Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 June 18: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 17:38, 23 June 2006

18 June 2006

Template:User Drug-free

This user is drug-free.

This user is interested in drugs.

This user is not interested in drugs.

Speedied under t2 (not policy). --Pascal666 21:07, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just recreate it in userspace. DRV isn't necessary for that. See WP:GUS; it might even already be there. -GTBacchus^(talk) 21:22, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn and Userfy if not already userfied; Endorse closure if already userfied. jgp (T|C) 21:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I've posted the last three versions of this template before it was deleted. They're rather different from one another. Note the first links to a user category that probably ought to be deleted along with most user categories. -GTBacchus^(talk) 21:35, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Though it would be nice if history can be preserved when it is being userfied. --WinHunter ^(talk) 02:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Considering over 750 users link to this template, it would be nice to at least have a redirect of some sort if it is to be recreated in user space. The first version above is the correct one. --Pascal666 23:54, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Migrate to userspace per WP:GUS. And re-point the existing links to the new location (perhaps per AWB?). Charon X/talk 00:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy and put in the triage section at the bottom of TfD until user pages are modified by a bot. Ansell 00:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Keep deleted from template space per T2 and German solution. Someone may userfy by all means per German solution, if that has not already been done. Metamagician3000 02:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Restore/Move to user space and then delete the template page or replace it with Template:GUS UBX to (after correcting links, of course). —Mi r a 02:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Restore per the fact that this is not T1 and per Wikipedia:Strict constructionist deletion. -- Where 02:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Undelete and Userfy per WP:GUS to preserve history. Though this userbox should not exit in template namespace any longer. Acceptable replacement of {{deletedpage}} is {{GUS UBX to}}. --WinHunter ^(talk) 02:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Undelete and Userfy per WP:GUS. Guess we have to cleanup and recover the wounded from some of the past battles. --StuffOfInterest 13:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Undelete and Userfy Will (message me!) 17:40, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Restore, deleted by a revoked CSD. Stifle (talk) 19:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Undelete and userfy per above. --Coredesat 21:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ===18 June 2006===
-====[[Fred Wilson (venture capitalist)]]====
-:[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fred Wilson (venture capitalist)]]
-Stated result was "delete, no reason to keep it and was an autobiographical article anyway". The actual result was no consensus, although there were issues with meat puppets on both sides. [[WP:AUTO]] is not grounds for deletion, only if it violates neutrality, verifiability, and notability guidelines. No rationale was provided by the administrator, and on [[User_talk:Sceptre|follow-up]] he only offered "The reasons to delete it outweighed the reasons to keep it." I have no opinion on whether this article should be kept or not, but the administrator (same as on two reviews below) should try to adhere to the standards and put in a good faith effort to determine consensus rather than impose his own opinion. I therefore request '''Relisting'''. ~ [[User:Trialsanderrors|trialsanderrors]] 23:37, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
-*Agree with the above, and also request '''Relisting'''. I was the editor who questioned the original deletion summary, as indeed the result was no consensus, only to receive the vague and non-responsive [[User_talk:Sceptre|follow-up]] mentioned above. The AfD discussion brought up arguments on both sides, including numerous [[WP:Notability|notability]] arguments in support of keeping it. [[User:Isarig|Isarig]] 04:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse deletion'''.  Article fails to establish anything above and beyond what is implied by "venture capitalist", is autobiographical, and serves no evident purpose other than to promote the subject's businesses.  No prejudice against later creation of a properly encyclopaedic article which establishes notability per [[WP:BIO]]. [[User Talk:JzG|Just zis <span style="border: 1px; border-style:solid; padding:0px 2px 2px 2px; color:white; background-color:darkblue; font-weight:bold">Guy</span> you know?]] 06:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
-**See above: ''Remember that Deletion Review is not an opportunity to (re-)express your opinion on the content in question.'' ~ [[User:Trialsanderrors|trialsanderrors]] 08:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
-***I'm agreeing with the close, and commenting on why I think it was valid (I did not vote at AfD but can see the deleted content). [[User Talk:JzG|Just zis <span style="border: 1px; border-style:solid; padding:0px 2px 2px 2px; color:white; background-color:darkblue; font-weight:bold">Guy</span> you know?]] 12:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse deletion''' - action within admin discretoinary power. --[[User:Winhunter|WinHunter]] <sup>([[User talk:Winhunter|talk]])</sup> 07:21, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse deletion''', well within admin's discretion. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for self-promotion. [[WP:AUTO]] is damn good grounds for deletion as it implies a failure to meet [[WP:N]] in the vast, ''vast'' majority of cases (most don't even come to AfD), and there is no reason to believe that this article was an exception. Sole activity of note to the public appears to be writing a blog for which no arguments for notability have been presented, the rest is his resumé, with no evidence that his companies meet [[WP:CORP]] either. Arguments to keep amount to so much armwaving that I'm surprised the limbs in question didn't fall off. --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 08:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse Deletion'''. AfD is not a vote, it's a discussion. --[[User:Improv|Improv]] 03:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse deletion''' - per [[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]] above: NOT a vehicle for self-promotion. Fortunately Sam, reconstructive surgery can work wonders for damaged limbs.  [[User:Doc Tropics|Doc Tropics]] 04:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
-* '''Endorse closure''' per Sam's arguments.  The closer could have been a bit more tactful in writing up the decision but the decision is well within normal administrative discretion.  [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] <small>[[User talk:Rossami|(talk)]]</small> 05:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
-* '''Relist''' - arguments were made that he was notable within his field that were not rebutted, but were not considered by the closing admin. If he's started two companies and runs a popular blog, I think the article deserves another look.--[[User:SarekOfVulcan|Sar]][[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:SarekOfVulcan|kOfVulcan]] 16:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
-** Starting companies is trivial in developed countries - you just need a small sum of money and to fill in some forms. And getting a blog requires nothing. Of course, starting ''successful'' companies, let alone notable ones, is a lot more harder, ditto writing a popular blog, but I've seen no evidence that either the blog or the companies are notable. --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 19:22, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
-* '''Relist''' -- Well, I'm exasperated that the commenters here have no knowledge of the industry in which Fred works, no knowledge of the size of his successful VC-backed companies (Yoyodyne -- inveted direct-marketing on the internet, bought by Yahoo, etc. etc.), and no interest in actually reading the article they say should be deleted. [[User:Mcenedella|Mcenedella]] 23:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 ====[[Template:User Drug-free]]====