Jump to content
Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Meta:Requests for deletion

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by Zacheus (talk | contribs) at 20:34, 21 May 2008 (Ban coordination). It may differ significantly from the current version .
Requests for deletion
This page hosts proposals for page deletion. Before using this page, see the Deletion policy, in particular the criteria for speedy deletion. Also make note of the various criterias for inclusion that Meta-wiki purports; this is not Wikipedia. Place {{RFD}} on the page you are proposing for deletion, and then add an entry in the appropriate section below; any language may be used on this page. After at least two weeks, an administrator will carry out the consensus or majority decision.

Articles that qualify for speedy deletion should be tagged with {{delete}} or {{delete|reason}}, and should not be listed here. (See also speedy deletion candidates.) Images with unknown sources should be tagged with {{no source}} and need not be listed here, either. To request undeletion, see #Requests for undeletion. See Meta:Inclusion policy for a general list of what does not belong on the Meta-Wiki.

Previous requests are archived.

Pages

Submit your request at the bottom of the section.

The following discussion is closed: KEPT per consensus.--Alnokta 13:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

Was nominated by anonymous — VasilievV 2 15:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

Keep; harmless fun IMO. But hey, the irony is mildly amusing. :-) James F. (talk) 17:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

This page is used for more than one year mainly for harrasement of my person. My enemies constantly insert their POV and my POV is removed: breach of audiatur et altera pars. —Zacheus Talk • Contributions • Edit counter 20:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

Templates

Submit your request at the bottom of the section.

The following discussion is closed: Kept — VasilievV 2 08:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

I feel that this template is unnecessary because on the top of every proposal for closing a project you can see "The result is KEEP" or "The result is CLOSE" or nothing; then you know the discussion has not ended yet. --MF-W 14:38, 4 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

This template categorize all proposals! M. M. S. 07:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep Not everyone (like those unfamiliar with Wikipedia) who looks at a proposal for project closing will know whether discussion is ongoing. This is just a friendly little banner that clarifies just that. Nishkid64 (talk) 09:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep I agree with Nishkid. Please bear in mind that proposal about closure of projects attract users of other wikis to Meta, and such templates can help them find their way better in Meta in their first experiences here. Huji 15:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep Meta needs to be a bit more accessible than most other wikis, so this template has a place. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep - I too agree with Nishkid. This template serving as a helping guide for those unfamiliar with Meta should be kept for that role. Rudget . 18:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep We use similar templates on EN:WQ and people find them helpful.--Poetlister 11:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

Categories

Submit your request at the bottom of the section.

Images

Submit your request at the bottom of the section.

The following discussion is closed: Deleted as non-free. It's an old bid, so it's not dangerous to delete it. It may be restored after Meta EDP will be accepted — VasilievV 2 08:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

Tagged as speedy, tag removed, re-tagged as speedy. Under the circumstances should be brought here for the views of the community. I am merely bringing it here, not voting. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

  • Delete Herbythyme's approach seems sensible. As the user who nominated this for speedy deletion, I do of course still suggest it should be deleted. With regards to this particular image, the uploader has provided details of the source but not made any comment about the licensing situation and the source website doesn't state that this is freely licensed. As such I consider that this is likely an unfree image and therefore not permitted by WM:IP based upon the points I've described and the widespread (ab)use of unfree images in Wikimania bids. Adambro 14:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep. We should keep as a whole the Wikimania bid. If you delete images describing the bid, then you damage the document provided to the jury and to the community. Anthere 23:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
    The problem with that is you're saying it is okay to use unfree images in Wikimania bids, I'd very much disagree. In the case of this image and the no doubt many others like it, there is no reason why a link couldn't be provided to the appropriate website, something which wouldn't overly inconvenience anyone. That remains the case now just as when a bid was being made. We shouldn't be allowing the use of unfree images anywhere on WMF projects where their use cannot be reasonably justified. Adambro 23:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep per Anthere--Nick1915 - all you want 02:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep per Anthere. --Aphaia 07:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep, per Anthere. --Thogo (talk) 07:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Comment Here are four other images tagged by Adam that I deleted per WM:IP: Image:Harvard-campus-map.gif, Image:Hilton BA.jpg, Image:Hlsmap.gif, Image:Int-res.jpg. Note to RfD closer: if the consensus is to keep the images, please restore these four as well. Nishkid64 (talk) 09:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Comment Could I ask that anyone who has or intends to vote keep that they explain whether their position relates to this particular instance and is intended to maintain the bid as is or saying that they think it is okay to decorate Wikimania bids with unfree images. The problem with simply saying "Keep per Anthere" is that I've already tried to provide a response to the points she made so it would only be right to expand your keep vote to explain why my comments have been dismissed. I note that my actions in raising issue with this and the image below have prompted Anthere to propose an EDP to allow us to use unfree content on Meta and whilst I appreciate the discussions on this issue, I don't think an appropriate EDP would permit the use of this image and until it does, per the Foundation resolution, we can't host unfree content here. I'd therefore suggest we concentrate on developing an EDP as appropriate rather than focusing on this images. Adambro 14:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Delete - I agree with Anthere to some extent: having such an image can help the document provided to the jury and to the community; however, having a non-free image for this reason is not the solution. Huji 15:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Delete; this image could feasibly be replaced by a free image, could it now? In that case I see no reason to be using nonfree stuff in this way. giggy (:O) 01:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Delete I can understand bending the rules a bit for upcoming bids, but once that year's decision has been made, they can be purged (and replaced with freely-available images once the event happens). EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
The following discussion is closed: On hold till EDP accepted — VasilievV 2 08:29, 17 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

As above. Tagged as speedy, tag removed, re-tagged as speedy. Under the circumstances should be brought here for the views of the community. I am merely bringing it here, not voting. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:00, 3 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

  • Delete Herbythyme's approach seems sensible. As the user who nominated this for speedy deletion, I do of course still suggest it should be deleted. With regards to this particular image, the image appears to being used under a claim of fair use but again, the WM:IP doesn't permit unfree content and we can't use any fair use material without an EDP per foundation:Resolution:Licensing policy and so it should be deleted. Adambro 14:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep. But if you do, before deleting such an image, but kind enough to save the text contained in it, which is part of our history and has given work to the translator. Before deletion, please make sure the image is saved on our internal wiki. Thanks Anthere 22:54, 3 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
    • Better. I would like to ask suspension of the deletion until meta has adopted an EDP. It seems that having low quality versions of a press article talking of wikipedia on meta, could possibly fit under an EDP. Anthere
      Proposition for an meta:EDP
  • Keep while I am happy to agree on the suspension proposed. I also appreciate Herby not to have the image gone just by speedy deletion. --Aphaia 07:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep, per Anthere and Aphaia. --Thogo (talk) 07:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Comment As per my comment above, I'd ask that we focus on discussing the proposed EDP rather than focussing on these images since without an EDP these unfree images simply cannot be kept per the Foundation resolution. Adambro 14:37, 5 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Delete, same as above. I wouldn't object to some undeletions taking place per Adambro once there is a stable EDP up, but that could take a while and in the meantime there is no reason for these nonfree images to be kept. giggy (:O) 01:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
The following discussion is closed: Already deleted.

I removed the no source tag as a source is given (and interwiki link), however I don't see how this image is useful for Meta. Maybe Commons, but unused and seemingly useless here. giggy (:O) 02:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

Requests for undeletion

Submit your request at the bottom of the section.

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /