Jump to content

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/archive May 2004: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m rm Survivor VI now that it's an article, clean up some whitespace & characters
m why were "----" even in there in the first place, now that I think about it?
Line 170: Line 170:


*[[Independent contractors]] said only ''independent contractors:'' [[User:Kingturtle|Kingturtle]] 05:18 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
*[[Independent contractors]] said only ''independent contractors:'' [[User:Kingturtle|Kingturtle]] 05:18 May 12, 2003 (UTC)

----
*[[Stalker (movie)]] whole content: ''kuguyfftrd''..whats this? ''[[User:AntonioMartin|AntonioMartin]]''
*[[Stalker (movie)]] whole content: ''kuguyfftrd''..whats this? ''[[User:AntonioMartin|AntonioMartin]]''


* [[Patrick Herron]]
* [[Patrick Herron]]
** This looks like a website advertisement. [[User:Hephaestos|Hephaestos]] 20:25 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
** This looks like a website advertisement. [[User:Hephaestos|Hephaestos]] 20:25 May 12, 2003 (UTC)

----
*[[User_talk:JohnOwens:Most_Wanted]]
*[[User_talk:JohnOwens:Most_Wanted]]
** Why is this even here?
** Why is this even here?
** Why don't you ask John? [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 22:23 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
** Why don't you ask John? [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 22:23 May 12, 2003 (UTC)

----
*[[Capitalism.org]]
*[[Capitalism.org]]
** vote for deletion
** vote for deletion

Revision as of 23:55, 12 May 2003


Add links to unwanted page titles to the list below so one of the Wikipedia:Administrators can find them and check whether or not they should be deleted. Please review our policy on permanent deletion before adding to this page.

Please sign any suggestion for deletion (use four tildes, ~~~~, to sign with your user name and the current date).

  • If the page should be deleted, an admin will do so, and the link will be removed from this page (it will show up on the Wikipedia:Deletion log).
  • If the page should not be deleted, someone will remove the link from this page. Page titles should stay listed for a minimum of a week before a decision is made.

Don't list here...

  • page titles of stubs that at least have a decent definition and might in the future become articles. There's no reason to delete those - see Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub
  • pages that need editing - see Wikipedia:Pages needing attention
  • pages that can easily and sensibly be redirected to another page. E.g., a page called Hume can be redirected to David Hume; presidant (a misspelling) can be redirected to president; etc. Even misspellings can be caught by search engines and provide Wikipedia perfectly relevant traffic!
  • pages in the wrong namespace (for example, user pages in the main namespace), can be redirected and should not be deleted if there are still old links to them.
  • subpages in your own user space, use Wikipedia:Personal subpages to be deleted

Note to admins

  • As a general rule, don't delete pages you nominate for deletion. Let someone else do it.
  • Simply deleting a page does not automatically delete its talk page or any subpages. Please delete these pages first, and then the main page. Also, if you delete a page, remove it from this list as well.
  • If another solution has been found for some of these pages than deletion, leave them listed for a short while, so the original poster can see why it wasn't deleted, and what did happen to it. This will prevent reposting of the same item.

See also:

