Content deleted Content added
Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Category talk:Candidates for speedy deletion/Archive 1) (bot Tag: Manual revert |
|||
(442 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|||
{| class="infobox" width="315px" |
|||
| algo = old(31d) |
|||
|- |
|||
| archive = Category talk:Candidates for speedy deletion/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
! align="center" | [[Image:Vista-file-manager.png|50px|Archive]]<br />[[Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page|Archives]] |
|||
| counter = 1 |
|||
---- |
|||
| maxarchivesize = 500K |
|||
|- |
|||
| minthreadsleft = 0 |
|||
| |
|||
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|||
# [[Category talk:Candidates for speedy deletion/Archive1|Archive 1]] |
|||
}} |
|||
|}<!--Template:Archivebox--> |
|||
{{Talk header}} |
|||
__TOC__ |
|||
{{Cfdend | action = rename | date = 2010 February 28}} |
|||
== user talk pages == |
|||
{{WikiProject Deletion}} |
|||
Wait a second.. why are all these user talk pages listed for deletion? --[[User:Fang Aili|F]][[User:Fang Aili/Esperanza|<font color="green">a</font>]][[User:Fang Aili|ng Aili]] <sup>[[User talk:Fang Aili|<font color="green">talk</font>]]</sup> 14:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:A vandal with an AOL IP added the speedy deletion category to the sockpuppet and AOL templates. I've removed it from one, and someone else removed the other. --[[User:Kuzaar|Kuzaar]]<sup>-[[User talk:Kuzaar|T]]-[[Special:Contributions/Kuzaar|C]]-</sup> 14:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Category Header Information == |
|||
This category has a large ammount of informational text, links, and summaries on the category. I just reverted [[User:Omniplex|Omniplex]]'s removal of all of this, as I find it useful. Admins working CSD seem to often use this page as a CSD ''Portal'', and this information is helpful to myself, and at least everyone else who helped create it. I'm not going to edit war over this, but think that gaining a consensus to it's usefulness may be good before deleting it. Please comment here: — [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 22:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I strongly disagree with that, it renders the category page useless. [[WP:HIDE]] is rejected, it's not supported by several browsers. The presented info is redundant, in parts wrong confusing articles with pages, deletion templates with speedy deletion templates, and propagating a dubious C: shortcut in addition to the established CAT:. Category pages are sets of pages, not essays or guidelines replacing the real policy. A category page requiring to scroll until its actual content begins, with sections and what else, is wrong. See also above wrt "too long". -- [[User:Omniplex|Omniplex]] 22:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::I agree with the [[:C:CSD]] not being needed, and just voiced a delete in the redirects for deletion debate on it. — [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 22:36, 25 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::I disagree that it renders the page useless, I use it as is alomst everytime I'm on. Additionaly, most of the category header info has been here all year, and the page still gets use. — [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 22:36, 25 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::[[WP:HIDE]] works for most users, they can disable the essay^Wintro if they hate it, in three different ways (1st part, 2nd part, both parts). [[WP:HIDE]] is cute where it works. -- [[User:Omniplex|Omniplex]] 04:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I just restored the subcategories section, rather then list those pages as subcategories (which they are), as it often confuses them with actual categories that are csd's. (They will show in their own area naturally now). — [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 01:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Yes, that's better. It also allows to link or bookmark [[CAT:CSD#Subcategories]] directly, skipping the intro without CSS. -- [[User:Omniplex|Omniplex]] 04:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I'm the person who originally put in the quick reference (I also made [[User talk:R3m0t/delaid.js|delaid]] along these lines) and added the divs which allow you to hide various sections. I disagree that WP:HIDE is unacceptable. Almost every browser in use is supported and the penalty for using an unsupported browser is low (especially compared to the penalty of not using a helper such as delaid! ;). The reference is meant to be handy and not a complete summary of the criteria, for obvious reasons. I just intended it to be something to flick back to (on the first tab, say) when writing a CSD tag or deletion summary. According to xaosflux, it is useful for that. If anybody thinks otherwise, they can use [[WP:HIDE]]. I think it is unacceptable for somebody ''not'' to use Firefox/IE5+/Mozilla/Konquerer/Safari/Camino/Flock/Maxthon and then complain they aren't accounted for. [[User:R3m0t/Sig|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 06:21, 26 