On 6/16/06, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, of course. They can move any non-protected page anywhere they like. And that ability shouldn't be removed considering how many newbies accidentally make their user page in the article namespace and it needs to be moved to the userspace.
In that particular case, no harm would be caused by copying/pasting it to their user page, then marking the original for speedy deletion. But I take your point.
On 6/16/06, Hsiang-Tai Chien htchien1225@yahoo.com.tw wrote:
I usually put a {{delete}} to a subpage that I do not want to use anymore and soon an admin will delete it for me. Maybe you can do that, too.
Ok, maybe that works well enough at EN Wikipedia. I tried it a couple of times later at Commons and discovered that 3+ months later the images were still there (could be extremely embarrassing if you uploaded the wrong image...)
On 6/16/06, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
User pages exist to serve the community and the project, not the users. As such, I think we should de-emphasize the notion of personal page ownership, and preserve community review on such pages. Improving these review and deletion processes, both on the policy and the technology level, strikes me as a better way to address any currently existing bottleneck situations.
That seems quite reasonable. Would a "special" {{delete}} template along the lines of "This isn't even in the main user space, can some admin just kill it?" be an improvement? You would have at least one pair of eyes checking it...
Steve