Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion
|
We welcome and appreciate civil discussion of requests to delete or undelete pages when reasonable objections are made or are likely, the advice in Wikiversity:Deletions is followed, and other options have failed. A good attitude is to explain what you have tried, ask for help or advice from fellow Wikiversity participants on what to do now, keep an open mind, accept any community consensus, and focus on how pages can be improved. Finding ways to improve pages is the preferred outcome of any discussion and consensus here. Pages should always be kept when reasonable concerns are adequately addressed. Reasons and responses should be specific and relate to Wikiversity policy or scope in some way, kept brief, and stated in a positive or neutral way. Vague reasons ("out of scope", "disruptive") may be ignored. A clear consensus should emerge before archiving a request. Often discussion takes a week or more to reach a clear consensus. Remember to add {{dr}} to the top of pages nominated for deletion. You can put "keep", "delete", or "neutral" at the beginning of your response, but consensus is established by discussion and reasoning, not mere voting. |
How to begin discussion Edit
|
Undeletion requests Edit
If an article has been deleted, and you would like it undeleted, please list it here. Please try to give as close to the title as possible, and list your reasons for why it should be restored.
Similarity of matter levels Edit
On December 25, 2022 User:Guy_vandegrift renamed the Similarity of matter levels page to Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Similarity of matter levels page without leaving the redirect to new page. But in Wikiversity there are some pages with links to Similarity of matter levels page, such as
Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Infinite Hierarchical Nesting of Matter, SPФ symmetry, Stellar Stefan–Boltzmann constant, Stellar Dirac constant, Substantial neutron model, Scale dimension, Gravitational constant, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Praon, Stellar Boltzmann constant, Nuon, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Discreteness of stellar parameters, Substantial electron model, Electrogravitational vacuum, Quantization of parameters of cosmic systems, Stellar constants, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Hydrogen system, Substantial proton model, Coupling constant, Stellar Planck constant, Strong gravitation, Model of quark quasiparticles, Characteristic speed, Substantial photon model, Strong gravitational constant, Gravitational model of strong interaction, Covariant theory of gravitation, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Monopoles, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Velocity circulation quantum, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Gravitoelectromagnetism, Field mass-energy limit, Physics/Essays/Fedosin/Quantum Gravitational Resonator.
There is no any explanation for the action of the User:Guy_vandegrift. I suppose he can explain. On the other hand it would be much better if the User:Guy_vandegrift take part in improvement of the Similarity of matter levels page, before its deletion in main space of Wikiversity. Fedosin (discuss • contribs) 06:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
My two edit summaries at User talk:Elominius (non-urgent) Edit
Deletion requests Edit
If an article should be deleted and does not meet speedy deletion criteria, please list it here. Include the title and reason for deletion. If it meets speedy deletion criteria, just tag the resource with {{Delete|reason}} rather than opening a deletion discussion here.
Pervasive copyright violations by User:Marshallsumter Edit
Though still active, this is a long discussion that should be archived and replaced by a status report--user:Guy vandegrift
|
|---|
|
User:Marshallsumter has over 1500 images uploaded on this site. Most of these images were uploaded under a claim of fair use. Unfortunately, none of these fair use claims appear to be valid. Almost every one I have looked at followed the pattern "No free licensed or public domain alternatives known to exist to show…" followed by the description of the image. For example, some of this user's uploads state that:
Moreover, most of these images are not used in ways which comply with Wikiversity's Exemption Doctrine Policy. The vast majority of them are used in a decorative fashion to illustrate a topic mentioned in the text of a page, not to further any specific educational goal. Does Wikiversity have a process capable of handling the bulk deletion of these images? I can't imagine RFD would be able to handle it. Is there any better way to address this? -- Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 01:27, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Discussion EditI agree with the assessment that the use of many of these "fair use" images is not consistent with either the spirit of Fair Use or the Exemption Doctrine Policy. The simple solution is to delete all Category:Fair use files images uploaded by Marshallsumter. Are there any other suggestions? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:26, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
(Unindenting for clarity.) With regard to the term "educational", the mission statement of the Wikimedia Foundation (as a whole!) is "to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally". Wikiversity does not have a unique mandate to create educational content - that is the purpose of the entire Foundation! - and neither does it have any unique privilege to use non-free content in the pursuit of that mission. You're focusing unduly on the single image I chose as an example, but I'll indulge you for a moment. The primary page where you used that image, Earth/Geognosy, does not even mention the image in the accompanying text. It appears alongside a definition of the term "geognosy". Moreover, it appears directly below another freely licensed diagram of the Earth's structure; you clearly found that one accurate enough to display, so it's not at all clear why you felt the need to use another non-free image with substantially the same content. Diagrams are almost never justifiable as fair use, as they are by their nature replaceable with free content (even if that content has not yet been created), and this one is no exception.