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't care, because I just scroll past it. In fact, feel free to use [[WP:HIDE]] to hide this comment :P [[User:Stifle|Stifle]] ([[User talk:Stifle|talk]]) 08:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:While I'm not an admin, I do think that if I were, the header would likely serve a purpose. Maybe not after a long time, but in the earlier part of adminship. So, I think it's just fine. (By the way, I sometimes simply scroll down when I'm just looking inside category or otherwise don't need it at that particular moment, so I will remain neutral on the [[WP:HIDE]] part.) --'''[[User:Wcquidditch|<font color="red">WC</font>''<font color="#999933">Quidditch</font>'']]''' <big>[[User talk:Wcquidditch|<font color="red">☎</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Wcquidditch|<font color="#999933">✎</font>]]</big> 13:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:When you wrote ''"I think it is unacceptable for somebody ''not'' to use"''...''"and then complain they aren't accounted for"'', was that an offer to sponsor the upgrade of RAM and harddisk space on [[User talk:Omniplex#CSS_expertise|my box]], which would allow me to install something better than <tt><shudder></tt>NS 4.x<tt></></tt>? If it hits less than one of 10,000 systems that would be still a considerable number, [[WP:HIDE]] was rejected for valid reasons. -- [[User:Omniplex|Omniplex]] 05:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Per xaosflux's request on my talk page to comment here, I also generally support the (very large) header, and also find the C:CSD shortcut non-good. If Omniplex(or anyone) would like to specifically justify selected removals, I'd be happy to consider them. [[User:JesseW/sig|JesseW, the juggling janitor]] 02:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:The part about five similar categories is another distraction from the following relevant content. If those categories are related, why not simply create a category for CAT:CSD plus these five categories? |
|||
:It's a general complaint, folks tend to spam lead sections with navigation boxes, instruction creep, images, and what else, forcing potentially interested readers to scroll many lines of unrelated "where do you want to go from here" info before actually seeing the first word of the content. |
|||
:It should be the other way around, first the content or at least lead section + ToC, then links to other more or less related pages for those who found that they arrived at the wrong place. |
|||
:Admittedly categories are different, no chance to add a "see also" section at the end. But maybe '''one''' link to [[:Category:Administrative backlog]] would be better than five links to similar categories. -- [[User:Omniplex|Omniplex]] 06:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Let's not forget this is not a normal category, it is not a palce where our readers are going to look for more interesting articles, its sole purpose is to queue deletion nominations by editors for admins. — [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 02:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Proposed modification to process. == |
|||
All members are invited provide comments on a proposal that may modify the current CfD process. The proposal is posted at [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Wikipedia jurors.]] [[User:Folajimi|Folajimi]] 03:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I think you've got the wrong page here. -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 22:40, 2 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== <nowiki>__NOGALLERY</nowiki> == |
|||
I jsut removed the use of this tag. I find having a gallery on this page is helpful for 2 reasons: It helps identify corrupt/missing as well as obvious attack images; and it sorts the images away from the articles. Even if these are non-free images; having them appear on this page as a method for their correction or deletion seems much more helpful to the project then not displaying them out of a licensing concern (if thats why this was added). — [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 21:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Yes, I am adding the __NOGALLERY__ tag to every category which is displaying thumbnails, per [[WP:FUC|FUC #9]]. This has been discussed [[Wikipedia talk:Fair use#nogallery|here]] and [[Wikipedia talk:Fair use/Archive 4#Fair use in categories|here]], between some other places. If anyone believes the tag should be removed from another category, please do drop me a line so that I can accumulate the complains and present them to the Fair use page (or post them directly in the Fair use page) to keep the revertion stated and prevent future tag insertions. I believe that, if there is broad consensus, it would be possible to create a list of pages where this tag should never be inserted. -- [[User:ReyBrujo|ReyBrujo]] 21:31, 2 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks for the speedy reply; I certainly understand the fair use requirements' and think that page is a good exception; is there an existing category/template that can be used to tag a apge as a fair-use