Actually, I *feel* there is a deletion spree going on on meta, which I find most inappropriate. It seems slowly, the goal of meta, what is acceptable over there is changing and I am not sure at all I like these changes.
Recently for example, someone listed one of my articles, which had been there for more than 2 years, listed under humour and essay. I had to move it as a subpage of mine to avoid it being deleted. The reason given to delete it was "rant and non encyclopedic"
Since WHEN do we have to write only encyclopedic and reasonably boring stuff on meta ?
It is not really surprising me that a birth project got deleted or threatened of deletion as well.
Meanwhile, there is a lot of crap still there, and people are delighted listing themselves under "wikipedians who went to tagadaschtroumpf college and wear 56 size pink shoes with a yellow hat".
What escape me is "what harm does humour and essays on meta when the essays are not insulting anyone ?"
What escape me is "why are some people trying to make meta a really clean and boring place" while it is supposed to be first of all a place for all of us to work together and possibly relax a bit from the stress of the projects ?
What escape me is "why trying to keep the place absolutely clean when it is only a personal site ?"
I would like to recall something I read on meatball a long time ago.
A wiki is a public place, and as all public places, editors are required to follow strict rules. Such as in wikipedia, writing only stuff that is encyclopedic and neutral. This causes stress.
It is very important to reserve personal place to editors so that they can let themselves go beyond the rules of the public places. Such as being biaised or putting some political rant.
Meta is such a place, where we can also share some funny and constructive moments; this also builds the community. And when editors feel confortable, they also join the fun and put new important proposal.
It does mean that meta should host full projects of course, but it is WITHIN meta role to host projects which some poeple are trying to set up.
Such projects should not "survive" deletion. They should NOT be on votes for deletion.
Ihmo.
Or... let's create another meta to really brainstorm on.
Ant
David Gerard a écrit:
Angela (beesley@gmail.com) [050520 12:08]:
Something's gone very wrong when playing chess on the wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Chess_championship) is acceptable but creating a demo Wikipedia in a new language is not. If this does not survive VfD, and you want a temporary small wiki, you're welcome at http://scratchpad.wikicities.com/. For a longer term Wikicity, you need consensus within Wikipedia that this language can *not* exist within Wikimedia.
Is there any actual deletion policy beyond "I feel like it"? Particularly, as seems to have happened here, when the nominator removes the page preremptorily themselves. As I understood it, from posts to this list, starting a new language in a test area in Meta: was something they were actually *supposed* to do.
What on earth is going on here? Beyond "if it survives VFD".
- d.