Difference between revisions of "User:Abd/Deletion questions"

Revision as of 01:45, 9 January 2015

from the deletion log

List of deletions without stated reason or reason possibly not adequate.

WikiIndex:Vanity wiki

• 23:09, 8 January 2015 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page WikiIndex:Vanity wiki (Not wanted/needed: content was: "A vanity wiki is a wiki used as a personal vanity press for advertising (including self-promotion), self-deprecation, or attempts to become an Inter..." (and the only contributor was "[[Special:Contributions/Leuco...)

Generally, following Wikipedia policy, Project subspace pages should not be deleted even if inappropriate, unless grossly inappropriate. An apparent policy page, if that is what this was, should be deprecated to rejected or proposed policy, not deleted. There should be, in fact, a policy about "vanity wikis," even if it is to say that they are acceptable, or to restrict them in some way. The term "vanity wiki" was used to justify certain deletions. So it could be important to resolve this. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Policy There are two pages that were created on Vanity wikis and WikiIndex:Vanity wikis. Why? A glossary entry would be reasonable if I had ever seen this term anywhere other than here in a recent discussion and a policy page would be useful if there was some agreed policy. Nathan can just make userspace drafts and some of his recent creations have been moved to his userspace for this purpose. Koavf (talk) 01:11, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

There are two separate issues, which L. conflated. There is the term "vanity wiki," which he did not invent. That's a glossary entry. Then there is the issue of a WikiIndex policy, and L. was claiming that the defacto policy was that such pages were to be deleted. I don't think so, but that's not the point here. If the content of the two pages was the same, then there was certainly no harm in deleting one. There is no requirement, to my understanding, that policy pages be drafted in user space. The difference is this: in user space, the user will be allowed defacto admin privileges, and may accept other edits or not, whereas in WikiIndex space, anyone may edit it (the same as in mainspace), there isn't such a special author privilege. --Abd (talk) 01:24, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Policy It's not required but as you know, Nathan is making proposed policy pages and marking things for deletion to prove a point. It's just disruptive and isn't making this a better site or one that's more useful for navigating the wikisphere. Koavf (talk) 01:33, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes. I agree. Nathan often, however, identifies weak points in policy and practice. We can take advantage of the opportunity and, in fact, he may even help. Dealing with Nathan can be frustrating. Having clear concepts of policy and guidelines helps. Steady on. Meanwhile, I'm treating this page a bit like a Deletion Request page, and I am going to add a proposed close here. (This page has no official status, this is just an exploration.) --Abd (talk) 01:45, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

• Proposed close. Deletion harmless. Undelete upon request from any established user and review page for lack of harm, edit if necessary. I am not requesting undeletion. --Abd (talk) 01:45, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Ben Weiss

• 03:56, 25 December 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page Ben Weiss (content before blanking was: "{{User infobox |name = Ben Weiss |image = http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb1393077475/common/avatars/thumb/1/14/5436510.png/150px-5436510.png.jpg |gender = {{tag|Male Wiki People|Male}} |mother tongue = {{language|en|N...")

This was apparently a bio of an asserted wikiperson. Policy on this is unclear. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Loopa23

• 03:55, 25 December 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page Loopa23 (content before blanking was: "{{User infobox |name = Loopa23 |image = 300px |mother tongue = {{language|en|N}} |DoB = 21 November 1999 (age 14) |nationality = American |home wiki = Loopa23 Wiki |other names = Loopa, Loop, Sp...")

Underage bio. When deleting pages, check for incoming links. I delinked one. A redlink will invite recreation. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

• 03:55, 25 December 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page Billy Arrowsmith (content before blanking was: "{{User infobox |name = William "Billy" Arrowsmith |image = MrBlonde267.jpg |Gender = {{tag|Male Wiki People|Male}} |Mother tongue = {{language|en|N}} |Residence = NY |Nationality = {{tag|United States|American}} |DoB = 23...")

unknown bio. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiBoy

• 20:04, 19 December 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page WikiBoy (content was: "{{:add}} http://wikiboy.net/" (and the only contributor was "76.27.236.154"))

I've listed this because no reason given. However, domain status is PendingDelete. I see signs that the domain was used to support spam subdomains. No sign of a wiki. I would not waste time on IP assertions. There is no there there. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Darth Muscare

• 20:03, 19 December 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page Darth Muscare (content was: "TBA" (and the only contributor was "Sweetie Belle"))

Looks like a Sweetie Belle project, she might finish. However, presumably she can recreate if she wants. I'm concerned about Sweetie Belle's bios, but that is not the issue here. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Inclumedia

• 02:01, 19 December 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page Inclumedia (content was: "Inclumedia is the organization, led by Nathan Larson, that sought to create Inclupedia by 15 July 2015. This plan was abandoned due to a lack of co-founders. ==External link== *https://github.com/Inclumedia")

Inclumedia was a somewhat well-known project. Not harmful content. Too much detail, I'm pretty sure, but no reason for deletion was given. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Newgon Wiki

• 05:57, 21 November 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page Newgon Wiki (content was: "{{Wiki |URL = http://www.newgon.com/wiki/Main_Page |logo = 135px |recentchanges URL= http://www.newgon.com/wiki/Special:RecentChanges |wikinode URL = No <!--http://YourWikiURL.org/wi...")

