Wikipedia:WikiProject Inclusion

This WikiProject is believed to be inactive. Consider looking for related groups or ask for help at the Teahouse. If you wish to help, you may still join the group. This status should be changed if collaborative activity resumes. Guide to WikiProjects Directory of WikiProjects Dealing with inactive WikiProjects

Wikiproject Inclusion is dedicated to promoting inclusion on Wikipedia. It is the project page for the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians. Please join us.

Goals

• To continuously improve Wikipedia and make it the most comprehensive source of reliable encyclopedic information available on the planet.
• Support Wikipedia's premise to comprise the sum of all human knowledge, freely accessible to all humans.

How to help

There are several ways to help:

1. Notify your comrades on the talk page when interesting discussions, rescues, or deletions are occurring.
2. Read to understand Inclusionism and Deletionism and how they interplay on Wikipedia.
3. Declare your opinions on your user page using the templates below.
4. Argue for Inclusion at relevant Village pump discussions.
5. Join the Article Rescue Squadron and improve its articles tagged for rescue.
6. Tackle the front lines of article deletion at AfD. You can monitor the entire current feed or concentrate on deletion debates in a particular area:
   1. Category:AfD debates uses the category function built into the AfD template. It has less specific categories but should theoretically pull from all deletion debates.
   2. Wikiproject Deletion sorting manually places AfDs into a plethora of categories; help them categorize or monitor one of the categories they create.

Resources

• Try to fix problems – The Wikipedia policy of trying to correct problems in articles through editing improvements, expansion and adding reliable sources is often more appropriate than a complete deletion or merging of articles.

Templates

Text	Description	Product
{{User inc}}	Userbox	This user is a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians.
{{User incl}}	Userbox	incl This user is an inclusionist.
{{UBX AIW}}	Userbox	This user is a member of Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians
{{User Inclusionist}}	Userbox	This user is an inclusionist.
{{User:Pythoncoder/incl}}	Userbox	This user is a proud member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians.
{{Inclusionist}}	Banner	This user is a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians. The motto of the AIW is conservata veritate, which translates to "with the preserved truth". This motto reflects the inclusionist desire to change Wikipedia only when no knowledge would be lost as a result.
{{Join inclusionists}}	Invitation	Greetings, you are invited to join WikiProject Inclusion, the project page for the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians. To join the project, add your name to the list here. To indicate your membership of the project, you may care to include one of the following templates on your userpage WikiProject Inclusion Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians {{User inc}} This user is a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians. {{User incl}} incl This user is an inclusionist. {{inclusionist}} This user is a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians. The motto of the AIW is conservata veritate, which translates to "with the preserved truth". This motto reflects the inclusionist desire to change Wikipedia only when no knowledge would be lost as a result.

Pledge

We the undersigned have formed this local WikiProject —based on the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians —to better organize action to support the principle article and material inclusion and to counter exclusion and deletion.

• We hold the view that the process of deletion carries a "systemic bias" or "process bias" by which the process itself becomes a haven for those who wish to use it —emphasizing deletion rather than offering reasonable alternatives for keeping or redirection. (Alternate project title: Countering Process Bias. See also Countering Systemic Bias)
• We campaign for the proper use of the Wikipedia:Cleanup process as it was instituted as a mainstream buffer before deletion is used.
• We seek to institute a review process for Wikipedia articles and templates, which will act in a similar way as Cleanup does for main articles.
• We also seek to begin a consolidation of the deletion processes, whereby these can be collectively tracked and responded to.

Participants

Feel free to add yourself here! (in alphabetical order)

