Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab): Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 349:

*:::::::I do think that we've fallen into a false binary here. The options are not "garbage in the mainspace" vs "auto-deleted as in the draftspace". There are other options (e.g., sticky prods for uncited articles, userification, bold stubbification, bold merging, developing a more consistent and predictable standard for evaluating articles, etc.). [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 20:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

*::::::::I think there is a argument to be made that this landscape might have changed a fair bit since this research was done. The latest data that these projects consider is from 2014-2017. [[WP:ACTRIAL]] happened after that research was done, and Wikipedia's policies have changed since those times. [[User:Sohom Datta|<b class="skin-invert" style="color:#795cb2;">Sohom</b>]] ([[User talk:Sohom Datta|<span class="skin-invert" style="color: #36c;">talk</span>]]) 20:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

*:::::::{{tq|I think then you're pretty much arguing that the draftification process should be removed entirely, and I don't agree with that.}} I'm sorry to pick on you but this is the clearest example yet of the circular reasoning that has got us into this mess: draftification must be good because we do it, so we must keep doing it because it's good. From literally the moment draftspace was created and people started doing this (before that, the equivalent process of [[Wikipedia:userfication|userfication]] was expressly forbidden without prior discussion), peopleothers have been pointing out that the coreunderlying logic makes no sense. Draftification is only for articles that shouldn't be deleted, but it's also only for articles that can't be in mainspace. But since [[WP:PRESERVE|fix good content in place]] is a part of the editing policy and almost all the [[WP:DEL-REASON|community accepted reasons for deletion]] involve the ''potential'' of the article, not it's current state, the intersection of those two sets is functionally zero (apart from some consensus-established edge cases like paid creations or upcoming films).

*:::::::This is why attempts to clarify and improve policy around draftification—and I've been closely involved in many of them—keep failing. You try to find a solid basis for guidelines and there just isn't one. We really need to stop trying to square the circle of justifying draftification as it is practiced now, and start asking what we the community actually wants to achieve with it and whether what we're doing now fulfils that aim. So far it's not looking good for the send-them-all-to-draftspace-and-the-god-of-notability-will-recognise-his-own camp, because there's not a shred of evidence that it helps improve content, retain editors ''or'' manage the NPP workload, and as WAID the empirical studies we do have concluded the precise opposite. But that picture could change with more research – somebody just needs to step up and do it! &ndash;&#8239;[[User:Joe Roe|Joe]]&nbsp;<small>([[User talk:Joe Roe|talk]])</small> 07:01, 27 September 2024 (UTC)