I have just discovered that a bunch of these have been obliterated as an unfortunate side-effect of an entirely right-minded drive to delete orphan talk pages.
The particular page which I stumbled across is [[Talk:Constitutional_Charter_of_Serbia_and_Montenegro/Delete]] which can be viewed here (if you have the right credentials :-): * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/Talk:Constitutional_Charter_of...
I understand that there is another project currently underway, moving the old VFD discussions to AFD. Should these even older discussions be treated in a similar fashion?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Phil Boswell wrote:
I have just discovered that a bunch of these have been obliterated as an unfortunate side-effect of an entirely right-minded drive to delete orphan talk pages.
The particular page which I stumbled across is [[Talk:Constitutional_Charter_of_Serbia_and_Montenegro/Delete]] which can be viewed here (if you have the right credentials :-):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/Talk:Constitutional_Charter_of...
I understand that there is another project currently underway, moving the old VFD discussions to AFD. Should these even older discussions be treated in a similar fashion?
Yes, they should be undeleted to (Insert current TLA here) subpages...
- -- Alphax | /"\ Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
Phil Boswell wrote:
I have just discovered that a bunch of these have been obliterated as an unfortunate side-effect of an entirely right-minded drive to delete orphan talk pages.
Why are orphan talk pages being deleted in the first place? I can't see any good reason to do that, myself, and plenty of good reasons _not_ to.
On 10/5/05, Phil Boswell phil.boswell@gmail.com wrote:
I have just discovered that a bunch of these have been obliterated as an unfortunate side-effect of an entirely right-minded drive to delete orphan talk pages.
The particular page which I stumbled across is [[Talk:Constitutional_Charter_of_Serbia_and_Montenegro/Delete]] which can be viewed here (if you have the right credentials :-):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/Talk:Constitutional_Charter_of...
If I read this correctly the AFD/VFD discussion was put on the talk page when it belonged on a A or VFD subpage. Why was it there to begin with.
I don't particularly like moving old VFD discussions to AFD either. It obscures their age.
--Mgm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
On 10/5/05, Phil Boswell phil.boswell@gmail.com wrote:
I have just discovered that a bunch of these have been obliterated as an unfortunate side-effect of an entirely right-minded drive to delete orphan talk pages.
The particular page which I stumbled across is [[Talk:Constitutional_Charter_of_Serbia_and_Montenegro/Delete]] which can be viewed here (if you have the right credentials :-):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/Talk:Constitutional_Charter_of...
If I read this correctly the AFD/VFD discussion was put on the talk page when it belonged on a A or VFD subpage. Why was it there to begin with.
I don't particularly like moving old VFD discussions to AFD either. It obscures their age.
Their age should be evident by the nicely timestamped closing comments.
- -- Alphax | /"\ Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
On 10/6/05, Alphax alphasigmax@gmail.com wrote:
Their age should be evident by the nicely timestamped closing comments.
I guess that's true, but I don't see how mass moving deletion discussions is at all useful. Having a link telling people about VFD and a button to check the other page would be a lot easier and a lot less work.
--Mgm
"MacGyverMagic/Mgm" wrote: On 10/5/05, Phil Boswell wrote:
I have just discovered that a bunch of these have been obliterated as an unfortunate side-effect of an entirely right-minded drive to delete orphan talk pages.
The particular page which I stumbled across is [[Talk:Constitutional_Charter_of_Serbia_and_Montenegro/Delete]]
...which I have now moved back to the appropriate VFD sub-page. I also took the liberty of topping and tailing it as per current practice.
If I read this correctly the AFD/VFD discussion was put on the talk page when it belonged on a A or VFD subpage. Why was it there to begin with.
Actually it started out as a sub-page of VFD and for some strange reason was moved to a sub-page of the talk page of the article.
I don't particularly like moving old VFD discussions to AFD either. It obscures their age.
The age should be obvious from the contents. I have no personal problem with mass-moving VFD discussions to AFD, assuming that naming conflicts are sensibly dealt with: I see it as simply a rather extended move operation :-)