Talk:San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge weld controversy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] deletion, recreation, and redirect
This was deleted after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge weld controversy. It was recreated afterwards. I have no particular knowledge of this incident and no particular opinion, but in the interest of deferring to those who participated in the Afd, I've turned this into a redirect to Eastern span replacement of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. Friday (talk) 18:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I did not notice the AFD
Seems strange that Wikipedians would prefer to delete encyclopedic content. I recieved no notice of the proposal for deletion, even though I am the author (rather rude, I think). - Leonard G. 18:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
P.S. The deltion resulted in a RED LINK - so even that was poorly done. - Leonard G. 18:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Judging from the Afd, folks didn't think it was particularly encyclopedic. Do you think this would be better covered in the other article? At a glance, I'd say the other article is in much better shape than this one. This is almost entirely source material, as was mentioned in the Afd. Friday (talk) 18:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- These are summaries of the source material, some of which are in DOC format, and could be difficult for some to access. At least the links to the documents and the news articles should be included. The whole point of a separate article was to allow the user to drill down to summaries and then original source, without overburdening the refering article, which itself I took out of the SFOBB article in the interest of compactness and text flow. - Leonard G. 18:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, like I said, I don't have much opinion yet on this. I did notify the Afd closer that his decision was in dispute, though. Normally a case like this should go to WP:DRV instead of just being recreated, but I don't see any harm in discussing it here on the talk page instead. Friday (talk) 19:10, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- These are summaries of the source material, some of which are in DOC format, and could be difficult for some to access. At least the links to the documents and the news articles should be included. The whole point of a separate article was to allow the user to drill down to summaries and then original source, without overburdening the refering article, which itself I took out of the SFOBB article in the interest of compactness and text flow. - Leonard G. 18:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
