Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/General Code of Operating Rules: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m →General Code of Operating Rules: fmt. |
|||
Line 13:
::"''The above arguments against deletion do not make any reference to Wikipedia policy''". That's wrong. (a) First, I say that WP's policy(!) is a guideline that is ''used'' to establish notability, not a ''law'' that formally excludes objects if they do not fit to the letter. WP:GNG is so short and unclear that various subareas created their own, substantially differing notability guidelines - e.g., academics start with "''The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline''", which is not at all "derivable" from the main guidelines WP:GNG; it is "newly invented as a common-senes guideline". By analogy, this guideline could immediately be adapted for standards: ''The standard has been significantly adopted in its area''. That no-one has done this ''formally'' is no reason at all that it can't be taken as a common-sense guideline.(*) (b) As I said, there are 1000s of documents using, invoking, commenting (via use and selection) GCOR (and NORAC); just work at the FRA.
::(*) Essentially, you make an ''exclusionary'' argument: What doesn't fit today's "rules", must die. I make an''inclusionary'' one: What fits a useful interpretation of WP's intention, should remain (or be included).
::--[[User:Haraldmmueller]] 08:57, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
| |||