[Cz-editcouncil] Article deletion question

Fri Apr 27 00:30:31 CDT 2007

Larry,

I know you agreed.
It just seemed important - as this seems to be a precedent - to know  
what its conclusion might mean.
And on the council a vote is just a vote, as is an opinion. The point  
however is to make a point make sense in a generic way - else you  
might create a precedent with a consequence not intended.

cheers

Rob

On 27-Apr, 2007, 7:14, at 7:14:42 , Larry Sanger wrote:

> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20070427/9846328d/attachment-0001.html 