Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:39, 1 June 2008

May 2005 – July 2006 August 2006 – February 2007 March 2007 – May 2007 June 2007 – August 2007 September 2007 – October 2007 November 2007 – December 2007 January 2008 – February 2008 March 2008 – April 2008 May 2008 – June 2008

Information displayed below the edit window

I've been told you might be able to help answer the questions I have at this village pump technical thread. Would you have time to have a look? Carcharoth (talk) 09:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

User:24.22.227.53

• You could've simply asked the deleting admin... --MZMcBride (talk) 22:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'm asking you then. Will you undelete my old user page, or email me the content? --Formerly the IP-Address 24.22.227.53 (talk) 17:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Assault (tort)

I re-created this talk page, which you had deleted. It had been vandalized and blanked, then deleted by you two months ago. Bearian (talk) 20:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

StEP

Hello! Sorry, for being a bit late, but I just noticed, that you deleted the Entry on StEP (Solving the e-waste Problem), saying, that it is infringing on copyrights. I am not certain, which parts of this are concerned, so, should you have the time, I would like to go over this, and change the parts, that you think are illegal. I was really trying, to refer to the website, whenever I quoted it. Thank you Drenmark (talk) 09:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)Drenmark

Talk:Foreign players in association football

Yesterday you deleted this talkpage under CSD G8. G8 specifically excludes any talk page useful to the project, and a cursory glance at the page would make it obvious that this was one of them, being used to plan an article before creating it. Now, in this case all three editors involved in the discussion are admins who can undelete when required, but as it was one of 34 you deleted in the same minute, I am concerned that you might be deleting pages without looking at them first, and hence deleting some valid ones. Oldelpaso (talk) 12:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Great Stuff

Just curious; the deletion log for Great Stuff shows that you deleted in at 20:08 on 23 May 2008, yet it doesn't show up on your list of contributions. How is that possible?Silverchemist (talk) 16:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I see that you deleted Great stuff, not Great Stuff. Silverchemist (talk) 19:11, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Bot approved: dabbing help needed

Hi there. Fritz bot has been approved at Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/FritzpollBot for filling in a possible 1.8 million articles on settlements across the world. Now dabbing needs to be done for links which aren't sorted as the bot will bypass any blue links. and I need as many people as possible to help me with Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Places to prepare for the bot. If you could tackle a page or two everything counts as it will be hard to do it alone. PLease also pass on the message to anybody else who you may think might be willing to help. Thankyou ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ 12:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

LA SALLE HIGH SCHOOL

Are you Miss McBride? Teacher of History? 76.170.193.94 (talk) 15:18, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Mebbe. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk redirs

Why do you keep deleting talk pages that redir to a talk page? We had this chat before. I'm aware of no policy calling for a deleting a talk page when the main page is an intact redir. Please cease. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Question

If one editor starts the article X, and the X article has a paragraph where most of the information comes from Y reference (the semantics has been changed greatly and massively reworded), then will the X article be a copyvio of Y reference? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 17:52, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Will you answer to my question? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 18:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you think this is copyvio of this reference? No other reference available for this information. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 18:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

46, XXXXX talk page dealetion.

Why did you delete the 46, XXXXX talk page and orphan the redirect? I really would like a reason for that! You can give me one on my talk page just click here. Deleting a talk page for no good reason is vandalism if you need to no more about wikipedia's policy on vandalism then click here.Miagirljmw14 (talk) 20:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

deleted "Talk:Dalles Dam" (orphaned talk page redirect)

This page should have been moved, not deleted. Was there anything on it? ~ WikiDon (talk) 21:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

FYI

Others are complaining about this too, deleting talk redirs. See above. Since you are not responding to this issue, we'll have to seek other means of addressing this if you continiue. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Your script deleted Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject User scripts/Requests. Seeing other complaints, I blocked it for a minute to get it to stop, but I see you've also stopped it. Gimmetrow 23:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Irony indeed. I saw your logs were consistenly every 5 seconds, 12 a minute. By the time I had undeleted the page and logged a block, you had stopped yourself. Gimmetrow 00:14, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Re your talk on my talk page. OK, now we can chat. It's good you hit my page because I'd just posted an AN thread, but I've now removed it. As for "do no harm", that cuts the other way too. It does no harm to leave it there to help people find where something went. It is mute whether something points to it or not IMHO. Keep in mind I brought this up two weeks ago. Also, it seems consensus is way against this action, so you may want to cease on that ground, totally. At least leaving out the Scouting ones will keep me happy. ;-) I'm sure you had no ill intent, but I do ask you leave the Scouting ones alone and seriously consider ceasing this action due to the many other comments on your talk page. Take care. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

