Misplaced Pages

:Deletion review: 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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:33, 20 September 2005 view sourceDESiegel (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users50,971 editsm →[]: typos← Previous edit Revision as of 18:51, 20 September 2005 view source Gamaliel (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators93,883 edits →[]Next edit →
Line 31: Line 31:
*'''Keep deleted''' - valid deletion - '''my left shoe exists''' but is not notable enough to justify an article in Misplaced Pages. (My right shoe might be another matter...) - ]]] 17:56, 20 September 2005 (UTC) *'''Keep deleted''' - valid deletion - '''my left shoe exists''' but is not notable enough to justify an article in Misplaced Pages. (My right shoe might be another matter...) - ]]] 17:56, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
**Except, the mere fact of something existing does indeed constitute sufficient notability for an article on it to be included. ] 18:15, 20 September 2005 (UTC) **Except, the mere fact of something existing does indeed constitute sufficient notability for an article on it to be included. ] 18:15, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
***I look forward to your article on Texture's shoes. ] 18:51, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
*I put the speedy delete tag on this. I put it on precisely because there was no context. There was no way to clean up the articel because ti did not realy indicate what it was about. A different article about this subject would allow consideration of notability and referncing and improvement, but an article with no context at all is simply useless. Some yearbooks are no doubt notable, IMO some are not, but there is no way to tell which this is until a new article is written that gives some useful context. '''Keep deleted''' with no prejudice agaisnt a new and better article of the same name. ] ] 18:30, 20 September 2005 (UTC) *I put the speedy delete tag on this. I put it on precisely because there was no context. There was no way to clean up the articel because ti did not realy indicate what it was about. A different article about this subject would allow consideration of notability and referncing and improvement, but an article with no context at all is simply useless. Some yearbooks are no doubt notable, IMO some are not, but there is no way to tell which this is until a new article is written that gives some useful context. '''Keep deleted''' with no prejudice agaisnt a new and better article of the same name. ] ] 18:30, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


Revision as of 18:51, 20 September 2005

Template:Vfu header This page is about articles, not about people. If you feel that a sysop is routinely deleting articles prematurely, or otherwise abusing their powers, please discuss the matter on the user's talk page, or at Misplaced Pages talk:Administrators. Similarly, if you are a sysop and an article you deleted is subsequently undeleted, please don't take it as an attack.

Content review

Editors who wish to see the content of a deleted article may place a request here. They may wish to use that content elsewhere, for example. Alternatively, they may suspect that an article has been wrongly deleted, but are unable to tell without seeing what exactly was deleted. As a subset of this, sometimes an article which is appropriate for a sister site is deleted without being properly transwikied. If the page is undeleted temporarily, it can be exported complete with history using Special:Export, and then redeleted. This will be especially useful once the import feature is completed.

History only undeletion

History only undeletions can be performed without needing a vote on this page. For example, suppose someone writes a biased article on Fred Flintstone, it is deleted, and subsequently someone else writes a decent article on Fred Flintstone. The original, biased article can be undeleted, in which case it will merely sit in the page history of the Fred Flintstone article, causing no harm. Please do not do this in the case of copyright violations.

Votes for undeletion

September 20

The Olmos

A school yearbook is a perfectly acceptable topic for inclusion in Misplaced Pages, as the correct standard for notability is simply "does it exist?". Kurt Weber 17:31, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep deleted. I'm going to resist opening this can of worms completely and just point of the entire content of this "article" was "A Yearbook of unprecedented quality." Perfectly valid speedy deletion. Gamaliel 17:37, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep deleted. Here is not the place to argue notability questions. That was a contextless substub and speediable under A1. There were 5 words in the article, and 4 tags preceding them. -Splash 17:39, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep deleted - very little content in the article to start with tbh. If someone were to write a decent article and then that got deleted then I might be arguing a different point of view, but this is not worth worrying about. -- Francs2000 File:Uk flag large.png 17:48, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Deleted. Perfectly valid speedy deletion. I suggest we keep the can of worms firmly sealed. android79 17:50, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep deleted - valid deletion - my left shoe exists but is not notable enough to justify an article in Misplaced Pages. (My right shoe might be another matter...) - Tεxτurε 17:56, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I put the speedy delete tag on this. I put it on precisely because there was no context. There was no way to clean up the articel because ti did not realy indicate what it was about. A different article about this subject would allow consideration of notability and referncing and improvement, but an article with no context at all is simply useless. Some yearbooks are no doubt notable, IMO some are not, but there is no way to tell which this is until a new article is written that gives some useful context. Keep deleted with no prejudice agaisnt a new and better article of the same name. DES 18:30, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

September 19

Myopia

An entry in Myopia/Combination of Genetic and Environmental factors, was speedied by User:Edwardian on September 15 with the argument that “rv to previous version - nearly all of the text was copied or changed only slightly, from <http://aarcolin4.net>’

It is clearly wrong that it was copied or changed only slightly from the page on the external link

1. The page on the external link has a word count of 2,970; my addition to the section has 1,129, ergo it is wrong to claim that it was copied.

