Misplaced Pages

:Miscellany for deletion/Misplaced Pages:Once upon a time...: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:18, 30 November 2006 editDoug Bell (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,585 edits comment← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:11, 5 May 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(14 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background-color: #E3D2FB; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
<!--
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to miscellany page for deletion, you must manually edit the MfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''delete''' the project, '''keep''' the user pages. (]) 09:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
====]==== ====]====
This page is linked from the ]. It was/is an attempt to write a story on Misplaced Pages. It is inactive. It is also questionable whether it should be here even if active--Misplaced Pages is ] a site for writing original stories and poems. This page is linked from the ]. It was/is an attempt to write a story on Misplaced Pages. It is inactive. It is also questionable whether it should be here even if active--Misplaced Pages is ] a site for writing original stories and poems.
Line 15: Line 21:
*'''Neutral'''. If it's just going to be inactive, it's not helpful. But I don't see how this hurt anything to begin with. Transwiki might be the correct option if it were still active, but as is, maybe we could tag it as historical? --] <small>]</small> 02:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC) *'''Neutral'''. If it's just going to be inactive, it's not helpful. But I don't see how this hurt anything to begin with. Transwiki might be the correct option if it were still active, but as is, maybe we could tag it as historical? --] <small>]</small> 02:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
* '''Strong delete.''' ]: "Misplaced Pages is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information not heretofore published," nor "original inventions," nor "ersonal essays or logs." ]: "Misplaced Pages is not a free wiki host for you to use for your own purposes. It's an encyclopedia. Our primary goal here is to write an encyclopedia, not to provide free web hosting to people. Even if your article isn't taking up much space, you are still misusing Misplaced Pages and preventing it from becoming a usable encyclopedia." The overriding purpose of this website is to build an encyclopedia, and things that subtract, slow down, and take away from that purpose do not have a place here. Editors contributing to this story could be contributing manhours towards articles and useful environments. &mdash; ] <small>(])</small> 02:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC) * '''Strong delete.''' ]: "Misplaced Pages is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information not heretofore published," nor "original inventions," nor "ersonal essays or logs." ]: "Misplaced Pages is not a free wiki host for you to use for your own purposes. It's an encyclopedia. Our primary goal here is to write an encyclopedia, not to provide free web hosting to people. Even if your article isn't taking up much space, you are still misusing Misplaced Pages and preventing it from becoming a usable encyclopedia." The overriding purpose of this website is to build an encyclopedia, and things that subtract, slow down, and take away from that purpose do not have a place here. Editors contributing to this story could be contributing manhours towards articles and useful environments. &mdash; ] <small>(])</small> 02:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
* '''Strong delete''' per Whedonette. Nonsense and offensive content. Of no benefit to the encyclopedia, and is totally unrelated. <font color="darkblue">]</font><sup><font color="red">]</font><font color="green">]</font></sup> 04:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC) * '''Strong delete''' per Whedonette. Nonsense and offensive content. Of no benefit to the encyclopedia, and is totally unrelated. ]<sup>]]</sup> 04:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' ] does not strictly apply to Misplaced Pages space. Our policies, for example, are all based on original research of Misplaced Pages's needs and behaviours. --] <small>]</small> 04:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC) **'''Comment''' ] does not strictly apply to Misplaced Pages space. Our policies, for example, are all based on original research of Misplaced Pages's needs and behaviours. --] <small>]</small> 04:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
