These are the deletion processes that i started. I don't do it for fun. If you can convince me that i am wrong in any of these cases, please do it. Be bold - a deleted article can always be re-created.
Deletion policies in the English Wikipedia are just right and Wikipedias in all other languages should adopt them. Notability counts; Verifiability counts; majority vote doesn't count.
Some people say that deleting non-notable articles is wrong, because Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia. This is a misunderstanding of the word "free" in this context - what makes Wikipedia free is the freedom to redistribute and modify its contents. The freedom of Wikipedia is not the freedom to write anything you want.
An encylopedia is not supposed to be a democracy and a "democratic" vote is not the right way to decide about deletion or any other encyclopedic matter. Some Wikipedias have elaborate rules about voting, while instead they should all adopt the very sensible English Wikipedia policy: Deletion discussion is not a vote.
None at the moment.
For more on this, see this post in a Polish blog; at the bottom there's a very long comment that i wrote in English: Brzydkie slovio i chińszczyzna.
These are proposed deletions - not bad enough for speedy, and not interesting enough for discussion.
None at the moment.
If you see that any of those links is not red, someone may have recreated the article. Maybe i was wrong and it actually became a worthy article.
These are some notable cases in which i speedily deleted an article myself on sight.
These are the deletion processes that i started. I don't do it for fun. If you can convince me that i am wrong in any of these cases, please do it. Be bold - a deleted article can always be re-created.
Deletion policies in the English Wikipedia are just right and Wikipedias in all other languages should adopt them. Notability counts; Verifiability counts; majority vote doesn't count.
Some people say that deleting non-notable articles is wrong, because Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia. This is a misunderstanding of the word "free" in this context - what makes Wikipedia free is the freedom to redistribute and modify its contents. The freedom of Wikipedia is not the freedom to write anything you want.
An encylopedia is not supposed to be a democracy and a "democratic" vote is not the right way to decide about deletion or any other encyclopedic matter. Some Wikipedias have elaborate rules about voting, while instead they should all adopt the very sensible English Wikipedia policy: Deletion discussion is not a vote.
None at the moment.
For more on this, see this post in a Polish blog; at the bottom there's a very long comment that i wrote in English: Brzydkie slovio i chińszczyzna.
These are proposed deletions - not bad enough for speedy, and not interesting enough for discussion.
None at the moment.
If you see that any of those links is not red, someone may have recreated the article. Maybe i was wrong and it actually became a worthy article.
These are some notable cases in which i speedily deleted an article myself on sight.