UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Archive/2011 06

Shortcut:
A/D

This page is for the request of page deletions within the Urban Dead wiki. Due to concerns about loss of data, the ability to delete pages is restricted to system operators. As such, regular users will need to request a deletion from the system operators. For consistency and accountability, system operators also adhere to the guidelines listed here.

Guidelines for Deletion Requests

All Deletion Requests must contain the following information in order to be considered:

• A link to the page in question. Preferably bolded for visibility. Note that Category and Image links need a colon at the front to turn them into links (ie [[:Category:Category]] and [[:Image:Image.jpg]]).
• A reason for deletion. This should be short and to the point.
• A signed datestamp. This can be easily done by adding ~~~~ to the end of your request.

In addition to placing a request on this page, please place the {{delete}} tag on the top of the page that is being recommended for deletion. Please make sure that the original content remains on the page, so that others can judge whether the page is worthy of deletion.

Any deletion request that does not contain these three pieces of information will not be considered, and will be removed by a system operator.

Once the deletion request has been entered, the request shall remain on this page, where it will be voted on for a period of two (2) weeks, as judged by the initial datestamp. At the conclusion of this two weeks, the appropriate action will be taken by a system operator, and at the end of that day the request will be moved into the Archive.

Certain types of pages may be better being scheduled for deletion in order to reduce the amount of red tape and stop this page getting too cluttered. To lodge a request for scheduled deletions, go to UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Scheduling.

Deletion of pages that match a certain criteria may be better serviced by a request for a Speedy Deletion. Speedy Deletions are for removal of pages that are clearly of no value to the wiki, and do not incur the two week voting requirement. Speedy Deletion requests can be lodged at UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions.

Speedy Deletion Eligibility

To be eligible for a Speedy Deletion Request, the page must fall under at least one of the following criteria:

1. No Content: The page contains no more than a line or two of content that cannot clearly be expanded, consists of random or incoherent content, or is duplicated elsewhere to no purpose.
2. Off-Topic: The page is a clearly off-topic page.
3. Unused Redirect: The page is an unused or underused (ie, only 1-2 pages using the link) redirect.
4. Empty Category: The page is a Category page that has no entries within it.
5. Missed Talk Page: The page is a Talk: Page from a previous deletion request that has not been deleted with the request (please note the relevant deletion request if this is so)

   As of 19 May 2010, Crit 5 is now a scheduled deletion.

6. Deletion Workaround: The page is a duplicate of a page that has been deleted from a previous deletion request (please note the relevant deletion request if this is so). A page that fits this criterion is immediately qualified for deletion without requiring it be nominated on the 'Speedy Deletions' page. Recreating a page that fits this criterion will get you a polite message to stop doing so. Any further infractions of this nature will qualify as vandalism and will be treated as such. Note that criterion 6 does not apply when the page has been restored through Undeletions.
7. Author Edit Only: The page has been requested for speedy deletion by the original author, and has been edited only by its author. Note that edits by adbots or vandals and reverts caused by them do not count.
8. User Page: The page is a User subpage that has been requested for speedy deletion by the original author.
9. Personal Page (Prefix Rule): The page is named after a user without the "User:" or "Journal:" prefixes and its content has been moved to the appropriate User or Journal page. Includes pages that should be User subpages, ie. in-game characters.

   As of 2011, August 29, Crit 9 is now a scheduled deletion.

10. Unused Template: The page is a template that has existed for at least one week and is currently unused within the wiki.
11. Non-existent User Page: The page is a User: page for a user that doesn't exist, and any content on the page has been moved to the appropriate User: or Journal: page.

    As of 20 June 2009, Crit 11 is now a scheduled deletion.

12. Defunct group page: The page is a non-historical group page, it is over two months old, it has not had an update in a month, and is not on the stats page. Such pages will remain in the queue for 5 days to determine their defunct status has been correctly identified. Due to the large number of pages that fit into this criterion, please {{speedydelete12}} on the pages to ensure that they are categorized differently from normal speedy deletion requests.

    As of 2007, September 16, this is no longer a valid criterion.

13. Missed sub-page: The page is a sub-page from a previous deletion request that has not been deleted with the request, and that serves no individual purpose (please note the relevant deletion request).

A page may also fall under a scheduled deletion and should be posted here if it is missed by the sysops.

Guidelines for Voting on Deletion Requests

• One vote per user.
• Voting should take place underneath the request, and each vote should be started with a # with no empty lines inbetween votes.
• There are four vote types:
  • Delete. For agreement with the deletion request
  • Merge. For indication that the content on the page should be merged with another page (includes an implicit Delete).
  • Speedy Delete. For indication that the page meets one of the Speedy Deletions Criteria (includes an implicit Delete).
  • Keep. For disagreement with the deletion request.

• The specific vote keyword should be bolded within the lodged vote. Any relevant comments are also allowed, but these should not be bolded.
• At least one Delete vote must be entered by the deadline in order for a page to be deleted. System operators may not use their own vote after the deadline to delete a page.
• If more Delete votes are entered than Keep votes, the page will be deleted. In any other circumstance, the page is kept.
• If 3 Speedy Deletes are lodged, and there are no Keep Votes, the page will be deleted as per Speedy Deletions.

