Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Libertarian Party of Nebraska


 * I would recommend letting it go, Serviam. It is possible to spend an incredible amount of time and emotional energy on these AfDs, but it's really not worth it, and will just cause burnout. A perusal of archives and user contributions indicates deletionists generally do not change their positions on the broad issue of deletionism, which is what this comes down to. Better to just work on these state affiliate articles over at LPedia and improve/create articles on Wikipedia that are sufficiently indisputably notable to make them unlikely to attract AfD nominations. (I don't mean to be pessimistic; I just favor the allocation of resources, including one's own time and energy, to where it will serve the most good.) In fact, I think my strategy from now on, when this happens, will generally be to leave a one-line comment ("keep, per such-and-such") and work mainly on the article if possible, noting any pertinent improvements on the AfD (which is what the writers of WP:BUILDER were talking about). Oh, by the way, in case anyone didn't realize, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is merely an essay, not a policy or guideline. Aldrich Hanssen (talk) 03:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I will take umbrage at your labeling anyone who nominates or supports an AfD a "deletionist," Aldrich Hanssen, and I would recommend that you keep in mind the official policy of No personal attacks. It seems that in this case the inclusionists are at fault, as the simple fact of the matter is that this is a poor excuse for an article, and as it stands it is a weak advertisement as well. All articles that behave like this one should be deleted from WP, not for the sake of deletionism, but rather for the sake of creating a reputable encyclopedia. • Freechild   'sup?   04:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * People who regularly nominate articles for deletion are deletionists. It's not degradatory. Most of them are proud of it and have userboxes for it. I'm a proud inclusionist. Articles that can be saved, should be.-- Serviam  (talk)  14:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)