Let me take another completely different example to show that this is not an isolated issue. On 28 July 2014, you uploaded File:Transportation-terminology.jpg, an image of a highway with cars and trucks at sunset, and declared that you were using it under fair use. You provided no justification for your claim of fair use, and you only used it on the page Draft:Terminology/Quiz, as a decorative element on a quiz about "terminology". At no point does the quiz even mention highways, cars, trucks, nor sunsets. The only connection I can see between this non-free image and the page you used it in is the fact that you obtained the image from a web page titled "The Definitive Guide to Transportation Terminology to Stay on the Same Logistics Page". The image was a decorative element on that page, and it does not serve any other purpose on this site either.
Or another: on 1 October 2016, you uploaded File:Diversity_of_plants.jpg under a claim of fair use, with the justification that "no free use or Public Domain image known to show the diversity of plants". I have an extremely hard time believing that no freely licensed images exist which contain multiple different plants, nor that it is somehow impossible to create a freely licensed collage of plant pictures. I am especially troubled by the fact that the image description indicates that you recognized that "apparently the image of sunflowers in copyrighted, and the image was deleted from Commons", and you uploaded it in knowing disregard of those copyright issues.
Or yet another: on 29 November 2017, you uploaded File:Referral_letter_1.png. This is a photograph of a private medical document which was deleted from Wikimedia Commons over copyright concerns. You provided no justification for it being fair use on Wikiversity, and you failed to provide accurate source information (the Commons URL it was deleted from is not the original source of the image), and the page you used it in contains no text referencing the image - it appears under a header with no additional caption or explanatory text.
None of these uses are justifiable as fair use under any definition of the term - neither Wikiversity's, nor WMF's, nor the law. Claiming otherwise - claiming that any image can be an "educational illustration" if it appears alongside a related piece of text - represents a fundamental misunderstanding of copyright law and fair use. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 04:37, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
I personally don't see any advantage in engaging with Marshallsumter regarding this issue. As with dozens or hundreds of previous discussions, it is likely to only result in long diatribes of misdirection without any acknowledgement or acceptance of the actual issues involved. Instead, I recommend we focus on the community response to the situation at hand. Omphalographer has identified issues which apply to hundreds of uploaded images. OhanaUnited has looked into several images and confirmed the findings. I have similar concerns regarding the images I've viewed. Others are welcome to review and confirm (or object) if they wish. But, accepting for the moment that the concerns are legitimate and widespread, do we want to just delete them all and have Marshallsumter start over, providing adequate fair use justification of any such images? Do we want to prohibit Marshallsumter from uploading any Fair Use images, as there is clear disregard for what Fair Use is and how it should be applied, and none of us has time to oversee this effort? Or is there someone willing to investigate the issues and identify which images legitimately meet Fair Use and EDP guidelines? I'm inclined to delete them all and give Marshallsumter a chance to start over and demonstrate that he is able to apply guidelines appropriately going forward. Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:45, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
I may have missed some of the subtleties here, but would requiring images to be uploaded to (and suitable for) Wikimedia Commons rather than Wikiversity offer a practical solution? Generally speaking, I prefer images to be on Commons because there is more checking to make sure they are appropriate and the images can then be used in any sister project in any language. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:11, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
What is the status of this discussion? It's been open for nearly a month now with no action. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 08:04, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
|
Extended content
|
|---|
|
I think Wikiversity should disallow efforts to bypass the custom Creative Commons with templates like this. See the following quote from this documentation page:
To make matters worse, there are a number of such pages in both template and main space. I have concerns about unnecessary templates in general. See my note to this template's author at User_talk:Cody_naccarato#Concern_about_some_templates_you_are_making
Checking 1 page, 6 templates, and 6 doc subpages EditAll 13 pages have been returned and double checked. My mental health is restored.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 02:48, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Decision to keep these pages is (almost) final -- unless the author wants to delete
|
_version_1.png){kind=link}
This is effectively a source document, not a learning resource. While the uploader suggested that it was "an experimental learning project to see if wikis can be used to give one a thorough understanding and comprehension of the basic Linux source code in a concise, efficient, and elegant manner", there's no indication of how that project was intended to work.
