UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Archive/February-2009

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Deletions Archive
2005 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Q3 Q4
2013 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
2014 Jan-Jun Jul-Dec
Years 2015 2016 2017 2018

This is the archive page for UDWiki:Administration/Deletions. This page represents all Deletions archived in the month of February 2009.


Resurrection_of_Caiger_Mall

A barely used, barely filled "conflict" page. No edits to expand upon it in almost two months. Left a note on the talk saying I would put it here. Gave them over a month. Still nothing. Not something deserving of its own page.--BFFs +SA+NSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSAN 4 EVA!!! 22:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

  1. Baleet --BFFs +SA+NSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSAN 4 EVA!!! 22:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
  2. Ion Cannon (Delete) From low orbit Linkthewindow  Talk  05:52, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
  3. Delete. Delete delete delete. --Blackboard 13:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
  4. Delete. Seriously, a wiki page doesn't need to be made for every single thing that happens at this mall. --Johnny Bass 15:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
    I disagree. May I direct you to my page - Blackboard finds ammo, pool cue at Caiger.--Blackboard 16:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
    Clearly a very epic struggle has been immortalized by your page. It's right up there with this event and probably should go up for historical status. --Johnny Bass 17:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
  5. Delete - Cillit bang!--SirArgo Talk 16:21, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
  6. Delete - Caiger Mall? Does anyone still actually give a shit about that place? --Papa Moloch 17:24, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
  7. Delete - Spam. --Pestolence(talk) 22:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
  8. Delete - For great justice. --ZsL 08:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
  9. Delete - Meh. --Janus talk 16:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
  10. Delete - Boringasslicious. MEIN FUHRER, I CAN WALK!--ScouterTX 23:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
  11. Delete - --WanYao 14:04, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
  12. Delete - So short it could be Vern the Midget. --The Cop 23:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Deleted -- boxy talkteh rulz 07:09 27 February 2009 (BST)

Barhah-Raz

A propaganda page pushed by the long inactive Rowcliffe Must Fall group. Most of the content is just an out of date edit of the Pegton page. Their various propagandistic additions are also repeated on their group page anyway. I guess it could just be moved to a group subpage, but as noted above they are inactive, and the content is largely duplicated. I bring it here, since more discussion can be generated.

Included in this request are the following:

Discuss. -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 14:46, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

--

  1. Move - Make sub-pages of Rowcliffe Must Fall. --Papa Moloch 17:21, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
  2. Merge - to subpage of RMF, as Moloch. --WanYao 17:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
  3. Merge - All hail Papa Moloch. His age is Papa, and his face is Moloch. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 18:24, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
  4. Move to their subpage. --Janus talk 20:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
  5. Move As Janus. Linkthewindow  Talk  05:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Haven't we already voted on this in the last couple of months? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 17:25, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I believe we did, yes... --WanYao 17:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Whatlinkshere is a wondrous thang! Try 7 months ago -- boxy talkteh rulz 11:19 10 February 2009 (BST)
So? :| --Janus talk 13:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Since it was voted to move, I've cleaned up their templates a little, and three of the pages above now qualify for SD. Barhah-Raz and Barhah-Raz Building Information Center just need moving and some link fixes afterwards. -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 16:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Moved to Rowcliffe Must Fall/Barhah-Raz & Rowcliffe Must Fall/Barhah-Raz Building Information Center -- boxy talkteh rulz 07:09 27 February 2009 (BST)

Grayside Civil War

A pointless page about a non-event which provides not a whit of useful, informative, factual or even entertaining information. It doesn't approach anywhere near NPOV: it's just a collage of POV rants which don't even make sense. --WanYao 00:22, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

