The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous 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 discussion was keep. While noting that this individual doesn't meet the "few hundred edits" standard on the English Wikipedia, I find consensus to keep a sufficient "special circumstance" to allow this. --
BDD (
talk) 18:03, 1 April 2014 (UTC)reply
WP:FAKEARTICLE. I could understand if it was kept by the user. But it wasnt. A user created this after his death. Pure violation of the guideline, regardless of his death.
Beerest 2Talk page 00:00, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep That may be the case, but why don't you attempt to rework it so that it could include this information, as we shouldn't just delete the entire page just because of this. Besides, the template is useful, so there is no need to nuke the page when we have a useful template there.
Kevin Rutherford (
talk) 00:06, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Its impossible to edit, a admin locked the page.
Beerest 2Talk page 00:33, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
So? Proposing deletion of a page that has been edited by the wider community and preserved as a memorial is disruptive.
Kevin Rutherford (
talk) 01:16, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Fix whatever issues it has (user an edit request template if needs be), and keep it. I'm not seeing how it breaks policy as it's marginally
WP:FAKEARTICLE and definitely not unfixable -
Alison❤ 01:26, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep, unprotect, and move to Wikipediaspace. Per
WP:FAKEARTICLE I definitely can't support keeping this in its current state (doubly so since the actual user had nothing to do with it). Maybe merging its contents to
WP:DECEASED would be best. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 02:07, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
I don't see it surviving in Wikipedia space since it seems very
WP:BLP1E. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 08:08, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. The
WP:RIP exception for userspace memorials is only for regular contributors. This user does not satisfy even the generous minimal requirements generally a few hundred edits and has never edited either his user page or talk page.
jni(delete)...just not interested 20:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep. No good reason to delete. We keep user pages for editors no longer with us who contributed less.
Jonathunder (
talk) 21:33, 24 March 2014 (UTC)reply
@
Jonathunder: Yes but its not a userpage. It got made in article space, and then it got moved to here by no reason.
Beerest 2Talk page 21:04, 28 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep I can see no benefit in allowing administrators to look at this but hiding it from everyone else.
Thincat (
talk) 09:37, 25 March 2014 (UTC)reply
I see no benefit in keep in protected either
Beerest 2Talk page 21:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep. It is more than appropriate to convert a late Wikipedian's userpage to a memorial, even if they only have 41 edits. All our volunteers
matter. --
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 13:33, 25 March 2014 (UTC)reply
You missed the point. He had no userpage here. It got created after death. Is there any MFD you will not keep?
Beerest 2Talk page 21:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Since many do not understand: THIS WASNT MADE BY HIM. Your basically wanting to keep some guys sandbox draft.
Beerest 2Talk page 21:04, 28 March 2014 (UTC)reply
This memorial page, a memorial page for a Wikipedian, one of us. Of course it was written by someone else. --
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 21:47, 28 March 2014 (UTC)reply
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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous 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 discussion was keep. While noting that this individual doesn't meet the "few hundred edits" standard on the English Wikipedia, I find consensus to keep a sufficient "special circumstance" to allow this. --
BDD (
talk) 18:03, 1 April 2014 (UTC)reply
WP:FAKEARTICLE. I could understand if it was kept by the user. But it wasnt. A user created this after his death. Pure violation of the guideline, regardless of his death.
Beerest 2Talk page 00:00, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep That may be the case, but why don't you attempt to rework it so that it could include this information, as we shouldn't just delete the entire page just because of this. Besides, the template is useful, so there is no need to nuke the page when we have a useful template there.
Kevin Rutherford (
talk) 00:06, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Its impossible to edit, a admin locked the page.
Beerest 2Talk page 00:33, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
So? Proposing deletion of a page that has been edited by the wider community and preserved as a memorial is disruptive.
Kevin Rutherford (
talk) 01:16, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Fix whatever issues it has (user an edit request template if needs be), and keep it. I'm not seeing how it breaks policy as it's marginally
WP:FAKEARTICLE and definitely not unfixable -
Alison❤ 01:26, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep, unprotect, and move to Wikipediaspace. Per
WP:FAKEARTICLE I definitely can't support keeping this in its current state (doubly so since the actual user had nothing to do with it). Maybe merging its contents to
WP:DECEASED would be best. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 02:07, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
I don't see it surviving in Wikipedia space since it seems very
WP:BLP1E. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 08:08, 22 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. The
WP:RIP exception for userspace memorials is only for regular contributors. This user does not satisfy even the generous minimal requirements generally a few hundred edits and has never edited either his user page or talk page.
jni(delete)...just not interested 20:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep. No good reason to delete. We keep user pages for editors no longer with us who contributed less.
Jonathunder (
talk) 21:33, 24 March 2014 (UTC)reply
@
Jonathunder: Yes but its not a userpage. It got made in article space, and then it got moved to here by no reason.
Beerest 2Talk page 21:04, 28 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep I can see no benefit in allowing administrators to look at this but hiding it from everyone else.
Thincat (
talk) 09:37, 25 March 2014 (UTC)reply
I see no benefit in keep in protected either
Beerest 2Talk page 21:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep. It is more than appropriate to convert a late Wikipedian's userpage to a memorial, even if they only have 41 edits. All our volunteers
matter. --
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 13:33, 25 March 2014 (UTC)reply
You missed the point. He had no userpage here. It got created after death. Is there any MFD you will not keep?
Beerest 2Talk page 21:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Since many do not understand: THIS WASNT MADE BY HIM. Your basically wanting to keep some guys sandbox draft.
Beerest 2Talk page 21:04, 28 March 2014 (UTC)reply
This memorial page, a memorial page for a Wikipedian, one of us. Of course it was written by someone else. --
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 21:47, 28 March 2014 (UTC)reply
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.