Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Eagle 101/WikiVoter

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Speedy Keep - enough is enough -- Tawker 04:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Eagle 101/WikiVoter

Is it so onerous to ask a person who wants to participate in AfD to actually read the articles, click on the link to the AfD and then edit the AfD page? This just makes AfD too much of an automatic process, allowing users to fast-edit AfDs without actually bothering to participate in a reasoned manner. User:Zoe|(talk) 02:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep this is a great tool and it is very helpful to many users. If you want to suggest a change suggest it at the discussion place, but not an mfd. And even if the project page is deleted, it is not going to stop people from using the tool. GeorgeMoney (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • It will if people revert votes done from the tool. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I don't like the tool either. I don't like it one bit. However, if I may point out several things: 1) It makes it easier to find single-purpose accounts; 2) shows the article itself prominently, making it easier to perform due diligence; 3) encourages edit summaries; and 4) helps eliminate votes where people say "nn, d" without bothering to do the most elemental Google search. I don't like that the use of the tool is restricted; I think it is absolutely and totally anathema to the spirit of Wikipedia. I also don't like that it encourages the use of those little obnoxious voting graphics, which encourage tallying at the expense of examining the quality of the discussion. However, if people want to use the tool, I see no reason to interfere with that. Captainktainer * Talk 03:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, or as an alternative somehow remedy the concerns over mindless AfD participation. Remember that it's not a vote, either... Ardric47 03:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Zoe, and I'm uncomfortable with the idea of an advantage for its users over regular AfD participants- allowing for a "super-voter" who, able to go through the process more quickly, can have more participation. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 03:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. This userpage is for a Wikipedia-related tool made in good faith. The tool can be, and is apparently, used for making reasonable evaluations of AfDs. The tools mentioned above by Captainktainer seem useful and are independent of any objectionable voting aspect. It is under development and could be changed to specifically prevent the sort of vote-like edits objected to. —Centrx→talk • 03:20, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep The concerns I see above appear to be from editors who may not be familiar with the program. WikiVoter actually encourages more informed AfD participation by presenting relevant decision-making material to the editor. At it's heart, the program essentially helps users with otherwise repetitive manual labor. Please also see Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Eagle 101 for other discussion on the program, including a walk-through overview of the program. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 03:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral. I don't see any pattern of abuse, so I can't justify asking for deletion right now. I do think there's a potential for abuse and this should be watched closely. I'd try it out, but it depends on too much unfree software that my system can't run. —ptk✰fgs 03:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. With all due respect, I think most or all of the delete votes are from people who've forgotten to assume good faith in the efforts of their fellow editors, and who haven't done their homework with regards to how the program works, or what it does. In particular, Zoe's statement, "Is it so onerous to ask a person who wants to participate in AfD to actually read the articles, click on the link to the AfD and then edit the AfD page?" is a bit hypocritical, since she obviously hasn't even tried out the program -- it includes several tabs which allow editors to easily and quickly switch between AfD and article pages for comparison, and to search major search engines in the hope of finding news stories or other reliable sources. That said, I can see why people are concerned, and I respect all of the reasoning -- all I ask is that you put a little more effort into investigating things before coming to a decision. Luna Santin 03:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment If I may please read the following comment I made on this very subject recently below - GIen 03:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep The author clearly states that the name of the tool is not to be taken literally. Furthermore, the tool requires a minimum of 250 mainspace edits, greatly reducing the possibility of the tool being abused. The tool saves me a lot of time by making it simpler to find AfD's according to the date they were created. Dionyseus 04:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiVoter concerns - examples of use

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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.