Deletion Queue

TUSN Radio

Abandoned since Christmas day and is just an empty template. -- Cheese 18:53, 21 April 2010 (BST)

1. Delete -- Cheese 18:53, 21 April 2010 (BST)
2. Delete -- not listed on radio page, and no comments have been supplied to either the page talk or the creator's talk regarding it. Asheets 18:56, 21 April 2010 (BST)

   As it turns out it is listed, but would probably fail a radio page monitor's check. I'll try to make contact with the creator to see what he has in mind. Asheets 18:58, 21 April 2010 (BST)

3. Speedy Delete - Crit 1. --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:57, 21 April 2010 (BST)

Malton Police Department/sandbox

This page is no longer needed. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to qualify for A/SD, so I'm putting it here. G F J 18:24, 18 April 2010 (BST)

1. Keep - Disc space = cheap! --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 05:44, 19 April 2010 (BST)
2. KeepDelete - Well, it's a group sandbox. Do we really know that it is no longer needed? If that can be reasonably shown to be true I'll change my vote.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 12:36, 19 April 2010 (BST)

   Yes, it's no longer needed. As it's a DEM/MPD subpage, the organization to decide whether it's still needed is the DEM/MPD, would you agree with that? I'm the current DEM chairman (feel free to contact us on Brainstock if you wish to verify), so yes, I do have the ability to find out whether we still need it or not, and we don't. But either way, here's why: The content on that page is nothing but an outdated copy of MPD, the most important change had been the inclusion of Template:MPDnavbar. If at all, that template is what is worthwhile to preserve. As deleting the sandbox does not delete the template, no valuable content is lost. Apart from the template, no complex and valuable changes had been made. Would that convince you? G F J 12:52, 19 April 2010 (BST)

   Why not just blank the page? Or ask it to be moved to DEM/Sandbox or similar? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:00, 19 April 2010 (BST)

   If this does not pass, it might be what we'll do - but why? If a page is no longer needed and does not contain content that might be valuable in the future, why should it be kept instead of getting deleted? Instead of having x unused DEM subpages flying around, I'd rather have a "clean" wiki presence consisting only of what is used or worthwhile to preserve (an example for inactive pages definitely worthwhile: MCI - this is quite different from a sandbox). I would think that having a "clean" instead of "messy" wiki presence does in general benefit the UD wiki, for instance decreasing the chance of newbies getting confused with different pages. Yes, it's unlikely that someone would see the sandbox and think that that is the up-to-date MPD page, but it can't be ruled out, I've seen (new) people getting confused with things that are even more obvious. Regards, G F J 16:16, 19 April 2010 (BST)

   Are you trawling the DEM pages completely, or working through in sections, one group at a time? Because we can merge pages, or turn them into redirects. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:18, 19 April 2010 (BST)

   Eventually, all DEM pages should be taken a look at. Not just by myself, of course. However, my own time is quite limited, so it would be hard to give any time frame. As to whether anything is done on a per-group basis or just whatever comes to our attention, the second option probably fits better, though we do look at our pages systematically. And yes, merging and redirecting can certainly make sense in some case - where would I go to request a merge of, say, two DEM subpages? I don't seem to find a place for that at UDWiki:Administration? G F J 16:30, 19 April 2010 (BST)

   What we'd probably do is copy everything over to one page and turned the other page into a protected redirect, so it couldn't be undone with out removing the protections. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:43, 19 April 2010 (BST)

3. Delete - Cheese 16:49, 19 April 2010 (BST)
4. Delete --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:43, 19 April 2010 (BST)
5. Delete -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 21:31, 19 April 2010 (BST)
6. Keep - Since the DEM has decided to use admin pages as tools of drama against groups they don't like, I see no reason to grant concessions to to them. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:12, 20 April 2010 (BST)
7. Delete - Linkthewindow  Talk  11:27, 20 April 2010 (BST)
8. Delete Historically, Iscariot is more prone to using admin pages as tools of drama against groups/users he doesn't like so I feel strongly obliged to nullify his vote where I otherwise wouldn't bother. --
    
    
    
    
   15:07, 20 April 2010 (BST)

Crit 10 AND Crit 1's

These are unused, as well as being crit 1's of the Template:Visited XXXX Mall templates which can be seen on userpages such as these.

• Template:Bale Mall
• Template:Ackland Mall
• Template:Blesley Mall
• Template:Calvert Mall
• Template:Dowdney Mall
• Template:Hildebrand Mall
• Template:Joachim Mall
• Template:Lumber Mall
• Template:Marven Mall
• Template:Marven Mall
• Template:Mitchem Mall
• Template:Nichols Mall
• Template:Pole Mall
• Template:Tompson Mall
• Template:Treweeke Mall
• Template:Woodroffe Mall

These re-qualify as SD candidates because they make juicy Crit 1's. --

 

 

 

 

06:16, 17 April 2010 (BST)

1. Keep - Not Crit 1 as they are not duplicates. The two template types are different sizes and allow different information to be added. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:12, 17 April 2010 (BST)
2. Speedy Delete as Crit 1 and 10. --
    
    
    
    
   12:09, 17 April 2010 (BST)
3. Speedy Delete --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:49, 17 April 2010 (BST)
4. Delete. G F J 17:54, 17 April 2010 (BST)
5. Keep - First off, as isc said, they are not duplicates. Look at the difference between Template:Visited Pole Mall and Template:Pole Mall. These templates are part of a "set" of 20 that people can use to show that they visited certain malls, which is silly, but so are most of the templates on this wiki. You've listed 15 of the 20 templates that aren't currently in use, however some of the "set" are. For example Caiger, and Buckley. Users should have the option of using these templates when and if they visit these malls, so that their templates share the same aesthetic. As an alternative to deletion, perhaps these two different template types could have links to each other so people can choose between the large and small versions. Just a thought.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 13:39, 18 April 2010 (BST)
6. Keep want me to make an image ark for them? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:06, 19 April 2010 (BST)
7. Keep - As Iscariot --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 23:28, 19 April 2010 (BST)

Crit 10s

Now these may be Subst templates, so someone like Aichon may need to check. Anything that said it was subst, I skipped, but there may be some others in here.

