[Cz-editcouncil] Article deletion question

Fri Apr 27 00:14:42 CDT 2007

Rob, I think you may not have read my message all the way through.  In
substance, I was agreeing with your earlier suggestion, that we move the
text of the present article to a subpage of "Binary economics" and just
blank the page.

When it comes to an actual controversies, we'll be taking votes, in which,
of course, I--or you--might be overruled.

--Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: cz-editcouncil-bounces at mail.citizendium.org
[mailto:cz-editcouncil-bounces at mail.citizendium.org] On Behalf Of Robert P.
Tito
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 12:51 AM
To: The Citizendium Editorial Council
Subject: Re: [Cz-editcouncil] Article deletion question

Larry 

do not bypass the economics workgroup - deleting the article now will mean
every article that somehow fails to meet some in-descriptive criteria will
be deleted - independent upon any workgroup. Not very scholarly.
If there is no such group yet we - as CZ - will have to conserve the article
and let the editors of economics decide upon its fate. If that means
withdraw the article to attention - so be it, if it means moving without
redirect to some/article so be it. It cannot be the academic encyclopedia we
seek will be made impossible by these sheer speed requirements.
Democracy and science means - you don't always get it your way.

Rob

On 27-Apr, 2007, 6:29, at 6:29:27 , Larry Sanger wrote:

The trouble, Matt, is that after I called for input from our economics
editors, only Martin responded. So on your proposal, either we wait for
another economics editor to speak up, or we tolerate plainly bad content for
an indefinite amount of time.

There is one precedent for a single active editor deleting an appalling
article: Peter J. King (who was a philosophy editor) authorized that I
delete an article titled "Ethics," which both of us agreed was, indeed,
appalling.

The question here is not whether we should have an article on the subject,
but whether this particular article should be deleted, or entirely
replaced--it doesn't matter which.

It's a separate question whether we save a copy elsewhere, except insofar as
you think that mitigates the gravity of deletion; but I don't really think
it does. Few people will know to look for, or be able to find, the archived
article.

On that, though, there is a proposal on the table and someone who wants to
get behind it--a repository for deleted articles:
http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,785.0.html

This is the second instance in a week where we might want to make use of
such a repository. Probably, we should move forward with that. If you want
to comment on the proposal, will you please do so not here, on this list,
but instead at the above URL on the forums? I ask only because I want to
keep this list relatively low-traffic or, at least, relatively focused. 

--Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: cz-editcouncil-bounces at mail.citizendium.org
[mailto:cz-editcouncil-bounces at mail.citizendium.org] On Behalf Of Robert P.
Tito
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:02 PM
To: The Citizendium Editorial Council
Subject: Re: [Cz-editcouncil] Article deletion question

All, 

To ensure that possibility I suggested the move to Binary_economics/Archive.
Only a healthy and populated (and active) economics group may decide over
deletion, not some editorial board with people (excuse the pun) without
economic knowledge.
Deletions are for the workgroups only, they decide not us we may advice and
no more.

cheers

Rob

On 27-Apr, 2007, 4:33, at 4:33:45 , DAVID INNIS wrote:

As a point of *process*, I think we should have more than one editor agree
to the deletion. The article can be written more neutrally by reviewing
other sources for binary economics and involving more authors and editors.
It certainly won't get approved as it is, but that doesn't mean it can't be
one day. I assume we are talking about setting precedents here. I'm not sure
that we want a controversial article to be easily deleted by one editor,
lest we lose a lot of articles. I do think, however, that the Editorial
Chief's input should count for something, perhaps not as much as an editor
for content on the subject, but certainly as a voice for content of
Citizendium as a whole.
Matt Innis

Larry Sanger <sanger at citizendium.org> wrote:

Dear Editorial Council members,

I'm going to try to have something like a kick-off mail in your box this
evening, but I wanted to get your input on something in the meantime.

We have a shortage of active Economics editors. I asked several who are
involved to comment on this article, which struck me as being quite biased:

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Binary_economics

And we got a comment back, here:

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Talk:Binary_economics#Editorial_Opinion

The opinion seems to me to entail that we should delete the article. In
particular, two items:

(1) This comment is most important: "I do not think the current entry can be
revised to make a suitable entry for Citizendium."

(2) The article "reads as promotional literature."

Our rules at present state (see
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Article_Deletion_Policy) that the first
two comments in particular are grounds for an *editor* to make a decision to
delete an article outright.

So I would like to ask your opinion about a question of *process* here:
should we, in the absence of any other active economics editor weighing in
on the matter, rely on the opinion of a single editor to delete an article
on the above grounds?

--Larry

_______________________________________________
Cz-editcouncil mailing list
Cz-editcouncil at mail.citizendium.org
http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-editcouncil

_______________________________________________
Cz-editcouncil mailing list
Cz-editcouncil at mail.citizendium.org
http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-editcouncil

_______________________________________________
Cz-editcouncil mailing list
Cz-editcouncil at mail.citizendium.org
http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-editcouncil

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.citizendium.org/pipermail/cz-editcouncil/attachments/20070427/982bb4f6/attachment-0001.html 