***Per ] and ] this page should be deleted. It's not benefitting the encyclopedia so ] doesn't apply. Also an inactive project is simply wasting Misplaced Pages server space. <font color="darkblue">]</font><sup><font color="red">]</font><font color="green">]</font></sup> 04:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC) ***Per ] and ] this page should be deleted. It's not benefitting the encyclopedia so ] doesn't apply. Also an inactive project is simply wasting Misplaced Pages server space. ]<sup>]]</sup> 04:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
****Are you seriously suggesting that only ] lets us use original research in Misplaced Pages-space? Your server space argument is a misconception, seeing that it's still on the server even if it's deleted. I am neutral on this, but could you use arguments that actually apply to the situation? --] <small>]</small> 04:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC) ****Are you seriously suggesting that only ] lets us use original research in Misplaced Pages-space? Your server space argument is a misconception, seeing that it's still on the server even if it's deleted. I am neutral on this, but could you use arguments that actually apply to the situation? --] <small>]</small> 04:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
*****No, that's not what I mean. If the article benefitted the 'cyclopedia, then ] would apply. But since the article certainly ''doesn't'', it should be deleted outright. Look, I realize that Wikipedians are normal people; they need entertainment just like everybody else, and Misplaced Pages's a great place for it, ''if the game actually benefits the encyclopedia''. I would probably vote '''keep''' on a game that required users to make improvements to articles. <font color="darkblue">]</font><sup><font color="red">]</font><font color="green">]</font></sup> 20:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC) *****No, that's not what I mean. If the article benefitted the 'cyclopedia, then ] would apply. But since the article certainly ''doesn't'', it should be deleted outright. Look, I realize that Wikipedians are normal people; they need entertainment just like everybody else, and Misplaced Pages's a great place for it, ''if the game actually benefits the encyclopedia''. I would probably vote '''keep''' on a game that required users to make improvements to articles. ]<sup>]]</sup> 20:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' ] (Have a nice day!) 08:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC) *'''Delete''' ] (Have a nice day!) 08:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete: this is just plain silliness''' - if you want policy, ] a place for social networking, and this distracts horribly from the encyclopaedia. I am becoming ever more convinced that the wretched Department of Fun is causing far more harm than good. Slay all related subpages as well. Burn with fire, lots and lots of fire. ] 19:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC) *'''Delete: this is just plain silliness''' - if you want policy, ] a place for social networking, and this distracts horribly from the encyclopaedia. I am becoming ever more convinced that the wretched Department of Fun is causing far more harm than good. Slay all related subpages as well. Burn with fire, lots and lots of fire. ] 19:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Line 27: Line 33:
*'''Keep''' -- although the project never got off the ground, note that USER PAGES are being targeted for deletion. Part of the agreement with Misplaced Pages users is to allow them to create user pages for their own and common use. As such they are private property and I do not want my user page deleted. If the concensus is that the ''Once Upon a Time'' Project be deleted, user pages should be retained. See established Misplaced Pages guideline -- ''Ownership and editing of pages in the user space'' in ]. ] 06:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC) *'''Keep''' -- although the project never got off the ground, note that USER PAGES are being targeted for deletion. Part of the agreement with Misplaced Pages users is to allow them to create user pages for their own and common use. As such they are private property and I do not want my user page deleted. If the concensus is that the ''Once Upon a Time'' Project be deleted, user pages should be retained. See established Misplaced Pages guideline -- ''Ownership and editing of pages in the user space'' in ]. ] 06:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
*:'''Comment:''' You have some misconceptions regarding user pages. For example, the User page guideline you reference states in ]: ''pages in user space still do belong to the community''. Also from that page: ''Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal homepage.'' And from ]: ''In excessive cases, your user subpage may be deleted, following a listing on Miscellany for deletion, subject to deletion policy.'' —]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 06:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC) *:'''Comment:''' You have some misconceptions regarding user pages. For example, the User page guideline you reference states in ]: ''pages in user space still do belong to the community''. Also from that page: ''Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal homepage.'' And from ]: ''In excessive cases, your user subpage may be deleted, following a listing on Miscellany for deletion, subject to deletion policy.'' —]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 06:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', sorry, Misplaced Pages is not a web host and even user pages should have some general connection with the encyclopedia. &mdash;] (]) 16:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC) *<s>'''Delete''', sorry, Misplaced Pages is not a web host and even user pages should have some general connection with the encyclopedia. &mdash;] (]) 16:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)</s>
