Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Tony Sidaway (talk | contribs) →[[wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|Biographies of living persons]] and "out of process": I'm not committed to the idea, but I think we should probably have a bright line here. |
|||
Line 886:
::::: I'm not committed to the idea, but I think we should probably have a bright line here. I expect that deletion policy will soon evolve to make summary deletions on this matter comparatively rare, but those remaining will most likely be cases of severely harmful content. In such case, even where open review is appropriate, it should not take place in a situation where, for instance, untrustworthy editors might publicise the content. As we've seen recently we've had a problem even controlling the profligate and damaging behavior of our administrators in this respect. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]] 01:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::Could you give an example of this severely harmful content? I'm having trouble envisioning a situation in which something's mere existence for five days is harmful. As for untrustworthy editors publicising the content, why would someone who wished to do that not just make up their own harmful information to publicise? -[[User:Amarkov|Amarkov]] <small>[[User_talk:Amarkov|moo!]]</small> 01:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
| |||