Debating "Deletionism" At Wikipedia 484
Ian Lamont writes "In a strange turn of events, the Wikipedia entry for Deletionpedia — an online archive of deleted Wikipedia articles — is now being considered for deletion. The entry for Deletionpedia was created shortly after the publication of an Industry Standard article and a discussion on Slashdot this week. Almost immediately, it was nominated for deletion, which has sparked a running debate about the importance of the Wikipedia entry, Deletionpedia, and the sources that reference it. For the time being, you can read the current version of the Deletionpedia entry, while the Wikipedia editors carry on the debate."
I know what Tony is going to say (Score:1, Funny)
Delete. But that is because he is that way. And no other. None at all.
Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
Oh wow, man. (Score:0, Funny)
My mind is officially blown.
Deletionism? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Deletionism? (Score:2, Funny)
Delete it (Score:5, Funny)
Better solution... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Deletionism? (Score:3, Funny)
I don't think the word "intelligent" means what you think it means. It is the last word that could ever be applied to the actions (or reactions, in fact) of wikipedia's admins.
Book burning by any other name.
Why not fork it? (Score:5, Funny)
Make an Includopedia and a Deletepedia. That way everyone is happy.
Re:Nope. (Score:4, Funny)
Deleting Deletionpedia... (Score:5, Funny)
Don't even have to buy it. From doing a Google News search, it looks to me like the controversy over deleting the Deletionpedia entry is going to make it notable even if it didn't start out that way.
In fact, the fact that the controversy over deleting the deletionpedia page is itself notable makes me very tempted to write a Wikipedia article "Deletionpedia Deletion Controversy"...
On the other hand, I guess that might be pushing it a little too far, though.
Those articles have been deleted... (Score:5, Funny)
Funny Story... (Score:5, Funny)
It wasn't long of course before these deletion-happy admins nominated it for speedy deletion. The decision was proving to be unanimous. And, I for one didn't blame them. A wiki page for an administrator of a website seemed rather silly.
My friend agreed. He didn't feel that he really should be on the site and decided to go to the deletion page and weigh in on the issue. He told the wiki admins who he was and that he wanted the page deleted thinking this would solidify the consensus that had for the most part already been reached. I think the quote was something along the lines of "I don't want to be on your gay-ass site, so I'd appreciate it if you just hurried up and deleted it before I leave you all with a fist-sized, mushroom-shaped bruise on all of your faces."
Not surprisingly, all of the admins had a change of heart and all decided they wanted to keep the page.
Re:Hmm... (Score:4, Funny)
I don't want an article on how the Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe just because no one can prove it's not true.
And I don't want all the bloody articles on the bible, but if they stay I'll be eaten by a grue before I let someone remove the FSM pages without a fight.
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
The neutrality [slashdot.org] of this section is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page [slashdot.org].
Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. [slashdot.org]
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
After that ridiculous incident, I stopped relying on Wikipedia for anything substantive. Its accuracy can not be assured due to the bureaucratic toolboxes that moderate the site.
We really do need that perfectly moderated and unbiased information website which provides you with the complete truth and is never wrong. I hear the Chinese government is working on one, but in the meantime there's this news channel called Fox which is fair and balanced. I mean, that's their catchphrase, so you know it's true!
Re:Funny Story... (Score:5, Funny)
"A couple years ago a wiki page was created about a friend of mine who ran a website, in addition to a wiki page about the website itself. It appeared to have been made by some fan who never made themselves known.
It wasn't long of course before these deletion-happy admins nominated it for speedy deletion. The decision was proving to be unanimous. And, I for one didn't blame them. A wiki page for an administrator of a website seemed rather silly.
My friend agreed. He didn't feel that he really should be on the site and decided to go to the deletion page and weigh in on the issue. He told the wiki admins who he was and that he wanted the page deleted thinking this would solidify the consensus that had for the most part already been reached. I think the quote was something along the lines of "I don't want to be on your gay-ass site, so I'd appreciate it if you just hurried up and deleted it before I leave you all with a fist-sized, mushroom-shaped bruise on all of your faces."
Not surprisingly, all of the admins had a change of heart and all decided they wanted to keep the page."
[citation needed]
Those who can... (Score:3, Funny)
In the words of Monty Python: "Yes, well, that's the sort of blinkered philistine pig ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage. You sit there on your loathsome, spotty behinds, squeezing blackheads and not giving a tinker's cuss for us struggling artists. You excrement! You whining, hypocritical toadies with your color TV sets and your Tony Jacklin golf clubs. Well I wouldn't become a Freemason now if you got down on your lousy, stinking, purulent knees and begged me!"
Re:Deleting Deletionpedia... (Score:5, Funny)
This just in: New Wikipedia 'Deletionpedia Deletion Contorversy' deletion controversy erupts as the Wikipedia Deletionpedia Deletion description is nominated for deletion. Delegates describe dangerous double dealings during dastardly deceptive deletions.
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, if you go back far enough: "This site under construction".
Re:Nope. (Score:3, Funny)
The point is that Wikipedia used to be more fun before the red tape took over. (Yes yes, I need a citation for that, I know.)
IMO - The personal biases, elitism and clique mentality used to fuel the article content itself: e.g., I am biased towards Ducati motorcycles; In the good old days, that means I'd write an article about Ducati motorcycles. These days I'd campaign to have the Triumph motorcycle page deleted.
Re:then stick them on knol (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Funny Story... (Score:5, Funny)
1. ^ "A couple years ago a wiki page was created about a friend of mine who ran a website" [slashdot.org]. Rutefoot, 2008
Re:Deleting Deletionpedia... (Score:1, Funny)
That's ok. It can always be deleted.
Re:Hmm... (Score:3, Funny)