Template:Ackland Mall

Template:Ackland Staff

Template:Bale Mall

Template:Bale Staff

Template:Blesley Mall

Template:Blesley Staff

Template:Buckley Staff

Template:Caiger Mall2

Template:Calvert Mall

Template:Calvert Staff

Template:Dowdney Mall

Template:Dowdney Staff

Template:Giddings Staff

Template:Hildebrand Mall

Template:Hildebrand Staff

Template:Joachim Mall

Template:Joachim Staff

Template:Lumber Mall

Template:Lumber Staff

Template:Marven Mall

Template:Marven Staff

Template:McLocations-nocat

Template:Mitchem Mall

Template:Mitchem Staff

Template:Nichols Mall

Template:Nichols Staff

Template:Pole Mall

Template:Pole Staff

Template:Stickling Staff

Template:Tompson Mall

Template:Tompson Staff

Template:Treweeke Mall

Template:Treweeke Staff

Template:Woodroffe Mall

Template:Woodroffe Staff

--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:32, 16 April 2010 (BST)

With unused templates, Yon, stick the {{speedydelete}} tag on too, and see if anyone comes a-runnin. That's what I usually do on the rar occasion we purge the UnusedTemplates.. --

 

 

 

 

01:25, 17 April 2010 (BST)

Out of curiosity, what makes you think I can check to see if templates are subst'd? I wouldn't have any idea where to start with something like that, aside from checking the contribs for people that are in the history of those templates, which would take days. Wish I could help with an easy fix though. I suppose we could ask Rooster if such a thing is possible, but I don't see how. —Aichon— 06:33, 17 April 2010 (BST)

I just saw your message on an unused template. I was just asking if you knew of any being used or anything.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:46, 17 April 2010 (BST)

Gotcha. In retrospect, my last comment came off way too accusatory sounding. I was merely curious though, since I didn't know if I had given the impression I could do things I can't actually do. Anyway, I'm guessing you're talking about this template? If so, it's the only one I've done that with, and I'm afraid I have no special knowledge about other templates out there that are only used for subst purposes (well, aside from a few, but they're common knowledge templates involved in DS and Suggestions). —Aichon— 11:02, 17 April 2010 (BST)

Yeah, that's the one.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:04, 17 April 2010 (BST)

1. Keep - I love these mass posts of yours, because it only needs a single keep. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 20:36, 16 April 2010 (BST)

   Why, may I ask?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:37, 16 April 2010 (BST)

   At least one is a group page and should be on A/MR rather than here and more than half are less than a month old and you haven't even taken the time to poke the author of more than half of these to point out that we delete unincluded templates on this wiki. He'll notice that one's missing at some point and recreate the lot, causing him more work and potentially another case here if he again doesn't stick them on a page. And so the cycle will go on and on. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 20:50, 16 April 2010 (BST)

   Ones requiring moves put on A/MR. Original author of most contacted. Everything left should be in order. The PANTHER one has been duped elsewhere, and saying I should wait a month is a stupid argument because the criterion is for a week.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:13, 16 April 2010 (BST)

   Wait, you admit that you were incompetently putting pages up for deletion that shouldn't be here and you want to quibble over allowing newbies a bit longer to store their work? It's a good job we have you enforcing these deadlines, or we'd run out of diskspace, which is expensive. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 22:23, 16 April 2010 (BST)

   Umm, no?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:17, 16 April 2010 (BST)

2. Delete The funny thing about that one single keep vote,... is that someone else would be entitled to come along and vote delete. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 22:35, 16 April 2010 (BST)

   Thing is, you don't get it. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 22:38, 16 April 2010 (BST)

   Thing is,... your always welcome to piss the hell off. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 02:44, 17 April 2010 (BST)

   No, see, a single vote for 'keep' means these can no longer be deleted via Speedy Deletions and have to go through regular Deletions for two weeks. 02:46, 17 April 2010 (BST)

   No see,... I did understand... thing is,... I can still vote delete.... and after two weeks, and enough delete votes,... his one keep vote didn't mean shit. His overall intent is to be a condescending ass. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 02:56, 17 April 2010 (BST)

   No, you don't understand. By voting keep I stop these being deleted for long enough for the author to be asked. Your delete however can mean that he can put them on a page and still be deleted even though they're in use. You could be depriving a user of their work even though they're using it because you have no comprehension of the system. Why do you think this hasn't been moved to the normal deletions page for two weeks already? Because I can retract my keep at any time if the author decides he doesn't want them. I understand the system, you don't and your petulant behaviour can have unintended consequences because you fail to understand the system. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:17, 17 April 2010 (BST)

   Actually,... I understand that it could fuck up the pages it's used one... and to be honest... I could give two shits less you half wit. I hope my vote breaks something,.... -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 22:49, 17 April 2010 (BST)

   You don't care if something you do breaks something on the wiki? Thanks, that's all I needed. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 13:41, 18 April 2010 (BST)

3. Speedy Delete --
    
    
    