exemption? (please reply on my talk or at CSD talk) — [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 21:35, 2 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::No category nor template that I know of; the main page consensus must have happened years ago. I believe this could be talked in the [[WP:VP|Village Pump]], where it may receive more feedback. However, I suggest first dropping by the Talk page of the Fair use page, where the idea for the NOGALLERY tag was thought, discussed and/or reported first. I can post a note there with the idea of creating a template, category or list with "candidates" for NOGALLERY exceptions, to later be discussed at the relevant places. -- [[User:ReyBrujo|ReyBrujo]] 21:46, 2 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Wha?!?! == |
|||
I just checked this page, and there were zero, yep zero candidates for speedy deletion. Someone must have been busy doing the deletes and we must not be looking hard enough in the mainspace for candidates. ;-) Let's keep up the good work. --[[User:Lord Voldemort|<font color="purple">LV</font>]] <sup><font color="#3D9140">[[User talk:Lord Voldemort|(Dark Mark)]]</font></sup> 21:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:how do i delete articles <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:64.12.116.5|64.12.116.5]] ([[User talk:64.12.116.5|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/64.12.116.5|contribs]]) 20:41, 20 July 2006.</small> |
|||
::Step one, sign up and create an account. Step two, spend some time editing articles and learning Wikipedia policy. Step three, apply for adminship. Once adminship is given, delete. --[[User:Lord Voldemort|<font color="purple">LV</font>]] <sup><font color="#3D9140">[[User talk:Lord Voldemort|(Dark Mark)]]</font></sup> 20:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Speedy tags in images == |
|||
Hmm...when I pull up the history of images, I cannot see an edit corresponding to a speedy tag being added. Why is that? --[[User:HappyCamper|HappyCamper]] 03:19, 23 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*I've been wondering the same thing. Apparently, if there's no fair use rationale provided in the initial edit, it's automatically tagged with {{tl|db-noncom}}. [[User:Royboycrashfan|Roy]] [[User talk:Royboycrashfan|A]].[[Special:Contributions/Royboycrashfan|A]]. 23:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Recent activity shows that users are uploading "non-commercial-only" images that are not allowed. Images that are "non-commercial-only" have this message: |
|||
<div class="infobox" style="padding:15px"> |
|||
'''Dear uploader:''' The media file you just uploaded has been listed for [[Wikipedia:Speedy deletions|speedy deletion]] because you indicated that it is used by permission for Wikipedia only or for non-commercial use only. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such images can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, [http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-May/023760.html this is in fact '''not''' the case]. Please do not upload any more images with this restriction on them. |
|||
'''If you ''created'' this image''' and want it to be kept on Wikipedia, replace this message with <nowiki>{{GFDL-self}}</nowiki> to license it under the [[GFDL]], or <nowiki>{{cc-by-sa-2.5}}</nowiki> to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use <nowiki>{{PD-self}}</nowiki> to release it into the public domain. |
|||
'''If you ''did not create'' this image''' but want it to be used on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may replace this message with one of the fair use tags from [[Wikipedia:Fair Use#Tagging fair use images|this list]] if you believe one of those [[fair use]] rationales applies to this image. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and [[Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission|request that they make the media available under a free license]]. |
|||
If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you. |
|||
{{db-meta|Image licensed as "[[:Category:Non-commercial use only images|for non-commercial use only]]" or "[[:Category:Images used with permission|used with permission]]" which was either uploaded on or after [[2005-05-19]] or is not used in any articles, and which lacks a [[Wikipedia:Fair use#Images|fair use]] assertion (<small>[[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#I3|CSD I3]]</small>).}} |
|||
<!-- Template:Permission from license selector --></div> |
|||
Do you know why these images keep showing with the [[Template:db-noncom|db-noncom]] template? These images violate the image use policy! I think the IPs/users who uploaded these files should be blocked for images due to policy violations. --[[User:Bigtop|<font color="blue">Big</font>'''<font color="gray">top</font>''']] <small>([[User talk:Bigtop|<font color="blue">tk</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/Bigtop|<font color="red">cb]]|[[Special:Emailuser/Bigtop|<font color="gray">em</font>]]|[[User:Bigtop/Esperanza|<font color="green">ea</font>]])</small> 19:23, 24 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:The way this works is that when someone selects "I have permission to use this image" or "This image is licensed for non-commercial/educational use", the image gets listed for speedy deletion immediately, with a message for the uploader not to upload the material again. |
