UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Scheduling
This page will be used for users to request that pages falling into certain categories be deleted as appropriate by a sysop without having to go through all the red tape of Speedy Deletions and Deletions. A list of pages in the Scheduled Deletions list is located here.
Deletion Scheduling
Deletion Scheduling requests should be requested in the same general format as normal Deletions. Votes will occur in the same general manner, and like normal deletion requests will be voted on for two (2) weeks, as judged by the initial datestamp. Votes in this case shall be as follows:
- Yea - For approval of the deletion scheduling request
- Nay - For disapproval of the deletion scheduling request
Remember that votes must be signed and datestamped (use ~~~~)
After the two weeks are up, if the page has reached at least a 50% majority in favour it is added to the Scheduled list. If the request fails to get the required number of votes, it doesn't get added. In either case, the closed request can then get shifted to the Archive.
Scheduling requests under consideration
Defunct Group Images
For the purposes of this proposed deletion, a "defunct group" is one whose page has been deleted from the wiki through either of the deletion pages. If a defunct group has any images related to their group (provided that they are otherwise unused) they may be deleted along with the group page. -- Cheese 00:00, 3 October 2009 (BST)
- Yes - Doesn't happen very often but saves it waiting for the month long unused requirement. -- Cheese 00:00, 3 October 2009 (BST)
- Yes - Deleting a group's page and subpages should also bring with it the deletion of images used only on those pages. 00:09, 3 October 2009 (BST)
Unused images
Currently unused images are deleted after they have gone one month without an edit. This is way too long; any image that has gone unedited for more than like a week (if that) is pretty much guaranteed to make it all the way down the line. I propose shortening the length of time unused images can go without edits before they are deleted to one week. Cyberbob Talk 06:00, 1 October 2009 (BST)
- The deletion of unused images is already problematic. Images can not be restored if a mistake is made, and it is very easy to delete images that have been removed in a page wiping vandal act that may not be noticed for some days, or in edit disputes. As soon as they are edited off a page, the image shows up as unused and (unless they've been uploaded recently) immediately qualify for scheduled deletion, with no way for the sysop to track down which page they used to be included on -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:35 1 October 2009 (BST)
- Have you looked at the list? It is made up of stupid ingame screenshots, outdated Necronet scans and logos for groups that have become defunct. In my weeks of trimming the list that is quite literally all I have ever seen, and if I was to ever see one that broke this mold I would hold off on nuking it simply because of this fact. The danger you speak of Does Not Exist. Cyberbob Talk 16:15, 1 October 2009 (BST)
- And in the event that it occurs (which in an extremely rare occasion that it will), it isn't beyond a sysop to notice it was uploaded either more than a month ago, or longer than the last unused-deletions purge, so an image under any criteria you hypothetically mentioned would stick out like a sore thumb and be fixable. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 16:31, 2 October 2009 (BST)
- Have you looked at the list? It is made up of stupid ingame screenshots, outdated Necronet scans and logos for groups that have become defunct. In my weeks of trimming the list that is quite literally all I have ever seen, and if I was to ever see one that broke this mold I would hold off on nuking it simply because of this fact. The danger you speak of Does Not Exist. Cyberbob Talk 16:15, 1 October 2009 (BST)
- Yes Cyberbob Talk 06:00, 1 October 2009 (BST)
Yes --Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 11:21, 1 October 2009 (BST)- No - As Boxy. --Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 12:39, 1 October 2009 (BST)
?' Are they causing a problem of some sort? If so then I see no reason not to. --Honestmistake 12:11, 1 October 2009 (BST)- No Sorry Bob, Boxy convinced me too. Without a very good reason I am unlikely to change my mind again. --Honestmistake 13:09, 1 October 2009 (BST)
- No - There are problems with this scheduled deletion criteria already, it doesn't need strengthening -- boxy talk • teh rulz 12:35 1 October 2009 (BST)
- No --SirArgo Talk 17:21, 1 October 2009 (BST)
- yes Because actually whats left in unused images isn't of huge use. Besides with a shorter time span, if I had it saved on my computer on monday to upload, I probably have it still saved the following monday. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 18:58, 1 October 2009 (BST)
- No While I feel one month is too long for the amount of images that get uploaded and forgotten, one week is much too short- users could conceivably upload a few images for a page or project, get sidetracked in real life for a week, and return to find their images had been deleted. I would support shortening it down to two or three weeks, but one week is just too short.--~ Red Hawk One Talk | space for lease 01:34, 2 October 2009 (BST)
- No - But only because, as I said on IRC, 2 weeks is more apt in my opinion. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 02:13, 2 October 2009 (BST)
- No - As redhawk and boxy.--GANG Giles Sednik CAPD 14:55, 2 October 2009 (BST)
- No - because the original schedule is fucked up in the first place. Back in the day of Crit12 groups used to be deleted, and when their owners requested the page to be undeleted it couldnt be fully because the images were deleted, without the required period to deem them unused has passed. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 21:25, 2 October 2009 (BST)
- No - Perhaps two weeks or 15-20 days would be suitable but one week is much too short. 00:09, 3 October 2009 (BST)
Recent Requests
0x0 Images
Failed with 5 for, 9 against. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 17:04, 27 September 2009 (BST)
- Image revision removal
- Image revisions that are older than 7 days are to be removed.