Please put new items at the bottom of the page


  • Thats how a nigger goes -- by banned user/racist troll User:Zog. It now redirects to Johnny Rebel, which I don't particularly object to; however I'd still like it deleted for the following reasons, mostly in the old versions in the edit history: 1)Zog's is deleberately racially insulting 2)It quotes in full the lyrics of a song by Johnny Rebel; as the Johnny Rebel article notes the copyright holder apparently doesn't like unauthorized copies on the web 3)It is mis-titled; "Thats" should have an apostrophy; capitalization is wrong for a song title. I think unlikely to be a usefull redirect, but if anyone feels strongly it should stay a redirect, perhaps we could delete the article to get rid of the potentially troublesome history and then recreate it as a simple redirect. -- Infrogmation 05:15 May 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • While I understand the motives, we don't normally take care to strip copyrighted material out of the history, and I don't want to set a precedent that we do. Martin 08:01 May 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • See meta:Wikipedia_and_copyright_issues for some legal arguments for permitting copyrighted text to stay in the history. Martin 13:04 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • To my knowledge, before this no-one has ever suggested we need to remove copyright material from history. I suspect that the Infrogmation's main reason for listing it is not the copyright or the naming issue, it's the offensive nature of the text. What if the next we hear about this text is when some white-supremacist magazine publishes "check out http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Thats_how_a_nigger_goes&oldid=xxx for the full text of Johnny Rebel's song", and another part of the media uses this to sully Wikipedia's reputation? -- Tim Starling 13:44 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • You could say the same about 1000s of other articles that have dodgy stuff in their histories. What makes this one special? Martin 14:38 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
      • Yes, I find the banned user's contribution here offensive-- intentionally so. I also think that even as a redirect it's pretty useless. However I was not trying to propose any change policy. That said, I'm curious to know if there are any particular arguements why keeping that history is a positive thing-- perhaps as doccumentation of the banned user? Wondering simply, -- Infrogmation 20:51 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • documentation of our takedown procedures for copyright/offensive material, thinks Isis (see link above). Also, reducing the amount of effort - I'm concerned that this would be the thin end of the wedge. Martin
AntonioMartin
It's from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica, so is OK -- sannse 17:40 May 11, 2003 (UTC)
  • Bush regime - a simple definition of an uncommon phrase that seems to only exist as a partisan swipe. Certainly doesn't deserve its own page. J.J. 10:18 May 3, 2003
    • If you don't think it's balanced, then you should edit it. --The Cunctator
    • The title itself (Bush Regime) is not NPOV. Do we talk of the Carter regime or the Lincoln regime? No. Bush regime implies a point of view. Kingturtle 02:41 May 4, 2003 (UTC)
    • bushisms redirects to damaging quotation, while Church of Emacs redirects to Editor wars. You could consider a similar solution. Martin
    • This should probably be merged into and redirect to Regime change. If there aren't any objections, I'll go ahead and move it over. -- Minesweeper 23:41 May 11, 2003 (UTC)
    • I object. The difference between "Bush regime" and "Carter regime" is that "Bush regime" is actually a phrase in use (15000 Google hits, e.g.).
      • "Bushisms" is also a phrase in actual use, and we've redirected that. How can you make "Bush regime" NPOV? Why don't we make "vast right-wing conspiracy" an article or "Hail to the Thief"? These are common phrases as well but are unambiguously POV. We should include the context of those phrases on related pages, but they shouldn't have articles of their own. -- Minesweeper 02:53 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
  • Atlas the moon - old disamb name, now changed everywhere for Atlas (moon). -- Looxix 18:51 May 4, 2003 (UTC)
    • Keep it. Perhaps the links are changed everywhere on wikipedia. But how about The Internet? See also the hints at the topof this page. -- JeLuF 10:41 May 11, 2003 (UTC)
  • Observing - I don't know how to qualify this: even less than a stub? -- Looxix 21:36 May 4, 2003 (UTC)
    • Now OK as a redirect
  • Ian Penman
    • It's a point-of-view smorgasbord, and I'm not sure there's really any info to use. Tuf-Kat
  • List of artists - Has anyone heard of any of these people? They seem to be from some Slavic country. If we should desire to keep it, shouldn't it be renamed to List of artists from X (whatever country they're from). -- Zoe
I googled 5 of them; Slovenian. -- Infrogmation 00:43 May 6, 2003 (UTC)
Pray tell, what is wrong with having a list of people from some Slavic country? And yes, I'm all for saying where the list is from. (I am always saying that.) So who is going to rename all the lists about most sucessful films, TV hits from 'x' year, etc that are exclusively American but whose title doesn't state that. A bit of consistency, Zoe, please. If wiki can create mountains of lists exclusively about America, it is duty bound to accept lists from "some Slavic country" irrespective of whether Americans have heard of them. Or if it demands the Slavic lists be renamed to state country, all the exclusively American ones should be too. Lets have full consistency here. ÉÍREman 04:10 May 10, 2003 (UTC)
  • Aberavon Constituency - this consists purely of two tables representing the results for this parliamentary constituency at the last two general elections. I've listed further objections to it on the talk page. Deb 20:44 May 5, 2003 (UTC)
