Cite the Wikipedia debates you say are happening. Citing HN freakouts isn't a valid argument, because anyone in the world can spark one at any time, because anybody can nominate any article for deletion.
The thing is, even when you succeed in fending off all that, it doesn't really feel good to have spent time on Wikipedia politics.
The fact that anybody can nominate any article for deletion doesn't really run counter to my point, which is, to reiterate:
> No matter how innocuous the topic, if somebody takes notice of it, you'll often find yourself constantly having to fight random people … it was unpleasant and I wouldn't want to deal with such people again.
In fact, when these freakouts happen, people who believe in the articles and know how WP works have to take pains to tell people not to jump into the AfD debate and start "voting" for the articles, because that actually makes the process work worse. Most of the time, when a self-evidently valuable article is proposed for deletion, WP's editors do a just-fine job of making sure they aren't actually deleted.
What you did here was move the goalposts. You claimed that computer scientists are getting shot down in content debates on WP. I asked you to point us to one of those debates happening, where the "jerk brigade" of editors and admins on WP were shouting contributors off of topics. All those debates and shoutings-down are logged.
You responded by highlighting discussions on HN of people freaking out about deletionism. We already know people on HN are freaking out about deletionism. Stipulated! The point is: those people freaking out on HN are mostly wrong.
But no, I am not moving the goalposts. I'm pretty convinced at this point that you've projected other people's goalposts onto my playing field. I'll quote myself again:
> No matter how innocuous the topic, if somebody takes notice of it, you'll often find yourself constantly having to fight random people
> Just Googling around Hacker News, I find a number of innocuous pages whose maintainers have had to defend themselves against deletion.
> Personally, I don't remember what the specific pages were I used to help maintain. I was doing it because I wanted to help out and I saw those pages could use it rather than because I cared a lot about the topics. But I do remember it was unpleasant and I wouldn't want to deal with such people again.
Those have been the goalposts all along. I didn't say anything about getting "shouted off topics." I just said it involves more headaches than I feel it ought to. (Clearly some people like mjn and yourself haven't had that experience, and I'm glad, but that doesn't take the bad taste out of the mouths of people who have.)
If the "fight" we're talking about here is (a) one simple sentence stating why the subject is notable and (b) a couple of links, I'm not sure "fight" is the right term.
Just Googling around Hacker News, I find a number of innocuous pages whose maintainers have had to defend themselves against deletion.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2752285
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=216723
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=288200
You might agree or disagree with some particular cases, and sometimes things go the right way, but either way it's still a hassle that you have to fight. Personally, I don't remember what the specific pages were I used to help maintain. I was doing it because I wanted to help out and I saw those pages could use it rather than because I cared a lot about the topics. But I do remember it was unpleasant and I wouldn't want to deal with such people again.