- Approved 16 May 2006
- Monumental Screw Ups
- Pages in this form: with//////lots//////of//////slashes, and this one: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Example_monumental_screwup are unable to be moved or edited via normal means. Their content is to be manually moved to a sensible pagename without extraneous //s in its title and the original page is to be deleted on sight.
- Note to sysops: A method for deleting these pages can be found here.
- Approved 23 August 2006
- Unused redirects resulting from page moves
- redirects resulting from moves, that only show admin pages in their "what links here" list.
- Approved 3 Mar 2007
- Copyrighted images
- Images that are requested to be deleted by the copyright holder
- Approved 10 Nov 2007
- Broken redirects
- redirects that lead to nonexistent pages
- Approved 12 Dec 2007
- Personal Information
- If a user wants personal information about themselves deleted from the wiki, they should be able to get it speedy deleted. Things like your name, your phone number, your email or home address, your workplace, pictures of your family etc. Link
- Approved 11 July 2008
Porn is to be deleted on sight.- I like porn, you like porn, but this isnt the place for it.
- Approved 22 July 2008
- Revoked 2 August 2009
- User page redirects
- in the main space should be delete on sight as crit 3 or 9 (excluding those redirecting to Kevan).
- Approved 26 November 2008
- Swearing in page titles
- Pages that have swearing in the title that is directed at a user or group (or their actions).
- Approved 22 July 2008
- Crit 7 by Proxy
- If a user leaves a sysop a note on their (i.e the sysop's) talk page requesting deletion of a page that falls under Crit 7, the Sysop may delete the page on sight, making clear in the edit summary that the user requested it via talk page.
- Approved 26 March 2009
- As of January 2010, this scheduling now includes pages that the author has blanked or replaced with text indicating a desire to be deleted. However, pages used as inclusions (such as many templates) are excluded from this criterion.
- Approved 3 January 2010
- Crit 11
- Userpages/Journals that are in the User: namespace but are non-existent users, and are already duplicated in the appropriate User: or Journal: subspace may be deleted on sight.
- Approved 30 June 2009
- Adbot-created pages
- Pages created by Adbots and Spambots are to be deleted on sight.
- Approved 30 July 2009
- Unnecessary banned user pages
- The User: pages of permabanned spambots and vandal alts (that have no contributions showing) are to be deleted on sight.
- Approved 27 November 2009
- Grouped location pages
- Grouped location pages are to be deleted once each individual location has its own page and all incoming links (excluding those refrencing deletion) are diverted.
- Approved 1 December 2009
- Unused Image Removal
- Images on the Unused Image list that are two weeks old are to be deleted. Images that are linked by text only will appear on the unused image list also.
- Approved 10 December 2009
- Associated talk pages
- Talk pages associated with pages that are deleted under other policies, including talk pages missed in previous deletions.
- Approved 19th May 2010
- Amended 14th August 2011
- Crit 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.
- Approved 29th August 2011