Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Permastub (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: keep . ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:23, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Permastub

This unreferenced essay by a banned editor is a blanket critique of stubs and implies that they should all be deleted or merged if there is no prospect of expansion. There are tens of thousands of informative stubs that to expand would only be adding puffery, padding and undue weight. Paper encyclopedias are full of informative, concise stubs. Atlantic306 (talk) 16:40, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I liked what you wrote such much that I added it to the essay. Unscintillating (talk) 18:35, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First AfD, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Permastub. Unscintillating (talk) 18:35, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, that improves the balance of the article, making its retention less problematic. Will let the discussion run for further views Atlantic306 (talk) 18:49, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nominator is absolutely correct that this essay has been dragging down Wikipedia for years in an counterproductive quest to avoid stubs. Encyclopedias have always had stubs. However, I'm not convinced that deleting this essay is the best way to counteract the damage it has done, so I've rewritten it. And it is also wise to listen to WhatamIdoing, who favored keeping this essay in the first AfD. I've also added a quote from the first AfD to the essay. Unscintillating (talk) 18:35, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Essay on an important project topic. Permastubs, doomed permastubs, and forests of permastubs, are strong rhetoric on the topic of article inclusion. The demise of the User:Phil Sandifer is of no bearing to this essay. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:21, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.