Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Possibility of bringing external delsorts under this project.

I have started discussions at the two most active deletion sorts that I know of that are not under this project about the possibility of bringing one or both of them under this project. The discussions can be found here and here. The only other active deletion sorting project I know of that is outside WP:DELSORT is on Wikipedia:WikiProject Football's main page. But that subject is already covered by Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Football, so that's a different situation. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afghanistani

Resolved
 – Moot and off-topic

salam, i wana put this page to be deleted. coz this is not proper noune to be used for Afghans, the one who live or is From Afghanistan.

plz help me in this case. thanks

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Living people

I have to admit I can't really see the point of this page. Because ALL living people pages have Category:Living people on them, category intersection (e.g. [1]) works perfectly. But instead we have two bots, Erwin85Bot (talk · contribs) and my own the wubbot (talk · contribs), on an endless task adding and removing the debates from this page. Not to mention the many humans adding debates manually.

"Living people" is a far more populous topic than any of the other ones for deletion sorting. As well as making it harder to maintain, this also decreases its usefulness. When it was created (without any discussion IIRC) I had envisaged it as being limited to debates where BLP concerns played an important part. But that has clearly been thrown out the window. The sheer size of the page makes it slow to load, even when my bot is working properly. When it trips up (which I apologise for), the page can become unusable.

I really don't understand why we maintain this page, when category intersection is more up to date, more accurate, and involves less workload for users, bots and servers. Therefore I propose that it be replaced with a prominent link to the relevant category intersection. the wub "?!" 13:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment, Wub. One interesting twist. With the page locked, User:Erwin85Bot cannot list new debates there. But it thinks it still can, and is still marking debates as listed there, even though they are not. :) - TexasAndroid (talk) 01:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I now stopped it from running. As I don't use this page myself I don't feel I have a say in this. However, I do agree with Wub's assessment. It would make more sense to just use category intersection. --Erwin (talk) 07:14, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm confused on how Cat scan is the better link. It's listed alphabetically rather than by expiration, so if I want to go through and check which I've already voted in, or which are due to be closed, I've gotta click through all the links. Why is there an issue with simply archiving the page more often? لennavecia 16:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok. So now we have a counter argument against the switch. I can see how having the list in chronological order can be a benefit. So where does that leave us? I see several possible paths forward:
  1. Restore the page as it was, getting the bots to not glitch the page up if at all possible. (Old status quo)
  2. Leave the page disabled, and rely on the intersection report going forward (new status quo)
  3. Scrap the page entirely.
  4. Something new. Scrap this page, but develop something better to replace it. Not totally sure what that could be, but I'm thinking something bot-created that is somehow based off of the category intersection thing, but formatted differently to address the concerns.
Those are the possibilities that occur to me. Not really sure which way I'm leaning, I more just wanted to prod this discussion forward. - TexasAndroid (talk) 12:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
A couple more comments while I'm on the subject. Looking at the intersection report, I see a lot fewer items on it than I would have expected. This is likely because the Living People cat is still far from fully in place. Many articles of obviously living people go up for deletion that are not in the category. So if the category is to be a full representation as much as possible of living people AFDs, an the intersection report falls short of that. When we had people manually listing debates into the category, it was easy enough to list things not in the category if it was likely that the article was of a living person. The intersection report cannot make such judgments.
But the report as-was is problematic. It's sheer size when fully reported is unwieldy. So here is a thought for a possible "Something new". Something of a cross between what we had before, and what we have now. At the core, the idea is a page of listed debates, added to regularly by bot and person, but for this one delsort page wre remove the transclusion, and just list the debate links. We have a visible format a lot like the intersection report, where you just have a list of links, not a wall of debates. But the human listing can resume, and the page can again be in chronological order. It's a raw idea, in need of development, but I think it might be the basis for a compromise. How does this idea sound to people? - TexasAndroid (talk) 12:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

File for deletion

Is it possible to use this Wikiproject to list a file for deletion? I would like to list this debate on the politics list. Thanks AndrewRT(Talk)(WMUK) 22:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Transclusion

While I'm here, is it possible to have a template generated from these pages which interested people can transclude onto their userpages, in the way that I have done for Signpost, for instance. This might list the current deletion discussions on the selected topics - a bit like the contents page for the individual topics? AndrewRT(Talk)(WMUK) 22:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Advisement wording about advertising and puppets

Near the top of the article is an advisement that includes

  • "It is considered highly inappropriate or unacceptable to advertise Wikipedia articles that are being debated in order to attract users with known views and bias in order to strengthen one side of a debate."
  • "It is also considered[who?] highly inappropriate[Need citation] to ask friends or family members to create accounts for the purpose of giving additional support. Advertising or soliciting meatpuppet activity is not an acceptable practice on Wikipedia."