|||
:The selection is intended as a trap for uninformed users, instead of them slapping a PD tag on it ("I found it on a public website, so it's in the public domain"), see [[MediaWiki talk:Licenses]], and as such it would not be helpful to block users who upload this type of image unless they do it over and over again. [[User:Stifle|Stifle]] ([[User talk:Stifle|talk]]) 15:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Is there a grace period before the deletions can take place? --[[User:HappyCamper|HappyCamper]] 12:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==Recently deleted== |
|||
Hi. I'm not an admin, but I created a framework on the top of this talk page which lists recently deleted articles. |
|||
You have to add nominated entries by hand, but as soon as an admin deletes the page it automagically appears in red above. Is this cool, or what?! --[[User:Ed Poor|Uncle Ed]] 19:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:The markup was interesting, but by the time I found it all the links were already deleted....hmm maybey they weren't, but I removed all of them to clear the reds, if there were nodisplay's I must have removed them as well. — [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 02:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Tons of errors showing up == |
|||
A redirect being used in someone's sig (redirecting to his old sig page) was marked as speedy for being a broken redirect. They didn't put it in a noinclude, and it made everywhere he'd signed show up on this list. I finally found the original source, and deleted it, so now there aren't speedy tags all over, but the places are still on this list. -[[User:Goldom|Goldom]] [[User_talk:Goldom|‽‽‽]] [[Special:Contributions/Goldom|⁂]] 07:17, 16 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*I believe there is a bot that runs to clean these up. Did a quick search and did not find it. If I'm right these will be fixed in the next hour or so. If you are concerned, you can do a null edit. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] 07:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
**There's no bot, though marudubshinki briefly did it with a bot. I usually do it, though others try to help sometimes (and that's when mistakes like this are made). --[[User talk:Rory096|Rory096]] 07:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Done. Pages that don't appear on [[CAT:CSD]] were cleared out. -- [[User:ADNghiem501|ADNghiem501]] 07:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
--xluavirus talking |
|||
my lua virus page is a candadate for a reason unknown to me, may i please know the reason? |
|||
== Images == |
|||
Would it be feasable for images to be put into a subcategory? They are kind of distracting (in screen spoace and bandwidth use) for those of us just loading this page to handle article/userspace speedy deletions. --[[User:W.marsh|W.marsh]] 21:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Images are CSD candidates too, what we need is for more admins to help out deleting / delisting them as aproprate, not hiding them away in some subcat because they are "distracting". It's not rocket sience, either the image fit a speedy deletion criterea or it doesn't, and if someone screw up we undelete images now so no big loss. As for the thumbnails: Well there is the <nowiki>__NOGALLERY__</NOWIKI> tag, not sure what the consensus is on using it here though. --[[User:Sherool|Sherool]] <span style="font-size:75%">[[User talk:Sherool|(talk)]]</span> 17:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::That's all fine and well but I'm just interested in handling article CSDs. Seperate categories just make sense... I would think it would make it easier to do images if you didn't have to scroll through potentially 50+ article listings to get to the images. --[[User:W.marsh|W.marsh]] 21:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Yeah, think its easier with them not thumnailed. But what would be really helpful is if a few more people just threw in a hand deleting a few each.... --[[User:Robdurbar|Robdurbar]] 10:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I have just asked a user who has tagged many images now on commons with a speedy tag to please stop doing so. They may be speedily deletable, but putting them in the category here just delays the deletion of the more urgent speedy candidates. [[User:Kusma|Kusma]] [[User_talk:Kusma|(討論)]] 11:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I'm fine with the nogallery on here, but it seems that if we are goign to count all of the image subcats for orphans/no copyright/etc, this page will be endlessly backloged, do they really belong here? — [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 05:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==List of speedily deleted articles?== |
|||
