Why are you interested in the deaths of "baseball players from over 100 years ago" and "[insignificant politician[s] in Turkey or Brazil"?
On a more serious note: Jimmy Wales has no direct control over the contents of Wikipedia. Sure the system has it's flaws, but all in all it solves a very difficult problem in a kinda-democratic way whi…
Why are you interested in the deaths of "baseball players from over 100 years ago" and "[insignificant politician[s] in Turkey or Brazil"?
On a more serious note: Jimmy Wales has no direct control over the contents of Wikipedia. Sure the system has it's flaws, but all in all it solves a very difficult problem in a kinda-democratic way which works out most of the time. IMHO the usability mentioned in the post is one of the smallest flaws of the system as it is consistent with the way editors use Wikipedia normally and the quoted page simply guides an unfamiliar user through the steps necessary to discuss a deletion. They could implement a form to that but what about the dozens of other actions a user might want to do (e.g. contest the validity of a source/a statement with contradicting sources/a biased formulation etc.).
Why are you interested in the deaths of "baseball players from over 100 years ago" and "[insignificant politician[s] in Turkey or Brazil"?
On a more serious note: Jimmy Wales has no direct control over the contents of Wikipedia. Sure the system has it's flaws, but all in all it solves a very difficult problem in a kinda-democratic way which works out most of the time. IMHO the usability mentioned in the post is one of the smallest flaws of the system as it is consistent with the way editors use Wikipedia normally and the quoted page simply guides an unfamiliar user through the steps necessary to discuss a deletion. They could implement a form to that but what about the dozens of other actions a user might want to do (e.g. contest the validity of a source/a statement with contradicting sources/a biased formulation etc.).
Yawn