There's also a weird little copyright issue with this content. While current versions of the Linux kernel are licensed under the GPL, some very early versions, including this one, used a custom license which prohibited any form of paid distribution.
(And, just in case anyone actually wants the code, it's available at: https://mirrors.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/.)
Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 02:20, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Done - Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 18:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Thousands of unused files Edit
There are thousands of unused files on Wikiversity. 5.000 can be seen on Special:UnusedFiles. There is a general clean up project on Wikiversity_talk:File_Review and one of the things discussed is unused files.
So far unused non-free files have been deleted and files without a license have also been tagged for deletion. That leaves files with a free license. So the question is what to do with those.
Unused does not always mean unusable. But if the file is not in use anywhere there is a risk that it is out of WV:Scope.
Example: The first file on the list is File:Sysop buttons.png. It is not in use and there is no links to the page. How to move forward?
- Should files be discussed one by one?
- Should there be a speedy template to add and if there are no objections after 90
7days the file can be deleted? And if someone disagree they can remove the template and start a regular DR? - Should they be taken in batches?
- Should we just leave all the files alone?
--MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 12:19, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- I'll wait to hear more from the community regarding which option(s) everyone would prefer. But regarding Option 2, I would use Proposed Deletions (90 days) vs. Speedy. We have a long history of tagging things and allowing 90 days for anyone to remove the tag if they want to keep the resource. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 19:26, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- Looking through the unused files list, I get the sense that the majority of them fall into a couple of basic categories:
- Slide presentations and other class documents created by User:Young1lim, which should probably be indexed somewhere and kept. There's a ton of potentially valuable material here and it would be a shame to delete it. (Update: this accounts for 4264 of 5791 total unused files in the last database dump!!)
- Graphs, diagrams, and homework assignments uploaded by ENES100 students. These are useless out of context and should be deleted.
- Files uploaded but not used by User:Jtneill's students for Motivation and Emotion pages. These should be deleted.
- Unused files or homework assignments from Filmmaking. These should be deleted as well.
- I would hesitate to use proposed deletion for these files, as there's simply so many of them that it'd be difficult for other editors to review what's up for deletion.
- Instead, as a first step, how about if we remove all of Young1lim's files from the list by creating a temporary page linking to all of his PDF uploads? Most of those files have fairly systematic names, so it should be straightforward to index them on that page. Getting those files out of the way will protect them from deletion, and should make it easier to figure out what's going on with the rest. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 22:12, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- Update: I've created a temporary list of User:Young1lim's (previously) unused files in my sandbox. After Special:UnusedFiles updates, those files should be off the list, making it easier to handle those. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 23:35, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- Omphalographer I do not think that a link is enough to make Special:UnusedFiles skip the files.
- But I think it sounds like a good idea to take the deletions in similar batches. If they are added to categories it would be easier for users to see the files. Then files could be nominted for deletion one category at a time. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 06:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I'm pretty certain the links I used should be sufficient; the files I linked to now all show my sandbox under "File usage", the same as any other file link would. It might be a few days before the page updates; it currently says the last run was on the 4th. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 07:08, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- UnusedFiles has updated and... well, either the links don't count, or there are a lot more PDFs that I missed somehow. Wow. I'll look into this. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 19:40, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I'm pretty certain the links I used should be sufficient; the files I linked to now all show my sandbox under "File usage", the same as any other file link would. It might be a few days before the page updates; it currently says the last run was on the 4th. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 07:08, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Update: I've created a temporary list of User:Young1lim's (previously) unused files in my sandbox. After Special:UnusedFiles updates, those files should be off the list, making it easier to handle those. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 23:35, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Omphalographer I added all free files from Young1lim to User:MGA73/Sandbox2 and if https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/73587 is correct then there are 1845 unused files. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 16:46, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- Omphalographer I wonder if system can handle it if a page use 20k files. For example this file File:DM.H.2.Logic.20180302.pdf is unused but if you click what links here it shows my sandbox. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 18:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
I have now added the files to 21 galleries in User:MGA73/Sandbox2 to User:MGA73/Sandbox22. Lets see if that does the trick. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 09:00, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- I checked Special:UnusedFiles today and now there are 2,295 files. Omphalographer and Dave Braunschweig as I understand it mass tagging all the files would flood the process so instead it is better to tag them in smaller numbers. Would you like to tag a few to begin with so we can see how it goes? If the files are usable and the source/author/license is good then the files could also be moved to Commons. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 15:01, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
- If we are convinced there is value in removing these images (the cleanup effort improves Wikiversity enough to be worth the time invested), then I'd like to see them tagged in themes. Perhaps start with all of the unused Robert Elliott Film School uploads, or all of the engineering homework uploads. If someone is going to the effort of tagging the images, it might be worth adding a category at the same time (Unused Film School images, Unused engineering homework images, etc.).