Is there a way for me to view a chronological list of articles that were speedily deleted in the recent past?--[[User:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back|The Fat Man Who Never Came Back]] 12:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Check [[Special:Log/delete]], pretty much everyting that does not mention a deletion debate or simmilar process in the summary is a speedy deletion. --[[User:Sherool|Sherool]] <span style="font-size:75%">[[User talk:Sherool|(talk)]]</span> 14:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==Image talk pages== |
|||
Please make sure if you speedy delete an image you also check to see if the image has a talk page, and speedy that as well. I've encountered about a dozen image talk pages with no image page just looking at the 100 most recent changes to image talk pages. [[User:VegaDark|VegaDark]] 10:28, 21 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Backlog == |
|||
People seem to have wildly differing opinions on what counts as backlog to this page. Can we all agree on a specific number of articles/images/both, at which point we'd consider CAT:CSD backlogged? -- [[User:Steel359|Steel]] 19:05, 5 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:IMO 50 - 100 is acceptable, as 200 is not a backlog, but a major problem. [[User:Feydey|feydey]] 15:16, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::I was the one who upped it to 200 articles/images [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion&diff=77380905&oldid=77378671], though looking back that's way too high. Though I don't think it should be too low else this page will be permanently tagged with the backlog notice which defeats the entire purpose of it. -- [[User:Steel359|Steel]] 15:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::I think 100 is good, BUT, I think Images shouldn't be counted or included HERE unless they are attack/obvious flaw images. The other speedyable images (miriad of licensing issues) should have their own page. — [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 02:57, 7 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:There's nothing wrong with 50, the number that was accepted for a very long time. If that means that there will permanently be a backlog tag here, that's a problem with the articles not being deleted, not the definition of a backlog. You don't fix that by changing the amount of articles needed for a backlog, you fix it by promoting more admins or finding more existing admins to clear the backlogs. Is this really how we want to deal with our problems now? Just change the definition of a problem so it's no longer one? --[[User talk:Rory096|Rory096]] 18:33, 8 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::The point of the backlog tag is to attract the attention of admins who wouldn't normally have noticed/done anything about it. Having the page permanently tagged as backlogged defeats the whole purpose of the tag. On a tangent, I wouldn't really consider 50 a backlog. That's just my opinion though. -- [[User:Steel359|Steel]] 19:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::You're right, which is why the page shouldn't permanently be tagged as backlog. That doesn't mean, however, that we should up our standards when the amount of work to be done increases, it means we have to work harder. --[[User talk:Rory096|Rory096]] 00:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Absolutely amazing == |
|||
''This thread was moved[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3ARequests_for_adminship&diff=80333647&oldid=80332730] from [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship]] because it's more appropriate here.`` |
|||
<small>Simultaneously sent to wikiEN-l</small> |
|||
I just saw the current message above the backlog tag at CAT:CSD. It reads: |
|||
<nowiki><!--</nowiki> Remove the comments around the line below this message (Adminbacklog) to add a backlog tag. To remove the backlog tag, put comments tags around it. Usually, the tag is added if there are 100 or more articles (or 200 articles & images combined) in this category. --> |
|||
When did it become acceptable to have 100 articles or 200 total things in CAT:CSD? Since we now have backlogs more often, that means we should raise the criteria for what is actually a backlog? Is this why we're unnecessarily raising our standards on RfA, because if we don't have as many "backlogs," but still have just as many pages waiting to be processed, then we don't need as many admins? This is appalling. We might as well stop promoting admins and just delete the backlog tag, then we wouldn't have any "backlogs" and nobody would have to do anything! Wouldn't that be nice? Ugh. This is just silly. We need to stop dicking around and start actually being productive. We're here to run an encyclopaedia, not pretend we're doing so and accomplishing absolutely nothing. --[[User talk:Rory096|Rory096]] 14:26, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Nor are we here to inflate our self-importance by thinking it's clever to oppose people on RfA. — '''[[User:Werdna|Werdna]]''' ''[[User talk:Werdna|talk]]'' ''[[User talk:Werdna/Review|criticism]]'' 14:27, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*Getting more admins is always good. I encourage both of you to find a suitable