**Revised: '''Delete''' project page, '''keep''' the use pages, per several below. (I'd still strongly encourage the editors of the user pages to put them up for speedy deletion at creator request). &mdash;] (]) 03:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', per the others,_] 16:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC) *'''Delete''', per the others,_] 16:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. WBardwin was mistaken about userpage policy, and the page in his space certainly isn't private property. But please don't take that as a reason to delete his harmless userpage, as one thing doesn't have to do with another. I ask people to consider this part of the userpage policy: *'''Keep'''. WBardwin was mistaken about userpage policy, and the page in his space certainly isn't private property. But please don't take that as a reason to delete his harmless userpage, as one thing doesn't have to do with another. I ask people to consider this part of the userpage policy:
Line 33: Line 40:


:I think everybody who's been here for a while could give their own examples of userpages that are purely for fun (="building the community"). I've had some egregious examples in my own space, notably ], which those of you who've been here long enough may remember seeing on the front page on April 1, 2005. Nobody ever offered to delete that one, in fact it was nominated on ] at one point. ;-) I assert that playful nonsense of such a type in the userspace is actually useful for the encyclopedia. ] argued once that editing "European toilet paper holder" had relieved his wikistress to the point where he changed his mind about leaving, and cheerfully hung around for an additional number of months, producing more Featured articles. Altogether, while that nonsense was active, the habitual editors of it (who included ]) produced a remarkable number of FAs. I appreciate that the userpages in question here are inactive, but presumably their purpose was originally similar: fun, relaxation, a creative break in the serious business of wiki-editing, a ] (red? a red link? I don't know what to do about that!) of editing. Please show that the wikipedia community is indeed generally tolerant. To give the eminently serious and productive editor WBardwin a slap for letting his hair down seems to me just like thoughtless mistreatment of a good user. Is this something to make him leave over? :-( (PS. There's no need to nominate "European toilet paper holder" for deletion, btw; it was deleted at my request long ago, and I've only temporarily recreated it as an example--I'll delete it again in a day or two.) ] | ] 21:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC). :I think everybody who's been here for a while could give their own examples of userpages that are purely for fun (="building the community"). I've had some egregious examples in my own space, notably ], which those of you who've been here long enough may remember seeing on the front page on April 1, 2005. Nobody ever offered to delete that one, in fact it was nominated on ] at one point. ;-) I assert that playful nonsense of such a type in the userspace is actually useful for the encyclopedia. ] argued once that editing "European toilet paper holder" had relieved his wikistress to the point where he changed his mind about leaving, and cheerfully hung around for an additional number of months, producing more Featured articles. Altogether, while that nonsense was active, the habitual editors of it (who included ]) produced a remarkable number of FAs. I appreciate that the userpages in question here are inactive, but presumably their purpose was originally similar: fun, relaxation, a creative break in the serious business of wiki-editing, a ] (red? a red link? I don't know what to do about that!) of editing. Please show that the wikipedia community is indeed generally tolerant. To give the eminently serious and productive editor WBardwin a slap for letting his hair down seems to me just like thoughtless mistreatment of a good user. Is this something to make him leave over? :-( (PS. There's no need to nominate "European toilet paper holder" for deletion, btw; it was deleted at my request long ago, and I've only temporarily recreated it as an example--I'll delete it again in a day or two.) ] | ] 21:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC).
