Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Log

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 debate was Keep. Xoloz (talk) 15:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Log[edit]

A totally useless article of no real value whatsoever; Special:Logs is an easy-to-find page, linked to from most places anyone would want to get to it from. Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 13:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or mark historical. It's not totally useless - it lists the Wikipedia logs in an editable form with archives. It could possibly be expanded to explain how to use the logs more effectively. Admittedly it was more useful when it was created - before December 2004, Wikipedia's logs were in the Wikipedia namespace, for example Wikipedia:Upload log. Graham87 15:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as historical. -Nard 20:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, simply because it organises links to the logs that existed before Special:Log was created, as well as the current logs; very old historical information is sometimes still interesting and there's no good reason not to preserve it. --ais523 12:06, 9 December 2007 (U T C)
Keep ais523 says it all. The page is historical. Acalamari 18:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Tonywalton ^Talk 11:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is already marked as historical, and it has been around since '04, so it is a bit o' WikiPistory thaat should be preserved.--12 Noon 09:19, 12 December 2007 (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.