I tagged it with who? and need-cite as it's not explained in detail in the article body nor does it link to articles that would explain these. For example, under sorting-authors I recently spotted an author who writes science fiction and so cross linked that under sorting-science-fiction. Is that "advertising" an AfD and how would someone decide if that my advertising was a devious method of support for a keep/delete for an AfD? People have left notes on my talk page asking me to comment on AfDs that I may be interested in. Are there any existing policies/guidelines related to this?

The part about puppets is a little clearer as it links to Wikipedia:Sock puppetry which is WP policy. I only tagged it as its wording needs a little tuning and when the first sentence gets cleaned up that'll be the time to tune the second sentence so that the two sentences work and flow together. --Marc Kupper|talk 18:05, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I've resolved this - It turned out the quoted wording I was commenting on was from December 2006. I've copy/pasted in the current wording from Wikipedia:Sock puppetry which is better. I also saw that as it's WP:POLICY then the who that considers advertising highly inappropriate is policy itself.

Problem

I've noticed this problem a lot when a soccer or association football player AfD is opened, someone will come along and list it here because they believe football means Association football when it means American football. Not sure what can be done since I've seen multiple users do this, but just figured a heads up could put a stop to this.--Giants27 (c|s) 19:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Guess this project isn't as active as I thought...--Giants27 (c|s) 18:33, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

List of relisted AFD debates

You might like Wikipedia:Coordination/afdrelists, which is updated every hour. —harej (talk) 06:29, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chodaczkow Wielki massacre

Opt-out of deletion sorting?

How do I opt my AFD nominations out of deletion sorting? Too often I have seen these used as, essentially, a method of votestacking. An AFD should get a good cross-section of the Wikipedia community, but deletion sorting lets them be dominated by the same incestuous bunch that failed to clean up the crap in the first place. *** Crotalus *** 17:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to calarify you don't want editors interested in the article to find you AfDs? do you own the AfD's you start? --Natet/c 08:50, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Short answer is you can't. My experience with deletion sorting doesn't match yours at all, so I wonder if it's a particular area that's a problem, the types of articles you are nominating, or if you are using the same kind of uncivil language in AfDs that you're using here?--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:51, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern Europe/Noticeboard

I would like to set up deletion sorting for Eastern European project/topics. How can I do that? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:03, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, we already have lists for the individual countries, you can find them at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Compact#Europe. Then you could transclude them into one Eastern Europe page linked from your noticeboard to keep track of them all at once. the wub "?!" 09:04, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
The problem is that there are topics that affect multiple countries, and so they would be transcluded multiple times. Here's an example: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soviet-run peace movements in the West. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:56, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Seeking help

I noticed this eidt while watching recent changes and thought it needed reverting since it blanked much information. However, I'm not familiar with the project or its discussions so I'm bringing the matter here for informed feedback. Any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks Tiderolls 04:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

The edit has been reverted, so no emergency. Thanks Tiderolls 05:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Request new category

Greetings, I know that our project isn't as active as others, but I was wondering if Wikipedia:WikiProject Asian Americans could have its own delete sorting category, maybe under the main category of Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United States of America. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:22, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't a deletion category for biographies of military figures be handy, given the great number of those bios?

Georgejdorner (talk) 16:52, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Philosophy?

There's a link to "Religion and philosophy", but this leads to Religion -- no mention there of [secular] philosophy. For religion, there are also deletion sorts for Judaism, and Spirituality, and perhaps more besides; but what's one supposed to do with philosophy? I'm tempted to answer my own question by suggesting that philosophy is worthwhile and thus not for deletion, but surely we do need a category for what purports to be philosophy; for Deep Thought. -- Hoary (talk) 15:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, there was a deletion sorting place for philosophy; it's just that it wasn't listed until my very recent edit. -- Hoary (talk) 13:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Newspapers, Magazines and Journalists

These topics don't really fit into one of the existing categories very nicely. Newspapers and magazines would fit as sub lists of literature and news, while journalists would be fit under news and authors. Authors and literature seem to be mainly used for novels/novelists while news is for news events.

