| Revision as of 03:51, 1 July 2009 editScjessey (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers29,025 edits →Category removal: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:57, 1 July 2009 edit undoBrandon (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators22,380 edits →Category removal: replyNext edit → | ||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
| Can you tell me why you ] from the file hosting category? It was added only recently, and DreamHost does indeed run a file hosting services called "Files Forever". -- ] (]) 03:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC) | Can you tell me why you ] from the file hosting category? It was added only recently, and DreamHost does indeed run a file hosting services called "Files Forever". -- ] (]) 03:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :Reverted, it might be helpful if the article explained or mentioned why it is in the category though. ]<small><sup>]</sup></small> 03:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:57, 1 July 2009
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Kibbutz Beth-El Israel
How come the article was deleted, again? You can answer here. --Shuki (talk) 18:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Same reason it was deleted last time. The author has made no good faith attempt to work to correct the article, instead they continue to post it under new titles with sock puppets. BJ 18:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- What was wrong with the article? --Shuki (talk) 18:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Serious WP:NPOV violations. It seems to be a "cult outing" article that seeks to reveal the practices of the kibbutz without any references to back up their claims. BJ 18:37, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Fact is that this group exists. Can you please point me to the deletion discussion? --Shuki (talk) 18:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- If the group exists than create an article, my deletions are entirely without prejudice. BJ 18:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Then I think that the article should be undeleted and the proper prod/del process allowed to take place, especially with more visibility. --Shuki (talk) 19:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Just write a stub, there is no need to undelete the libelous version. BJ 19:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- I don't have any information on this group. If you can't do it, then we should get help from somewhere else. --Shuki (talk) 19:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Shuki, I've looked at the article and its contribution history, which was one edit. An article as it was cannot remain in that condition, and it would take removing revisions from the visible history log to clean it up. With it having only one revision, deletion was the only option. As bjweeks said, you are welcome to start a fresh article with verified reliable sources. Undeletion of that revision will not aid in building an encyclopedic contribution. Keegan (talk) 19:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- This behaviour and attitude is very suspect. No justification has been given to warrant a speedy, and definitely looks more like WP:NOTCSD. The issue with one large edit is absurd. I'm actually for large edits in minimum steps. I also don't particularly like cults but certainly, recreating the article will let WP editors police it properly. It actually seems like a balanced article. --Shuki (talk) 20:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Fact is that this group exists. Can you please point me to the deletion discussion? --Shuki (talk) 18:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Serious WP:NPOV violations. It seems to be a "cult outing" article that seeks to reveal the practices of the kibbutz without any references to back up their claims. BJ 18:37, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- What was wrong with the article? --Shuki (talk) 18:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Are we reading the same article? It is almost entirely unsourced criticism bordering on libel. There is nothing that can be salvaged from the current text, it would need to be written from scratch and sourced to be acceptable. I can not in good faith undelete this article. If you insist you can try to have it overturned at WP:DRV but I strongly suggest just having a proper article written. BJ 20:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Frankly, it seems like a decent article and yes, you finally forced me to read the whole thing. We all want articles to be proper on WP, and some take much longer than others to improve. If this is a cult, and especially with its documented business ventures, then it should have an article here. --Shuki (talk) 20:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Rawr!
Sup brah? --MZMcBride (talk) 01:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Category removal
Can you tell me why you removed DreamHost from the file hosting category? It was added only recently, and DreamHost does indeed run a file hosting services called "Files Forever". -- Scjessey (talk) 03:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Reverted, it might be helpful if the article explained or mentioned why it is in the category though. BJ 03:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)