PS please also leave arbitration case pages and talk pages alone. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:List of missing journals

When I split Misplaced Pages talk:List of missing journals I did not split the talk page. I've recreated the redirects you deleted. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 23:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

talk page deletion?

Hi! Can you clarify this deletion, please? The deletion sorting is still at that location and I see no reason to delete the talk page. Am I missing something> Thanks! _{TravellingCari} 00:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

ETA, I see above that it may have been a script gone wrong, now stopped but please see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Museums and libraries, which is still there. Thanks! _{TravellingCari} 00:04, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

thanks so much! _{TravellingCari} 00:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

...and more talk page deletion problems... any reason why you deleted the 16 talk page redirects to the stub list (e.g., Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types/Government, law, and politics)? The listed reason is that they were orphaned; none of them are. Grutness...wha? 01:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

That's not what "orphaned" means when talking about talk pages! Orphaned talk pages are ones where the project page (e.g., article) has been deleted and the talk page has accidentally been left behind. Talk pages that have been turned into redirects aren't deleted, even if they have no incoming links - in exactly the same way that most article redirects are left even if they have no incoming links. A talk page redirect is still useful even if it has no incoming links, since it is most likely that it will be clicked from the project page itself. If it is removed, that will create a redlink and also create the likelihood that a separate talk page will eventually be created, even where a redirected, centralised discussion is more useful. Please stop deleting these redirects! Grutness...wha? 01:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Redirect deletions

I'm a little mystified - I have a lot of license templates on my watchlist, and I noticed that you deleted the talk pages of the documentation. An example would be Template talk:PD-self/doc, which formerly was a redirect to Template talk:PD-self - there were a whole bunch of others. It's normal practice to redirect the doc talk pages to the template talk pages so conversations about the template are kept in one place. Why are you deleting all these redirects? Kelly 01:17, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

FYI, the instructions for users to redirect those doc talkpages is found here in the last part of the paragraph. Kelly 01:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The point of having those redirects is in the how-to guide I linked above. If they haven't been used yet, so what? What was the point of deleting them? Kelly 01:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Indiscriminate deletion of redirects does do harm

In another place you claim that deleting redirects that have no incoming links and only one revision does no harm. This is an incorrect assumption. Redirects serve at least three purposes other than page renames and incoming wikilinks: Incoming links from outside of Misplaced Pages, users who type in XYZ in the search box on the left side of the screen and click "Go," and users who type in http://en.wikipedia.org/XYZ in their web browsers. Before deleting any redirect, you need to ask yourself if any of these three things are plausible. If they are even remotely plausible, and there isn't another good reason to delete that particular redirect, such as to create a disambig page or make way for a page move, then do no harm and discuss it before deleting it. Talk page redirects should almost always redirect to the same page as the article redirect. If it doesn't, look at it and see why - there is probably a good reason. There are some times when deleting a talk page redirect is a no-brainer:

• When the talk page redirects to something completely unrelated to what the article is, or if the article is a redirect, what the article is redirected to. If John Smith redirects to John Smith (author) and Talk:John Smith redirects to Talk:John Smith (politician), for example.
• When the talk page redirects to a talk page that itself is a candidate for speedy deletion, such as a talk page whose article has been deleted. Be careful with this one: If the Talk:X redirects to Talk:Y, and Y: redirects to Z, Talk X and Talk Y should both be made to point to Talk:Z. Talk:X should not be summarily deleted unless there is a good reason, like an implausable typo. Rather, if X does not exist, X should also be made to redirect to Z.

Robo- or quickly-deleting redirects on the order of tens per minute indicates a lack of individual attention and has a very high risk of doing harm. Robo-deleting is only appropriate in obvious cases or when the list has been pre-screened by a human, and each entry given individual attention. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)