  1. Delete - Has no "potential". Except for spastics to make drama amongst each other. --WanYao
  2. Delete - See above, excluding the "spastics" --ScouterTX 00:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
    "Except for to make drama amongst each other." sounds stupid though. -- Cheese 00:38, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
    Doesn't really matter in this case I guess. --ScouterTX 01:13, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  3. Delete to avoid further drama concerning it. Replace "spastics" with "people" then to avoid illogical fallacy. My brain hurts :/ --Ryzak Black 01:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  4. Delete - Wow. --Met Fan F 01:09, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  5. Keep -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 01:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  6. Delete - Dammit Wan, you beat me to it! Linkthewindow  Talk  01:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
    Just remembered these from last month. If I remember correctly, the content is quite different (but one could argue that this page still is breaking the spirit of the policy-although it would be a bit of a long shot, tbh.) This silly little bout of drama has been going on for a while, it seems. Linkthewindow  Talk  12:26, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
  7. Delete post-haste. Saying "opinion" is not a way to make POV okay on a public page. ߘlackboard 01:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  8. Keep - It seems to be an active page and maybe with more work it won't suck so hard. Is there anyway we can move it to a group or user subpage?--SirArgo Talk 01:25, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
    You should lurk more--ScouterTX 01:31, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
    You should have a VB warning for editing a subpage of a group you aren't in.--– Nubis NWO 22:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
    Um, what the hell did that prove? I have read that before and I merely agree that is should be moved to the group namespace.--SirArgo Talk 01:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
    You mean like last time? -- boxy talkteh rulz 10:43 29 January 2009 (BST)
    Oh yeah, that was really hardcore vandalism! How could I! --ScouterTX 14:17, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
  9. Delete - about 3 people will care when this goes. Liberty 04:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  10. Keep - Let them get it all out -- boxy talkteh rulz 10:42 29 January 2009 (BST)
    Meh, there's no potential here. It's too big a mess, and everything I have seen of the contributors points to the fact that they don't possess the skill set to turn it into a coherent page. Furthermore, I object to the name. STARS, who are probably the single most important group in E Grayside, weren't involved in this.... Therefore to call it a "civil war" when the largest, longest-standing, most important group in the suburb had nothing to do with it is misleading. If someone wants to create a REAL page, with a legit title and REAL content on this conflict -- fine. But this page belongs in the trash. --WanYao 20:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  11. Delete - While I think it's a laugh, I agree with WanYao that it isn't really a civil war, otherwise STARS would have been involved, which we wasn't. --The Cop 22:38, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  12. Delete - Kill with fire. --Haliman - Talk 03:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
  13. Move A cute little page, but needs to be in a different namespace Asheets 20:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
  14. Delete - and move to group subspace. --Pestolence(talk) 01:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
  15. Merge - Send it to one of the groups' userspaces. --ZsL 01:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
    They've already got one that was moved to their group sub-page area, guys -- boxy talkteh rulz 23:51 5 February 2009 (BST)
    I see, but it doesn't have that purdy template and certain info from the Civil War page isn't on the one you linked. --ZsL 06:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
    Does it need to be? The one already in their group space is fine, after the first deletions case over two of their pages, we stated if they were so inclined to make a page, not to mention our name anywhere. So if this one was deleted, it leaves that one, and if only that one remains, with no reference to us, I don't care. Although the upcoming Project Malton page they're creating doesn't look promising. --Ryzak Black 14:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
  16. Delete--BFFs +SA+NSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSANSAN 23:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
  17. Delete - Meh. Just kill it. -- Cheese 23:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
  18. Delete - KILL IT WITH FIRE --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 18:21, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Deleted--– Nubis NWO 18:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Blue Aegis Group/History/Grayside Conflict

Due to a mutual agreement, that satisfies both parties, I would like this page to be deleted. As this page has been edited by others (albeit in a very minor way) I would like to ask that this page be deleted. --Captain Rickety 17:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

  1. Speedy Delete then? --Janus talk 17:47, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
I got it. It was only editted by others to fix NPOV stuff. Still qualifies as a speedy.--– Nubis NWO 18:09, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Zombykiller user page

User:zombykiller

Reason - I have created a new wiki account with exact same info as this one User:Bhuwannabe --bhuwannabe 00:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

  1. Speedy Delete - crit 7 (You'll notice that he posted under that name in the history.) Please use speedy deletions in future if you are requesting a deletion for your own page. Linkthewindow  Talk  00:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
  2. SD - Liberty 00:56, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
  3. It would be better if you keep and redirect the old user page (and talk page) to your new ones, so that people can still find you if they need to discuss any of your old edits -- boxy talkteh rulz 02:23 3 February 2009 (BST)
    Users don't get redirects--– Nubis NWO 16:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
  4. Keep - with redirect. --WanYao 14:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
    Users don't get redirects--– Nubis NWO 16:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
  5. Speedy Delete - Crit 7. As above. --User:Axe27/Sig 00:35, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
  6. Speedy - I'd advise him to keep it, but it's up to him. As above. --Pestolence(talk) 02:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
  7. Get this off ma A/D, if he wants it gone then it shall be done.--xoxo 02:51, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
  8. Keep as redirect, because he just told me so :) --Janus talk 13:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
    Users don't get redirects--– Nubis NWO 16:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
  9. Crit 7 - And if he requests it under the zombykiller account all your keeps count for nothing under Nubis' precedent. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 15:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
    I asked him and he prefers the page to be kept as redirect. --Janus talk 15:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
    Users don't get redirects.--– Nubis NWO 16:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
    I thought that only redirects like 'zombykiller' (without the User prefix) weren't allowed.. :| --Janus talk 16:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
    Redirects are redirects. Besides, I edited all the links to go to Bhuwanbananadanana. And he signed them all that way too.--– Nubis NWO 23:36, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
    Yeah, but redirects in the main namespace are redirects in the main namespace, and this wasn't. --Midianian¦T¦DS¦C:RCS¦ 00:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
    Users don't get redirect from the main namespace. There is absolutely nothing to say that you can't redirect an old account to a new account if you change usernames. It's pure common sense to do so, so that the user can still be found later despite having a whole new user name -- boxy talkteh rulz 03:27 13 February 2009 (BST)
    ^This is 100% correct and true. Users have always been allowed to redirect their old accounts wherever they deem appropriate within reason. It would be dumb if we did it differently than that for the aforementioned reason. --Karekmaps?! 15:11, 18 April 2009 (BST)

Done--– Nubis NWO 16:50, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Personal tools
advertisements