2. As to the charge that it was "changed only slightly", again, wrong: the difference between the two is 1,841 words. Would any fair-minded person claim that there is only a slight difference between the two?

researich2

  • This was just a reversion of text, not a deletion of an article and does not need to come to VfU. You should discuss the question either on the talk page of the article or the talk page of the editor you mention above. Note that it need not be the case that the whole document was copied: any part of it (save for individual sentences, usually) are also copyrighted and may not be simply copy-pasted in. Anyway, the discussion belongs on the relevant talk pages rather than here. -Splash 18:53, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

September 16

Misplaced Pages:Association of Debationist Wikipedians

Improperly speedied. See Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Association_of_Debationist_Wikipedians. Vote was one keep and one delete, both by the same person. Five day period had not elapsed. Does not meet any criteria for speedy deletion. Reason given was "Nonbio that fails not to make any assertion of non-notability." Dpbsmith (talk) 20:23, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

It's a good thing you're failing to make a point here or I'd have to block you :-) --fvw* 20:30, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
Just to spell it out for those who might not visit the AfD page (at the risk of spoiling the joke) there was a nomination for deletion, one keep vote, one delete vote, one comment pointing out that the same voter voted both ways, and one note that the article had been speedied. All of these were by one editor, who has now nominated the page for undeletion. This editor is also the only editor to have edited the page in question. Keep deleted because it was speedied by the creator and sole editor of the page. Thanks for the comic relief. -:) DES 20:46, 16 September 2005 (UTC)


Logs

Del log ǁ Daily AFD Log ǁ Move Log

Copyvio

  1. {{copyvio|url=}} ~~~~
  2. {{subst:article-cv|PageName}} from . ~~~~ Log

AFD Nom

  1. {{subst:afd}}
  2. {{subst:afd2 | pg=PageName | text=Reason why the page should be deleted}} ~~~~
  3. {{subst:afd3 | pg=PageName}} Log


  1. For 2nd or later nom, use: {{subst:afdx|2nd}}

Template:Afd top & Template:Afd bottom

<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; 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 article below. <font color=red>'''Please do not modify it.'''</font> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article'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 re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD 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 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 article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>

DRV templates

<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background-color: #C7BEFA; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #8779DD;">

:''The following discussion is preserved as an ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.''


:''The above discussion is preserved as an ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.</div>

Closing AFD

Deletion

  1. Close AFD using {{subst:at}} RESULT. ~~~~ and {{subst:ab}}
  2. Go to article page. Click "What links here." Delete any redirects, or redirect them elsewhere. If the page you are deleting should never have an article, remove all links to it.
  3. Delete Talk and any related subpage.
  4. Delete article, placing Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/"Article" in "Reason for deletion" box.

No consensus, merges, redirects, keeps

  1. As above.
  2. Remove AFD tag from article. Link Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/"Article" in edit summary.
  3. On Talk page, place {{subst:Old AfD multi|date=date of nomination|result=result|votepage=article name}}
  4. If redirecting, fix double redirects.

Miscellaneous

  1. Merge and delete decisions: Refs Rossami's and Dan PB Smith's comments. Methods here.
  2. When closing out a day's AFD log:

AFD-dictated merger templates

{{afd-mergeto}} and {{afd-mergefrom}}.

  • {{afd-mergeto|Destination article|Source Article (2nd nomination)|25 December 2024}} produces
This article was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on {{{3}}} with a consensus to merge the content into the article Destination article. If you find that such action has not been taken promptly, please consider assisting in the merger instead of re-nominating the article for deletion. To discuss the merger, please use the destination article's talk page. (March 2009)
  • {{afd-mergefrom|Source article|Source Article (2nd nomination)|25 December 2024}} produces
The article Source article was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on {{{3}}} with a consensus to merge the content into Misplaced Pages:Deletion review. If you find that such action has not been taken promptly, please consider assisting in the merger instead of re-nominating the article for deletion. To discuss the merger, please use this talk page. Do not remove this template after completing the merger. A bot will replace it with {{afd-merged-from}}.


00:42, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

September 14

Categories: