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.
This page, whilst well meaning and good humoured, has become a huge bloated stain on the face of Wikipedia. I know that all Wikipedians experience a bit of burnout every now and then, and that humour can be a good thing, but there are
ways to make people laugh without creating a huge mess of useless text. I think the bolded sentence at the top of a page says it all:
"Give yourself at least an hour and 45 minutes (2 hours and 45 minutes with the manual version) because there are more than 1,302 questions!"
Do we really need something that can waste over an hour of people's time without producing anything productive? I'm not saying that by taking this away people will use their procrastination time doing something useful, but I don't think that there is anything positive to be gained from having a page like this around.
BJAODN is bad enough.
Veesicle (
Talk) (
Contribs)
01:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Comment. A potential positive gained for the numerous editors who take the time to go through the entire test is that it helps them realize that there may be a
problem. The number of questions can always be cut down or split into sections. –
Pomte02:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep. There are only 394 questions. "1,302" is a joke. Nobody needs to do the whole test, or even any of the test if they don't want to. In addition to its value as humor to readers, it's a place for restless and creative thinkers to contribute OR appropriately.
Matchups02:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete. This was on my list of pages to nominate for deletion. I know there is going to be the chorus of "It's humor" and "It's not doing any harm" voices, but really, it's not funny, so the humor thing fails, and per the nom, it's just one more thing that makes Wikipedia a joke. Sometimes I think that too many people here have become more interested in the Wikipedia culture than in the encyclopedia, and this is just one more example of that attitude. —
Doug Bell04:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Very weak delete. Wikipedia culture is interesting, and I have no issue with people who spend a lot of time with it. But to spend time on culture to the exclusion of things which improve the encyclopedia should be discouraged. And this seems to be encouraging spending too much time with the culture. Very weak, though. -
Amarkovmoo!04:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep - a few things like this lying around don't do any harm and may even lighten up the mood a bit when we seem to have a lot of problems at the moment.
Metamagician300011:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
For articles, it isn't. Please explain how the rationale at
WP:ILIKEIT applies to project space. (You know, this is why shortcuts similar to WP:ILIKEIT were RFD'd...)
GracenotesT §
14:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
The last time I took this test (some time ago), I wanted to delete some questions, rather badly. All of the "you get points if you're offended by the above question" items can be a rather inhumane form of torture, after a while. So keep and refactor, because it's quite a part of Wikipedia culture, but please allow the bold removal of unfunny questions, and encourage people to add funny, and oh noes, even useful indicators of wikipediholism. Not so much culture, but more emphasis on accomplishments. If the best indicator of wikipediholism is taking the time to take this test, then ugh.
GracenotesT §
14:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Strong delete I used to think that this test was good for new users to learn the in and outs of wikipedia, but not anymore. This test has gotten out of hand; I tried to shorten it about a month ago, but it's even longer now. My recommendation? Either delete, or restore the archived version (top left corner of the talk page). Eventually, it's going to get big again though. ·
AOTalk16:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep - An interesting trend to see the dvelopmend of wikipediholicism over time (I.E. the growth, and the sheer inasnoity of some of the questions). I get a good lauch out of it every time i read it and it really ise not hurting anything.
-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider)16:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Personally, I don't consider it's growth funny; anyday now, wikipedia's servers will crash because of the enormity of this one huge page. :-) ·
AOTalk17:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete - It's fun and interesting, but it is also much too large. It should be either deleted or shortened. RyGuy17:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Comment I encourage people to remove content from the test. Not good content, but basically content that was put there to make the test-writer sound smart (which gets annoying after a while).
