Okay, some time ago, they blew up the Wikipedia article on Exaile. (One of the major Linux music players obviously
needs no article.) Now, they've blown up the article on MyPaint.
The latter is an annoying case. No, admittedly there's no sources. Nominator says "we shouldn't have a consensus for deeming most FOSS as notable" - well, duh, maybe we should craft actual software notability criteria
then, it seems to be AWOL at the moment, and it's a tad bit annoying that the software notability has to be judged solely through the common notability criteria (i.e. availability of outside coverage). But Exaile's case showed that even reviews in high-profile web sites shouldn't be trusted. The fact that Blender guys endorse MyPaint is obviously not important at all. What the hell can
we trust these days, then? Do we need
the third-party books nowadays?
We need the MyPaint article. Where's MyPaint's press coverage? Should I blame them
for not publicising the project better?
And at the same time, we get more and more and more bullshit articles that no one even looks at. If the deletionists are winning, why the hell does the site have over 3 million articles? Why?
And an actual quote from the deletion discussion
: "Thank god we don't have a bunch of "WP:IAR" hand wavers this time around and can delete this cleanly." Yeah, especially when everyone who values their sanity stays the hell away from AfD. I've been writing a webcomic about assassins lately, and haven't done that much research into the topic yet, but even I know that best way to murder someone in the night is to make sure no weird helpful people buzz around and stay concerned about wellbeing of others. With attitudes like this, it's easy to see why I don't follow AfD any more.
And let's not forget the whole recent deletion and deletion reviews discussions around Human disguise
. Hundreds of kilobytes. Thousands of words. A few million bullets. No answers.
Here's an analogy that I posted on my user page today:
Sticking articles in AfD is like seeing a book being fed in a wood chipper. Very slowly. There's no point in trying to save the book from being destroyed once the process has already started because the damage has already been done. The rednecks with shotguns think it's hilarious to do this sort of stuff, and you don't want to annoy people with shotguns. With enough determination and hard work, those books can, theoretically, be rearranged back into coherent wholes if you salvage all pieces of paper. Ultimately, in this situation we can at least comfort ourselves that not everybody engages in this sort of hideous destructive behaviour. Far from it.
In summary: with each case like this, my faith in the workability of AfD decreases. We need some new process to replace it.
Articles get murdered
in the night.
So yeah, I've probably snapped. I just can't defend our deletion processes any more. I'm not having a complete mental breakdown here.
I'm not blaming anyone here. I try not to call anyone names - the above comment about shotgun-wielding ignoramus psychopats is an obvious exaggeration and anyone who doesn't get that is an obvious n00b who has no idea about our consensus on humour.
I'm against these prevalent negative attitudes.
Simply put, I'm against the notion that producing hundreds of kilobytes of deletion and deletion review discussions is somehow helping the community to build an encyclopedia. We're pretending we're seeking consensus and acting toward the good of the website. We failed to realise that the site is growing too fast for AfD to handle.
I still somehow have faith in tomorrow. Somehow.
I just wonder why no one's fixing things.
I mean, I can't. I've got to go draw more stuff using the awesome graphics application that doesn't exist because some nascent philosopher figured out its existence is original research. Damn. Can't really argue with that.
Do I sound jaded again? Sorry...