• 9t5
• Abeg92 16:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC). Absolutely.
• allixpeeke (talk) 07:30, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
• Ansony89 (talk) 19:23, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
• applsdev (talk) 11:35, 22 December 2022 (UTC+4)
• Ariel Pontes (talk) 08:17, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
• Asds751 (talk) 13:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC) The advantage of Wikipedia over a physical entity IS that we do not need to comply to the material limitations of our predecessors. We should be using this power we have been given. A robotics competition could have been the reason someone went into their field, while for someone else it could have been a debate club. Both deserve their place on Wikipedia if they still are having that impact on people and the world. Let 300 edits be done rather than 1 deletion be allowed.
• Ayenaee (talk) 22:01, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
• Ayvind-Bjarnason (talk) 22:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC) Why hello there
• AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 13:06, 20 November 2021 (UTC) Fighting with deletionists forced me to go as far as writing an essay for them so they don't wipe out wikipedia. Please share this simple guide with them so we keep world informed: Keep it, don't remove!
• Blitzfan51 speak to the manager Let's save some articles! 16:42, 31 March 2023
• User:CyclePat --Pat 04:28, 1 December 2005 (UTC) (do check my other categories)
• Cycl^opia - ^talk 19:23, 4 October 2009 (UTC) - WP is not paper, and notability is almost always a POV concept. Oh, and "encyclopedic" is the most abused word ever. Sometimes deletion is meaningful, but much more often not. I patrol AfDs (2-3 a day usually), with an eye on BLPs which are usually slashed by overzealous application of BLP policies.
• DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 06:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC) I strongly believe that the focus should be on sourcing and improving articles rather than deletion. Information and free, unbiased knowledge is very very important and the effort of editors here is essential to this project. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 06:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
• DCmacnut<> 14:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC) I consider myself an inclusionist, especially for Wikipedia's in other languages.
• Demt1298 (talk) 15:33, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
• Dswitz10734 (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC) I'm sick of the deletionism here.
• Emergent Digital Corvid⋅𓅩⋅Talk ✉ 19:57, 1 September 2026 (UTC)
• Eoline 20:59, 22 September 2026 (UTC)
• Explodicator7331 (talk) 15:02, 7 March 2023 (UTC). I mean, I already get miffed when I see an AfD request.
• Fadesga (talk) 18:52, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
• Fakescientist8000 Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 12:01, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
• Ganeshk
• Guy Macon Wikipedia in not paper, and notability is too often a codeword for knowing how to get the mass media to pay attention to something.
• Hammelsmith (talk) 03:54, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
• Hazarasp (talk) 11:59, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
• Illegitimate Barrister, 12:27, 12 December 2015 (UTC) Inclusionism! Tolerance, not bigotry.
• J 1982 (talk) 13:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC) Do you miss the old days back in 1994 when only the paper encyclopedia was around? If you were even born back then!
• Jonathan Bowen (talk) 09:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
• Kevin Murray
• Lova Falk (talk) 13:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC) improve and expand instead of delete!
• DarthVetter (talk) 23:20, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
• Mitar (talk) 22:36, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
•  — Myk Streja ^(when?) 02:06, 13 July 2017 (UTC) Venerable is not the same as verifiable or reliable. Just because a source is "new" does not mean it can't be used or relied upon.
• User:Ne0Freedom: as long as it is verifiable, Quotations don't need to be NPOV. All History books are written by those triumphant in wars, and therefore POV. --Ne0 (talk) 21:22, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
• Nutiketaiel (talk) 14:24, 16 October 2008 (UTC) - Wikipedia has unlimited space; we should start using more of it. Everything is notable to someone.
• Oneiros (talk) 22:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• --PATH SLOPU ^(Talk) 14:36, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
• User:PseudoSkull - I believe highly in the philosophy of inclusionism. Moderation between deletionism and inclusionism would sound like a good idea to me, except even within this it takes away from the very primary purposes of Wikipedia. Include as much as possible, and delete as little as possible. Delete only the unverifiable/untrue and the nonsense. PseudoSkull (talk) 23:19, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
• — pythoncoder  (talk | contribs) 02:14, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
• Devin Murphy 18:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
• Redacted II (talk) 15:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
• User:Rogue 9 Wikipedia is not paper. People need to figure this out.
• --Sm8900 (talk) 13:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC) happy to help.
• Smartcom5 ^(Talk ?) 16:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC) Dunno why i wasn't still listed here, since i've got the template on my userpage from the very beginning. Anyway, here i am!
• Snowolf^(talk) on 17:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• Sternenmeer (talk) 01:22, 20 October 2009 (UTC) ‒ WP is really not Paper. In fact, the Paper Age is ending before our very eyes. The deletionists overzealously stick too much to old pre-digital principles dictated by former scarcety of information that no longer exists anymore, not outside our minds anyway ... Enraged by the current ridiculous deletionism storm in the German Wikipedia (see fefe & netzpolitik) I pledge to improve or flag content rather than delete it. I'll also probably like never propose an article's deletion, cause if it really validly should be deleted, someone else will propose it anyway while I'm off adding valuable content somewhere else :D :D :D. I pledge to enrich and grow WP best I can :).
• TARDIS (talk) 18:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
• Carter (talk) 20:41, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
• The Obento Musubi (talk · contribs)
• The Unbeholden (talk) 10:46, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
• Thewellman (talk) 23:20, 26 June 2017 (UTC) I'm not usually a joiner, but these goals deserve all the support I can offer.
• Toby Bartels (talk) 22:21, 4 September 2013 (UTC): There's still hope! Wikipedia is not paper. The only standard for notability should be verifiability.
• Tom Danson (talk) 20:13, 26 March 2010 (UTC) CONSERVATA VERITATE! WIKIPEDIA IS NOT PAPER!
• Universal Life (talk) 20:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
• Yiba (talk) 03:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC): Notability cannot be established without having a point of view. NPOV is a core policy that takes precedence over all guidelines and requires the preservation of minority viewpoints to ensure neutrality. 'Notable', 'reliable', and even 'verifiable' are all inherently subjective.
• Taiwanese Elephant🐘(talk|contribs) 13:20, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
• ❖ ⚜ 𝕽𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖆𝖗𝖉 𝕲𝖗𝖆𝖞𝖘𝖔𝖓 ⚜ ❖ 09:36, 1 March 2026 (UTC) Anything valid Matters

Arguments against article deletion

Related WikiProjects

• Freedom of speech
• Wikipedians against censorship