    
   12:09, 17 April 2010 (BST)
4. Speedy Delete - As my original justification.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:50, 17 April 2010 (BST)
5. Delete. G F J 10:08, 18 April 2010 (BST)
6. Keep - DDR just put many of these same templates up for deletion, which is weird and redundant. I don't know why there are two different deletion requests for some of the same stuff, or why they are all being lumped together but now I'll just explain myself again. Many of these templates are not duplicates. Look at the difference between Template:Visited Pole Mall and Template:Pole Mall. The "mall" templates are part of a "set" of 20 that people can use to show that they visited certain malls, which is silly, but so are most of the templates on this wiki. You've listed 15 of the 20 templates that aren't currently in use, however some of the "set" are. For example Caiger, and Buckley. Users should have the option of using these templates when and if they visit these malls, so that their templates share the same aesthetic.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 13:47, 18 April 2010 (BST)

   I put them up for deletion as Crit 10s, and DDR put them up for deletion as Crit 1s.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:00, 18 April 2010 (BST)

   Ah, so these were originally put up on speedy deletion and then moved here? It's still a bit weird to have the same items up for two different deletion requests.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 12:41, 19 April 2010 (BST)

Alliance/Department of Emergency Management - Fuerza Latina

This page is no longer needed, out of date, and not linked to on any relevant pages. Please delete. Thanks, G F J 15:41, 13 April 2010 (BST)

• Del Monte 15:44, 13 April 2010 (BST)
• Speedy - Owner request. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 17:02, 13 April 2010 (BST)
• Delete - Simple enough. —Aichon— 18:46, 13 April 2010 (BST)
• Delete - It should have been only on the group pages, but if it's out of date and historically insignificant, then go ahead and diggity it. --VVV ^RPMBG 20:05, 13 April 2010 (BST)
• Delete --
   
   
   
   
  01:27, 17 April 2010 (BST)
• Keep - disc space = cheap! --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 05:46, 19 April 2010 (BST)

Second Battle of Krinks

Doesn't exist. The "battle" is a guy and his zerg taking out generators and transmitters. Only two sentences long at the time of this edit and no real content can be hoped to be added. Plus, not a very good idea if you think about it. Infrastructure 13:43, 10 April 2010 (BST)

He added more info and removed the template. The only problem? Most of the page are blatant lies. Infrastructure 14:05, 10 April 2010 (BST)

I give this one input and then leave it.

1. Most part of the NSU is currently training somewhere else. The Krinks (WWSIS) is also being attacked by NSU, though. So that makes it a battle. That there are no dead/wounded yet, doesn't mean there is no battle. There have been several real-life wars without any dead or wounded.
2. Your statement that "no real content can be hoped to be added" is totally irrelevant. You asked the page to be deleted within minutes after I made it. I was still editing it.
3. The First Battle of Krinks and the Second Battle of Krinks have nothing to do with each others. --Cornholioo 14:02, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

1. Keep this rubbish off of admin pages.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:07, 10 April 2010 (BST)
2. So fucking what 14:12, 10 April 2010 (BST)

   As it happens, I got nothing else to do at the moment. Infrastructure 14:13, 10 April 2010 (BST)

3. Move to his userspace.--Thadeous Oakley 14:18, 10 April 2010 (BST)

   To clarify, any hope that this page can be NPOV is dead shit if the past drama can be counted on. We're better off labeling it Cornholioo's personal POV, and moving it to his userspace as a result. --Thadeous Oakley 14:39, 10 April 2010 (BST)

   This is nonsense, I'm just reproducing facts on that page. Quote me one sentence which is POV. You can't, since there are only facts out there. --Cornholioo 14:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

   The page itself is already POV, it's not like you asked the other group for it. --Thadeous Oakley 20:00, 10 April 2010 (BST)

4. Move - As Thad. -- Cheese 14:34, 10 April 2010 (BST)
5. Delete - Because this guy has very little idea of what a "battle" on UD traditionally is, and the original battle was barely one to begin with. Starting to stretch the boundaries a bit. Fuck it, a lot. --
    
    
    
    
   15:38, 10 April 2010 (BST)
6. Keep - There's no good reason to delete. --Cornholioo 15:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
7. Move The amount of nonsense on it is already astounding. Move it to your namspace already. --zyckde 19:30, 10 April 2010 (BST)

   Why you just don't edit it if you think it's wrong? You can even tell me what you think is wrong and I'll edit it myself. --Cornholioo 18:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

   Oh yeah, that worked out fantastic last time didn't it? --Thadeous Oakley 20:00, 10 April 2010 (BST)

8. Move - As Thad. See you guys again in a few weeks for the Third Battle of Krinks. -- Papa Jadkor ^{(RRF) (MotA) (MT11)} 20:15, 10 April 2010 (BST)
9. Delete - Nothing of value --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:24, 10 April 2010 (BST)
10. Keep - It's an article in progress in the mainspace. Since when do we delete stuff as it's going up? Even though most people on the wiki don't like the original author that's really no reason to go deleting all willy nilly. If you wish to make it better add some positive contributions to it. If you think it's pointless drivel, ignore it and let it die a natural death.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 20:39, 10 April 2010 (BST)

    I think the problem is that these pages don't seem to just go away when ignored, as the last month's A/A and A/VB histories would show with the First Battle of Krinks. Also, it's closely related to an ongoing A/A case in which the page was locked to prevent his, and others', continuous conflicting edits. This page seems like a workaround. —Aichon— 21:13, 10 April 2010 (BST)