- I don't have time to do this, but I'm not opposed if someone else is willing. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:35, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
I think unused files should be deleted if:
- They not have a valid license. There are no unlicensed files left (except perhaps newly uploaded).
- They have a non-free license (including NC and ND). It seems they are harder to find on wikiversity because here a link to the file also count as "in use". I noticed that some files are "in use" in pages in draft namespace or user namespace. On Wikipedia it would not be allowed to use non-free files outside main namespace.
- The copyright is for other reasons unsure. For example the files in Category:Files uploaded by Robert Elliott (other) are uploaded by Robert but the author is someone else.
If everything is good but the file is just not in use for some reason then the file could still be usable. And I agree that it would be a valid option just to ignore them unless someone want to spend some time to check the files.
So for now I will try to put all unused files uploaded by Elliott in a category. Then we can see how many it is and I can check if the files really are unused. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 18:48, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- There are 95 files in Category:Files uploaded by Robert Elliott - unused. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 19:40, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Perhaps someone can help me out here? If the result that it is easier/better just to keep the unused files (unless they are non-free)? Or is the result that they could be deleted? If they can be deleted should the files be marked with a deletion template?
I made a list and it seems that these users are the top uploaders of orphan files (50+). Not sure if that info is relevant but now you now :-)
- User:PCano 288
User:Guy vandegrift 233deleted- User:Katluvdogs 138
- User:Robert Elliott 100
- User:Alsirajmamun 80
- User:Pabloruiz 68
User:Evolution and evolvability 66linked to (WikiJournal files)
--MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 13:53, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
- @MGA73: If you tell me now to access my orphaned files, I will be happy to go through and delete them. It would probably be OK to mass delete them right now, but it would be nice to double check before doing that.Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 09:47, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Guy vandegrift: I made a list in User:MGA73/Sandbox. Perhaps some could go to Commons? --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 10:16, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- I removed all the files except one that I did not create: File:Monopoly;_Corruption_makes_the_world_go_round.jpg -- Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:42, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- Awesome! I checked my list and the problem is that I filtered the files by username and there was one other user that had the letters "Guy" in the name (User:Mr. Guye). He only uploaded one file and that file ended up on the list. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 15:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- For my uploads, I'm guessing that it's probably PDFs? The majority of these are linked to by pages, even if they're not embedded, so are probably false positives for this flag. If that's not the case let me know! T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 07:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Evolution and evolvability: I added the files to User:MGA73/Sandbox and it seems you are right that it is pdf-files and that they are linked to. I noticed that some of the files are not in Category:WikiJournal files. I wonder if the files should all be there. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 19:48, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
- @MGA73 Thanks for collating those together! I've updated the name of that category and I'm going through the files using a template ({{Information_Q}}) to make sure they're all included in that cat. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 00:09, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Evolution and evolvability: I added the files to User:MGA73/Sandbox and it seems you are right that it is pdf-files and that they are linked to. I noticed that some of the files are not in Category:WikiJournal files. I wonder if the files should all be there. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 19:48, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
- For my uploads, I'm guessing that it's probably PDFs? The majority of these are linked to by pages, even if they're not embedded, so are probably false positives for this flag. If that's not the case let me know! T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 07:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
- Awesome! I checked my list and the problem is that I filtered the files by username and there was one other user that had the letters "Guy" in the name (User:Mr. Guye). He only uploaded one file and that file ended up on the list. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 15:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- I removed all the files except one that I did not create: File:Monopoly;_Corruption_makes_the_world_go_round.jpg -- Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 14:42, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Guy vandegrift: I made a list in User:MGA73/Sandbox. Perhaps some could go to Commons? --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 10:16, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
User pages created as part of Computer Essentials (ICNS 141) Edit
While going through unused files, I was reminded of another lingering issue.
Between 2009 and 2011, a course at w:Mahidol University International College required students to create user pages on Wikiversity and upload pictures and/or video of themselves to complete homework assignments. One typical example of these pages is User:Netac~enwikiversity. The course appears to have stopped using Wikiversity after 2011, but most of the content created by the students is still present.
I'm curious whether it might be appropriate for us to bulk delete the user / user talk pages and related media which were created as part of these assignments. I don't see any educational value in retaining these pages, and many of them contain personal information (like names and photos) which the students may not have expected to remain online and accessible to the public indefinitely.
I haven't assembled a full list of the pages involved, but there are some partial lists at:
- Computer Essentials/Archived Homework/Term 2, Sect 1, 2010/2011
- Computer Essentials/Archived Homework/Term 2, Sect 2, 2010/2011
- Special:WhatLinksHere/User:Icns141
Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 03:42, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
- If students are not active then I agree that they should perhaps be deleted. If they were asked to create the page as a part of their study they may not have realised or wanted their info to remain here forever. If they ever return they can always ask to have page restored. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 14:37, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
What is to be gained by deleting these files? As user pages, they don't show up in a search. Deleted pages aren't removed from the database, so it doesn't save any space on the server. I'm having trouble seeing the benefit of deleting this content. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:45, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
- It protects the privacy of the users who created these pages. As noted above,
many of them contain personal information (like names and photos) which the students may not have expected to remain online and accessible to the public indefinitely
. Excluding the pages from external search indexing doesn't make them inaccessible; it just makes them harder to find. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 21:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Invalid fair use by User:Marshallsumter Edit
On Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion#Pervasive_copyright_violations_by_User:Marshallsumter there have been a long discussion about invalid fair use files.
According to this there are 1520 non-free files by Marshallsumter.
I think many files like File:Supraglacial stream Rainbow Glacier.jpg does not qualify as fair use.
This file is in use only in User:Marshallsumter/Rocks/Glaciers/Glaciology. Other files are used in Draft-namespace.
I was thinking that since the user is blocked then the page will probably never be finished. If the pages that are not in main namespace are deleted or the files are removed from the page then the photo will (and perhaps many other) will be orphan.
Could that be a way to try to fix at least some of the bad files? --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 17:38, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- I think most of those files are on this list with 471 files User:MGA73/OrphanNon-free. So if the list is correct we could delete those files. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 18:35, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
There are many files and userspace pages by Marshallsumter and Kizer, who hasn't edited in 15 years. I'll make a calendar reminder to delete them in two weeks and I'll check this thread again to see if anyone responds. Silence is approval, etc. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:39, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- I would support the removal of most of the pages created and/or primarily edited by Marshallsumter, but, as a matter of procedure, can you prepare a list of the pages you intend to delete? Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 20:35, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- I think that is a good idea. I tried to copy {{list subpages|Marshallsumter|User}} to my sandbox and noticed that there are some strangely named talk pages. I think that some pages and their talk pages were separated by a mistake. For example:
- The difference is the 2 in "Radiation_astronomy2/".
- If the pages are to be deleted it may not be a big deal but it would be easier to find out if the talk page were moved so it had the same name as the non-talk page.
