Like it or not, Wikipedia is the web's jumping-off point for serious knowledge about a given subject, especially technical subjects, and having citations in the article gives people reasonable places to jump off to.
So don't spam the deletion discussion. Add good citations and references instead.
I don't advocate going nuts about it, but Wikipedia's deletion policies often lead to the permanent removal of interesting topics.
There are things that I have learned from Wikipedia that no one else will ever be able to read - because some arbitrary decision maker decided it wasn't important. That's what frustrates people.
> (...) but Wikipedia's deletion policies often lead to the permanent removal of interesting topics.
Quite the opposite, in my experience. The policies are reasonable and help the content stay. However, they are subject to interpretation -- and some experienced users that prefer deletionism (``deletionists'') -- are able to game the system and get some content removed pretty much in spite of policies (at least its spirit).
Name the articles. If they are useful I am quite happy to rework them into something salvageable.
In most of the cases what is deleted has no real content, but a year or so later someone will recreate the article well, probably not knowing it had been deleyed.
Like it or not, Wikipedia is the web's jumping-off point for serious knowledge about a given subject, especially technical subjects, and having citations in the article gives people reasonable places to jump off to.
So don't spam the deletion discussion. Add good citations and references instead.