Any thoughts? Thryduulf (talk) 13:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Agree, these are completely reasonable additions. J04n(talk page) 14:01, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Mathematics

Would like to suggest adding a category for Mathematics. Four related AfDs added today. J04n(talk page) 01:05, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I just came here to request the same things. Generally, I think that the broad category of "Academics and educators" should be subdivided by field of study. Editors who have a primary interest in, say, French literature, are not necessarily interested in or especially qualified to comment on articles about, say, physicists—and vice versa. The topical WikiProjects would be a good starting point for subdividing the list. In addition to subdividing the "Academics and educators", I suggest that the subject matter categories be organized by field of study, again with emphasis on the topical WikiProjects.—Finell 03:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I brought up the idea of a mathematics list on the mathematics wikiproject a couple of months back and there wasn't really any interest. If others think it would be a good idea despite this, then I'm happy to go along with them. Thryduulf (talk) 10:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
That's because a bot tandem (User:Jitse's_bot using some lists generated by User:Mathbot) already lists them at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Current activity. Pcap ping 14:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I just came here to recommend Mathematics. Seems obvious. I would also think we'd benefit from a breakdown of Science into Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Geology, Paleontology, and Astronomy, and that some individual social sciences like Economics, Sociology, Anthropology, Archeology, Psychology, etc., would be useful. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:07, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Papua New Guinea

The page Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Papua New Guinea exists, but is not listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Flat. There is an Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Oceania. I think that Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Papua New Guinea should either be added to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Flat (and transcluded in Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Oceania) or redirected to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Papua New Guinea.

I am mentioning this issue because I wanted to add Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Papua New Guinea bus crash to the correct page, and found that Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Papua New Guinea was not in the standard format, but instead contained one suggestion that I think has since been resolved. - Eastmain (talk) 00:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I redirected it to the Oceania one. Not listed at WP:DS/C either, and had a grand total of one post, so it was probably created without any discussion here. Pcap ping 16:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

"Other" creep

It looks like the list of "other" stuff has become a kitchen sink. I've done a few changes [2] [3] [4], which should be non-controversial, but I think the following should also be moved into "Topical":

leaving just the following two in "Other", which should be renamed as "Wikipedia page type":

Regards. Pcap ping 15:59, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

One problem with the current setup is that the "Culture" section has only two things in it, when a bunch of stuff really obviously belongs in there, especially ethnic groups, gender, etc. It doesn't do much good to fix up "Other" has having been too much of a kitchen sink, when "Topical" is even more of one. It could be split up in various other ways. Events and News are obviously of-a-piece. All legal/government topics could be another cluster (terrorism, piracy, military, etc.) And so on. My suggestion would be to take the category/OoK structure and mirror it, or confusion will result more and more over time, as DELSORT develops its own peculiar categorization scheme. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 21:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Moving stuff around in the WP:DS/C page (without renaming) doesn't break anything, so you can be WP:BOLD there with obvious fixes. Mirroring OOK is pointless as we don't separate queues for all those topics. Pcap ping 21:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Game(s) changes

By the way, I've reverted the changes to the Game queue, except for the renaming to Games. I don't like the VG queue because additions are not semi-automated, and deletions from there are not automated. So, I'm not sorting anything in their queue, although I am watchlisting it. I don't see an issue with having overlapping queues because many articles get listed in more than one queue anyway. Pcap ping 21:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Video games page

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Deletion#Requested_move and the thread immediately above it are relevant to editors here. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 21:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Theater queue

Apparently there isn't one. Nor is there one for performing arts in general. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Canterbury Drama Society for instance. Pcap ping 02:50, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Error?