11. Move - To his userspace. It doesn't belong in the main namespace while it's so POV and a cause for this much drama. And since I know Cornholioo wants examples of POV, here are a few: referring to the occurrence as a "battle" within the context of UD (this isn't real life...battles in this game involve people dying, not staring at each other angrily), making the page before declarations of hostility from other allegedly involved parties (I've seen no acknowledgement from the groups you claim are involved that there is a battle occurring, and they even deny it outright), speaking on behalf of other allegedly involved parties (in the very first sentence, no less), NSU-centric writing (second sentence and the entire The Conflict section, since most of that information is trivial), and biased writing (first sentence of Casus Belli). Essentially, the entire thing is POV. Side note: I'll ignore any point-by-point rebuttals since there's nothing further for me to discuss (although I was teetering on the fence between Delete and Move...). —Aichon— 21:13, 10 April 2010 (BST)

    If I follow that way of thinking, then the page of the First Battle of Krinks can be deleted as well, right? Maybe the WWSIS doesn't recognize the First Battle of Krinks as a battle as well. Deaths may follow. I've also said that on the page. --Cornholioo 7:53, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

12. Ban Cornholioo I mean,.... Move it to his user space... -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 22:07, 10 April 2010 (BST)
13. Delete - We do not have pages for 'potential battles'. Three generators and a radio do not a battle make. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 01:21, 11 April 2010 (BST)
14. Move/delete - move into a user/group subpage, wherever the author wants it, then delete the redirect until a proper battle takes place -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 11:36 11 April 2010 (BST)
15. Delete - The mongtardation on that page is too great for it to be allowed to exist. --Papa Moloch 12:29, 11 April 2010 (BST)

    Your comment however, reflects great intelligence. --Cornholioo 12:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

    Jaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam. 14:39, 12 April 2010 (BST)

16. See Poodles -- 
    •   Timmah!  
    •   Talk  
    15:47, 11 April 2010 (BST)
17. Keep - The only thing that's POV is whether it's actually a battle. If you don't think it deserves the title of 'The Second', just move it to the history section of the building's page. --VVV ^RPMBG 06:06, 13 April 2010 (BST)
18. Delete: I just feel it lacks anything of value. - User:Whitehouse 20:50, 16 April 2010 (BST)

    I just feel your post lacks anything of arguments. I've never really supported democracy. This is why. --User:Cornholioo 15:49, 17 April 2010 (BST)

    Is there any point to you saying that? You know, like, at all? Infrastructure 15:54, 17 April 2010 (BST)

    Democracy is only fun when it swing your way, eh?--Thadeous Oakley 23:58, 17 April 2010 (BST)

    The reason I feel it lacks anything of value is because it's on a tiny scale. You call this a battle, I call it a skirmish, and even that's stretching it. All that happened was that a couple of people got killed and a few generators were destroyed. It's not really noteworthy, interesting or useful. - User:Whitehouse 00:07, 18 April 2010 (BST)

    Don't rise to it Cornhole here is just trying to provoke reactions. Ignore it and it will just be whining to itself--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 00:09, 18 April 2010 (BST)

    Seen as your intelligence requires it I will explain myself. If you pick a random person from this wiki there is an enormous chance you pick an idiot. For example: you and your dumb friends are not able to understand much. This always like that in society. The majority of the people is dumb and only a few people with a good education know stuff. However, the democrat is scared of the people, so gives them the right to vote (while their vote barely has influence, though). Just give the people with more experience (note: I didn't say I'm one of them), and only them, the right to vote, and the outcome would be a lot differend. But of course you have no idea what I'm talking about. --Cornholioo 21:36, 18 April 2010 (BST).

19. Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure, err... Delete. I've tried myself to repair the worst bits of Cornys POV bullshit, to possibly restore some kind of value to the article. And all it did was that I ended up in an edit war, in which Corny even ignores the most factual and attestable points his opposition presents. If he wants just a personal toy that allows him to hallucinate how great deeds his group does, he should do so in his userspace. --Spiderzed 21:55, 18 April 2010 (BST)
20. Delete --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 05:47, 19 April 2010 (BST)
21. Move namespace baby. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:53, 19 April 2010 (BST)

Image:KKK.jpg

Uhh... Yeah. Thoughts? --Haliman - Talk 02:28, 8 April 2010 (BST)

COME TO YOUR SENSES PEOPLE. --Haliman - Talk 00:54, 9 April 2010 (BST)

Used to slander another group. Meh. Still not really insta-deletable or anything. I mean, we allow Swastikas, this is relatively not as bad.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 00:56, 9 April 2010 (BST)

Check the goals history. I'm pretty sure "To text rape everyone in Santlerville" is bad. Especially since there are so many groups that make text rape be bestiality. --Haliman - Talk 01:38, 9 April 2010 (BST)

And? So? But? Therefore? "I don't like them" is not a valid reason to have anything deleted on this wiki, we are not Conservapedia. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 01:41, 9 April 2010 (BST)

For the record, I support their new goal. :P --Haliman - Talk 02:08, 9 April 2010 (BST)

1. Keep The file isn't really necessary within this medium, however, I do believe you need to give the uploader the time to make use of it in a positive light.... let's see how she makes use of it, and if she does,.... then I'll vote delete from there. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 02:50, 8 April 2010 (BST)
2. Keep - while the basis of the KKK was extremely negative to most races in the world the user may have some usage that isn't in a racist manner, until you know how it is going to be used, it should be kept, if its used hatefully then by all means delete the image and bring the person to A/VB -- 
   •   Timmah!  
   •   Talk  
   02:53, 8 April 2010 (BST)
3. Keep - Regardless of how it's used. --VVV ^RPMBG 04:38, 8 April 2010 (BST)
4. Keep - Give them time to use it. —Aichon— 05:22, 8 April 2010 (BST)
5. Keep - This is meh. even if they do use it as a KKK roleplay group. --
    