candidate and nominate him or her - and encourage your friends to do likewise. (unfortunately the last person I wanted to nominate declined because he thought he hadn't done enough vandalfighting to not get voted down; I'm looking for others atm). [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#DD0000">><font color="#FF6600">R<font color="#FF9900">a<font color="#FFCC00">d<font color="#FFEE00">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 14:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:*I am hard-pressed to find somebody willing to go through the chinese water torture that is RfA on english Wikipedia at the moment. Let alone somebody who'll actually pass the damn thing. — '''[[User:Werdna|Werdna]]''' ''[[User talk:Werdna|talk]]'' ''[[User talk:Werdna/Review|criticism]]'' 14:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::*Can we all stop acting as though the sky is falling. Thanks. -- [[User:Steel359|Steel]] 14:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::*I've been through worse, and been through it before. I'd be mighty useful during the day on these backlogs, but I don't stand a chance in hell of promotion. --[[User:Badlydrawnjeff|badlydrawnjeff]] <small>[[User_talk:Badlydrawnjeff|talk]]</small> 14:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::*It is better to light a candle. I've found a second person to nominate, I hope s/he'll accept. [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#DD0000">><font color="#FF6600">R<font color="#FF9900">a<font color="#FFCC00">d<font color="#FFEE00">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 14:49, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::*Then you're simply not trying hard enough. At this moment, there are 14 people and one bot trying to gain adminship. So the suggestions that noone is willing to try RfA are patent exaggeration. -[[User:Splash|Splash]] - [[User talk:Splash|tk]] 18:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::*15 people (and 1 bot) on the RFA main page doesn't mean that they will all pass. — [[User talk:Moe Epsilon|<font color="000000">Moe</font>]] 02:28, 7 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::*That is exactly not what Werdna said, though. -[[User:Splash|Splash]] - [[User talk:Splash|tk]] 15:27, 7 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
===Suggestion=== |
|||
Just a thing non-admins could do, if they're interested in helping out and showing that they will work on admin backlogs: Go through old AFDs that haven't been closed yet, find ones with few or no comments where you think a closer isn't going to be comfortable making a decision yet, and relist them on today's AfD page (make sure to remove them from the old AfD page). This doesn't require you to be an admin, and it's something that admins will eventually do anyway with many of these AfDs, so if you do it first, they can spend more time actually closing AfDs. Also, closing consensus keeps and merges is something any uninvolved Wikipedian can do if they want, and those are a bit more time consuming to close than simple deletes. |
|||
My point here is that it's regrettable that RfA is such a nightmare for some people, but I think some candidates can get over the hump if they show they clearly are cut out to be admins by doing admin-like work. Of course this is not the only thing non-admins can do to show they're cut out to be admins (I think I'm on the record supporting all the non-admins in this thread), but for others it's a good way to help out. |
|||
I bring this up because there's currently a huge backlog in closing old AfDs, which I'm working on, but it's really beyond what any one person can realistically deal with at this point. --[[User:W.marsh|W.marsh]] 15:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*Er, a backlog on AFDs isn't really going to be resolved by relisting AFDs. [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#DD0000">><font color="#FF6600">R<font color="#FF9900">a<font color="#FFCC00">d<font color="#FFEE00">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 15:24, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::No, but they need to be relisted (some never get any comments in their initial 5 days). Relisting is something admins end up doing if no one else does, and it's a time-consuming process, eating up time admins could spend actually closing AfDs. I thought this was clear in my initial post. --[[User:W.marsh|W.marsh]] 15:26, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes, there are some AfDs that simply cannot be closed properly without first relisting them. I did the best I could with [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 September 25|September 25]] but I simply don't have the time it would take to close this [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/U.S. Congressional Delegation from XXX|last monster]]. I don't think what we need to help conquer the AfD backlog is more admins to close AfDs: what we need are more admins who are willing to close contentious AfDs. I was just as guilty: after feeling that I was hung out to dry in a single DRV, I took a break from closing contentious AfDs to reduce my Wikistress. Maybe I