GracenotesT §
17:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Yes, that's what I tried to to, but it didn't work. You'd have to delete over half the test if you want it to be just Wikipedia-related, but then of course, it would grow back. ·
AOTalk17:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
I'm sorry, but I don't see how this test could determine who'd make a good admin; could you please explain this a bit more clearly? ·
AOTalk22:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep - This test serves as a way to tell you either "You're not a Wikipediholic; good job on balancing your life" or "You're editing too much, get a life!" However, I feel that there are too many questions. Therefore, I think that we should establish a process in which we condense the questions into a short quiz.--Ed¿Cómo estás?23:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep but shorten by 5 - 45 %. This test has been around for so long, I don't think it should be deleted. Recently, I have been unable to add questions because its length was preventing my interest of editting. Seriously, you don't have to take the test, nobody's really saying you have to. However, only shorten it a little, as removal of questions and lowering of possibility of gaining many points may cause it to further lose popularity among users. I suggest reducing it by, say, 10%, and encourage removal of some nonsencial questions and discourage some large additions of questions. Thanks. –
AstroHurricane001(
Talk+
Contribs+
Ubx)(+
sign here+
How's my editing?)00:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep in mind that shortening by 10%—45% will make some users go back, add questions, and increase it by 15%—50%. It has to either be deleted, or be cut down by some 70% (that's how much junk it has). ·
AOTalk10:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Well, it's a good effort... I think much more should be deleted. A better solution IMHO would be to replace the current revision with
this one, and then add the important questions back (ie. the ones new users can learn from, such as AIV, RfA, ER, PR, etc). ·
AOTalk14:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep but shorten. I am a very busy student (Three compositions a day, 5 projects a week), yet I still have time for this test. It really isn't that long. However, there are some questions that could be deleted. They have no relation to Wikipediholism. I would like to keep the test, but we could shorten it a bit. Also, Wikipedians get to know other Wikipedians through this test, therefore this is a community-building exercise.
Littleghostboo[
talk ]
14:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete - I would prefer to vote Keep, but I've really given up trying to save all the humorous pages on Wikipedia from MfD. There's no point, since everyone seems to want to delete them. At least (unlike some recent MfD nominations) this one doesn't involve tearing apart someone's userspace. WaltonVivat Regina!15:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete unless shortened. It was funny a while back when 500 points was a lot, and it only took 15 minutes to complete. If we need wikihumor, just have a look at
WP:BJAODN or Uncyclopedia.
Bjelleklang -
talkBug Me17:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Comment: when this MFD started, the test was 89459 characters long. Now, it's 42082. There's still a bit more to clear, but I'm working on it...
GracenotesT §
17:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Neutral - Wikipedia is a serious project. This page has wasted our time doing something that is productive and therefore must be deleted; however, the main background of this page focuses whether or not to see if you're Wikipediholic or not so it's best to archive this page as a historical page. — zero»18:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep, harmless. "Do we really need something that can waste over an hour of people's time without producing anything productive?" Why don't we just delete article namespace entirely and start over? People spend far too much time reading wrong articles. Here I am, reading about
Ottoman Empire instead of reading about
TCP like I should if I want to get myself educated. The main namespace is very dangerous - reading wrong articles could lead to wasted time! =) --wwwwolf (
barks/
growls)
08:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Oh, nothing, it's just that after spending hours of reading the article, I fail to understand what they have to do with the TCP window/buffer sizes. The article is therefore completely irrelevant to the learning goal at hand, and counts as wasted time! =) --wwwwolf (
barks/
growls)
11:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Very Strong Keep: We need humor. (Why does the community try to delete everything that is even remotely enjoyable (
Wikipedia:Esperanza,
WP:BJAODN?!?!))
Speedy keep- this is certainly a bad faith AFD nomination. Possibly by a sockpuppet of a banned user like what happened on the AFDS of
WP:FUN.
Darkness of meta
Keep - I don't see how this fits into the
reasons for deletion in the policy, and there are certainly alternatives to this. Many questions are asked more than once, and many others could easily be removed without affecting the character of the test. If people want to waste their time, let them. It's not a reason to delete the page. Hersfold(
talk/
work)22:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep, but trim mercilessly - it may not really have 1302 questions, but it really does take an hour and 45 minutes. --
Random83215:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)reply
I've tried it a couple of times on the automatic and at the original length, before this AFD went up, it took nearly 4 hours.
Simply south15:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep, but cleanup. I have no problem with the principle of it, but 1,300 questions is a little too many. The reductions of the past few days are good. Hut 8.519:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep It should be a part of
WP:-D. I was just about to take it again. It has helped me build much confidence in myself as an editor, and if it weren't for this test, I probably wouldn't be here typing this right now.
A•N•N•Ahi!20:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete - What relevance does this have to do with wikipedia? This is more suited for a humor web site than here, should be taken out.--
LifeStar14:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Strong keep. Delete the deletionists! - I skimmed the test in a few minutes, and love the results scoring interpretation. I also saw the lame, humorless, delete votes, and therefore had to vote myself to keep it. Deletionists are EVIL! :) --
Timeshifter15:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Extreme Keep. Per Snowolf. You don't have to complete it. If you shorten it, it isn't a test of wikipediholicism. Leave it the way it is. And just reading a page doesn't do it. Please don't jump in and start shortening it yet. At least propose it somewhere. That starts edit wars if you don't. I think the test is G-R-E-A-T the way it is.
Chrishyman20:01, 6 April 2007 (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 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.
