Wikinews:Deletion requests

(Redirected from Wikinews:DR)


This page is where Wikinewsies discuss whether a page or file should be deleted or undeleted through consensus. See the Deletion Log or the Deletion Archives to see which pages have been deleted or kept.


Deletion requestsEdit

July 11, 2021Edit

NHS and CigaretteEdit

Per @Acagastya:'s suggestion, these redirects may be unnecessary. NHS is too generic, and "cigarette" can refer to a tube containing substances other than tobacco intended for smoking. —chaetodipus (talk · contribs) 20:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

CommentsEdit

  •   Comment I disagree that NHS is unnecessary; all references to an "NHS" on Wikinews generally refer to the UK's National Health Services. This may be a case where we have a disambiguation page in mainspace, but most other organizations that might be an NHS likely won't see much coverage, see for example w:NHS (disambiguation)chaetodipus (talk · contribs) 20:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

VotesEdit

Delete the two. Re cigarette, cigarette is for smoking -- what you put in it is not fixed -- you can roll it with tobacco, or you can have cannabis. Re NHS, we literally had discussed about such globally unknown abbreviations (including this) and it is no mystery how much unnecessary effort of admins go behind fixing the ambigious names later being changed. If it should be NHS (UK), then don't put the burden on future maintainers, keep it that way from the start. We don't go by "what NHS means in Wikinews articles in the past" -- such mistakes takes hours of our time, when it comes to fixing the mess. We need to future-proof.
•–• 06:11, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete: I'm hesitant as to whether either of these changes are necessary, but given that no actual categories are being deleted or renamed, simply redirects, I'm inclined to agree. I do think that tobacco cigarettes and the UK NHS are by far the most common use for both terms, but as acagastya notes, they're not universally used for one topic, probably for the best to err on the side of caution here and delete. --LivelyRatification (talk) 03:30, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Keep: I think this request reeks of pedantry. For the sake of a theoretical future in which articles on another NHS or, even more bizarrely, tobacco in any other context would accumulate in sufficient notability and quantity as to require new categories, we are causing an unnecessary amount of inconvenience for the users of today. To prepare for one step forward, we're going two steps back. --JJLiu112 (talk) 04:04, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

@JJLiu112: I think this only concerns the redirects NHS and Cigarette - the National Health Service and Tobacco pages wouldn't be touched. LivelyRatification (talk) 04:38, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Yes, and their deletion would be an unnecessary inconvenience if the reason for doing so is just "well, maybe one day, there'll be enough articles on a DIFFERENT NHS/DIFFERENT use of tobacco". JJLiu112 (talk) 05:16, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Ah, OK. I understand that concern, I was just unsure if you thought that the tobacco article was being deleted. LivelyRatification (talk) 05:17, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
It is about doing the right thing and being precise. Having some regional acronym, which does not have international ties or recognition is a recipe for disaster, a western equivalent of white-washing, and it should be lead by example. Cigarette is not the same as tobacco and should not even point to the same thing. Not future-proofing is not how enwn works, you would have seen in the edit history time and time again. It should not even exist, in principle. Just like IRCTC should not. And having cigarettes as tobacco is wilfull ignorance, something we don't do here -- just like America vs USA. •–• 06:48, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
While I am sympathetic to your arguments in regards to being overly Westernised, I'm not entirely sure about your future-proofing argument. I don't think that we always need to disambiguate to prevent a possible future where we may need a separate category. To give an example close to home for me, our Melbourne category is for the town in Australia with over 5 million residents. There are, indeed, a number of other places called Melbourne, including Melbourne, Florida with over 84,000 people. We have indeed had some articles that have referenced that Melbourne. It is not inconceivable that a Floridian Wikinewsie could write enough articles to warrant a category for Melbourne, Florida.
On that grounds, should we disambiguate the Melbourne category to Melbourne (Victoria) or Melbourne (Australia)? I'd say no, but it seems like based on your future-proofing argument, we should. These are only redirects, so I don't really object, but I don't think it's at all necessary to disambiguate for the sake of it, just in case we might one day have an article on additional topics with the same name. LivelyRatification (talk) 01:01, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Undeletion requestsEdit

Proposed deletionsEdit

 Purge server cache  For reference, it is currently December 8, 2021.

CopyvioEdit

Delete articles posted before December 7.

AbandonedEdit

Delete articles posted before December 6.

Minimal and PREdit

Delete articles posted before December 5.


Unsourced preparedEdit

Delete articles posted before November 28