end in themselves.
_______________________________________________
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: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

SCZenz
The reason for what you call process-fetishism is letting all editors
feel that they have a voice in deletion rather than just a few admins.
 I know we can't overdo it, but the goal is laudable.

SCZenz

On 1/23/06, Tony Sidaway <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 1/23/06, SCZenz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I'd suggest that end-running the forum because you disagree with its
> > current regular users is an error.  We need to hash out disagreements
> > about how things are to be run, even if it's difficult, not form
> > separate warring fiefdoms.
>
> Oh even if we had a working process, this wouldn't limit the scope of
> action of individual administrators and editors.  The processes are
> only supposed to be there to make things easier; let's not fetishize
> them as an end in themselves.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
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: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

Tony Sidaway-3
On 1/23/06, SCZenz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The reason for what you call process-fetishism is letting all editors
> feel that they have a voice in deletion rather than just a few admins.
>  I know we can't overdo it, but the goal is laudable.
>

Afd gives all a hand in the process.  After I've done a resurrection
it's a doddle to tag it for deletion (which sometimes I do anyhow as a
matter of form).  The response is usually very highly supportive.  See
for instance the results of the second AfDs of Tally and SuperOffice.
The near-unanimous vote to keep in each case is not untypical of my
resurrections.
_______________________________________________
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: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

SCZenz
Ok, so you're saying that undeletion doesn't need oversight, but crap
deletion does?  Aren't crap deletions supposed to be shot down by the
community just as well-reasoned BOLD undeletions are supported?

SCZenz

On 1/23/06, Tony Sidaway <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 1/23/06, SCZenz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > The reason for what you call process-fetishism is letting all editors
> > feel that they have a voice in deletion rather than just a few admins.
> >  I know we can't overdo it, but the goal is laudable.
> >
>
> Afd gives all a hand in the process.  After I've done a resurrection
> it's a doddle to tag it for deletion (which sometimes I do anyhow as a
> matter of form).  The response is usually very highly supportive.  See
> for instance the results of the second AfDs of Tally and SuperOffice.
> The near-unanimous vote to keep in each case is not untypical of my
> resurrections.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
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: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

Tony Sidaway-3
On 1/23/06, SCZenz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Ok, so you're saying that undeletion doesn't need oversight, but crap
> deletion does?  Aren't crap deletions supposed to be shot down by the
> community just as well-reasoned BOLD undeletions are supported?
>

I don't have a great overweening analysis of the thing, I just
undelete good stuff that gets deleted (and I've had to do too much of
that, recently).  What I've said on this and other threads is that I
agree with the idea of defetishizing the deletion process.  I've
expressed support for the idea of letting people cut an AfD short by
make obvious merges and redirects, for instance.
_______________________________________________
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: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

SCZenz
I'd support changes like that, actually.  The problem, as always, is
that what's obvious to one person is not always obvious to all.  I am
concerned, therefore, that people could feel cut off from their
ability to participate by one admin's "obvious" decision.  Perhaps the
solution is to have people say '''Speedy Merge''' or similar, and do
so once a few people have agreed to that idea?

SCZenz

On 1/23/06, Tony Sidaway <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 1/23/06, SCZenz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Ok, so you're saying that undeletion doesn't need oversight, but crap
> > deletion does?  Aren't crap deletions supposed to be shot down by the
> > community just as well-reasoned BOLD undeletions are supported?
> >
>
> I don't have a great overweening analysis of the thing, I just
> undelete good stuff that gets deleted (and I've had to do too much of
> that, recently).  What I've said on this and other threads is that I
> agree with the idea of defetishizing the deletion process.  I've
> expressed support for the idea of letting people cut an AfD short by
> make obvious merges and redirects, for instance.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
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: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

Tony Sidaway-3
On 1/23/06, SCZenz <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  Perhaps the
> solution is to have people say '''Speedy Merge''' or similar, and do
> so once a few people have agreed to that idea?
>

Doesn't work.  As you say, what's obvious to one isn't obvious to
most.  I think we should give editors the ability to edit through the
AfD, and let the results speak for themselves.  Our greatest asset is
the skill of our editors.  Show, don't tell.

