On Monday 23 September 2002 07:55 pm, Fred wrote:
No misunderstanding and no apology. But I do think putting deleted material in history should solve the problem. As to evalating exactly what you have done, that is your responsibility, Life is just too short to follow someone around.
Fred
Do you ever have anything positive to say here or do you just enjoy insulting people you don't like (mostly me)? Name calling is a childish game played by children and those with weak minds in an atempt to cheaply "win" an arguement they feel they would otherwise lose.
With that said, I wouldn't at all mind the replacement of the deletion function with a de-linking from the database function; When a page is de-linked from database then all links to it would be replaced by an empty link and the de-linked page would be listed on a log page (this would be similar to Microsoft's Recycle Bin).
Then all the micro-stub lovers could pick and choose at their leisure the micro-stubs they wish to turn into stubs and the history of who first typed the epic prose of "fill in", or "Pete Rose was a ball player. Jesus rules!" or my favorite "I am the bomb and you all know that i am the bomb and you all know that i will always be the bomb regardless of what anyy of you have to say about the fact that i am the bomb and about the fact that i will always be the bomb" will be preserved.
But then there is the problem of badly named pages that resulted from typos or vandalism, such as the hypothetical [[DON QUIOTE LIKES CARROTS]] or [[When Derams May COme]]. It would be silly to keep a page history, even one hidden under an edit link, for a page title that will never become an article or even a redirect.
There is also the problem of copyright violations that need to be removed for legal reasons.
So unless the developers or the software itself periodically clears-out the recycle bin by permanently deleting old de-linked pages, then there are significant draw-backs to this plan.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
maveric149 wrote:
But then there is the problem of badly named pages that resulted from typos or vandalism, such as the hypothetical [[DON QUIOTE LIKES CARROTS]] or [[When Derams May COme]]. It would be silly to keep a page history, even one hidden under an edit link, for a page title that will never become an article or even a redirect.
I don't think that these are really a problem. Yes, it's certainly silly if these pages are kept around, but it's also harmless, if we have plenty of room. Since Wikipedia is faster now than when I first joined, it seems to me that server speed increases faster than database size (even though it increases discontinuously, in jumps), so I'm not worried about loading the database with junk entries.
There is also the problem of copyright violations that need to be removed for legal reasons.
Definitely. But we need to deal with this anyway, since many copyright violations are preserved in histories of pages that were rewritten and thereby saved from deletion. Instituting my proposal may exacerbate the copyright problem, but that's good if it focuses our attention on it to get rid of it. Thus, I suggested the feature of deletion of individual revisions (to be used sparingly and slowly, as copyright violations are dealt with now).
-- Toby
At 10:59 PM 9/23/02 -0700, you wrote:
On Monday 23 September 2002 07:55 pm, Fred wrote:
No misunderstanding and no apology. But I do think putting deleted material in history should solve the problem. As to evalating exactly what you have done, that is your responsibility, Life is just too short to follow someone around.
Fred
Do you ever have anything positive to say here or do you just enjoy
insulting
people you don't like (mostly me)? Name calling is a childish game played by children and those with weak minds in an atempt to cheaply "win" an
arguement
they feel they would otherwise lose.
Setting up a few straw men to knock down and a big smokescreen of obfustication is not much good either. I suggest you leave legitimate short articles alone and continue to deal appropriately with problems such as you mention below.
Fred
With that said, I wouldn't at all mind the replacement of the deletion function with a de-linking from the database function; When a page is de-linked from database then all links to it would be replaced by an empty link and the de-linked page would be listed on a log page (this would be similar to Microsoft's Recycle Bin).
Then all the micro-stub lovers could pick and choose at their leisure the micro-stubs they wish to turn into stubs and the history of who first typed the epic prose of "fill in", or "Pete Rose was a ball player. Jesus rules!" or my favorite "I am the bomb and you all know that i am the bomb and you
all
know that i will always be the bomb regardless of what anyy of you have to say about the fact that i am the bomb and about the fact that i will always be the bomb" will be preserved.
But then there is the problem of badly named pages that resulted from typos or vandalism, such as the hypothetical [[DON QUIOTE LIKES CARROTS]] or [[When Derams May COme]]. It would be silly to keep a page history, even one hidden under an edit link, for a page title that will never become an
article
or even a redirect.
There is also the problem of copyright violations that need to be removed
for
legal reasons.
So unless the developers or the software itself periodically clears-out the recycle bin by permanently deleting old de-linked pages, then there are significant draw-backs to this plan.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav) [Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Do you ever have anything positive to say here or do you just enjoy
insulting
people you don't like (mostly me)? Name calling is a childish game played by children and those with weak minds in an atempt to cheaply "win" an
arguement
they feel they would otherwise lose.
Setting up a few straw men to knock down and a big smokescreen of obfustication is not much good either.
Instead of complaining to maveric about setting up straw men, you might look at yourself and wonder whether it might be reasonable for people to think you insulted them if you call them a vandal.
Andre Engels
At 02:32 PM 9/24/02 +0200, you wrote:
Do you ever have anything positive to say here or do you just enjoy
insulting
people you don't like (mostly me)? Name calling is a childish game
played by
children and those with weak minds in an atempt to cheaply "win" an
arguement
they feel they would otherwise lose.
Setting up a few straw men to knock down and a big smokescreen of obfustication is not much good either.
Instead of complaining to maveric about setting up straw men, you might look at yourself and wonder whether it might be reasonable for people to think you insulted them if you call them a vandal.
Andre Engels
Mav seems to give as good as he gets. I suppose we should all avoid inflamatory language, but you know, "He started it..." Actually I don't think anything I've ever written has been deleted. It has all, however short, been either a base for a decent article or had links to further information on the topic. I would simply like derogatory comments and labeling to stop regarding legitimate "short", not "stub", articles. Maybe I'm just asking for NPOV.
Fred
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org