Talk:Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians/Arguments

Silly arguments from deletion page, moved to talk

• Wikipedia is not /dev/null UninvitedCompany 20:19, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Translate please?

Only an inclusionist wouldn't understand it.

Because deletionists use their awkward language(s). Too bad.

• The proliferation of mediocrity is never its own excuse, and the absence of good information does not obviate the need for that information. Geogre 16:55, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What???

Only an inclusionist wouldn't understand it.

Because deletionists use their awkward language(s). Too bad.

• Wikipedia is not Google JFWT@lk 20:00, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia should replace Google.

• • Somebody has been reading my essay :) -- Avraham 14:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

...

And keep out all the bad results/articles.

There is no bad information - use "Inappropriate" instead. Move it then

• Roses are red/violets are blue/in Soviet Wikipedia/bad article delete you. --Slowking Man

Translate please?

Only an inclusionist wouldn't understand.

Because deletionists use their awkward language(s). Too bad.

• Wikipedia is not Chewing Tobacco, and Other Surreal Essays.

What are you talking about???

Inclusionists wouldn't know.

Yeah, because it's written in Moron language, a special language for deletionists.

• Del Taco. Uh, demeat...baleet...DELETE IT. 21655 20:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Translate this alien language, please.

Everyone knows it except inclusionists.

Yeah, because it's written in Moron language, a special language for deletionists.

• Chuck Norris is a deletionist. Mynameinc 02:15, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

So what?

Inclusionist 03:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Some general arguments

• Do I care for article in particular, (even if) Not really much right now, I (or any other editor) may spend various hours of research time for improving articles that I don't care but others may care
• Do I find the article useful, It may be useful for some other people interested in the area, I (or any other editor) also may care about the info in the future if I (they) get interested, moreover verifiable list articles useful in general, if the article doesn't hurt anyone or violate policy actually
• Do deleting the article helps anyone on earth, (if and generally) Simply no.
• Can the article will be improved in the future, (if and generally) Yes.
• Can the article will be improved easier in the future if we not delete it, Certainly Yes.

I recently used these arguments in a deletion review. They may be helpful. Kasaalan 11:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)