This page, whilst well meaning and good humoured, has become a huge bloated stain on the face of Wikipedia. I know that all Wikipedians experience a bit of burnout every now and then, and that humour can be a good thing, but there are
ways to make people laugh without creating a huge mess of useless text. I think the bolded sentence at the top of a page says it all:
"Give yourself at least an hour and 45 minutes (2 hours and 45 minutes with the manual version) because there are more than 1,302 questions!"
Do we really need something that can waste over an hour of people's time without producing anything productive? I'm not saying that by taking this away people will use their procrastination time doing something useful, but I don't think that there is anything positive to be gained from having a page like this around.
BJAODN is bad enough.
Veesicle (
Talk) (
Contribs)
01:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Comment. A potential positive gained for the numerous editors who take the time to go through the entire test is that it helps them realize that there may be a
problem. The number of questions can always be cut down or split into sections. –
Pomte02:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep. There are only 394 questions. "1,302" is a joke. Nobody needs to do the whole test, or even any of the test if they don't want to. In addition to its value as humor to readers, it's a place for restless and creative thinkers to contribute OR appropriately.
Matchups02:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete. This was on my list of pages to nominate for deletion. I know there is going to be the chorus of "It's humor" and "It's not doing any harm" voices, but really, it's not funny, so the humor thing fails, and per the nom, it's just one more thing that makes Wikipedia a joke. Sometimes I think that too many people here have become more interested in the Wikipedia culture than in the encyclopedia, and this is just one more example of that attitude. —
Doug Bell04:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Very weak delete. Wikipedia culture is interesting, and I have no issue with people who spend a lot of time with it. But to spend time on culture to the exclusion of things which improve the encyclopedia should be discouraged. And this seems to be encouraging spending too much time with the culture. Very weak, though. -
Amarkovmoo!04:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep - a few things like this lying around don't do any harm and may even lighten up the mood a bit when we seem to have a lot of problems at the moment.
Metamagician300011:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
For articles, it isn't. Please explain how the rationale at
WP:ILIKEIT applies to project space. (You know, this is why shortcuts similar to WP:ILIKEIT were RFD'd...)
GracenotesT §
14:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
The last time I took this test (some time ago), I wanted to delete some questions, rather badly. All of the "you get points if you're offended by the above question" items can be a rather inhumane form of torture, after a while. So keep and refactor, because it's quite a part of Wikipedia culture, but please allow the bold removal of unfunny questions, and encourage people to add funny, and oh noes, even useful indicators of wikipediholism. Not so much culture, but more emphasis on accomplishments. If the best indicator of wikipediholism is taking the time to take this test, then ugh.
GracenotesT §
14:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Strong delete I used to think that this test was good for new users to learn the in and outs of wikipedia, but not anymore. This test has gotten out of hand; I tried to shorten it about a month ago, but it's even longer now. My recommendation? Either delete, or restore the archived version (top left corner of the talk page). Eventually, it's going to get big again though. ·
AOTalk16:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep - An interesting trend to see the dvelopmend of wikipediholicism over time (I.E. the growth, and the sheer inasnoity of some of the questions). I get a good lauch out of it every time i read it and it really ise not hurting anything.
-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider)16:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Personally, I don't consider it's growth funny; anyday now, wikipedia's servers will crash because of the enormity of this one huge page. :-) ·
AOTalk17:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete - It's fun and interesting, but it is also much too large. It should be either deleted or shortened. RyGuy17:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Comment I encourage people to remove content from the test. Not good content, but basically content that was put there to make the test-writer sound smart (which gets annoying after a while).
