Someday, I need to post something about myself instead of just using this as a personal reference page...
- 1 Current projects
- 2 Articles I want to start someday soon
- 3 Articles to edit
- 4 My accounts on other Wikiprojects
- 5 Reference pages that I want to keep track of but don't keep on the "watchlist"
- 6 Thoughts on redirects
- 7 Templates
- 8 Reference list of "surprising" VfD discussions
- Wikt:Appendix:Military slang
- Wikt:Appendix:Architectural glossary
- Category:Date of birth missing
- Transwiki list
- User:Rossami/Analysis of undeletions
Articles I want to start someday soon
Articles to edit
- add to motherese
- fix overwatch
- copyedits to maniple for readability
- copyedits to Revaluation of fixed assets
My accounts on other Wikiprojects
Reference pages that I want to keep track of but don't keep on the "watchlist"
- Wikipedia:replies (was "What Our Critics Say About Us")
- m:Reading level
- Wikipedia:How does one edit a page
- Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links
- Wikipedia:Peer review
- Wikipedia:MediaWiki custom messages
- Wikipedia:Template messages
- Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits
- Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress
- Proposed new structure for VfD
- Category:Candidates for speedy deletion
- User:Rossami/Admin vote
- Log file of admin actions taken
- Edit count analyzer
- Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace
- Meta:Help:Interwiki linking
- page usage stats
Thoughts on redirects
Link rot and RfDs
When nominators "vote"
** Comment: Nominators generally should not add a "delete" opinion in the bulleted section of these discussions. Your opinion is clear from the nomination. Adding a bullet gives the impression that you're trying to have your opinion double-counted. It creates potential confusion for the admin who eventually has to close the discussion. Thanks. ~~~~
- It is not, because despite what wizards may say it is redirects for discussion. It is not articles for deletion or categories for deletion it is for discussion. That is why a nomination does not imply a delete. Really, it says so quite clearly. Nominating something does not imply any !vote: frequently nominators do not add a vote. When they do, it does not imply delete, it may be that they require the consensus of the community without being sure themselves. Really, what's the beef? it is hardly as if anyone will nominate a keep vote, they just boldly retarget that under WP:BRD. [User:SimonTrew|Si Trew]] (talk) 23:49, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
For threads with lots of anonymous votes
*Comment: New users should be aware that votes by anonymous and very new accounts are generally very steeply discounted during these discussions. We have had significant problems in the past with abuse of the voting process and attempts to bias the outcome by users creating [[Wikipedia:sockpuppet|]]s. Hard facts which add to the discussion are appreciated. Opinions and qualitative judgments are likely to be ignored. ~~~~
When untranscluding an exceptionally long debate
This discussion has become very long, and is no longer being shown directly on this page in order to improve performance. Please click this link to view or participate in the discussion. ~~~~<br> [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/pagename]]
This discussion thread has become very long and extremely difficult to sort out. In an effort to assist the admin who must eventually make this decision, I propose the use of a recap table. In addition to your vote and explanation below, please record your name in the table. Comment: For this to work, please keep all comments below. I've taken my best guess at the current opinions of the discussion participants. If I've listed anyone's vote incorrectly, please move it. ~~~~
||Abstain or Ambiguous vote
Reference list of "surprising" VfD discussions
- Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Karafuto Prefecture - initially tagged as 1) patent nonsense then 2) fancruft but turned out to be historically real (though obscure)
- Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Treaty of Finkenstein - initially tagged as a hoax.
- Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Kaleidoscope Entertainment - initially tagged as a speedy. Moved to VfD where the response was a clear "keep"
- Terrax and Nina Kulagina - initially tagged as speedy but one was a valid topic from fiction, one was a real person whose disputed claims were thought to be fiction. (These two articles were subsequently found to be copyvios.)
- Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/United Cracking Force - initially tagged as speedy. Moved to VfD where the response was a clear "keep"
- Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Diadem (physics) - an article which was around for a long time and sucked in a surprising number of people who tried to wikify and copyedit what was ultimately uncovered as a hoax.
- Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Climate theory - initially thought to be a hoax and/or patent nonsense but turned out to be a real (though now discredited) theory of Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu
- Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Religious persecution by Jews - initially a "no consensus" with a strong "delete" majority. Controversy raged over the closing admin's decision. (See here, here and here.) Re-vfd' only a few weeks later here where it received near unanimous "keep" votes.
- Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Like cola - initially tagged as a hoax
- Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Pseudowallerian degeneration - initially tagged as a hoax but later verified
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pseudowallerian degeneration (2nd nomination) - deleted as unverified phenomenon mentioned nowhere but in one scientific paper
- Re-created as a "harmless redirect" 
- Back at RfD as of May 28, 2006