shouldn't have done that. But the fact remains: we have plenty of good, experienced admin volunteers who are willing to close AfDs (and they close many of them!), but not enough who are willing to close difficult and contentious AfDs. --[[User:Deathphoenix|Deathphoenix]] [[User_talk:Deathphoenix|'''ʕ''']] 16:13, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::This is something I've considered for the future. I just wasn't ready to ask if it would be OK for me to do so. I guess I'm afraid of making a mistake that would hurt me in the future. Like others, I would only want to do things that I would get my head lopped off. Perhaps, we need to remeber we are all volunteers, we all have feelings, and we all sometimes need to release stress in a way that others don't need to experience.[[User_talk:Dlohcierekim|<font color="#009000"><span style="cursor: w-resize">'''Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim'''</span></font>]] 19:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Believe me, closing contentious AfDs can be pretty stressful when you encounter people who have a vested interest in the article being kept in its whole form (or want to see it deleted). I suppose that's why there aren't a whole lot of people doing it (and why I quit doing it for a while). Heck, I even came up with [[User:Deathphoenix#Contentious AfDs-to-Outraged Comments Ratio|a ratio]] about it. :-) But it would be a really nice thing if we have some thick-skinned admins who are willing to take the flak and close these AfDs, because seeing the eight day backlog was what convinced me that I should return to closing contentious AfDs, even though, to be honest, I didn't really want to do it that much. --[[User:Deathphoenix|Deathphoenix]] [[User_talk:Deathphoenix|'''ʕ''']] 20:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Quick reference (I8 & I9) == |
|||
The quick reference lists "I8: Attack Images" and "I9: Identical on Commons" while there is no longer an I9 at [[WP:CSD]]. We should probably change one or the other so they coincide. Why didn't we leave I8 as (This criterion has been superseded by G10 and is kept for historical reasons.) and keep I9 at I9, as we did with A6? Hope this makes sense, [[User:DVD R W| DVD]]+[[User_talk:DVD R W| R/W]] 00:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== How do you salt a page? == |
|||
So it won't be recreated? Looks like this one might need it [[Santo Calarco]]. I'm a new admin helping out here and I know it's possible to do, just can't find instructions. --[[User:Plange|plange]] 04:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:It looks like you figured it out. —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']] • 04:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Yep, [[User:Blnguyen]] notified me on my Talk page :-) Just so I make sure I'm doing things right, was I right to salt that page? --[[User:Plange|plange]] 04:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes, it was right. Also, it would help if every time a page is salted a few old ones were removed (See [[Wikipedia:Protected deleted pages#Administrators]]), but that's not obligatory. —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']] • 05:11, 26 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==Why is my newly uploaded image listed here?== |
|||
Hi, I just uploaded an image for the article on [[Georgi Gladyshev]] and I see that it is at speedy deletion. What is the point of allowing me to upload it? What is the correct way to upload a photo for an article of a noted person who is still alive, i.e. when the photo is not more than 100 years old? --[[User:Sadi Carnot|Sadi Carnot]] 00:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I have tagged it appropriately. It would be best to get him to agree to release the picture under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), or similar license (such as certain Creative Commons licenses). —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']] • 00:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks you, I will go that route next time. Also, does this mean that the person has to agree to the following: |
|||
:::Copyright (c) YEAR YOUR NAME. |
|||
:::Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document |
|||
:::under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 |
|||
:::or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; |
|||
:::with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. |
|||
:::A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "GNU |
|||
:::Free Documentation License". |
|||
::Or, what exactly (in words) do they have to agree to? --[[User:Sadi Carnot|Sadi Carnot]] 02:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::They have to agree to license it under the "GNU Free Documentation License", and they should understand generally what that means, so link them to http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html. See also [[Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission]]. —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']] • 02:34, 8 November 2006 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 19:18, 19 May 2024
![]() | Deletion (defunct) | |||
|