User:Friday/bad
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
People often argue on Afd or other discussions that the article people are trying to fix or remove isn't the worst that we have. These arguments, while often true, are not useful. One bad article does not justify another. Wikipedia is not consistent. If we have List of triviacruft on some cartoon that had only 3 episodes, and someone's trying to delete List of triviacruft on some cartoon that ran for 6 episodes, it doesn't mean they're being unfair. It means they haven't gotten to the other one yet. Cleanup, editing, and deletion happens to individual articles. We don't have a good way to do it consistently and simultaneously against several articles, so inconsistency is sometimes the result. This is OK.
If "we have even worse articles" is the best argument that someone can come up with against deletion, maybe the article in question isn't worth keeping? If bad content can't be turned into good content, why would we want to keep it?
