Battlestar Wiki talk:Think Tank/Deletion Archives

Method 1

Method 2

Support Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 11:11, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Method 3

Support --Catrope 11:15, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Comment Sorry, I was too lazy to type it out and wanted to copy/paste it, but must have hit "cut" instead. --Serenity 13:54, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Comment I propose we archive the deleted pages themselves as well. If you've been away for a while, there is no way to find out what was deleted. --Catrope 11:15, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Comment Actually, that's a pretty good idea. (Not that the pages are actually deleted from the database anyway, because they're still there, they just can't be accessed by anyone other than the admins. So it should be a simple matter of "undeleting" and moving.) -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 11:19, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Comment I know. But most people around here are not admins ;) BTW, we could have the namespaces "Deleted:" and "Deleted talk:", undelete everything we can and put it in there. --Catrope 14:11, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Oppose The reason I am opposed to this is because if we add a namespace to the system, it has to be the same for also de, fr, tr, etc. It might not be the same lanugage. So doing this just for english seems unneeded for it's own namespace. Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 15:15, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Comment Do you mean that even in DE, talk pages are in the Talk: namespace? 'Cause at Wikipedia.nl, they're in the Overleg: namespace, Wikipedia.fr has Discussion: (I think), etc. --Catrope 15:28, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Comment That's not what I said. Default namespaces are pre-programmed by the software. i.e. Quotes namespace is the same through out all the wikis. There is no change in lanauge. Yes... we could rename it to their lanaguage our speficy just this happen on the "EN" wiki, but using custom namesapces for something like this Mediawiki will not work. If I go http://de.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/User:Shane it formats correctly because the system known user is what ever it is "de". But from http://de.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Benutzer:Shane to http://en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Benutzer:Shane it will not work. So creating a newspace would create it even in de and it will always be "Delete" or whatever. Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 16:49, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Also... Wikipedia:Articles for deletion is already pretty well suitied and I think this is more "needed". Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 23:09, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Honestly, I utterly despise the AFD process. It is needlessly volatile and all I'm looking for is a means to archive deletion discussions. That's it. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 23:13, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Support -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 11:19, 6 March 2007 (CST)
Support --Serenity 11:41, 6 March 2007 (CST)
Support --Talos 13:52, 6 March 2007 (CST)
Support We need to ensure that the items deleted DON'T get copied back somewhere else (isn't that the point of deleting?) --Spencerian 14:35, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Comments

So how would this be implemented? Instead of deleting an article, it would simply be "moved" to a different namespace (leaving a redirect in the old spot)? A lot of times deletions are made to actually get rid of an article, and redirecting would mean the article would still appear to be a valid link (and in fact, would still take you to the deleted article), effectively not deleting it. Or would it be moved, and then delete the redirect? At which point... how would people find it? Unless they understand the "Delete" namespace, it seems like it'd be difficult to know that an article had a deletion discussion that would exist, and how to find it. Maybe I'm missing something obvious. --Steelviper 15:36, 6 March 2007 (CST)

My thought on this is very simple: we just archive the deletion discussions. Then, if someone brought up the issue, we could always recover the page in question. This is honestly my preference, given the reasons and issues you brought up. Having said that, I'll reiterate that my only concern is to archive the discussions, not the material that is discussed. (By the way, the people voting for Method 3 are voting only to archive the discussion itself on a namespace, not the actual article.) -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 18:19, 6 March 2007 (CST)