5 ms·
I used to be staunchly against deletionism, but having had more experience with exactly the above kind of page, where someone who cares a lot about some organiz
by lambda 14y ago
I used to be staunchly against deletionism, but having had more experience with exactly the above kind of page, where someone who cares a lot about some organization or topic that really isn't at all notable can go to an awful lot of trouble to create stuff that just junks up Wikipedia with biased, poorly researched and poorly cited pages, I am a lot more sympathetic to deletionism these days.
There are real costs to maintaining pages; editors need to revert vandalism, fix it to match the style guidelines, look for citations, resolve disputes, keep it neutral, ensure that it reflects a broad consensus about the actual truth of the matter, and so on. For small, insignificant topics, an article can be more trouble than it's worth.
- tingletech 14y agodestruction is selection, and selection is destruction
- guard-of-terra 14y agoYou could always stub and protect such a page instead of deleting it. I don't care about orgs but when a band or programming language bages get deleted i'm not happy.