    
    
    
   06:29, 8 April 2010 (BST)
6. Keep - As DDR. Not really much of an issue.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:53, 8 April 2010 (BST)
7. Keep - Sewiously Pom-Pom. 00:58, 9 April 2010 (BST)
8. Keep - Asking for 'thoughts' on something is done on talk pages, not in a deletions case. It is not an objectionable image in any way, people may disagree with a UD group but that does not make things connected to them subject to deletion. All this image depicts is a (still active) group of American racists, that's never been cause for removal from this wiki. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 01:32, 9 April 2010 (BST)
9. Keep - This is ridiculous. They're not even "based" on the KKK, it just represents the group (not as the KKK), kinda. --Skin 02:28, 9 April 2010 (BST)
10. Keep - pretty much as Iscariot, and that you've got no right to not be offended. I'll only vote for this if it's used in a manner that might get Kevan in legal trouble (although in that case, he'll probably intervene anyway.) Linkthewindow  Talk  15:14, 10 April 2010 (BST)
11. Keep - delete as unused later... every player wins a prize -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 11:43 11 April 2010 (BST)
12. YOURDISKFACE=*BLEEP* That is to say Keep--Arthur Dent BIN LADEN IS DEAD!!!!! 14:55, 20 April 2010 (BST)

Recent Actions

The Minutemen

An old page of mine, the group never truly reached a stage worthy enough to be called active, and besides, the page sucked then, too. :P

Not quite sure if this qualifies for speedy deletion, but I'm fairly sure I'm the only one who's ever edited it. Cheers. - Knyle 20:03, 21 April 2010 (BST)

1. Speedy Delete Crit 7.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:06, 21 April 2010 (BST)
2. Speedy Delete Although the page history is long gone, you did upload the images, good enough for me to confirm as author. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 20:21, 21 April 2010 (BST)
3. Speedy Delete. G F J 21:31, 21 April 2010 (BST)

Speedy deleted. —Aichon— 22:52, 21 April 2010 (BST)

User:PoliceScanner

Moved from A/SD.

Userspace designed to hold code in a similar manner as DangerReport, except that it was made redundant some time ago. The PD Status Map does not rely on it.

Two formatting templates for crit 10:

• Template:PD Ransacked
• Template:PD Unknown

The userspace for crit 1/10:

• User:PoliceScanner
• User:PoliceScanner/Barrville
• User:PoliceScanner/Chancelwood
• User:PoliceScanner/Chudleyton
• User:PoliceScanner/Crooketon
• User:PoliceScanner/Dakerstown
• User:PoliceScanner/Dartside
• User:PoliceScanner/Dulston
• User:PoliceScanner/Dunell Hills
• User:PoliceScanner/Earletown
• User:PoliceScanner/East Boundwood
• User:PoliceScanner/Foulkes Village
• User:PoliceScanner/Gatcombeton
• User:PoliceScanner/Grigg Heights
• User:PoliceScanner/Jensentown
• User:PoliceScanner/Judgewood
• User:PoliceScanner/Lamport Hills
• User:PoliceScanner/Molebank
• User:PoliceScanner/Mornington
• User:PoliceScanner/New Arkham
• User:PoliceScanner/Nixbank
• User:PoliceScanner/Owsleybank
• User:PoliceScanner/Peddlesden Village
• User:PoliceScanner/Quarlesbank
• User:PoliceScanner/Reganbank
• User:PoliceScanner/Rhodenbank
• User:PoliceScanner/Roywood
• User:PoliceScanner/West Becktown
• User:PoliceScanner/West Boundwood
• User:PoliceScanner/Wykewood

--  RoosterDragon  19:42, 5 April 2010 (BST)

1. Keep - Are you this user? Until then fuck off. You don't get to arbitrarily delete a user's space just because you don't think it's worthwhile. For fuck's sake go do something useful instead of trying to wipe out the work of users that do things differently to you. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 20:12, 5 April 2010 (BST)

   Edit conflict before move from A/SD This is hardly personal spite. The 'user' is not a user, and clearly just a another placeholder persona from years ago before the wiki knew better. The prefix on the pages means little. Still if these 1-3 year old unused and unfinished pages are still somehow useful, then I'd be happy to see A/D run. --  RoosterDragon  20:31, 5 April 2010 (BST)

   The prefix on the page means fucking everything. This work belongs to a user and you have absolutely no proof that he/she isn't referencing this coding even years later from this site. Did you even ask the user on their page and await a response? You fucking didn't, did you? There's so much to be done on this wiki and you choose to spend your time eliminating user pages that in no way improves this wiki at all. I take it you've never heard of disk space = cheep? Or is there some mass crisis about the wiki running out of space that I've missed while I've been active and doing shit around here. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 20:39, 5 April 2010 (BST)

   If I have to hear somebody trot out some line about disk space I might cry. I don't want it deleted to save space, because it doesn't. --  RoosterDragon  21:03, 5 April 2010 (BST)