Newgon Wiki would be controversial, for sure, but I have never seen illegal content there. Definitely some *text* that is NSFW. As mentioned elsewhere, much worse on Commons. It's old, the wiki is not active, but is still up. Possible historical advocacy. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

GlWiki

• 05:57, 21 November 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page GlWiki (content was: "{{Wiki |name=GlWiki |URL=http://web.archive.org/web/20071221033453/http://www.childlover.org/index.php/Main_Page |logo=100px |wikinode URL=No |status=Dead |language=English |editmode=OpenEdit |engine=MediaWiki |maint...")

This was an active wiki. See [1]. Glwiki stands for Girl Love wiki.[2] The current domain displays as a web forgery. Historical information on this wiki could fit the WikiIndex mission. Possible historical advocacy (I didn't see any yet.)

BoyWiki

• 05:56, 21 November 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page BoyWiki (content was: "{{Wiki |URL = http://en.boywiki.org |logo = 125px |recentchanges URL = http://en.boywiki.org/wiki/Special:RecentChanges |wikinode URL = https://www.boywiki.org/en/BoyWiki:WikiNode...")

This is a live wiki with multiple users. No illegal content AFAIK. Possible advocacy? I haven't seen any. (Pointing to scientific research is not advocacy. Claiming that the research shows no harm from certain activities could be advocacy.) As a live wiki, though, it has users who may advocate this or that. One of them is Leucosticte, but he is only recent and not an admin or major contributor. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

ChildWiki

• 05:56, 21 November 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page ChildWiki (content was: "{{Wiki |name=ChildWiki |URL=http://childwiki.net/ |logo=File:Childwiki.png |recentchanges URL=http://childwiki.net/wiki/Special:RecentChanges |wikinode URL=http://childwiki.net/wiki/Project:Wikinode |about URL=http://childwiki.net/wi...")

Leucosticte domain, his creation, for "child liberation," his own ideas about it. It's not up, was apparently taken down recently, pages are still in Google cache. The wiki is covered on Boywiki, the article was not created by Leucosticte, see history. The WikiIndex deletion was immediately mentioned there. I followed that whole history (shown in the BoyWiki edit history) while it was happening. The whole thing was face-palm. There are some captures. [3] shows what I recall as typical content. What is being advocated is almost purely offensive. The Randomly Featured Article argues that "Children's right to engage in self-destructive behavior should not be infringed, because it is beneficial from an evolutionary standpoint." Why do I think this isn't about freedom for children? Leucosticte has been explicit here on this very issue. He picks to argue whatever he thinks will be most offensive, in the context.

However, it was a wiki. It had open registration. Anyone could edit it (Leucosticte always allows that, even in the extreme. At one point he gave all users of Rationalwikiwikiwiki admin privileges, and one nuked the entire site.) It is harmful to list this wiki? That is the issue that needs a policy decision. Otherwise it is whatever offends whatever admin who looks. Definitely, Leucosticte sets up extreme examples. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

ChildPorn.info

• 05:56, 21 November 2014 Koavf (Talk | contribs) deleted page ChildPorn.info (content was: "{{Wiki |name=ChildPorn.info |URL=http://childporn.info/ |logo=http://childporn.info/w/skins/common/images/childporn.png |recentchanges URL=http://childporn.info/wiki/Special:RecentChanges |wikinode URL=No |about URL=http://childporn.info...")

The site appears to have been an anti-child porn site, but that's not completely clear. I cover this on Talk:ChildPorn.info. The site was taken over and redirected to a porn site, apparently. The domain was recently reregistered using a registrar Leucosticte uses, and he obviously has the database for some kind of wiki. It is possible the deleted page has some details. the appearance from the page names is that it is "information" about child pornography. Leucosticte is unlikely to host anything actually illegal. When he wants to go to federal prison, he simply emails the feds with what he knows will require them to pick him up. No fuss. He's never put up any child porn. He does advocate legalization of activities that are vehemently rejected by most. --Abd (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)