I am not sure why a man is categorized as being "list" related? Happy Valentine's Day! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 00:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

That error should be reported to the talk page of the editor that made it. You can also just remove him from the lists queue. Pcap ping
I removed him. Pcap ping 01:07, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 01:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Problem

Hi there I am having trouble getting the desort tool working I have added the code to my monobook.js page and saved it :) but it does not bring up the additional action on the AFD page. I am editing using chrome but tried it out on firefox as well so that is not the problem. I have been using both Twinkle and Friendly for quite some time so that is also not the issue... also I have cleared my cache to no avail. Any suggestions? I have posted on User:John Vandenberg's talk page but have not received a reply so I figured I would try here... Thanks. -- RP459 Talk/Contributions 03:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The problem was with Chrome... works fine with firefox... -- RP459 Talk/Contributions 08:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorting of blanked articles

I have started a thread about categorization of blanked articles pursuant to the proposed pure wiki deletion system. Tisane (talk) 23:37, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Christopher Ashlee

Could somebody please head over to the fiasco that's going on over at this article and ask the clearly POV'd editors to stop intentionally maligning the article to have it deleted? Thanks. 207.237.230.164 (talk) 16:48, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit does not complete

I am trying to use the automated tool but it will not complete the edit. I am using Firefox and have been using Twinkle for 2 1/2 months. As a clarification, it will bring up the window, but the window will not close on its own and the edit does not happen if I close it with the close button. NotAnonymous0 did I err?|Contribs 05:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

The problem was that I was using the vector skin, which I like better. Any chance that this can be made compatible? NotAnonymous0 did I err?|Contribs 05:53, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Bilateral relations

This is a hot-button topic at WP:ANI right now with accusations of canvassing, etc. Somebody had created a delsort queue for this, but it wasn't working properly, nor was it discussed here. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Bilateral_relations. I've added as an emergency measure. Pcap ping 09:36, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Other deletion discussions

Does this WikiProject cover other deletion discussions, like templates and files? --TorriTorri(talk/contribs) 16:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

They can be put at the bottom of individual subject deletion sorting pages under their own heading. Ty 20:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Deletion archives

What is the number in parentheses mean in the deletion archives? I sit explained somewhere? Rmhermen (talk) 22:05, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

It's the length of the discussion (number of characters, I think). It was meant for picking out long, particularly contentious debates that could have been of interest. the wub "?!" 15:54, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Shadow Casts

It seems to me that Shadow Casts is language related because it tries to define a meaning for the phrase "Shadow Cast" having to do with a kind of entertainment activity at some movie theaters. How does Angr think this is not Language related? --Fartherred (talk) 20:44, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Transferring responsibilty for bot

Just a courtesy notice: See Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#Who wants more work?, I really can't keep up with maintaining the wubbot (talk · contribs) any more. Hopefully someone (probably more skilled!) will take it on. the wub "?!" 15:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

List for stuff in the news

Is there a list for that kind of thing. Current events or something? - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 18:39, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Time to re-institute Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Living people

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Living people was temporarily disabled about a year ago following a thread near the top of this page. With the current drive to clear the backlog of unreferenced BLPs, a list devoted to living people at AfD would be quite helpful in my opinion. Any thoughts? J04n(talk page) 15:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

  • I read through the original reasoning for removing this from deletion sorting. As I understand it, deletion sorting BLPs just generated a huge list. I don't see that anything has changed that would remedy that. The scope of Wikiproject Unreferenced BLP Rescue covers those having no references. A BLP article may be nominated to AFD for a variety of reasons, and may be referenced. So unless the list can be further cut down to the unreferenced ones, then it might prove to be unmanageable. Is there some stats that can be generated to indicate how many we would be dealing with? -- Whpq (talk) 23:18, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Agreed, the list would be too long and of no practical use that I can see. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:02, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

AfD category discussions at Village Pump

Modification of one category in AfD Categories. Just fyi if anyone would wish to participate. Regards. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ―Œ ♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣ 18:26, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Bug in Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/delsort.js

Someone made this unusual edit, presumably with delsort.js as I see that script included in his vector.js. Looking at the code, the replacement at line 490 is unsafe if the page title being listed contains "$1", "$2", "$3", "$4", "$&", "$`", "$'", "$$", "$_", or "$+" (and maybe others). Changing line 490 to the following should fix it, but I have not tested it. 

var newval = textbox.value.replace(sectionHeaderRE,'$&{{' + wgAfdPage.replace(/\$/g, '$$$$') + '}}\n');

What that does is escape the "$" so it will be output literally instead of being used to introduce a replacement variable. Please review, and update your script if that is in fact correct. Thanks. Anomie⚔ 17:32, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

How to add a Category for deletion?