You talk of people feeling disenfranchised because they're not
included in a discussion, but if all they have to say is "nn delete"
when an article clearly contains salvageable material, I don't think
it's a bad thing that they should feel that nobody is taking any
notice.
_______________________________________________
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: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

David Gerard
In reply to this post by SCZenz
SCZenz ([hidden email]) [060124 07:38]:

> I'd suggest that end-running the forum because you disagree with its
> current regular users is an error.  We need to hash out disagreements
> about how things are to be run, even if it's difficult, not form
> separate warring fiefdoms.


I'd suggest backing up and reading the previous discussion. The AFD/DRV
culture is poisonous enough to be causing problems at the Foundation level;
this shit has to stop, and to stop quickly. Leaving it in the hope it will
improve is not an option.


- 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
|

[Flag] Re: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

Travis Mason-Bushman
How about we look at a crap UNdeletion nomination, to show that process
is not entirely a fetish of the "deletionists."

[[Gfxvoid]], currently on [[Wikipedia:Deletion review]]. An article
about a non-notable forum which fails [[WP:WEB]] guidelines and
received a pile of delete votes - a metric crapload of deletion votes,
including speedy deletion votes. Not a single keep vote was cast. An
admin sensibly speedily deleted the article and closed the debate.

Now here we have it thrown up on Deletion Review for no other reason
than "non-notable, spam is not a CSD criterion."

Well, so what?

I think this just even further proves Tony and David's point, that the
deletion process is hopelessly overbureaucratized.

-FCYTravis
_______________________________________________
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: [Flag] Re: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

Haukur Þorgeirsson
> Now here we have it thrown up on Deletion Review for no other reason
> than "non-notable, spam is not a CSD criterion."
>
> Well, so what?

Indeed. Speedy deletion is often applied when an article has received a
bunch of deletion votes and no keep votes. I'm actually fine with that,
process wonk though I may be. I also agree that Deletion Review should
focus more on content and less on process than it currently does.

But I still think AfD is basically doing a good job most of the time and
that if its critics would spend half the time they spend complaining about
it on participating in it it would work even better :)

Regards,
Haukur

_______________________________________________
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: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

SCZenz
In reply to this post by David Gerard
Maybe there are a few specific problems--like the ones Jimbo
identified recently--that can be addressed quickly, and then more
discussion about what to do with the "culture"?  I don't see the need
for the kind of sweeping changes you've suggested.

SCZenz

On 1/23/06, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> SCZenz ([hidden email]) [060124 07:38]:
>
> > I'd suggest that end-running the forum because you disagree with its
> > current regular users is an error.  We need to hash out disagreements
> > about how things are to be run, even if it's difficult, not form
> > separate warring fiefdoms.
>
>
> I'd suggest backing up and reading the previous discussion. The AFD/DRV
> culture is poisonous enough to be causing problems at the Foundation level;
> this shit has to stop, and to stop quickly. Leaving it in the hope it will
> improve is not an option.
>
>
> - d.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
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: Dealing with crap deletion nominations

Phil Boswell
In reply to this post by David Gerard
"David Gerard" <[hidden email]> wrote
in message news:[hidden email]...
> David Gerard ([hidden email])
> [060123 10:52]:
[snip]
> [00:46]  <kim_register> Ok, so based on this alone
> [00:46]  <kim_register> normal wikipedia policy should be consensus
> consensus consensus
> [00:46]  <kim_register> large pages can best be split and transcluded
> [00:47]  <kim_register> transcluded sections will survive AFD anyway,
> since
> even those will have like 50 editors or so
> [00:47]  <kim_register> this way we can keep a consistent and coherent
> policy across the entire encyclopedia namespace

Certain editors of my acquaintance will be shitting breeze blocks at this.

They know who they are, and they hate templates (hates them precious!).

Permission to express grim satisfaction at their pained expression as they
squeeze that lump of concrete through their back passage, SAH!
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
123