Recently I have noticed some redirects like {{NYCS stub}} to {{NYCS-stub}} listed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion . The stub sorters, typically the only people to frequent SFD, are voting for their deletion on the grounds that they are "incorrectly named". What? That is in fact NOT a reason to delete a redirect. I don't think template redirects even have the performance problem of nested templates; there is no reason to delete these redirects. If someone wants them deleted, they can be listed on [[WP:RFD]] like all other redirects.
Grutness now says I'm vandalizing SFD by removing the redirects and his change in the scop[e of the page to include redirects. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASPUI&diff=26146174... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion&... (and the rest of the recent history of SFD)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
SPUI wrote:
Recently I have noticed some redirects like {{NYCS stub}} to {{NYCS-stub}} listed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion . The stub sorters, typically the only people to frequent SFD, are voting for their deletion on the grounds that they are "incorrectly named". What? That is in fact NOT a reason to delete a redirect. I don't think template redirects even have the performance problem of nested templates; there is no reason to delete these redirects. If someone wants them deleted, they can be listed on [[WP:RFD]] like all other redirects.
Grutness now says I'm vandalizing SFD by removing the redirects and his change in the scop[e of the page to include redirects.
This is completely and utterly WRONG. Unless they are misleading or overly broad, we should NEVER delete redirects. Especially on templates, where it's often hard to remember the exact spelling, capitalisation and hyphenation involved.
- -- Alphax | /"\ Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Bike-stub has now been protected blank because I was recreating it as a redirect to {{cycling-stub}}. I ask again - what the fuck is wrong with people?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
SPUI wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Bike-stub has now been protected blank because I was recreating it as a redirect to {{cycling-stub}}. I ask again - what the fuck is wrong with people?
I know, let's remove redirects and free links from Wikipedia and go back to 1000 permutations of CamelCase!
- -- Alphax | /"\ Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
On 10/23/05, SPUI drspui@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#template...
Unprotected for the time being to allow SPUI to prove that it should not be deleted. (Being bold)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 10/23/05, SPUI drspui@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Bike-stub has now been protected blank because I was recreating it as a redirect to {{cycling-stub}}. I ask again - what the fuck is wrong with people?
I've come to the conclusion that most of these sorts of instruction creep and "consensus" enforcement are teenagers and twenty-somethings trying their hand at rule making.
I'm not sure how to get them to drop their ideas of pressing their wills onto the wiki regardless of the damage they're doing, other than statements from prominent Wikipedia members about how such behavior is improper and not in the spirit of the wiki.
I don't know what else to do either, but it's a very serious problem. -- Michael Turley User:Unfocused
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Bike-stub It's been protected blank again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/Deleted/O... The original discussion WASN'T EVEN ABOUT A REDIRECT! Fuck you, Mairi. Fuck you, Grutness. Fuck you, Phroziac.
SPUI wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Bike-stub It's been protected blank again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/Deleted/O...
The original discussion WASN'T EVEN ABOUT A REDIRECT! Fuck you, Mairi. Fuck you, Grutness. Fuck you, Phroziac.
Not only that but I've been blocked for "Delete warring". Asshole.
SFD obviously only has jurisdiction over stub templates. To be considered a stub template it should meet the following criteria: 1. It is a template. 2. It is used to indicate stub articles.
On 10/25/05, SPUI drspui@gmail.com wrote:
SPUI wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Bike-stub It's been protected blank again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/Deleted/O...
The original discussion WASN'T EVEN ABOUT A REDIRECT! Fuck you, Mairi. Fuck you, Grutness. Fuck you, Phroziac.
So CSD G4 does not apply.
Not only that but I've been blocked for "Delete warring". Asshole. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l