Entertainment
 

Forum:Massive deletion - discussion

The Star Wars wiki of fan invention.

Forums > Senate Hall > Massive deletion - discussion

The following was a discussion about the mass article deletion that ended on July 28, 2009. The discussion is no longer active. Should you wish to voice your opinion on the topic, please do so on the talk page.

This is a discussion on the ongoing mass deletion preparation and eventual execution, as approved here.

Contents

Preparation guidelines

Starting today and ending on Thursday, May 28, 2009, any user who is interested will use the Special:Random feature (also shown as the “Random page” button) to look for articles that fail the Manual of Style and encyclopedic standards. So how do we determine if an article gets deleted? Basically, it needs to fail a significant amount of MOS standards. If an article just has a few spelling errors here and there, then it wouldn’t be deleted. That’s just absurd. I’m talking things like, well, this. No offense to the author, but it’s filled with POV errors, grammar errors, spelling errors and every error you can possibly think of. It comes down to spelling, grammar, POV, structure, formatting, etc. Basically, take storyline out of the mix, and what you have left is whether or not something fits encyclopedic standards and the standards of the Manual of Style and other relevant policies.

Depending on what the issue(s) is/are, the users will tag the article with the MassDelete template. HOWEVER, other tags would need to be added as well. Tags would be things such as:

I’m sure there are more that I’m forgetting, since those are just off the top of my head, but I trust that you get the idea. Anyway, once MassDelete and one or more of those tags is put onto an article (this is to tell the author what's wrong with it), it’s subject to deletion. If someone objects to the tagging of the article, they can contact the person who tagged it and they can work it out together. They can call in a neutral administrator to help them decide whether it remains tagged or if it becomes untagged.

CAVEAT: If you come across an article that clearly seems to have had a lot of effort put into it but still has issues with spelling, grammar and the like, I strongly suggest that you help to clean some of that up. Please use common sense and proper discretion - this mass deletion is for epic failures, not things that have a few issues here and there.

After this one month process is over, we would put out a general wiki-wide announcement saying that authors of all tagged articles have TWO MONTHS to correct the issues in their articles. I'll post a reminder about the process for that once we get there. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 21:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

Please use this space for any discussion regarding the ongoing tagging of articles for the massive deletion. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 21:05, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

  • Quick question: Do two sentence stubs fall into the MASS DELETION category. I personally think they should. Please let me know.-JEDIMASTERAUST (Boardroom) (Community Service) 22:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

As I said in the previous thread, no. There is nothing wrong with stub articles. Even Wikipedia has them. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 22:29, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

If for example, one of our articles gets tagged, if we fix it up, can we remove the tag, or does the original placer of the tag have to?--Nightmare975 08:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Curious... While I try to concentrate most of my tagging on articles with cleanup tags and the like, I've seen a couple of articles get tagged for being so facepalmingly stupid that reading it caused brain damage. Do article in which the storyline is brain-damaging fall into the Mass Delete category? If not... I may have a couple of articles to revert... Trak Nar Ramble on 08:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I made it very clear in my proposal that we can't tag articles on the basis of storyline because the quality of the storyline is subjective. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 12:08, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

  • Guess I got a tad carried away then. Time to revert Darth Sylar and peruse the hidden category of articles that need to be cleaned up/fanonified for things to tag... Trak Nar Ramble on 04:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

If you want my advice, tag anything that's in the POV/cleanup/fanonify/tense categories. Anything that's in there is likely to have been there for a long time, so the authors clearly have no intention of cleaning them up and/or they need a good kick in the butt from the mass delete tag to do it. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 13:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

  • I say delete nothing because I will improve on my pages and transform them into better pages that there will be no more of that annoying Mass Delete template.(Babylon 8 (Talk) 23:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC))

We will review your articles, Babylon, after the tagging period and improvement period is over and underway, respectively, but not before. As I told you on your talk page, just be patient and don't be so worried about your articles. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 03:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

  • I'm sorry but I have to worry about articles with a mass delete template because mass delete might means termination to the pages.(Babylon 8 (Talk) 16:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC))

Yeah.... potentially three months from now. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 16:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey how come we have a mass deletion page and template in the first place? You only built it here to delete pages that still needs some improvements.(Babylon 8 (Talk) 19:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC))

