Memory Alpha

Memory Alpha:Pages for deletion/Forum:Why Vandals?

< Memory Alpha:Pages for deletion

Revision as of 20:50, December 2, 2010 by SulfBot (Talk | contribs)

40,427pages on
this wiki

This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete "Forum:Why Vandals?".

  • If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale".
  • If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion".
  • If a consensus has been reached, an admin will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution".

In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page.

Deletion rationale

I figured I'd at least try to get rid of this. Almost the entire thread is simply personal attacks and other violations of MA policy. It had died almost two months ago, but has since been revived with further personal attacks and mis-characterizations (I remember the newest event being discussed). Let us be rid of this violation of policy. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


That's right! Delete the things we don't want to hear! la la la la! Can't hear the people who disagree! I vote Keep. If only so that I can have someone else reply as to why we even have forums if their going to be patrolled by "thought police". --<unsigned>

First off, my problem is not with discussions that I do not like, or disagree with, it is that this particular discussion violates the policy against personal attacks, as well as probably half a dozen other policies. I was willing to let it go, but then someone else went in to complain and commit personal attacks about something that happened months ago. These are policy violations, and over issues that are old. Get over it, move on, and do not engage in personal attacks, people. Not that hard a concept. Second, know that this is not a vote. You may suggest to keep, but in the end this will be determined by the admins enforcing policy. --OuroborosCobra talk 09:52, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I don't really see any "violation of policy" there. Sure, there are some apparent misrepresentations, but really no harsh personal attacks for the sake of it. On the other hand, there's at least some useful insight into what makes different people tick the way they do, here... -- Cid Highwind 11:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Right, these aren't personal attack in the completely irrational/unrelated sense, like "you smell bad" or "your mother dresses you funny," they are gripes relating a persons behaviour on MA. There are some cheap shots which I would imagine come mostly from frustration, but mostly it's on message, and there are some good responses as well, making it a good enough discussion to Keep. --Bp 12:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Mr. GNDN here. I am somewhat embarrassed to see this forum topic surface again. I did start it several months ago out of frustration with certain comments that seemed, at the time, brusquely worded. The adage about "sleeping on a letter" before sending applies both to the comments and my unfortunate reaction thereto. I do appreciate the efforts made by those who were able to recognize the heart of my comments despite the invective that covered them. Since "the rant" I've come to better understand the collaborative nature of MA and, I hope, I have conducted myself accordingly. The point is that while I do not "own" this topic, I vote to delete as it is more hurtful than appropriate to the circumstance. A simple misunderstanding became much more than it needed to be; the editors that do the day-to-day work on this site are far more aware of the causes of --and solutions to-- the frustrations that I aired out than I once realized. For what it's worth, the issues have been resolved and this topic has served out its useful life. --GNDN 20:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Delete. Because the original poster agrees. >.> --6/6 Neural Transceiver 22:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
The original poster isn't the only contributor. --Bp 20:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. The discussion is pertinent, and as can be seen in threads from Memory Beta's Ten Forward here and here, it's an ongoing and pernicious problem. -- Renegade54 21:10, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
    • I would point out that I can find nothing relevant in the second discussion pertaining to the thread in question. That thread seems to have more to do with Talk:Main Page/archive#Memory Beta?. Even that first discussion over at Memory Beta is more about that that one person bashing Memory Beta. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
      • You're right, the second link was about a perceived feud and not about archivist's or admin's attitudes on MA. My mistake. The first, though, while it started as a complaint about a single user, it brought out comments from others who had had bad experiences here on MA in the past. -- Renegade54 21:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I also wanted to point out that multiple times, the user being complained about has his name misspelled, multiple times, and in my mind intentionally. That is part of what I consider a personal attack. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I vote to move this to Forum:Complaints regarding that jerk, Alan "Del Bechio". It is a far more accurate title than "Why Vandals?", which clearly has nothing to do with the content... --Alan del Beccio 00:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Admin resolution

Kept, but needs to be moved to a more, um... descriptive title. --From Andoria with Love 20:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki