On 14 April 2013 11:59, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 14 April 2013 11:44, Charles Matthews > <charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > >> Indeed. As is characteristic of false dichotomies. >> I was once asked by a prominent journalist where I stood on this. I >> replied that it was a boring question. And that once I had defined >> myself as deletionist on science topics, where we don't want cruft and >> pseudo, and inclusionist on humanities topics, where we really cannot >> always know what the academics will turn to next. > > > When people from TV come asking for a (quote) "passionate deletionist" - > > http://www.mail-archive.com/wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org/msg01448.html > > - we're well past the time of being able to talk sensibly in such polar terms.
Mmm, I remember that mail and whom I suggested ... I'm still quite deletionist on BLPs because of examples where our "rules" are too easy to game. I'm certainly not an anti-stub deletionist because that I see as destructive of future growth, and I improve many stubs these days. If "passionate" means "nuance-free", which is a fair cop much of the time, then I agree with you. Charles _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
