- 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 keep. Reform of the page can be discussed on its talk page. -- Core desat 05:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians
I'm not really sure this page serves a healthy purpose any more. You can easilly see if someone has stopped editting by checking their contribs log, and see if they left a reason by checking their user/user talk page. This page seems to glorify leaving Wikipedia, by adding a little 2-3 line memorial for you if you have friends who notice you left. Ultimately, does this page actually help us create a better encyclopedia? I'm not seeing it. But I'm not trying to attack this page, I'm just trying to see if there's actually consensus for having it around anymore. -- W.marsh 01:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- I would normally vote keep on this, but since it is becoming so very long, Delete per nom. — $PЯING rαgђ 02:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I see no reason to delete this. If this falls into inactivity then tag as historic.-- James, La gloria è a dio 02:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I as well don't see any reason to delete this page. In fact, if this was a lot more intense, it would be similar to the
WP:BJAODN controversy. (
→
zel
zany -
review) 02:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- BJAODN was harmless but this kind of creates this reward for leaving Wikipedia in a huff, it immortalizes one's decision to leave. While I don't think this page actually makes anyone decide to leave, I think it adds to the drama. -- W.marsh 02:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, I do a lot of work on this page, and I don't think it glorifies leaving Wikipedia or detracts in any way. It merely documents users whose contributions wer valued but have decided to leave for whatever reason. I think it's good to recognize their efforts.-- Cúchullain t/ c 05:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Well, I don't see any glorifying of anyone's edits, just a page that says "these editors have left". Its harmless, but just as Springeragh had said, it potentially be very long (or it IS already very long). Leave it up to you guys. - Zachary crimson wolf 14:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep What the beans, man? Are we going to delete every page that's not an article? -- Captain Wikify Argh! 17:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I don't use this page, but some people do. There's nothing wrong with it. Yechiel Man 04:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep What happened to community building? I do not see anything wrong with remembering Wikipedians who have contributed a lot but have left for various reasons. This list is also useful in other ways. If you read the reasons why these Wikipedians leave, you will read the same reasons over and over again. You will see that Wikipedia has some major systemic problems that must be dealt with. For more information, see this post I made to the village pump and Wikipedia:Reform. -- Kaypoh 06:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: I say we ought to keep it but shorten the list to Wikipedians who can be quickly noted (by messages on talk pages etc.) as being "Absent/Missing" from Wikipedia and not only Wikipedians who haven't edited in a few months, when it could be that they have simply forgotten to put {{vacation}} or something of the sort on their talk page... Booksworm Sprechen-sie Koala? 08:51, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep but cut down. Keep users who are truly missing (i.e. who left without a message or wikibreak notice) and remove those who announce their departure - they aren't missing, they've left. Majorly ( talk) 14:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep in agreement with Majorly. Users who have said they've left should be removed, as they've said they've left. I also suggest removing users who have been blocked indefinitely, as they aren't missing, they're blocked and can't come back. Acalamari 23:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep it. What is wrong with it? Repaxan 00:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Wikipedia history. -- MichaelLinnear 06:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. How does this page harm the project? szyslak 10:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Are we going to forget those who have left? - Yancyfry 03:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep- May we never forget..... Eddie 21:27, 14 June 2007 (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.
- 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 keep. Reform of the page can be discussed on its talk page. -- Core desat 05:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians
I'm not really sure this page serves a healthy purpose any more. You can easilly see if someone has stopped editting by checking their contribs log, and see if they left a reason by checking their user/user talk page. This page seems to glorify leaving Wikipedia, by adding a little 2-3 line memorial for you if you have friends who notice you left. Ultimately, does this page actually help us create a better encyclopedia? I'm not seeing it. But I'm not trying to attack this page, I'm just trying to see if there's actually consensus for having it around anymore. -- W.marsh 01:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- I would normally vote keep on this, but since it is becoming so very long, Delete per nom. — $PЯING rαgђ 02:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I see no reason to delete this. If this falls into inactivity then tag as historic.-- James, La gloria è a dio 02:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I as well don't see any reason to delete this page. In fact, if this was a lot more intense, it would be similar to the
WP:BJAODN controversy. (
→
zel
zany -
review) 02:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- BJAODN was harmless but this kind of creates this reward for leaving Wikipedia in a huff, it immortalizes one's decision to leave. While I don't think this page actually makes anyone decide to leave, I think it adds to the drama. -- W.marsh 02:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, I do a lot of work on this page, and I don't think it glorifies leaving Wikipedia or detracts in any way. It merely documents users whose contributions wer valued but have decided to leave for whatever reason. I think it's good to recognize their efforts.-- Cúchullain t/ c 05:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Well, I don't see any glorifying of anyone's edits, just a page that says "these editors have left". Its harmless, but just as Springeragh had said, it potentially be very long (or it IS already very long). Leave it up to you guys. - Zachary crimson wolf 14:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep What the beans, man? Are we going to delete every page that's not an article? -- Captain Wikify Argh! 17:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I don't use this page, but some people do. There's nothing wrong with it. Yechiel Man 04:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep What happened to community building? I do not see anything wrong with remembering Wikipedians who have contributed a lot but have left for various reasons. This list is also useful in other ways. If you read the reasons why these Wikipedians leave, you will read the same reasons over and over again. You will see that Wikipedia has some major systemic problems that must be dealt with. For more information, see this post I made to the village pump and Wikipedia:Reform. -- Kaypoh 06:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: I say we ought to keep it but shorten the list to Wikipedians who can be quickly noted (by messages on talk pages etc.) as being "Absent/Missing" from Wikipedia and not only Wikipedians who haven't edited in a few months, when it could be that they have simply forgotten to put {{vacation}} or something of the sort on their talk page... Booksworm Sprechen-sie Koala? 08:51, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep but cut down. Keep users who are truly missing (i.e. who left without a message or wikibreak notice) and remove those who announce their departure - they aren't missing, they've left. Majorly ( talk) 14:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep in agreement with Majorly. Users who have said they've left should be removed, as they've said they've left. I also suggest removing users who have been blocked indefinitely, as they aren't missing, they're blocked and can't come back. Acalamari 23:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep it. What is wrong with it? Repaxan 00:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Wikipedia history. -- MichaelLinnear 06:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. How does this page harm the project? szyslak 10:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Are we going to forget those who have left? - Yancyfry 03:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep- May we never forget..... Eddie 21:27, 14 June 2007 (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.