*'''Keep''' ]; ]; ]; and ]. --<font color="#06C">]</font> 23:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC) *'''Keep''' ]; ]; ]; and ]. --] 23:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' There seems to be some misunderstanding here regarding user space vs. project space. These user pages exist as part of the Misplaced Pages eponymous department of fun page for this MfD. The fact that some of the pages exist in user space is really not the issue. The issue is whether to have a subproject here on book writing, regardless of namespace. —]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 23:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC) *'''Comment''' There seems to be some misunderstanding here regarding user space vs. project space. These user pages exist as part of the Misplaced Pages eponymous department of fun page for this MfD. The fact that some of the pages exist in user space is really not the issue. The issue is whether to have a subproject here on book writing, regardless of namespace. —]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 23:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
** Then why not nominate the Misplaced Pages namespace article and deal with the user pages seperately instead of in one submission. --] 02:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
*** Because it's ''irrelevant'' that whether the chapters of the story are in user space or project space. The issue is, as I state above, whether to have a subproject here on book writing. The chapters are part of that project. —]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 02:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' the page in project namespace (that's not what the project namespace is for) '''keep''' user pages (harmless fun in semi-private space is perfectly OK). ] | ] 02:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' "Once upn a time and" '''KEEP''' the user subpages. And everyone lived happily ever after. . . .] 02:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete.''' Once upon a time there was a rather silly and unhelpful project page... A happy ending for this story would be '''delete!''' ><<span style="font-family:verdana">]]] <sup><u>''']</u></sup></span> 21:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' the user pages. ] 10:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' all pages in this nomination. I believe the Department of Fun was called "wretched" earlier in the page. Well, I say that a Misplaced Pages where all editors must constantly work as information-adding robots would be far more wretched than any attempt to alleviate the monotony. In addition, if you feel that it's distracting to you, don't go there or pay attention to it. There's no need for juvenile attempts to destroy other people's work because you stumbled across it and do not like it; simply never go there again if it bothers you. ] 18:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>

Latest revision as of 17:11, 5 May 2022

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete the project, keep the user pages. (Radiant) 09:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Once upon a time...

This page is linked from the Misplaced Pages:Department of Fun. It was/is an attempt to write a story on Misplaced Pages. It is inactive. It is also questionable whether it should be here even if active--Misplaced Pages is WP:NOT a site for writing original stories and poems.

Also included in this nomination are the following two user subpages:

See similar MfD Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:AtionSong/World's Longest Poem (second nomination).

--Doug Bell  02:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Note: This is actually the second nomination of this page. The first one was a year and a half ago at Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Once upon a time... and closed as an overwhelming keep. --tjstrf talk 02:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral. If it's just going to be inactive, it's not helpful. But I don't see how this hurt anything to begin with. Transwiki might be the correct option if it were still active, but as is, maybe we could tag it as historical? --tjstrf talk 02:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong delete. WP:NOT#OR: "Misplaced Pages is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information not heretofore published," nor "original inventions," nor "ersonal essays or logs." WP:NFT: "Misplaced Pages is not a free wiki host for you to use for your own purposes. It's an encyclopedia. Our primary goal here is to write an encyclopedia, not to provide free web hosting to people. Even if your article isn't taking up much space, you are still misusing Misplaced Pages and preventing it from becoming a usable encyclopedia." The overriding purpose of this website is to build an encyclopedia, and things that subtract, slow down, and take away from that purpose do not have a place here. Editors contributing to this story could be contributing manhours towards articles and useful environments. — Whedonette (ping) 02:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong delete per Whedonette. Nonsense and offensive content. Of no benefit to the encyclopedia, and is totally unrelated. Yuser31415 04:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment WP:NOR does not strictly apply to Misplaced Pages space. Our policies, for example, are all based on original research of Misplaced Pages's needs and behaviours. --tjstrf talk 04:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Per WP:NFT and WP:USER this page should be deleted. It's not benefitting the encyclopedia so WP:IAR doesn't apply. Also an inactive project is simply wasting Misplaced Pages server space. Yuser31415 04:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