There's a discussion started at [Categories for deletion: Atomic Age of Comic Books, but I can't seem to add a note about this to the WikiProject Comics Noticeboard, which seems set up for only the "Articles for deletion" template. Can anyone tell me how? With thanks, --Tenebrae (talk) 18:45, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Problem?

I don't know whether it's my computer or something on the page; but when I try to view this project's page all I see is the project banner and the TOC—everything else is blank. I don't seem to be having a similar problem with any other WP pages. Deor (talk) 12:22, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Never mind—restarted my browser and problem disappeared. Deor (talk) 12:31, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

How to add a new list

Hi I was wandering how to add a new list particularly for the WP:BIGBRO. Thanks. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 01:30, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposal: put delsort notes on AfD pages immediately after the nomination

In AfD discussions, {{delsort}} notes are usually added at the end, but then new comments are added so they often end up in the middle, possibly between one contribution and a reaction to it. It makes more sense to put them immediately after the nomination, so that you get something like this:

List of fictitious people
List of fictitious people (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Delete. The people on this list do not exist. Nonnotable topic; no scholarly sources.  --Lambiam 01:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

If the instructions on {{AfD in 3 steps}} are modified to read:

  • Insert this text:
    {{subst:afd2 | pg=PageName | cat=Category | text=Why the page should be deleted. ~~~~}}

(bringing the signature inside the text field), template {{afd2}} can be made to include a placeholder for {{delsort}} notes, by adding at the end something like:

<!-- End of nomination. Put any deletion sorting notes immediately under this comment -->

 --Lambiam 01:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

One possible advantage of the current system of mixing delsort notices with the discussion is that it makes it easier to tell how some of the participants might have found out about the discussion. As a somewhat strained analogy, I don't think you would want relist notices moved to the top instead of mixed in, because then you wouldn't be able to tell as easily which comments were before or after the relist. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Geography

Just came here looking for a place to sort Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quadripoint but couldn't find a category. There needs to be a general Geography topic group. Not just geographical places but Geography as a subject itself. -- Ϫ 18:46, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Lists of people vs improvements

On Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists of people, there are two sections ('Lists of people' and 'improvments'), but I don't see anything in the posting instructions stating under what section any particular article should be posted. Any ideas? Hmains (talk) 20:07, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Expand scope of project to include notifications of RfCs

Issues by topic area (View all)
Article topics (View all)
Biographies (watch) {{rfc|bio}}
Economy, trade, and companies (watch) {{rfc|econ}}
History and geography (watch) {{rfc|hist}}
Language and linguistics (watch) {{rfc|lang}}
Maths, science, and technology (watch) {{rfc|sci}}
Media, the arts, and architecture (watch) {{rfc|media}}
Politics, government, and law (watch) {{rfc|pol}}
Religion and philosophy (watch) {{rfc|reli}}
Society, sports, and culture (watch) {{rfc|soc}}
Project-wide topics (View all)
Wikipedia style and naming (watch) {{rfc|style}}
Wikipedia policies and guidelines (watch) {{rfc|policy}}
WikiProjects and collaborations (watch) {{rfc|proj}}
Wikipedia technical issues and templates (watch) {{rfc|tech}}
Wikipedia proposals (watch) {{rfc|prop}}
Unsorted
Unsorted RfCs (watch) {{rfc}}

I would think that people who are interested in keeping tabs on deletion nominations for specific topic areas would be equally interested in getting notified of ongoing RfCs. Currently the RfC process has an underdeveloped (compared to this project) system of notification that looks like the box displayed here. __meco (talk) 08:38, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Methodological issues with citation counts

This discussion moved here from the project page.  --Lambiam 19:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Part of the basic problem seen within virtually all the comments annunciating insufficient citations for a given author - and this applies throughout the Wiki world, not just here - is the varied methodologies by which journals actually publish the names of the authors in question. For example, Mark J. Palmer will appear in article headers as I have just written the name; as "M. Palmer," as "M.J. Palmer," as "M. J. Palmer," and even as variants of this name in reverse (i.e., "Palmer, M.J.").

