User talk:Fresheneesz/Focus on improvement

Clean slate

Ok, this seems like a good title, at least until a better one comes along.

My initial thoughts: We should identify a specific problem that this essay is addressing. I think the problem that most people can agree exists is conflict between inclusionism and deletionism. Phrasing it in terms of "-isms" rather than "-ists" has the advantage of not slapping labels on people. The fact is, there are articles being proposed for deletion, and other people arguing that those articles could be improved rather than deleted, and that they're not being given enough of a chance. That perennial conflict is what we wish to address, right?

Having said what the problem is, we suggest a way to address it. Our suggestion runs like this: Suppose you see an article in stub or sub-stub condition, without references, etc. Run through a checklist before you nominate it for deletion. Have you considered whether you can improve the article? Have you done a Google search? Have you checked for incoming links that might provide context? Have you consulted the talk page to see if there's something there you're missing? Have you checked with the article's author(s) to see if they know about sources? If the topic is too small for an article, have you looked for an appropriate merge target for any verifiable information? If you've checked all of these things and you still think it needs to be deleted, then go ahead and PROD or AfD it, and make it clear in your nomination that you did your homework.

If more people used such a checklist, there would be less trouble at AfD involving accusations of rampant deletionism.

What do you think? Are these ideas consistent with what you're thinking? Does the "checklist" idea work for you, or is it too gimmicky? -GTBacchus^(talk) 01:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The checklist idea sounds perfect. I'm a little busy this week (first week of school), but i'll try to impliment that sometime soon, unless you do it first. Fresheneesz 19:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)