The Wikipedia process is still pretty good last time I checked?
There was a notability challenge in en.wikipedia on Olavo de Carvalho, a Steve Bannon type who wrote some philosophy books (like -- on Aristotle and Epicurus) as a younger man (and keeps getting his "philosopher" self-nomination challenged because he didn't go and get a college major in philosophy). I was for keeping the page, but on balance I think the process, arguments and result were fair -- even if almost certainly carrying some underlying political motivation.
We have to focus on the process. It's the only way to general axiology.
I don't have faith in the process anymore. Wiki-lawyering to remove content, is too effective. To what end? Saving disk space?
I'm no longer motivated to fight deletionism in my domain. I don't want to spend time that is not appreciated.
I suspect that as soon as a page is tagged for deletion by someone, others that enjoy being the arbiters of what is and is not WP, flock there. If they lack interest in the topic, they will vote to remove with many technical reasons. Statements that others do find it relevant or interesting, are simply ignored.
There was a notability challenge in en.wikipedia on Olavo de Carvalho, a Steve Bannon type who wrote some philosophy books (like -- on Aristotle and Epicurus) as a younger man (and keeps getting his "philosopher" self-nomination challenged because he didn't go and get a college major in philosophy). I was for keeping the page, but on balance I think the process, arguments and result were fair -- even if almost certainly carrying some underlying political motivation.
We have to focus on the process. It's the only way to general axiology.