Jump to content

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/archive May 2004

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Votes for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Infrogmation (talk | contribs) at 20:58, 2 May 2003 (remove deleted item). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Add links to unwanted page titles to the list below so one of the Wikipedia:Administrators can find them and check whether or not they should be deleted. Please review our policy on permanent deletion before adding to this page.

Please sign any suggestion for deletion (use four tildes, ~~~~, to sign with your user name and the current date).

  • If the page should be deleted, an admin will do so, and the link will be removed from this page (it will show up on the Wikipedia:Deletion log).
  • If the page should not be deleted, someone will remove the link from this page. Page titles should stay listed for a minimum of a week before a decision is made.

Don't list here...

  • page titles of stubs that at least have a decent definition and might in the future become articles. There's no reason to delete those - see Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub
  • pages that need editing - see Wikipedia:Pages needing attention
  • pages that can easily and sensibly be redirected to another page. E.g., a page called Hume can be redirected to David Hume; presidant (a misspelling) can be redirected to president; etc. Even misspellings can be caught by search engines and provide Wikipedia perfectly relevant traffic!
  • pages in the wrong namespace (for example, user pages in the main namespace), can be redirected and should not be deleted if there are still old links to them.
  • subpages in your own user space, use Wikipedia:Personal subpages to be deleted

Note to admins

  • As a general rule, don't delete pages you nominate for deletion. Let someone else do it.
  • Simply deleting a page does not automatically delete its talk page or any subpages. Please delete these pages first, and then the main page. Also, if you delete a page, remove it from this list as well.
  • If another solution has been found for some of these pages than deletion, leave them listed for a short while, so the original poster can see why it wasn't deleted, and what did happen to it. This will prevent reposting of the same item.

See also:

  • Studiolink - advertising disguised as an article. -- Zoe
    • I'll second that, naturally. -- John Owens 23:40 Apr 25, 2003 (UTC)
    • I . . . em . . . third (?) it. naturally! ÉÍREman 23:58 Apr 25, 2003 (UTC)
    • I think the article was well-intended, just worded wrong to sound like an advert. LittleDan 02:36 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)
    • This business is completely obscure. It's like writing an article about an individual who has not acheived any kind of fame. An encyclopedia cannot possibly contain information about every business and person in the world. I say delete it. kpearce

It's a bit hard to assess the consensus here. I'm going to put an X next to all the articles that apparently by consensus don't need to be deleted, and can be removed from the list without anyone complaining. Can the contributors involved in this debate edit my markings please? If there's any active debate on on the entry, leave the X off. Please don't just change the marks to indicate your POV. -- Tim Starling 04:09 Apr 28, 2003 (UTC)

Unless there is a stub (or a beautiful article) on them of course could you please delete

