User:Inmatarian
Profile
Alias Inmate2993. Contact through
Articles Contributed To
- List of Internet phenomena#Personal sites - Info on SolidSharkey.Com (Deleted by another user)
- Tiled - Started article (Deleted by another user)
- List of level editors - Added Megazeux and ZZT
- List of palettes#NES- Added NES Palette table visual aide
Articles Defended from AFD
- Wikinfo
- Growing Earth Theory- Pending
- List of level editors - Survived
- Metal Gear glossary - Resulted in Deletion
- Seiklus - Survived
- Weapons in Deus ExResulted in a Merge.
- Wikinfo- Survived
- Wiki on a Stick - Resulted in Deletion
Articles Condemned in AFD
None Yet.
Open Discussions
- Talk:List_of_palettes- NES Palette
- Talk:ZZT - Citation_Materials
Opinions about Wiki Policy
Deletion
Priority should probably be placed on recency and traffic. Older articles that don't conform shouldn't be outright erased. Wiki's own posterity saves all edits to all pages, so space concerns are clearly not an issue. If anything, non-conforming articles that don't survive review should be marked to indicate that it failed review, and locked to prevent any editing. Then, after a short "cooling off" period, allowed for appeal to be unlocked and given a second chance at being made to conform.
Notability
Way too subjective. Use of Google to determine notability shouldn't be allowed, as google is just an algorithmic data indexing tool. Again, space clearly isn't an issue, so I don't see why any information which is at least good to someone shouldn't be kept. Although Wiki does try to remain neutral and unbiased, it does have to accept that it is part of the world, and only keeping high profile information is acting in bias towards that information, thus driving its own notability further.
Addendum
Citation of secondary sources, however, is a must. Notability, or how the term is misused, Popularity, shouldn't be the point of Wikipedia. Verifiability should be the point. The retention of all correct data is what's important.