[WikiEN-l] Votes for deletion

[Anthere]

--- Zoe <zoecomnena at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I twice deleted a newbie's article called [[First
> Bull
> Run]].  The first time, it was deleted because it
> was
> a copright violation.  The second time, because its
> entire content consisted of nothing but a link to
> the
> page that the copyright violation had come from.  I
> indicated both times that the title was wrong, it
> should be [[Battle of First Bull Run]].  The third
> time, the user actually created a useful article,
> although still with the wrong name, which Danny
> redirected to a correct article name.
> 
> Some anonymous person who is using the URL
> 172.158.95.251, and whose use history contains only
> attacks against me, is arguing that I should have
> submitted those pages to the Votes for deletion page
> before deleting them.  And The Cunctator is backing
> him up.
> 
> I find this a ridiculous stance.  Are we required to
> put EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE on the votes for deletion
> page, and then wait a week and for some other use to
> delete them?  The Wikipedia:Policy on permanent
> deletion of pages page CLEARLY says "If the page
> contains no useful content (all gibberish for
> example)
> and no useful history, this step may be skipped."
> 
> Are we really going to have to list every article on
> Votes for deletion?  That is completely unwieldy.
> 
> Zoe

I have a memory that a long time ago, Quercus posted
something which came from his site. He was politely
said that this could be a cp infrigement, and asked if
he was the author of it, and if the content was free.

Another reaction could have been to immediately delete
the content since it clearly came from another web
site.

I think the first move was more polite and let room
for explanation. 

This said, as I already stated, this page "vote for
deletion" is as heavy as a french administration.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com