On 6/16/06, Angela <beesley(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, of course. They can move any non-protected page
anywhere they
like. And that ability shouldn't be removed considering how many
newbies accidentally make their user page in the article namespace and
it needs to be moved to the userspace.
In that particular case, no harm would be caused by copying/pasting it
to their user page, then marking the original for speedy deletion. But
I take your point.
On 6/16/06, Hsiang-Tai Chien <htchien1225(a)yahoo.com.tw> wrote:
I usually put a {{delete}} to a subpage that I do not
want to use anymore
and soon an admin will delete it for me. Maybe you can do that, too.
Ok, maybe that works well enough at EN Wikipedia. I tried it a couple
of times later at Commons and discovered that 3+ months later the
images were still there (could be extremely embarrassing if you
uploaded the wrong image...)
On 6/16/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence(a)gmail.com> wrote:
User pages exist to serve the community and the
project, not the
users. As such, I think we should de-emphasize the notion of personal
page ownership, and preserve community review on such pages. Improving
these review and deletion processes, both on the policy and the
technology level, strikes me as a better way to address any currently
existing bottleneck situations.
That seems quite reasonable. Would a "special" {{delete}} template
along the lines of "This isn't even in the main user space, can some
admin just kill it?" be an improvement? You would have at least one
pair of eyes checking it...
Steve