Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Wikipedia:When to use the revert button

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete . ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Wikipedia:When to use the revert button

Redundant, covered by Wikipedia:Reverting, not even correct (you're not supposed to rv good faith edits). Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 06:31, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Waste of time busywork nomination. SLAP the nominator, and tell him he is supposed to talk to active users before seeking to delete their work. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:47, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- That would be nice, but a lot of my work has been hauled before XfD or CSD without a discussion. Also, what makes this busywork? Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 06:55, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - "A lot of my work has been hauled before XfD or CSD without a discussion"? You have my sympathy, it is rude, and if I see it happen I will speak up. Inadequate notification is justification in getting it refunded/userfied.
    What makes busywork? Read the article? Asking mfd reviewers to review your mfd nomination, when it is a completely harmless/worthless page. On investigating, the author does have a habit of silly stuff. Now that we are here, warn the author Lomrjyo (talk · contribs), not to create silly things outside his userspace, and especially not "not even correct" things. As a habit, it is WP:Disruptive, which not even half humourous like trouts. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:05, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yeah, I get that it's a somewhat harmless/worthless page, but I think the less unworkably bad drafts we have in draftspace, the better off we are. G13 is too long a wait for some things(trash), and too short for others(actually useable stuff), IMO. Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 07:14, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete bad pointless advice Legacypac (talk) 08:27, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as bad advice, and as apparently an attempt to conflate two spaces. Between Scylla and Charybdis, send this to the Maelstrom. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - bad advice. Already covered. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:37, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - nomination seems redundant. If editors want to make guides for other users they should be free to do so and not have their work deleted unless it breaks a rule. Deleting people's essays for "being bad" is not a rule here on Wikipedia. Poor nomination. Egaoblai (talk) 15:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy - Isn't draftspace for drafts in some way intended for mainspace? If it's not good advice, it doesn't belong in projectspace. That doesn't mean it doesn't belong in userspace (there's all kinds of bad advice in userspace), although it would be good to tell the user why it's not good advice. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:59, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. Belongs in userspace. Aside from that, all editors are free to write essays expressing their own particular viewpoints on things pertaining to the project, and they shouldn't need to worry about them being deleted. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 01:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Changing vote to delete. While I stand by my statement that users should be able to express their individual opinions, I believe that essays exist to present arguments for legitimate viewpoints. This certainly fails at the first, with no explanation whatsoever, and possibly at the first, insofar as an (apparently) unexplained revert of a good faith edit is an excessive bite. I'll echo what other editors have said above: this is bad advice, and the project does not benefit from its retention; if anything it is hurt by it. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 00:00, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Userfy to User:Lomrjyo/When to use the revert button - Not sure why this was created in the draftspace, nonetheless, it is not yet detailed enough to become a projectspace essay. However, it is fine as a userspace page. Strong because this was created by an active editor less than a month ago. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:41, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... 'active' maybe, but with still only 6o mainspace edits does not yet demonstrate that they fully understand how Wikipedia works. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:19, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A userspace page need not contain fully coherent ideas but may contain those that are still developing. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 19:43, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - We don't need an Idiots guide on when to use the "revert button" ... If you don't know when to use it then you don't deserve to have it, period. –Davey2010^Talk 22:25, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there's no reason for this to exist. It doesn't contain any useful information. Lepricavark (talk) 20:01, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.