[Cz-editcouncil] Article deletion question

Fri Apr 27 02:37:36 CDT 2007

I agree that the article cannot remain publicly accessible, but I do not 
grasp the effective difference between archiving the article and moving it 
to a subpage, or the significance of this difference. Could this be 
explained.

On another note, a list participant recently requested a facility be 
provided for converting word-processed documents into wiki markup. If this 
has not yet been addressed, I wish to second the request.

- Robert

 On Apr 27, 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