        • Are you seriously suggesting that only WP:IAR lets us use original research in Misplaced Pages-space? Your server space argument is a misconception, seeing that it's still on the server even if it's deleted. I am neutral on this, but could you use arguments that actually apply to the situation? --tjstrf talk 04:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
          • No, that's not what I mean. If the article benefitted the 'cyclopedia, then WP:IAR would apply. But since the article certainly doesn't, it should be deleted outright. Look, I realize that Wikipedians are normal people; they need entertainment just like everybody else, and Misplaced Pages's a great place for it, if the game actually benefits the encyclopedia. I would probably vote keep on a game that required users to make improvements to articles. Yuser31415 20:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete: this is just plain silliness - if you want policy, WP:NOT a place for social networking, and this distracts horribly from the encyclopaedia. I am becoming ever more convinced that the wretched Department of Fun is causing far more harm than good. Slay all related subpages as well. Burn with fire, lots and lots of fire. Moreschi 19:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Moreschi pretty much said anything useful I might have said myself. | Mr. Darcy talk 20:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Irrelevant to writing an encyclopedia. JChap2007 03:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Moreschi, who seems to be turning into my mouthpiece in these matters... riana_dzasta 04:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -- although the project never got off the ground, note that USER PAGES are being targeted for deletion. Part of the agreement with Misplaced Pages users is to allow them to create user pages for their own and common use. As such they are private property and I do not want my user page deleted. If the concensus is that the Once Upon a Time Project be deleted, user pages should be retained. See established Misplaced Pages guideline -- Ownership and editing of pages in the user space in Misplaced Pages:User page. WBardwin 06:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    Comment: You have some misconceptions regarding user pages. For example, the User page guideline you reference states in WP:USER#Ownership and editing of pages in the user space: pages in user space still do belong to the community. Also from that page: Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal homepage. And from WP:USER#Removal: In excessive cases, your user subpage may be deleted, following a listing on Miscellany for deletion, subject to deletion policy. —Doug Bell  06:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, sorry, Misplaced Pages is not a web host and even user pages should have some general connection with the encyclopedia. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Revised: Delete project page, keep the use pages, per several below. (I'd still strongly encourage the editors of the user pages to put them up for speedy deletion at creator request). —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, per the others,_Seadog 16:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. WBardwin was mistaken about userpage policy, and the page in his space certainly isn't private property. But please don't take that as a reason to delete his harmless userpage, as one thing doesn't have to do with another. I ask people to consider this part of the userpage policy:
"The Misplaced Pages community is generally tolerant and offers fairly wide latitude in applying these guidelines to regular participants. Particularly, community-building activities that are not strictly "on topic" may be allowed, especially when initiated by committed Wikipedians with good edit histories. At their best, such activities help us to build the community, and this helps to build the encyclopedia."
I think everybody who's been here for a while could give their own examples of userpages that are purely for fun (="building the community"). I've had some egregious examples in my own space, notably User:Bishonen/European toilet paper holder, which those of you who've been here long enough may remember seeing on the front page on April 1, 2005. Nobody ever offered to delete that one, in fact it was nominated on WP:FAC at one point. ;-) I assert that playful nonsense of such a type in the userspace is actually useful for the encyclopedia. User:Filiocht argued once that editing "European toilet paper holder" had relieved his wikistress to the point where he changed his mind about leaving, and cheerfully hung around for an additional number of months, producing more Featured articles. Altogether, while that nonsense was active, the habitual editors of it (who included User:Giano) produced a remarkable number of FAs. I appreciate that the userpages in question here are inactive, but presumably their purpose was originally similar: fun, relaxation, a creative break in the serious business of wiki-editing, a reculer pour mieux sauter (red? a red link? I don't know what to do about that!) of editing. Please show that the wikipedia community is indeed generally tolerant. To give the eminently serious and productive editor WBardwin a slap for letting his hair down seems to me just like thoughtless mistreatment of a good user. Is this something to make him leave over? :-( (PS. There's no need to nominate "European toilet paper holder" for deletion, btw; it was deleted at my request long ago, and I've only temporarily recreated it as an example--I'll delete it again in a day or two.) Bishonen | talk 21:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC).
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.