Many of the searches undertaken here CLEARLY are insufficient to count or otherwise determine the # of citations (by which it would appear many of the deletors are judging "significance," of the work - something I as a scientist would argue scientists themselves should be doing, not potentially misguided "encyclopedia," editors.

It certainly would be amusing to see some of this activity taking place for pages representing musical bands, for example, that have had exactly ONE recording cut, and the like.

I also must question the excessive use of Google Scholar for this purpose. Mainline journals (i.e. Journal of the American Chemical Society) are covered, while lesser known, private publications (i.e. many by Elsevier) are not.— 71.41.22.222 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Response to spa anon. GS is the only citation database that is available at no cost. It is much better than it used to be and its limitations are known to those who use it regularly. If you know of better search results then let us have them. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC).

Who should have an article?

I've been reading through the Category:Newfoundland and Labrador politician stubs to see what articles I could update. However I've noticed articles of politicians from the 1800's and I'm wondering if there is a need for the articles? To me some of these people don't need to have a wikipedia article, especially seeing there are politicians who have served in the last decade who are move relevant that don't have pages. I'm wondering if there is a need to have stubs of politicians who haven't served in decades, especially if there pages don't recieve 100 views a month. Two examples are John Fox (Newfoundland politician) and James Fox (Newfoundland politician). Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 01:03, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed layout change for {{Deletion sorting}}

I've proposed a change at Template talk:Deletion sorting. Comments would be welcome, thanks - Pointillist (talk) 16:01, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Deletion

Hi, could someone please add Video games delsort page Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Deletion to the list? I understand it overlaps with games delsort, but is nevertheless actively maintained by the project. My attempts seemed not to work. Thanks! —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 08:08, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Why is list of popes (graphical) is deleted?

I am sorry if this is a wrong place to ask this question. But I want to know why List of popes (graphical) is blanked and redirected to List of popes article when the majority of are against it.

Reviewing the history only one person User:Sottolacqua is repeatedly deleting it. Should I revert it or can some one help me in this regard? --Jayarathina (talk) 12:06, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved
 – Article has been updated and redirection removed as per consensus --Jayarathina (talk) 02:17, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Twinkle and DELSORT

There has been a long-standing desire by some editors to integrate deletion sorting into Twinkle, so that editors can sort the deletions automatically as they propose them. I'd noticed that Twinkle was being reworked in a hurry for the new MediaWiki release, and by several more editors than normal, so I asked if they take a look at some existing scripts and see if they can be integrated (see my post here). I didn't realize that shortly after that post they were releasing the new Twinkle, and that page has now become filled up with new bugs/issues. The programmers are going to be busy putting out these fires, but I fear that if DELSORT isn't integrated now while people are actively updating Twinkle, it may not happen at all. I'm not a programmer, and the one who was working on it has mostly-retired, but his scripts are available. Again, the thread is here (so far the current devs seem not to have noticed it, and it got buried pretty quickly), so if anyone has any other ideas, or wants to show the programmers that they are interested in this functionality, have at it. Thanks! ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 07:45, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Firefox breaks popup?

Hi, after upgrading to Firefox 4.01, delsort no longer does anything when invoked via Twinkle. Is this a known problem? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 19:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Seems to be a fairly widespread problem not constrained to FF4. Doesn't work in Chrome, Opera or Safari, either. Has to be a problem with the tool itself. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 15:47, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, it seems TW was recently upgraded, that might've broken the tool. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 15:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
And per Wikipedia_talk:Twinkle#Twinkle_deletion_sorting, a short-term fix would be to import User:AzaToth/morebits.js to your skin js page for now. I think TW devs are working on it though... Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 16:00, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Feasibility of adding WP:FFD discussions to delsort pages

A proposal has come up at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Non-free content enforcement that suggests that the files for deletion page be broken up into subpages similar to what now prevails on WP:AFD; and that breaking up the nominations would allow at least some of the files to be sorted into the various project deletion sorting lists.

