Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

User:DragonflySixtyseven/Casey at the Wyrm[edit]

Firstly, let me say that requiring unregistered editors go through this process is ridiculous. Anons should be able nominate anything for deletion, just like on Wikimedia Commons.

Anyway, here goes.............

User:DragonflySixtyseven/Casey at the Wyrm needs to be deleted because "Distribute freely, but give credit where credit is due!" is NOT functionally equivalent to CC-BY.

Functionally, CC-BY explicitly allows for re-distribution, remixing and usage commercially. "Distribute freely, but give credit where credit is due!" only explicitly allows for one of the three.

Having the page on Wikipedia is functionally equivalent to a copyright violations and needs to be deleted. 197.245.47.92 (talk) 04:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done I have created the page for you. I see you have notified the author. —PC-XT+ 15:45, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
I dispute the block-evading user's argument that this either is, or is functionally equivalent to, a copyright violation. I further dispute the block-evading user's argument that the redistribution statement from 1992 is not equivalent to CC-BY. DS (talk) 17:46, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

ColonelHenry user pages[edit]

Could someone please move User talk:109.150.216.114 to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/ColonelHenry user pages? I can't create or move pages. Thanks. 109.150.216.114 (talk) 13:03, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Done. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  17:21, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure#NAC Deletes[edit]

There is a discussion about non-admins closing discussions as "delete" at Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure#NAC Deletes. See the subsection Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure#So, this is the question we're asking, where the opening poster wrote, "Should non-adminstrators be allowed to close deletion discussions as delete?" Cunard (talk) 19:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Discussions not showing up[edit]

I noticed that there are quite a few MfD discussions that do not appear in that table of page contents. Is there a technical reason for this or do they need to be physically added to the list? I'm sure there are editors who just come by the page and scan through the list of pages under discussion and I think all pages being considered should be listed there and linked to their proper section. Liz Read! Talk! 19:36, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

@Liz: Please give examples of some that are not listed, but which you believe should be. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi, @Redrose64:, the example I was looking at was Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch for February 1st but that has been hatted. But there are 6 MfDs on the page for February 1st but only 3 that are listed in the page contents. Liz Read! Talk! 17:06, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
@Liz: They're all there: if you look at the table of contents, the discussions for User:World Guitar Rankings/sandbox, User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch and User:DerbyCountyinNZ/Oscars are at 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 respectively. The section numbering changes because Burntout123 (talk · contribs) put a ==References== section into Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Burntout123/Burnt-out diabetes mellitus. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm beginning to think I'm going crazy because this is what I see for Feb. 1st and 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3:
  • 2.7 February 1, 2015
  • 2.7.1 Wikipedia:WikiProject Algae/Articles/Capea
  • 2.7.2 User:Badshah(Rapper)
  • 2.7.3 User:Burntout123/Burnt-out diabetes mellitus
3 References
  • 3.1 User:World Guitar Rankings/sandbox
  • 3.2 User:DerbyCountyinNZ/Oscars
  • 3.3 January 31, 2015
  • 3.3.1 User:Fanficgurl/Jackie Castro
  • 3.3.2 User:Fanficgurl/Michael Castro (singer)
  • 3.3.3 User:HopeDamico15/sandbox
  • 3.3.4 User:AFGHANCELEBS/sandbox
I don't see User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch anywhere. But it could be that the references section messes up the listing and I'm not sure why User:World Guitar Rankings/sandbox & User:DerbyCountyinNZ/Oscars were moved from Feb 1st but I am admittedly new here. Thanks for answering my questions. Liz Read! Talk! 20:18, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
You don't see User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch anywhere, because 24 minutes after my last post but 18 minutes before yours, the page was updated by Legobot. If you follow that link, you will see that {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch}} was removed; you may also notice that {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:White Dragon Dynasty}} was moved down from the January 30, 2015 subsection of the Current discussions section, to the January 30, 2015 subsection of the Old business section; this is another aspect of Legobot's normal housekeeping here. The References section does mess up the listing, but only as far as the section numbering is concerned: the sections and subsections are all there, and in the correct order; it's just that some of them have the wrong numbers. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:35, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm not going to belabor this point but the reason I posted this question yesterday is that I saw no mention of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch on the page contents yesterday and then noticed other MfDs from Feb. 1st missing, too. But at this point, that case is closed and I'm ready to move on. It just seemed odd to partake in a discussion that was present in the body of the MfD main page but not listed in the contents. Thanks again for all of your answers, Redrose64, it's much appreciated. Liz Read! Talk! 23:16, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Well, it was definitely there, at position 3.2 in the TOC. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Notice[edit]

A discussion is on at WP:Village pump (proposals)#Splitting up the MfD regarding a proposal to split the scope of this page. Your comments would be appreciated. Thanks, SD0001 (talk) 06:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC)