Meta talk:Deletion policy/Archives/2003
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the [talk page]. |
Banned users
Options possibles, after insisting that this should be exceptional, and justified
- either (essentially) by the wish to preserve a valuable edit (per some english people opinion)
- or (more unusually) to promote guiding the banned user toward useful edits, rather than bad ones (per french opinion for example)
Bad things and bad users will not always disappear because we wish them to. Some indeed respect the ban, most get tired of being reverted, some never give up, and keep coming back. When technical options do not allow us to keep these users away, it is best to adapt.
- Option 1 : the page is undeleted by a sysop, the original contributor still appears as such; second, the page is edited to be refactored by the second author.
- Option 2 : the page is recreated under another person name, with the original content first, with indication of the original author in the comment box (user name, or ip); then the page is edited by the second person to be refactored
- Option 3 : the page is recreated under another person name, with the original content first, with indication that the original author is not the one creating the page, but no indication of who the banned user is; then the page is edited by the second person to be refactored
- Option 4 : the page undeleted, then moved as a subpage in personal space, for a certain time. Later, it may be moved back (basically option 1) or recreated (option 3 or 4)
More candidates for speedy deletion
These three are included at en. Is there any reason there were not included here?
- Very short pages with no definition or context (eg "He is a funny man that has created Factory and the Hacienda. And, by the way, his wife is great.").
- I think this should be included as such a page would be as useless on Meta as it would on en.
- Reposted content that was deleted according to this deletion policy. This does not apply to undeleted content that was undeleted according to undeletion policy.
- This would seem a necessary addition to prevent the same page having to be listed every time it is recreated.
- New Wikipedia user home pages accidentally created in main article space. However, move content to their user home page first, and consider waiting a day or two before deleting the resultant redirect.
- I can't see any reason to leave this out.
Also, en mentions that opinions differ as to the correct approach to pages with only external links, and also to pages that are perceived as purely trolling. Are there any guidelines on what to do with these at Meta? Maybe these are acceptable here and should not be part of the deletion policy. The note that possible copyright infringements are not candidates for speedy deletion would also seem a sensible thing to add here.
Angela 05:11, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Very short pages with no definition or context
- the idea could be included, but by definition Meta does not seek to define the content of the page or the interest of an article. It is not an encyclopedia. We have no notion of stub here. What could be however included, that it must respect what meta is about. For example, plain articles should not belong to this place, but to the encyclopedia, hence we could delete them. This said, there also is laxism toward this, and meta contains more than one page that is actually irrelevant to meta goals (such as personal comments about life and such). We have room, it would be sad that such pages are just plain deleted. Also, encyclopedic articles could be moved to encyclopedia...so...In short, the type of page you cite could be either seen as pure garbage, or go trough the 15 days. I do not think it needs to respect the same standards than an encyclopedic article.
Reposted content that was deleted according to this deletion policy.
- make sense, yes. To my opinion, it is a bit like going through a door, while it is closed, but you may be right that it is sometimes necessary to be insistant :-)
New Wikipedia user home pages accidentally created in main article space.
- of course. Though we could just as well move the page to the user space, and let the redirect exist. The redirect to the user space does not hurt anyone, and in case the user had a link from another pedia to his page, it does not break the way.
Also, en mentions that opinions differ as to the correct approach to pages with only external links, and also to pages that are perceived as purely trolling. Are there any guidelines on what to do with these at Meta? Maybe these are acceptable here and should not be part of the deletion policy.
- no, there is nothing. Hum...I have no memory of pages ever posted with only external links...I see no reason why it should be speedy deletion though. It is not offensive, not hurting meta. It may be source of information to editors. Better to list them in the 15 days. Or not to mention them at all. I would not do anything at all, provided that it is not a flooding of such articles. Ihmo, should not be part of the policy.
The note that possible copyright infringements are not candidates for speedy deletion would also seem a sensible thing to add here.
- agreed.
Anthere 11:21, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)