Difference between revisions of "Talk:Deletion"
(New page: Good idea - categories and articles that are up for deletion should be listed here before a Sysop removes them. When deleted, they should remain on this list (but struck out) with a signat...) |
m (Undo revision 5411 by 98.216.182.192 (Talk) unrelated/spam via proxy) |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Good idea - categories and articles that are up for deletion should be listed here before a Sysop removes them. When deleted, they should remain on this list (but struck out) with a signature of the sysop who authorized it. Not sure how other wikis deal with | + | Good idea - categories and articles that are up for deletion should be listed here before a Sysop removes them. When deleted, they should remain on this list (but struck out) with a signature of the sysop who authorized it. Not sure how other wikis deal with redundant articles, but this is a good start ;-) [[User:Ioneill|Ioneill]] 20:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC) |
| + | |||
| + | ==MarsDrive== | ||
| + | Check with Frank Stratford over at the MarsDrive forums. This may be a MarsDrive entry, and as he or Hal Fulton (cant remember which) wrote the Wikipedia article it can be released under any license that they choose. Likely it would be best if it were moved to the MarsDrive article. That article should also have been verified with MarsDrive as being public domain before its content was removed. I mentioned this problem to Frank previously but it must have fallen by the wayside. - [[User:Jarogers2001|Jarogers2001]] 15:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I did post that article up but was rather confused as to where to post it. I'm used to using wikipedia anyway so if anyone would like to correct me that would be fine. | ||
| + | |||
| + | That was Frank. I am clarifying with him and will resolve the issue once I have received a response. - [[User:Jarogers2001|Jarogers2001]] 04:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==SPAM and Blatant Vandalism== | ||
| + | I would argue that there shouldn't be a review period for obvious attacks on Marspedia. I believe we need to get rid of them the instant they're identified, as when attackers find other people's attacks up on a wiki, it encourages more such attacks. Then we have to change our defensive posture to something more draconian. -- [[User:Strangelv|Strangelv]] 11:23, 27 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | :I perfectly agree. To my understanding this page is not there to provide a review period at all. It is rather a communication channel from non-sysops to sysops, allowing sysops to directly see what's up to do, with no necessity to look at all new articles. This is particularly useful when, hopefully, there are many new articles per day in the future. By the way, every sysop should include the [[deletion]] page on her/his watchlist and activate the according e-mail option. -- [[User:Rfc|Rfc]] 19:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 19:33, 29 December 2010
Good idea - categories and articles that are up for deletion should be listed here before a Sysop removes them. When deleted, they should remain on this list (but struck out) with a signature of the sysop who authorized it. Not sure how other wikis deal with redundant articles, but this is a good start ;-) Ioneill 20:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
MarsDrive
Check with Frank Stratford over at the MarsDrive forums. This may be a MarsDrive entry, and as he or Hal Fulton (cant remember which) wrote the Wikipedia article it can be released under any license that they choose. Likely it would be best if it were moved to the MarsDrive article. That article should also have been verified with MarsDrive as being public domain before its content was removed. I mentioned this problem to Frank previously but it must have fallen by the wayside. - Jarogers2001 15:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I did post that article up but was rather confused as to where to post it. I'm used to using wikipedia anyway so if anyone would like to correct me that would be fine.
That was Frank. I am clarifying with him and will resolve the issue once I have received a response. - Jarogers2001 04:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
SPAM and Blatant Vandalism
I would argue that there shouldn't be a review period for obvious attacks on Marspedia. I believe we need to get rid of them the instant they're identified, as when attackers find other people's attacks up on a wiki, it encourages more such attacks. Then we have to change our defensive posture to something more draconian. -- Strangelv 11:23, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I perfectly agree. To my understanding this page is not there to provide a review period at all. It is rather a communication channel from non-sysops to sysops, allowing sysops to directly see what's up to do, with no necessity to look at all new articles. This is particularly useful when, hopefully, there are many new articles per day in the future. By the way, every sysop should include the deletion page on her/his watchlist and activate the according e-mail option. -- Rfc 19:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