I know those lists are routinely combed by bots, and I was wondering: would the addition of file discussions to the article discussions gum up the works? I'd expect that each delsort list would acquire a Files subheader, and file discussions sorted into it would appear transcluded there. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:03, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Professor Guranda Gvaladze

Dear friends, you deleted the article about the outstanding Georgian botanist, Doctor of Biological Sciences (1973), Professor (1991) Guranda E. Gvaladze (b. in 1932). She is one of the founders of the Georgian scientific school of Plant Embryology, author of 180 scientific works (among them 3 monographs), founder (1990) and the first head (1990-2003) of the Department of Plant Reproduction of the National Botanical Garden at the Ilia State University (Tbilisi). Since 2003 she is a Chief Research Fellow of this Department. Since 1990 Professor Gvaladze is a Founding Member of the International Assotiation of Sexual Plant Reproduction Research (IASPRR); Since 1983 - a Member of the Board of the Georgia's Botanical Society. She received a International S. Navashin Medail (1990). Since 1998 Professor Gvaladze is an Academician of the Abkhazian National Academy of Sciences (former Abkhazian Regional Academy of Sciences), based in Tbilisi. This Academy is oficially registered and fully recognized by the Georgian National Academy of Sciences. You must restore this article, my dear friends. With kind regards, Professor Zurab D. Urushadze ( [email protected] ).

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guranda Gvaladze. The main reason for the deletion was the lack of reliable sources that could be used to verify all these claims, and secondarily that even if they could be verified it is still not clear that she passes the requirements of WP:PROF. So it is unlikely that the article would be restored in its present state. But if adequate sources could be found, the result might be different; in that case, the course to take would be to try to persuade the closing administrator, Ron Ritzman (talk · contribs), or failing that to take it to WP:DRV. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:31, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Sport TOC

On Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sports the table of contents appears halfway down the page instead of at the top. Does anyone know how to fix this? AIRcorn (talk) 06:21, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

DelSorting Issues

I have a delsorting script that allows me to click on a tab, bring up a javascript menu, and automagically delsort incoming AfDs. However, it no longer appears to work. Clicking on the tab has no functionality. My script hasn't been changed at all-- has there been some changes within XfD that has caused these problems? I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 06:47, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Discussion notification

Greetings. A discussion related to this WikiProject has been opened at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#Deletion sorting proposal. Your thoughts are most welcome, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 13:49, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

FORMER OTTOMAN REPUBLIC OF GREECE-FOROG

I stumbled across these redirects, they are obviously made by an ethnic Macedonian editor as a "critical comment" or a practical joke of some sort in relation to the Macedonia naming dispute, in any case they do not serve anyone (apart from those participating in the joke i suppose), as they are not used in any context. I have no idea of the technicalities regarding page deletions, can some admin please handle it ?--A Couple of Things (talk) 00:05, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

New deletion sorting categories

I've been deletion sorting for a few months now and have probably sorted many hundreds of articles into categories now. It's a relatively low-stress and enjoyable gnoming task, but I think after all this, I feel like there are a few categories that we could add or change.

Off the top of my head:

  • Motorsport: for F1 and other motorsport
  • Books: for music, we have Bands and musicians, Music and Albums and songs, but for literature and other forms of writing, we don't have an equivalent books category. There was a whole swathe of deletions a while back for books related to Islam and the politics of the terrorism/Islamophobia/Islamism etc. and there wasn't a clear book category for them despite WP:NBOOK and the intuitive feeling that with books, we can judge them in some kind of reasonably objective way (if they've had reviews, become bestsellers etc.)

Anybody got any other ideas of new deletion sorting categories? —Tom Morris (talk) 20:41, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

i think that both of the ones you suggest are good. i'd especially find books useful. also, i've been thinking that it might be nice to have one for hoaxes, which could encompass both articles that are proposed for deletion because they are hoaxes and (more rarely) ones that are about hoaxes. i enjoy trying to figure out whether the subject of an article is real or not, regardless of what other categories it belongs in, so i thought maybe others would too. it seems that articles about hoaxes might as well go in there too, since they're going to end up there anyway, and might appeal to the same kinds of editors.— alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:56, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed split: Video games from Games

