deletionists

Suppose further that it occurs to you to ask yourself whether you support the deletionists or the inclusionists.

Trying to fight against the deletionists on Wikipedia with their spurious claims is a barrier to entry.

Some of the deletionists are very far into 'burning the village in order to save it' territory.

That would be fine, but there are some 'deletionists' out there that wouldn't be happy with that.

How long does an article have to correct itself before the deletionists have their way with it?

Some deletionists aren't happy with just reverting edits; they insist on actually deleting articles completely and forcing contributors to start over.

I'm not a big fan of Wikipedia's deletionists, but I hope they go after this page.

Well, it was more than a few years ago at this point, and the long and short of it is that the deletionists won.

The deletionists won and quite a few people refuse to participate anymore.

If the deletionists let up, and WP spiraled out of control with vanity articles, it would likely stop being an encyclopedia anyone can edit.

Particularly since it looks like the deletionists are winning their war.

If that is what it takes to get the deletionists away then feel free to add any valid reference I say.

And the deletionists where more often the "majority" culture and male, which resulted in a feedback loop for the nonminority and female.

The deletionists, though - yes, they do seem to care about the "right" version.

I mostly quit contributing because of the deletionists, but I have some recollection about one of the "alienated" communities the article mentions.

Is it the sum total of all knowledge or is it just the subset that the deletionists deem "worthy" (or "notable" in their jargon)?

Deletionists get an upper-hand over inclusionists when the article is deleted because the history is not available, and you have to start all over.

Regardless, I am appreciative of Wikipedians like you for contributing and defending against The Deletionists.