User talk:ShadowCyclone/Archives/2020/November

Interview request

Hello, ShadowCyclone!

My name is Daniel, and I'm a senior at Harvard writing an undergraduate thesis on Wikipedia. One chapter of my thesis will center around Wikipedia's notability policy; I'm particularly curious about the inclusionism vs. deletionism debate that has played out among Wikipedia editors.

I see that you're listed among the newer members of the Association of Deletionist Wikipedians. If you see this message, would you mind if I sent you a few questions (via email or right on here) about your views on deletionism and how you approach the question of notability?

Thanks so much!

--Dalorleon (talk) 17:31, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Sure, I’ll be glad to answer your questions. ShadowCyclone talk 17:53, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Awesome, ShadowCyclone! Thanks so much for agreeing to answer my questions! Feel free to take your time and get back to me when you can. And let me know if you need me to clarify any of these questions.

• How long have you been editing Wikipedia? And how long have you identified as an deletionist?
• How would you describe your personal brand of deletionism? Where do you draw the line between topics that are Wikipedia-worthy and topics that are not?
• How does your belief in deletionism impact the way you contribute to Wikipedia? (Creating new pages, deleting old pages, trimming down existing pages, etc.)
• How do you feel about Wikipedia’s general notability guideline as it’s currently written? (“If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list.”) As a deletionist, do you think this is an appropriate standard for notability, or would you favor changing it to something more narrow? (Also, do you happen to know when this exact guideline was formulated, and by whom?)
• In general, as you contribute to Wikipedia, how heavily do you rely on Wikipedia’s “official” policies and guidelines for guidance? If you prefer forging your own path, do you feel that Wikipedia offers you that flexibility?
• Have you ever participated in the Articles for Deletion forum? If so, in what way? Has your belief in deletionism ever influenced how you contribute there?
• Has your belief in deletionism ever brought you into disputes with other Wikipedia editors? If so, how were those disputes resolved?

Thanks again for agreeing to help my research! If I do include your responses in my thesis, would you prefer to remain completely anonymous, or can I include your username? I really appreciate it! --Dalorleon (talk) 15:55, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

1.) I have been editing for 2 years now. I have identified as a deletionist for almost a year.

2.) I believe that the topic should be well-covered by reliable, independent sources for inclusion in Wikipedia. I think that too many obscure, under-sourced, unnoteworthy articles make it difficult to find high-quality, relevant articles, which doesn't do well for the site's reputation.

3.) I remove trivial information that I believe negatively affects the article, too much irrelevant information overshadows the notable, important things and as a result, makes the article more difficult to read comfortably.

4.) I believe that Wikipedia's notability guidelines are sufficient as is, it just seems that quite a number of editors ignore it. I do not know when this guideline was formulated and I don't know who made it.

5.) I think that the guidelines are mostly sufficient, but a little too lax when it comes to crufty information in articles. Just because they were covered by a reliable source doesn't necessarily mean it's important or relevant.

6.) Yes, I have participated in AfD multiple times. If the article proposed lacks notability, I generally suggest it be deleted. Articles that are heavily under-sourced or have a high volume of information can be improved (by adding reliable sources and trimming irrelevant information) and don't necessarily need to deleted from my view.

7.) I have yet to get into a dispute with another Wikipedia editor over my belief in deletionism.

You are free to use my username in your thesis. Thank you! ShadowCyclone talk 19:17, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your responses, ShadowCyclone! They're very helpful. I'll let you know if I have any follow up questions. For now, I wish you the best of luck! --Dalorleon (talk) 01:04, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 24 November 2020 (UTC)