I would really, really like it if deletion sorting for video games was tracked in a separate subpage from games otherwise. For myself and surely anyone else from WP:GAMES trying to keep track of games stuff, it's very frustrating to do so, because 95% of deletion stuff regarding "games" is always about video games. WP:VG is a much larger and more active project (obviously; video games are much more popular than crokinole and lawn darts, heh). VG deletion sorting already has all the eyes on it that it'll ever need, while games in the general, non-bleepy-bloopy-button-pushing sense doesn't, by a long shot. Obviously, both projects' talk pages would need to be notified of the split so watchlists can be adjusted. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 18:45, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Anyone? Anyone? I'd just go be bold and do it, but suspect that there are various things in various places that would need to be changed to reflect this split, so I want to leave it to someone who does delsorting all the time, like maybe Tom Morris. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 01:41, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that sounds good. Go ahead! Err, I should probably put some text in bold, like this: Support. I know WikiProject Video Games have their own list, but it doesn't appear on the DELSORT lists, so those of us who do deletion sorting usually stuff it into games rather than tag it with the WikiProject one. This is the same for WikiProject Pornography and a fair few other WikiProjects. No point having what are essentially WikiProject specific delsort pages. —Tom Morris (talk) 01:58, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Except where a logical delsort category happens to coincide with a project, which is the case here. I think the project list should simply move, to an official delsort list. There's no reason for the project to maintain its own when the VG material isn't in the (non-video) games delsort list any more. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 00:59, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Support - I don't consider myself all that knowledgeable about delsorting, but from a concept point of view, I think separating VG & non-VG games (hellooo RAS syndrome!) can only be beneficial to both. I wish I could say I resent the implication that I don't care about crokinole, but... well... *shrugs* I see your point. :) Salvidrim! 06:58, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
I've seen somewhere a crokinole simulator video game. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 04:47, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
I've played crokinole IRL in some distant past. Salvidrim! 04:53, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Shameless plug: Don't forget WP Games can subscribe to WP:Article Alerts and get automagically notified of only the relevant notices. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:46, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
I should set that up. I've been greatly digging that for WP:CUE. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 04:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
That one's been subscribed since April 2009 Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cue_sports/Article_alerts. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:16, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Request: Can someone clarify what needs to be done, what has to happen to make this work? I'm unfamiliar with the guts of the DELSORT system. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 04:48, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Actually, my bot doesn't do anything to delsorts. In fact, I don't think there's many bots that do. Delsorts are manually maintained. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:13, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I thought he wanted help on setting up an Article Alerts page for WP:GAMES. Salvidrim! 09:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Support Some kind of separation, that being the case, though how that is done is not something I have any knowledge of. It certainly shouldn't be the case that video game nominations swamp the general games delsort list. Someoneanother 17:32, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Ottoman Empire

I think that Ottoman Empire should have its subpage within Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:42, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Automatic delsort

Does anyone know if and when the delsort feature will be restored to Twinkle? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:13, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Burma

Can a delsort page be created for Burma? We seem to have pages for all soerts of other obscure countries. With recent political events there is sure to be a crop of new articles emerging. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Archive page length

I notice some of the archive pages are getting rather long:

I can easily enough have AnomieBOT start creating numbered archives, and adjusting {{deletionlist}} and {{deletionlistarchive}} to link to the extra archives wouldn't be too difficult either. But I have some questions:

  1. It seems these deletion sorting archives are set up to be transcluded somewhere. Would creating numbered archives break whatever does that? Is it already broken anyway due to the length of the archives?
  2. Would anyone object to my moving the existing archives to "/Archive 1", so the standard archival templates can be used for the linking?

Thanks. Anomie⚔ 18:03, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Notifying AFDs

I have just been WP:BOLD and modified both {{Deletionlist}} and {{Deletionlist-country}} to slightly strengthen the advice which appears at the top of each deletion sorting list regarding notifying an AFD discussion about its inclusion in a delsort list.

The guidance used to say: "You can also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Listname|~~~~}}".

However, the use of delsort at AFD now seems to be nearly universal, and so it seems right to me that its usage should be encouraged. I have therefore strengthened the wording from "can" to "should", so that the guidance now reads: "You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Listname|~~~~}}".

I hope this is uncontroversial, but thought it best to point out the change just in case. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:24, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merging and expansion for fringe topics

How about we merge the existing delsort pages for Conspiracy theories and Paranormal into one named "Fringe topics" which would be including also some topics that don't fit so well into the two I mentioned? __meco (talk) 15:41, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Archive_5&oldid=1146471098"