GracenotesT §
17:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Yes, that's what I tried to to, but it didn't work. You'd have to delete over half the test if you want it to be just Wikipedia-related, but then of course, it would grow back. ·
AOTalk17:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
I'm sorry, but I don't see how this test could determine who'd make a good admin; could you please explain this a bit more clearly? ·
AOTalk22:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep - This test serves as a way to tell you either "You're not a Wikipediholic; good job on balancing your life" or "You're editing too much, get a life!" However, I feel that there are too many questions. Therefore, I think that we should establish a process in which we condense the questions into a short quiz.--Ed¿Cómo estás?23:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep but shorten by 5 - 45 %. This test has been around for so long, I don't think it should be deleted. Recently, I have been unable to add questions because its length was preventing my interest of editting. Seriously, you don't have to take the test, nobody's really saying you have to. However, only shorten it a little, as removal of questions and lowering of possibility of gaining many points may cause it to further lose popularity among users. I suggest reducing it by, say, 10%, and encourage removal of some nonsencial questions and discourage some large additions of questions. Thanks. –
AstroHurricane001(
Talk+
Contribs+
Ubx)(+
sign here+
How's my editing?)00:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep in mind that shortening by 10%—45% will make some users go back, add questions, and increase it by 15%—50%. It has to either be deleted, or be cut down by some 70% (that's how much junk it has). ·
AOTalk10:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Well, it's a good effort... I think much more should be deleted. A better solution IMHO would be to replace the current revision with
this one, and then add the important questions back (ie. the ones new users can learn from, such as AIV, RfA, ER, PR, etc). ·
AOTalk14:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep but shorten. I am a very busy student (Three compositions a day, 5 projects a week), yet I still have time for this test. It really isn't that long. However, there are some questions that could be deleted. They have no relation to Wikipediholism. I would like to keep the test, but we could shorten it a bit. Also, Wikipedians get to know other Wikipedians through this test, therefore this is a community-building exercise.
Littleghostboo[
talk ]
14:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete - I would prefer to vote Keep, but I've really given up trying to save all the humorous pages on Wikipedia from MfD. There's no point, since everyone seems to want to delete them. At least (unlike some recent MfD nominations) this one doesn't involve tearing apart someone's userspace. WaltonVivat Regina!15:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete unless shortened. It was funny a while back when 500 points was a lot, and it only took 15 minutes to complete. If we need wikihumor, just have a look at
WP:BJAODN or Uncyclopedia.
Bjelleklang -
talkBug Me17:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Comment: when this MFD started, the test was 89459 characters long. Now, it's 42082. There's still a bit more to clear, but I'm working on it...
GracenotesT §
17:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Neutral - Wikipedia is a serious project. This page has wasted our time doing something that is productive and therefore must be deleted; however, the main background of this page focuses whether or not to see if you're Wikipediholic or not so it's best to archive this page as a historical page. — zero»18:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep, harmless. "Do we really need something that can waste over an hour of people's time without producing anything productive?" Why don't we just delete article namespace entirely and start over? People spend far too much time reading wrong articles. Here I am, reading about
Ottoman Empire instead of reading about
TCP like I should if I want to get myself educated. The main namespace is very dangerous - reading wrong articles could lead to wasted time! =) --wwwwolf (
barks/
growls)
08:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Oh, nothing, it's just that after spending hours of reading the article, I fail to understand what they have to do with the TCP window/buffer sizes. The article is therefore completely irrelevant to the learning goal at hand, and counts as wasted time! =) --wwwwolf (
barks/
growls)
11:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Very Strong Keep: We need humor. (Why does the community try to delete everything that is even remotely enjoyable (
Wikipedia:Esperanza,
WP:BJAODN?!?!))
Speedy keep- this is certainly a bad faith AFD nomination. Possibly by a sockpuppet of a banned user like what happened on the AFDS of
WP:FUN.
Darkness of meta
Keep - I don't see how this fits into the
reasons for deletion in the policy, and there are certainly alternatives to this. Many questions are asked more than once, and many others could easily be removed without affecting the character of the test. If people want to waste their time, let them. It's not a reason to delete the page. Hersfold(
talk/
work)22:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep, but trim mercilessly - it may not really have 1302 questions, but it really does take an hour and 45 minutes. --
Random83215:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)reply
I've tried it a couple of times on the automatic and at the original length, before this AFD went up, it took nearly 4 hours.
Simply south15:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep, but cleanup. I have no problem with the principle of it, but 1,300 questions is a little too many. The reductions of the past few days are good. Hut 8.519:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep It should be a part of
WP:-D. I was just about to take it again. It has helped me build much confidence in myself as an editor, and if it weren't for this test, I probably wouldn't be here typing this right now.
A•N•N•Ahi!20:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete - What relevance does this have to do with wikipedia? This is more suited for a humor web site than here, should be taken out.--
LifeStar14:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Strong keep. Delete the deletionists! - I skimmed the test in a few minutes, and love the results scoring interpretation. I also saw the lame, humorless, delete votes, and therefore had to vote myself to keep it. Deletionists are EVIL! :) --
Timeshifter15:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Extreme Keep. Per Snowolf. You don't have to complete it. If you shorten it, it isn't a test of wikipediholicism. Leave it the way it is. And just reading a page doesn't do it. Please don't jump in and start shortening it yet. At least propose it somewhere. That starts edit wars if you don't. I think the test is G-R-E-A-T the way it is.
Chrishyman20:01, 6 April 2007 (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.