Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Illustrating a point
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Userfy. Scimitar parley 19:11, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Illustrating a point
Contentless
]- I totally don't understand what point this is trying to make. It doesn't really make sense (but wait, is that a bureaucrat who wrote it?). And I'm not aware of any stub notices we use on Wikipedia namespace pages. In any case, I don't think deletion is the way to go. It needs time to be proposed as policy, or whatever the author was intending to do with this (which I'd like to hear). Userfy for now. --Dmcdevit04:55, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
- Userfy with haste. Bureaucrat or not, this has no business in
articleWikipedia: space yet! -Splash 04:56, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply] - Userfy (I guess). As in: move to a subpage of his userpage -mysekurity 05:53, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd like to point out to Splash that this is not in the article space, but the Wikipedia space. Still userfying is the way to go. -Mgm|(talk) 10:03, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
- Merge with WP:POINT if the definition is really considered necessary. Otherwise, delete. --FreelanceWizard 10:50, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Violation of ]
- Delete Violation of WP:POINT. JamesBurns 10:10, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, redir to 13:38, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete COULD be a violation of ]
- Comment - what exactly is being disrupted here? People throw around WP:POINT way too liberally. --SPUI (talk) 23:02, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep for the time being. WP:POINT. Could these people please explain what they meant by this? What point is Ed trying to prove? I don't see how suggesting that people lead by example could possibly be in violation of anything at all. — Asbestos | Talk 13:23, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I'm not done developing this. Stubs aren't supposed to be deleted simply because they are short. "I'm about to use this article to make a point, er, I mean ILLUSTRATE a point." There are many ways you can simultaneously (a) do something constructive and (b) use it as an example to teach somebody. "Here, let me show you what I mean." This is the opposite of disrupting to make a point: it's using an example of something good to encourage others to do good. Why is this so hard to understand? BECAUSE I HAVEN'T FINISHED WRITING THE ARTICLE YET. I've been busy:
- Mediating
- Getting new features into the software
- Defending NPOV policy
- Helping clueless newbies
- Stopping personal attacks
If you didn't like the article, why didn't you leave me a note on my user talk page, instead of vfd'ing behind my back? And before you say "the rules permit it", let me remind you about Wikipedia:gaming the system. Uncle Ed 18:23, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
- Comment. Not gaming anything, I think the article is inappropriate in Wikispace at least in its present form. Please feel free to Userfy it yourself and develop it into something worthwhile. No personal insult intended. Whig 22:10, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- None taken. Thanks. All I ask, is that if someone userfies it, they leave a note somewhere so I can find it. Uncle Ed 12:50, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Userfy. If you aren't done, why is it linked from Talk18:19, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
- 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 article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.
.