2. Eat it. With mustard. 20:32, 5 April 2010 (BST)
3. Speedy Delete - As Rooster. —Aichon— 20:38, 5 April 2010 (BST)
4. Delete --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:21, 5 April 2010 (BST)
5. Delete Send it back to the bowls of hell! -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 21:45, 5 April 2010 (BST)
6. Delete - There's no page for Wyke Hills. --VVV ^RPMBG 23:27, 5 April 2010 (BST)
7. Delete - It's about time you got round to this you lasy bastard ;) --
    
    
    
    
   05:25, 6 April 2010 (BST)
8. Delete - I'd say the lines "How to Update. guide coming soon" dated 2007 pretty much demonstrate the fact that this never became functional. Delete delete.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 13:32, 7 April 2010 (BST)
9. Delete - As Giles Sednik. --Skin 02:33, 9 April 2010 (BST)
10. Delete. G F J 17:58, 17 April 2010 (BST)

Deleted. —Aichon— 18:50, 19 April 2010 (BST)

Department of Emergency Management (new)

This page had apparently been some kind of joke in 2008, it is superfluous and misleading. A "NDEM" does not exist and never existed, the page is not linked to on any other articles, and it does not contain valuable content (it is merely an outdated copy of Department of Emergency Management where a few words and numbers had been replaced - nothing which would make preserving it worthwhile). Thanks, G F J 11:32, 18 April 2010 (BST)

1. Merge - Also, this IS linked to on other pages.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:43, 18 April 2010 (BST)

   Merge with what, if I may ask? Definitely not with Department of Emergency Management, in case that's what you were thinking about. This two year old "joke" that consisted of copying the DEM wiki page and replacing a few words has absolutely no place on any official DEM pages. Regarding links, please note that I wrote "articles" - the single link that exists is on the talk page of a group that appears to be inactive. With best regards, G F J 12:32, 18 April 2010 (BST)

   The userspace of the person who made it.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:32, 18 April 2010 (BST)

2. Keep - I consider this nomination an act of bad faith vandalism by a member of a partisan group. What next? The DHPD requesting The Dead be deleted? Summon Sonny to decide whether this page should be kept, any attempt by the DEM to delete it is immediately suspect based on the past actions of the group. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 12:23, 18 April 2010 (BST)
3. Delete - It is a forgotten joke that isn't terribly funny from what I can tell. However, please do not mislead people with clever wording such as "not linked to any other articles...". It does link somewhere. Just be honest and save ocd users like myself the hassle of having to counterfeit your story. Anyways, if this delete vote passes, the link on the talk page should be changed to link to this deletion request.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 13:56, 18 April 2010 (BST)
4. Delete Same as giles. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 15:07, 18 April 2010 (BST)
5. Delete Also, he's right, it does not link to any articles. Look up the word "article", I can guarantee you it isn't a talk page. --Thadeous Oakley 15:21, 18 April 2010 (BST)
6. Keep - I can see no valid reason for deletion under any previous criterion or scheduling. 19:32, 18 April 2010 (BST)
7. Keep - As leader of the Malton Sanitation Department I can assure you this organization is still very active. Labine and I scheme and plot every day. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 05:45, 19 April 2010 (BST)
8. Delete Or remove all links to The DEM, this is nothing to do with The DEM and having links to our pages is misleading.--DI Sweeny 10:51, 19 April 2010 (BST)
9. Delete the use of the DEM table and the use of a similar page name, with the added (new) is somewhat misleading,and some wording still says DEM instead of NDEM, which could confuse someone not in on the parody. --verratio 14:27, 19 April 2010 (BST)
10. Keep but add a simple note. this group is a parody of the DEM --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:04, 19 April 2010 (BST)
11. Keep but do what Ross said. Not that it's going to happen considering the DEM meatpuppeting'll start soon. ;p -- Cheese 16:40, 19 April 2010 (BST)

I don't like doing this, and another sysop can put it back if they disagree, but I'm pre-emptively Keeping it due to lack of sufficient reason for deletion, given that the group is active. We do not delete pages of existing groups without good reason, and just because they're parodies of existing groups in ways that may be potentially misleading is not a good enough reason (I'd link the Department of Evangelical Morons too, but the group requested that their page be deleted awhile back). Aside from the fact that the page has a link to it and the content that's different from the current DEM page is not insubstantial (just copy paste the code from NDEM to DEM and then tell it to show you the changes), the group leader (who was never contacted) claims they do indeed exist and are still active. That's all we need to know, since we don't go around deleting existing groups. Just add a NPOV section to the page (anyone can add one). —Aichon— 18:38, 19 April 2010 (BST)

Further discussion moved to talk page -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:51 20 April 2010 (BST)

ZombieJesus treatment

As part of the battle against stupid Glossary articles, I present ZombieJesus treatment. I think it's stupid. The article is stupid. It's content is stupid and the whole idea, I barely understand. Then again, it could just be me being extra tired. Either way, I'm giving this a ago. --

 

 

 

 

14:23, 2 April 2010 (BST)

1. delete --
    
    
    
    
   14:23, 2 April 2010 (BST)
2. Eat it with barbeque sauce 14:31, 2 April 2010 (BST)
3. Delete - although I really want to see this actually tried in practice. Linkthewindow  Talk  15:38, 2 April 2010 (BST)
4. Delete- If only more people did this.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:46, 2 April 2010 (BST)
5. Delete its as dumb as a Pistol Ninja --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:25, 2 April 2010 (BST)
6. Delete What is this? I can't even... --Suff-TMS- <-- Killin' zombies! 16:29, 2 April 2010 (BST)

   Get it right! 16:35, 2 April 2010 (BST)