  • Image:Carcinogen.jpg should go, because it is probably not what it says, and also it is duplicated. See image for full story. -- Egil 10:27 Apr 27, 2003 (UTC)
    • Let's not get into a biology discussion. The fact that's it's duplicated is reason enough for me. I vote to delete. -- Tim Starling 06:10 Apr 28, 2003 (UTC)
    • duplicated is sufficient reason Martin 00:44 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)
  • Fisting -- Do we really want to have an article about something like this? If so be advised that it will open up a whole slew of similar things. (206.156.242.36)
    • It may not be an attractive concept, but it exists so yes, we should have it here. ÉÍREman
    • Presumably, we should delete all sex-related entries except for missionary position? Martin 00:03 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)
    • Comment: BMP should not be an allowable image format... -- Anon.
        • Hi anon. Sorry for putting this comment here. But hopefully you will see it here. If you really want to stay anonymous you should log in. You don't need to give you real name,any personal details or you email address. By not loggin in you expose your ip address as 217.158.106.64, a quick dns lookup shows you to be online with claranet, in europe{ probably the uk) and connected via adsl. I could telnet to 217.158.106.64 and really start digging, but I've already made my point. If you log in, you log in nick will show instead of your ip address and you will be truly anonymous. Theresa knott 08:40 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)
      • Officially, it isn't. The Wikipedia guidelines specify that all images should be JPG or PNG, as appropriate. (Note that most of the above six files are orphans because the image is also available in JPG or PNG format.) Alas, some people apparently don't know or care about such things as "guidelines" and "appropriate". -- Paul A 07:31 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)
  • Food quality, currently "Food quality is the quality of food - see agriculture". There has been quite a bit of editing and blanking.
  • Harar
    • possible copyright violation -- JeLuF 20:52 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)
  • Pittsburgh Locomotive And Car Works
    • possible copyright infringement, even though it's taken from the Smithsonian. And whether or not it's a copyright violation, it was certainly carelessly pasted. -- John Owens 23:41 Apr 30, 2003 (UTC)
  • Transcendental idealism
    • It said "Copywright©(sic) 2001 Alex Scott" right on the page. Obviously not new content written for the purpose, then, and merely added with non-GFDL conditions. -- John Owens 23:50 Apr 30, 2003 (UTC)
  • Thats how a nigger goes -- by banned user/racist troll User:Zog. It now redirects to Johnny Rebel, which I don't particularly object to; however I'd still like it deleted for the following reasons, mostly in the old versions in the edit history: 1)Zog's is deleberately racially insulting 2)It quotes in full the lyrics of a song by Johnny Rebel; as the Johnny Rebel article notes the copyright holder apparently doesn't like unauthorized copies on the web 3)It is mis-titled; "Thats" should have an apostrophy; capitalization is wrong for a song title. I think unlikely to be a usefull redirect, but if anyone feels strongly it should stay a redirect, perhaps we could delete the article to get rid of the potentially troublesome history and then recreate it as a simple redirect. -- Infrogmation 05:15 May 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • While I understand the motives, we don't normally take care to strip copyrighted material out of the history, and I don't want to set a precedent that we do. Martin 08:01 May 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • See meta:Wikipedia_and_copyright_issues for some legal arguments for permitting copyrighted text to stay in the history. Martin 13:04 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • To my knowledge, before this no-one has ever suggested we need to remove copyright material from history. I suspect that the Infrogmation's main reason for listing it is not the copyright or the naming issue, it's the offensive nature of the text. What if the next we hear about this text is when some white-supremacist magazine publishes "check out http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Thats_how_a_nigger_goes&oldid=xxx for the full text of Johnny Rebel's song", and another part of the media uses this to sully Wikipedia's reputation? -- Tim Starling 13:44 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • You could say the same about 1000s of other articles that have dodgy stuff in their histories. What makes this one special? Martin 14:38 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
      • Yes, I find the banned user's contribution here offensive-- intentionally so. I also think that even as a redirect it's pretty useless. However I was not trying to propose any change policy. That said, I'm curious to know if there are any particular arguements why keeping that history is a positive thing-- perhaps as doccumentation of the banned user? Wondering simply, -- Infrogmation 20:51 May 2, 2003 (UTC)


  • Young and Innocent
    • This page redirects to Ernest Hemingway, while at the same time it obscures the fact that there is an Alfred Hitchcock movie of the same name. No valid links to this page seem to exist. --KF 13:56 May 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • Disambiguated. KF, please read Wikipedia:Disambiguation -- Tim Starling 14:33 May 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • All of you, please read the Ernest Hemingway biography. --KF 15:09 May 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • You don't have to do any deletions for this; it's a perfectly reasonable title for the film (since there is no such novel). I will move things around now that way -- no secret sysop superpowers required. -- Toby 07:36 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
  • Iwi
    • whole content: Maori for tribe, literally "bones". Hmmmn check that out...at least needs more info like word origin and where it is used..

Antonio Half a Man Half a transexual Martin

  • Jump on It
    • Funny capitalisation and content says roughly "CD is awful" -- SGB
  • Spectal type - wrong spelling of spectral type (actually a redirect to Stellar classification), I have fixed all references and now nothing links there. At18 17:47 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • Should remain a redirect - Egil 19:18 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
      • But no one will ever link it. It's just a misspell. At18 19:46 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
        • Ah, OK, now I see the rule about misspell redirects. I don't agree with it, anyway let's keep the page. At18 19:52 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
  • Slant drilling content was: "drilling under a border and shit"
    • Maybe there was some thruth in that - anyway, it should be slightly better now. Seems like Wikipedia is lacking in its coverage of oil drilling and modern petroleum engineering, though. - Egil 19:18 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive_May_2004&oldid=883645"