nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 183:
Line 183: + + + + +
→Deletion: Cynical attitude! And some further comments
:#Deletion discussion - on this site? Har. In the end, it all grinds down to non-binding discussion until some sysop arbitrarily decides to delete it or to declare that the nomination was an attempt at liberal censorship.
:#Deletion discussion - on this site? Har. In the end, it all grinds down to non-binding discussion until some sysop arbitrarily decides to delete it or to declare that the nomination was an attempt at liberal censorship.
:In the end, unless a sysop notices the "DELETE THIS" in the Recent Changes, these things are going to rot either way. But we might as well keep pretending that there is a difference between them. --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 16:17, 26 January 2008 (EST)
:In the end, unless a sysop notices the "DELETE THIS" in the Recent Changes, these things are going to rot either way. But we might as well keep pretending that there is a difference between them. --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 16:17, 26 January 2008 (EST)
:: That's a very cynical attitude! But not far wrong though, unfortunately! (I'm not endorsing point 3, though.)
:: The problem I have with categories is that they need to be regularly checked. (As far as I know, there's no way to get notified when a new page appears in a given category.) Perhaps we should have a page where we list speedy deletion candidates (or do we already?). If that page is on our watchlists, we will notice if it gets changed (something gets added to it). But that means putting a notice on the page concerned (assuming that's actually necessary) ''and'' on the speedy deletion page. Perhaps you (plural) could have a think about it, and start a discussion somewhere (and invite likely-interested parties to participate in the discussion).
:: As for point 3, the main problem is very little discussion by anyone. It doesn't need to be binding; if there is a consensus, surely a sysop can act on that consensus (or explicitly reject it if he thinks he really should). But the severe lack of interest in discussion is the main problem, I think.
:: We've tried implementing a deletion process a couple of times before, but I don't think that we've ever really got it right, and that's as much as anything because there was no real discussion on how it should work.
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 05:34, 27 January 2008 (EST)
== Ok ==
== Ok ==