    • Someone who knows the topic should either rename it or move it to an appropriate site. Kingturtle 21:29 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
  • Are We Get Restless, Martin Wright and Laura Norder of importance? IMHO I'd say, delete them. Kingturtle 22:04 May 5, 2003 (UTC)
      • 1) Delete. Name of an exhibition?? What, Is they modern da Vincis who have only two exhibitions in 4 centuries? --Menchi 02:21 May 8, 2003 (UTC)
      • I can't ascertain the importance of Martin Wright and Laura Norder:
      • 2) Martin Wright is a really common name, of many many people.
      • 3) Laura Norder happens to be also what Margaret Thatcher pronounces "law and order."
    • --Menchi 02:21 May 8, 2003 (UTC)
  • Patrick Herron read like a press released. I wikified it. But I don't know if Herron is a significant poet. Kingturtle 02:06 May 6, 2003 (UTC)
    • Patrick Herron looks like a vanity page and has hardly any content. --Nate 06:46 May 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • Sankaraabharanam needs to be either extremely reworked or deleted. It's a bit hard to follow at the moment, to say the least. -- John Owens 06:59 May 6, 2003 (UTC)
    • Big job to re-write. Someone ought to .... but ... It certainly can't stay in its current form Tannin
      • I cut all the text and put it into the discussion section of the article. that thing is gnarly. maybe someone can fix it. Kingturtle 21:36 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
  • Meiji new government a page redirecting to a non-existing article --synthetik 16:25 May 6, 2003 (UTC)
    • I deleted it. It was an orphan redirecting to an article that didn't exist. Kingturtle 21:38 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
  • How to get rich - nonencyclopedic. -- Zoe
    • Let's move it to Meta-Wikipedia instead. --KF 04:19 May 7, 2003 (UTC)
    • I object -- Taku 14:01 May 7, 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree with Zoe. Many editors have wasted time trying to make it better, but it's still rubbish. What on Earth could we put here other than a random collection of editorial opinions? Plus there's an anonymous contributor hanging around, resisting any attempt to fashion it into an encyclopedic article. -- Tim Starling 00:59 May 8, 2003 (UTC)
    • This is an interesting article, but I don't believe it belongs in Wikipedia. -- Minesweeper 10:20 May 11, 2003 (UTC)
  • Sangoma: stubby and POV, only makes a single point about them (happens to relate to the only page that links to it). More info, or delete. -- John Owens 04:53 May 7, 2003 (UTC)
    • I added it to Find or Fix a Stub. Kingturtle 21:43 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
  • Balanced scorecard is nought but an external link to balancedscorecard.com, and a link to scorecard, which is itself only a link to the Spanish language page for scorecard. I think they can both go. -- John Owens 23:04 May 7, 2003 (UTC)
    • Deleted. It was an orphan redirecting to a blank page. Kingturtle 21:53 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
  • Tipperary Hill: copyright violation, it says so right on the page, "© 2001 David W. Bishop" -- John Owens 23:33 May 7, 2003 (UTC)
    • Tipperary Hill: is not a copyright violation, as it was posted by me, the author and copywrite holder David W. Bishop myself. -- David W. Bishop (aka Papa Bishop) 09:58 May 10, 2003.
      • Thanks David :) I've reinstated the page :) Martin
  • Daniel Evans: very non-encyclopædic, and I'd guess that not a lot of people other than that one contributor know much to write about him. -- John Owens 23:53 May 7, 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete. A self-puffery at its extreme. --Menchi 02:21 May 8, 2003 (UTC)
    • Ah hah, a look at Aneska makes things much clearer. Note the User:Sam Francis link. -- John Owens 05:49 May 8, 2003 (UTC)
      • Isn't this favourtism? Allowing small bands whose members are Wikipedians to have an article? --Menchi 20:17 May 8, 2003 (UTC)
        • Mind me, I certainly did not mean that that justified it, just that it explains it. -- John Owens 20:32 May 8, 2003 (UTC)
      • Deleted. orphan stub about non-encyclopedic person. Kingturtle 21:58 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
    • If anything, it should be a user page (assuming it's an auto-biograpghy). --Menchi 20:36 May 8, 2003 (UTC)
  • Battle of Warsaw probably copyright violation, replaced with copyright infringement note. Kosebamse 09:47 May 9, 2003 (UTC)
    • The original 'author' of this page has now replaced it with a stub and external link. ÉÍREman 03:44 May 10, 2003 (UTC)
    • I did some wikification to it, I think it can stay. -- Zoe 19:50 May 10, 2003 (UTC)
user:anthere
  • Image:RIAA.jpg - hardly of use in an encyclopedia. -- Zoe
  • StarProse reads like a press release. I don't see the significance of this company. I vote for deletion. Kingturtle 02:30 May 11, 2003 (UTC)
    • Oppose Deletion, reads like Microsoft or any other company.
  • Juche - possible copyright infringement. --Camembert 12:48 May 11, 2003 (UTC)


  • Wikipedia:Censorship - seems pointless to me. --Camembert 17:14 May 11, 2003 (UTC)
    • Agreed, it should go -- sannse 17:27 May 11, 2003 (UTC)
    • I think it should stay -- May 11, 2003 (UTC)
  • Bead artists and the articles of the artists listed on the page. This seems more like a series of promotional pages. Kingturtle 17:25 May 11, 2003 (UTC)
  • Image:Cheicon.jpg I know this will bring debate but this photo is not clearly in the public domain. Ericd 23:34 May 11, 2003 (UTC)
  • Stay Together for the Kids, a Blink-182 song. This stub of a stub has remained untouched for 6 months. I know of no reason why this song is significant enough for its own article. Kingturtle 04:46 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive_May_2004&oldid=914408"