   :( --Suff-TMS- <-- Killin' zombies! 22:36, 3 April 2010 (BST)

7. Delete - By which I mean keep, in order to make the silly humans waste AP for no reason. --VVV ^RPMBG 19:40, 2 April 2010 (BST)
8. Delete - Diskspace = Cheep! -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 21:05, 2 April 2010 (BST)
9. Delete - Preferably with a vengeance. —Aichon— 04:57, 3 April 2010 (BST)
10. Keep - We should not Delete this page because if we do Delete this page, I will be sad that we DELETED this page. I mean, people who try to DELETE THIS PAGE RIGHT NOW are crazy. --Haliman - Talk 03:04, 4 April 2010 (BST)
11. Delete Speedily if Hali wasn't really serious with his keep vote.... -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 14:53, 4 April 2010 (BST)
12. Delete - Wow it makes my head hurt. I'm archiving it so that future generations may use it as a weapon.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 13:36, 7 April 2010 (BST)
13. Speedy Delete - Now duped as a crit 1.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:54, 8 April 2010 (BST)
14. Delete - <_< -- Papa Jadkor ^{(RRF) (MotA) (MT11)} 19:49, 10 April 2010 (BST)

Deleted. —Aichon— 05:55, 17 April 2010 (BST)

Wabbajack

Another possible victim of the Glossary purge. This was part of a big create-silly-redirect spree that Revenant had which, if I remember right, left a lot of annoying clones of his group With Blackjack and Hookers. Ah yes, here they are, here, here, here, and here, the latter an example of him changing the redirects that previously went to With Blackjack and Hookers, so they went to Wabbajack and Hookers. I'm pretty sure at the time I made them all redirects to original group.

Either way, I'm rambling about crap. The point is Wabbajack is a product of these sprees and is totally off-topic and imo should be either deleted, or moved into groupspace. Personally, I'm really wanting to go for Speedy Delete as crit 2.

1. Speedy Delete as a crit 2. Maybe change to Move to group subspace later though. --
    
    
    
    
   12:48, 4 April 2010 (BST)
2. Keep - This is a valid redirect. As a member of the group Revenant is entitled to dictate how the group is known colloquially. While it does not belong in the glossary category it is a valid group redirect. For as long as MAHB redirects to the Militant Order of Barhah, this should redirect to its group. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 13:01, 4 April 2010 (BST)

   If you think it would make a legitimate redirect, then you can always make it one. But at the moment it contains paragraphs of crit 2 content which can't be justified with the "namespace" argument- since it isn't in their namespace to begin with. --

    

    

    

    

   13:10, 4 April 2010 (BST)

   My bad, I fail reading. I'm remembering the fictional world where this was a redirect plain and simple. Wipe the page and turn it into a redirect as it's currently O/T. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 13:15, 4 April 2010 (BST)

   Yeah, I dig that. --

    

    

    

    

   13:16, 4 April 2010 (BST)

YEE BOYY!!!! (converted to a redirect- solves many isssues with it) --

 

 

 

 

13:17, 4 April 2010 (BST)

As an aside I fully support all such changes, O/T pages don't belong on this wiki, but if groups are using them as disambigs/O/T pages turn them all into redirects as we have no shortage of random wiki pages to serve as redirects and its the business of the group in question as to what they have as a redirect. If Extinction want Zerging Scumfucks as a redirect, all power to them. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 13:23, 4 April 2010 (BST)

The easy thing is, most of the pages in this summary clusterfuck will be easily fixed like that, at the very leased by merging some of the helpful information first. I almost can't wait. --

 

 

 

 

13:31, 4 April 2010 (BST)

User:Sweawm_rune/The_sweawm_rune_show

This user decided to take over 27.20 on the wiki... I have never heard him broadcast nor have i ever even heard him. Yet he took apon himself to add this page to 27.20, At the very top. This user has not been active in ages, And the page it's self is pitiful. I would like to see if this page can be removed, And i would like to remove him from the 27.20 frequency. Ridicules. --Suff-TMS- <-- Killin' zombies! 21:09, 31 March 2010 (BST)

We can't just delete the subpages of a user for these things, but you're free to ask him to remove his listing from radio frequency in question. 21:13, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Alrighty, I understand. Thank you anyway :)--Suff-TMS- <-- Killin' zombies! 20:11, 1 April 2010 (BST)

• Keep - But consider your formatting fixed anyway. :P --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:21, 31 March 2010 (BST)
• Keep - Forgot about doing this. Been a long day. 21:24, 31 March 2010 (BST)
• Keep - Same as Mis... -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 22:45, 31 March 2010 (BST)
• Keep - It's his namespace, and it's about his doings. There's nothing wrong about it being poorly written or obscure. --VVV ^RPMBG 00:54, 1 April 2010 (BST)
• Keep - For obvious reasons that have already been stated. —Aichon— 02:07, 1 April 2010 (BST)
• Keep - anticipating a pre-emptive cycling of this as kept in a few days --
   
   
   
   
  09:04, 1 April 2010 (BST)
• Keep - bandwagon. Linkthewindow  Talk  07:31, 2 April 2010 (BST)
• Keep - Alternately we could delete this page and all of Suffery's just to make a point... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 21:06, 2 April 2010 (BST)

I've given this a pre-emptive keep since Suffery seems to understand now. --

 

 

 

 

02:51, 4 April 2010 (BST)

My idea was better. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 12:41, 4 April 2010 (BST)

Archive

e 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 2019 2020