Wikipedia process is loathsome but grievance farming about deletions of articles that didn't come close to meeting mind-bogglingly well-documented inclusion standards but were about Persons of Protected Identity so we don't need to understand those standards is also loathsome
interpreting the fact that a bureaucratic process that exists for the sake of diligence in not letting automated tools make ham-fisted false-positive-prone judgments hasn't yet gotten to a flagged article as an endorsement of that article's existence isn't even *good* propaganda
-
-
All I'm saying is that someone deleted one of few women to have won a physics Nobel Prize, an obviously notable figure per WP's other guidelines, and the article was given less time to work through its issues than any of the things on that list which has some entries from 2014.
-
One way someone can warrant a Wikipedia article is simply by winning a famous award. She did. The admin could have recognized her notability, marked the copyvio/ref issues, & told the new editor to fix it. If the admin's not up for that, why are they patrolling new articles?
- 13 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.