Template talk:Delete

general comments
Mark said: Also, I think I would like the template more if it were to say that adminstrators were going to delete the page in the next month or so...
 * Mark, it sounds like you're looking for another template, which is what I was trying to suggest about temporary pages. To me it doesn't make sense to make something for deletion unless the idea is to delete it.  If we want to mark something as temporary (a scratch space, or a placeholder that we're willing to hold for some time, but not longer), then I think we need different tags for those functions.  No need to be one size fits all. TedErnst | talk 16:41, 27 Mar 2006 (EST)

I guess I don't agree. Obviously, what's new right? :-) I am looking for the WikiIsSlow nature of the WikiWay. I am not comfortable with quick deletions, except for blatently obvious spam.  I want to give more space to others for them to explore.  I am not sure if it feels like a ColdBlanket or what, but it doesn't feel right to me. Also, I am interested in a KISS philosophy, why have two pages for deletion when one will do. (this concern also has to do with talk pages)
 * off topic, I am excited to get the Meatball: interlink - but not sure how or why it is happening. anyone? MarkDilley


 * Yes, what's new. :-) But now we have two different ways to delete, which doesn't make sense to me.  I don't have a problem not deleting stuff immediately, if that's how we want to work things.  I wasn't aware that's the conversation we were having.  If we're talking about temp pages, they shouldn't be deleted until the work they're there for is done.  And how do I know that if I'm just looking at stuff marked with DeletedPage?  This whole procedure feels not-well-thought-out.  Maybe you're bringing a procedure here from another wiki.  If that's the case, please say so and explain how it works.  By the way, I'd much rather change the rules for how we use this template than use the DeletedPage tag.  Heck, change the text on this template if you like.  The DeletedPage tag just doesn't make any sense to me. TedErnst | talk 00:05, 4 Apr 2006 (EDT)


 * and I would much rather use the DeletedPage tag... :-) again our collaboration is foiled!! Damn yee wiki... my experience is with it at DeletedPage.  We used it even before it became automated.  To me it is a much more WikiWay to operate.  The templates are cool and I like their use (limited though),  I am trying to keep my use of wiki as simple as possible.   This conversation will have to go somewhere else, but here are some things I was thinking.  We are using MediaWiki software for this wiki.  I have heard Wikipedia people say they don't know why anyone would use it if the weren't building an encyclopedia.  I also agree with CommunityWiki that MediaWiki interfers with TheoryBuilding (in that there is discussion/talk page available for each page).  We, and many people on the internet, are using MediaWiki because they have done a good job and made it the easiest wiki to install, amoung many other features.  I am glad to be working on this project on a MediaWiki, but that doesn't mean I want to throw out what I know as wiki.  There was a conversation early on about FreeLinks and CamelCase - it was set up as an either or ... I suggested it as both.  As far as I am concerned, having both options hurts nothing here.  Kinda goes along with my ideas of Versioning.  As you have suggested before, we are not want for space.  MarkDilley

Both options hurts if new people want to figure out what we're doing and we're not clear about it ourselves. If we're going to keep two, we either need to document them and explain how they're different in their use, or document them as two different ways to do the same thing, as a personal preference kind of thing. I like the template because it puts those pages into a category, where I can see all pages marked for deletion. DeletedPage is more difficult to use because it requires me to check backlinks, which aren't exactly easy to find. I was thinking about this more overnight and I really like the idea that pages aren't deleted right away. Maybe we could have a different template for each month, and then at the end of the month following (or in the middle or whatever), those pages could be deleted. Otherwise, I see no way to know when a page should be deleted. TedErnst | talk 14:36, 4 Apr 2006 (EDT)


 * The "Deletedpage" template doesn't seem to be in use at the moment -- Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Deletedpage. Is that because it is so incredibly useful that sysops have already gone through and deleted every page that transcluded that template? Or is that because no one uses that template any more, and we ought to delete it now to eliminate the above-mentioned confusion? --DavidCary 03:27, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

Why do we need to protect a deleted page?
After I delete a page, often s will re-create a page with exactly the same name and fill it with spam again. And then I delete it again, and the cycle continues over and over again.

One way to break this cycle is to deliberately create a fresh page with that exact name and some harmless text on it -- perhaps some AntiSpamMeasures keywords -- and then protect that page so spammers don't fill it with spam again. Is there a better way? --DavidCary 03:27, 21 June 2009 (EDT)