No, Babylon, we created it to delete garbage. There are thousands and thousands of articles on this wiki that qualify as "garbage". If you want to go somewhere that will let you write articles that utterly fail in encyclopedic standards, go somewhere else. I'm sorry, but that's the only option now. These are our policies and we are going to enforce them. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 20:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

My articles are not garbage they just need improvements.(Babylon 8 (Talk) 20:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC))

I thought this is a fanon wiki that accepts everything that is star wars fanon including darth grievous and undead?(Babylon 8 (Talk) 21:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC))

  • Those are perfectly acceptable, but the article doesn't fit the Manual of Style. Therefore, it must be deleted. Sorry to sound rude, but have you even bothered to read the Layout Guide and Manual of Style? If you don't want your articles deleted, then I suggest you read them. --JediCommando (Talk) 21:22, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
    • Seriously dude, JediCommando has it right. Stop complaining, go read, and let the improvement commence. Otherwise, in three months, our Death Star will blow your Alderaan into oblivion. –Victor (talk page) 05:51, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay first of all the manuel of style guide is there for a pointless reason because I can't understand what it says. Second I know that adding things to pages will change Garbage pages into better pages and third I did not graduate college. Therefore I am not a good writter and you might as well delete those pages and so I can recreate them as stub pages. Also whos paying the admins?(Babylon 8 (Talk) 08:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC))

  • Why don't you spend time cleaning up your articles instead of complaining? Plenty of people didn't graduate college, or even attend, so that argument about you not graduating is seriously weak. One only needs to apply ones self. Seriously, take a look at one of the many other articles that are present here to learn how one should be properly formatted. It's not overly difficult. And nobody is paying us, we do it out of the kindness of our hearts. :) -- CurrentBigThing (Speak) 10:33, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Per Wayne entirely. From what Wayne's told me, I don't believe he went to college, and he's one of the best writers we have here. Perfect example. Secondly, no one pays us. This wiki is entirely voluntary, as Wayne says also. Thirdly, you can complain about what we're doing but it's still going to happen, so you might want to get to work fixing your articles and use this page solely to ask for help or any real questions you have. :) -- (talk) (contributions) 16:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

  • And also, adding more crap won't change anything. All you're going to do is add more stuff that fails our policies because you have no idea what you're doing. The MOS is not there for a pointless reason. It's very simple to understand if you read it and decide to apply yourself. I'm going to say "per the others" and tell you to stop whining, suck it up and go fix your articles. If you're not going to do that, *points over there ---->* then there's the door. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 17:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
  • I highly doubt you're actually trying to understand the Manual of Style if you "can't understand what it says". Everything is clearly explained. Per Brandon about it not being there for a pointless reason. Drewton (Drewton's Holocron) 17:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I SAY END THIS DISCUSSION, GET RID OF BOTH THE MANUEL OF STYLE PAGE AND GET RID OF THIS PATHETIC PAGE SO WE CAN EDIT WITH FREEDOM AND PAGES LIKE DARTH GRIEVOUS WILL BE LEFT EDITED WITHOUT A MASSDELETE TEMPLATE INTERFERING IN THE FIRST PLACE!(Babylon 8 (Talk) 00:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC))

  • LMAO....no. If you want consensus, create a forum page to get rid of the Manual Style and see how much you will fail, but this Mass Delete thing is here to stay, almost 30 votes to 2 people. If you can't write articles without lots of POV, Mary Sue elements and in the way of the MOS, tough titties. --Arav (Ancient Grove) (Lost Archives) 04:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

You can say that if you want, and you're entitled to your opinion. However neither this discussion nor the MoS will go. You can put a vote up to end both, if you want, but I assure you it'll be rejected instantly. So, bad luck, nothing's going to change. The quicker you stop complaining and start fixing, the better life will be for you. -- (talk) (contributions) 07:09, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

  • Tough titties? LOLLERSKATEZ! –Victor (talk page) 05:28, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I know, I'm hilarious right? File:Rolleyes.gif --Arav (Ancient Grove) (Lost Archives) 05:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

God, I've been having so much trouble trying to place the MassDelete tag anywhere. I'm so unsure that I can't place it. That and the random page keeps sending me to Brandon Rhea's pages and empty year articles.--Nightmare975 07:04, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

