Message: 6 Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 18:29:37 -0700 From: Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BuddhaInside's behaviour To: Discussion list for English-language Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Message-ID: 1063589377.5317.21.camel@frank.vibber.org Content-Type: text/plain
On Sun, 2003-09-14 at 18:02, Angela wrote:
After being told that he could not have his user
page
deleted without good reason on both [[Wikipedia:Personal subpages to be deleted]] and
on
his talk page, BuddhaInside started an edit war at [[Wikipedia:Personal subpages to be deleted]].
This seems like a remarkable waste of time. Why _not_ delete the pages? They're not articles, they're user pages and that user requested their deletion.
Seconded. As mentionned in the title, these are "personal" pages. Or not ?
The "public state record" is not lost. It may always be seen by a sysop as a deleted page, and undeleted if necessary.
So what is the point in refusing the deletion of a *personal* page ? How wikilove is it to irritate someone for such an unimportant point ?
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Brion wrote:
This seems like a remarkable waste of time. Why _not_ delete the pages? They're not articles, they're user pages and that user requested their deletion.
Anthere wrote:
Seconded. As mentionned in the title, these are "personal" pages. Or not ?
The "public state record" is not lost. It may always be seen by a sysop as a deleted page, and undeleted if necessary.
So what is the point in refusing the deletion of a *personal* page ? How wikilove is it to irritate someone for such an unimportant point ?
In general I don't see a problem with deleting personal pages either. But for an *active* contributor the page is likely to be regenerated very quickly. The talk page for sure, especially with a controversial user. Someone is going to want to talk to them and will start a new page in no time. And the user page itself is likely to be regenerated - either by someone wanting to remove the red link from "recent changes" or by someone mistaking it for the talk page (as often happens with blank user pages).
So we would end up having to delete the pages over and over again. That *would* be waste of time.
If BuddhaInside just wanted a clean slate on hir pages, then I would say delete. But permanently non-existent user talk pages are not practical for an active contributor (and the implied refusal to communicate with other users is unhelpful to say the least)
sannse