- Also I wonder if there are other pages that were incorrectly moved. Does anyone have a good way to find talk pages without a matching page? --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 13:20, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
List of MS-files Edit
- MS has 351 subpages and I'm assuming that all should be deleted, as he is blocked and will not work on them and no one else will as well:
Marshallsumert subpages - delete
|
|---|
|
Marshallsumert subpages - perhaps keep
|
|---|
|
List of Kizer-files Edit
- Kizer has a more manageable 38:
Kizer subpages
|
|---|
|
Discussion continued Edit
- The latter seem like they can all be deleted. I'm open to anyone thinking these userspace drafts should stay. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:54, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
- Kizer's "Web Page" project was moved to userspace as the result of a fairly recent deletion discussion, cf. Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion/Archives/18#Web Page and subpages. Same goes for much of Marshallsumter's userspace content; there's also some non-draft pages in his user space like User:Marshallsumter/Deletion concerns, as well as the recently moved User:Marshallsumter/Dedicated Programming Compiler and User:Marshallsumter/Resources favored by women, which should probably be kept. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 21:54, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
- I just checked all Kizer's pages. None of them have been edited since they were moved. Except a category was removed because user pages are not supposed to be in the main categories. That tells me it is very unlikely someone would suddenly edit the pages. Besides if the programs are 15 years old it is very unlikely someone still uses those programs and/or the layout of the programs are still the same. So the pages are highly outdated. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 08:26, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
- I also checked how often User:Kizer/Web_Page was viewed with pageviews.wmcloud.org and it seems it was not viewed from 2015 to December 2022 and then it was viewed when the DR started. My quess it we will see the same if we check all the sub pages. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 09:59, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
- I just checked all Kizer's pages. None of them have been edited since they were moved. Except a category was removed because user pages are not supposed to be in the main categories. That tells me it is very unlikely someone would suddenly edit the pages. Besides if the programs are 15 years old it is very unlikely someone still uses those programs and/or the layout of the programs are still the same. So the pages are highly outdated. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 08:26, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
- Kizer's "Web Page" project was moved to userspace as the result of a fairly recent deletion discussion, cf. Wikiversity:Requests for Deletion/Archives/18#Web Page and subpages. Same goes for much of Marshallsumter's userspace content; there's also some non-draft pages in his user space like User:Marshallsumter/Deletion concerns, as well as the recently moved User:Marshallsumter/Dedicated Programming Compiler and User:Marshallsumter/Resources favored by women, which should probably be kept. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 21:54, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
- The latter seem like they can all be deleted. I'm open to anyone thinking these userspace drafts should stay. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:54, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Based on my history of interactions and also that I am the blocking custodian / bureaucrat on MS, I won't vote or participate in this discussion. But if the Community agrees to delete these files, I can have MaintenanceBot do the work. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:09, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
I think there's a consensus to mass-delete Kizer's pages and not MS's. Am I correct? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:47, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- I personally think both sets could be deleted. I just did not check the pages of MS because I wanted to see if Kizer's pages could be deleted first. MS is blocked so there is almost no chance the pages will ever be completed. However, there are a few of MS' pages that I think someone would like to keep. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 10:02, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
- I sorted the files in lists. If someone would like to hold on to some of the files perhaps they could just move them down to the keep section? --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 11:17, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
- There are no problematic files in the pages of MS that are now in the (perhaps) keep section. So if they are kept it will not reduce the number of non-free files getting orphan and easy to delete. So I see no problm keeping those pages and just deleting the rest. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 06:35, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry to bother you User:Omphalographer but perhaps you could check the list and either move the pages you would like to keep or write a "Ok now"? In case any pages with non-free files are to be kept I think we should remove the non-free files as long as the page is not final. But I would rather not spend time on that if the page can be deleted instead. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 06:42, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
- There are no problematic files in the pages of MS that are now in the (perhaps) keep section. So if they are kept it will not reduce the number of non-free files getting orphan and easy to delete. So I see no problm keeping those pages and just deleting the rest. --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 06:35, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
- I sorted the files in lists. If someone would like to hold on to some of the files perhaps they could just move them down to the keep section? --MGA73 (discuss • contribs) 11:17, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Abandoned page.
duplicate content of VHDL.
Sirnails (discuss • contribs) 15:58, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hmm. Neither this page nor VHDL have any meaningful content, but we do have a substantial collection of lecture notes on the topic at VHDL programming in plain view, and I believe there are some additional notes which aren't linked from that page. How would you feel about redirecting VHDL for FPGA design to VHDL, and turning the latter page into a collection of resource links? That seems like a more productive solution than deleting the page outright. Omphalographer (discuss • contribs) 17:44, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- that sounds great - i've got no objections to redirecting the page however i'm planning to put some effort into the VHDL page (and the Field-Programmable Gate Array page).
- On a tangent, any objections to consolidating the content on the VHDL programming in plain view with VHDL?
- Sirnails (discuss • contribs) 23:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)