  • You and me both. Some articles just barely meet the MoS requirements and without actually suffering reading through them, it's hard to tell otherwise. Trak Nar Ramble on 07:53, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't the tags be explained on the article's talk pages? As far as my stuff is concerned, the storyline had the Remnant switching to Earth time on 1/1/2000 so I'm not sure what the tense problem is since 0 BBY/ABY = 1977 in my storylines. While I agree that some of the character pages should be split up, but since the series is tagged for deletion again it's basically a moot issue at this point. I still think my work and the rest of the Earth stuff is best served by having its own Wiki since some of the articles on the Fanon Wiki look worse then some of the articles here. I don't even think there is an MoS there. Ken S. (Talk) 20:02, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

  • In regard to tense, it seems to me from glancing at some of the articles that whomever tagged your articles is referring to the Tense section of the Manual of Style where it states: "All in-universe articles must be written in past tense". Every article I looked at of yours (including some that were not tagged for deletion) were in present tense or mixed tenses. As for your other comments, I am unsure what wiki you are referring to that does not have an MoS, please clarify/explain. If you have objections or concerns about specific articles that have been tagged, I would suggest utilizing the talk page created by the deletion template so that it will be easier to talk more in depth about that article. --Kathkira talk 22:52, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Progress report

Just to give an update, since April 28th the participants in this process have tagged over 1,000 articles, so well done to all of you who have been helping out! We have two and a half weeks left to go. I'm hoping to get this number to 3,000, because I know that there are another 2,000 articles deserving of the BAHLEET button. If you signed up and haven't started participating, please do so. If you didn't sign up, you're more than welcome to help out anyway. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 12:33, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, how do you know there are 2000 more? --C3PO the Dragon Slayer 6,000,000 forms of communication | Dragons I've Slayed 19:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Policies haven't been enforced for three years. It's not exactly a leap to suggest that there are over 3,000 articles that fail policies to the degree that they would warrant tagging in this mass deletion, considering we have over 24,000 articles. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 19:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

  • I'm sure there are thousands of other articles out there that need tagging. There are some articles I have encountered that's hard to determine if they meet the MOS or not, but just to be safe, I skip them, as I've already got carried away on one or two articles. File:Rolleyes.gif--JediCommando (Talk) 22:25, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
    • I too am sure there are thousands. Out of 24,000 I bet that less than half adhere to standards. –Victor (talk page) 01:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I give up. I'm not willing to do any more rewritting. I say get on with the mass deletion immediately so we can rewrite them as better pages.(Babylon 8 (Talk) 01:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC))

  • No, there will be no deletions until July 28th. That's the way its going to work, so cut the crap. If you don't like it, the Log Out button is in the upper-right hand corner. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 02:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I just want those pages deleted and get this Mass deletion over with quickly and I'm only raising a legal point.(Babylon 8 (Talk) 18:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC))

  • We are not going to be deleting any tagged articles until July 28th. And you're not raising a "legal" point. Stop complaining. Drewton (Drewton's Holocron) 18:58, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
  • If you want the deletion process to go faster, tag all your articles (the ones with MassDelete template on them) and add another template called {{Delete|Author Request}}. That might help your urge for deleting if you can’t be bothered to fix them fully. --Arav (Ancient Grove) (Lost Archives) 00:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Almost at the end

The mass deletion ends at the end of today, May 28, 2009. I didn't phrase the mass deletion FAQ well; the FAQ made it seem like it ends at the beginning of May 28th rather than basically 11:59pm on May 28th. I've been telling people the latter, so we'll end it at the end of today (Thursday) to be fair to all of those people. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 04:03, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

We need to change the site notice.--Josh BenderTalk 17:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. For future reference, there were 1,463 articles in Category:Articles under mass deletion discussion at the time of the site notice update. Great job to everyone who participated. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 17:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
P.S. The tagging actually lasted until about 2:36 EST this morning (assuming Qurnin Son was the last article tagged). --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 17:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Over

Well, it's over. Just for future reference, User:Weeg has deleted 1,422 articles on July 28 from 12:06 AM EST to 2:46 AM EST, according to the deletion log. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 14:34, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://swfanon.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Massive_deletion_-_discussion"