Talk:List of people by name: Fv-Fz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] CSD Nomination & {{Holdon}}

No criterion resembling WP:CSD#Articles or WP:CSD#General criteria has been cited. A more detailed defense of this page (which i am confident would prevail even as an AfD defense) will follow. I have restored the page, which was deleted despite {{hangon}} and despite the lack of a WP:CSD. Although the notice is blatantly unjustified, the terms of the Speedy-request template preclude my removing it; another editor's intervention to do so would be appreciated.
--Jerzy•t 19:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
_ _ For some readers, the context will rescue this technical description more comprehensible: the best window on what (besides lunch) i was doing, for three hours or so and 56 edits, is the view (via the second-deepest level in the infrastructure of the LoPbN tree's inter-page navigation) of the changes needed to support the regrouping of the children of that tree's List of people by name: F "index-only" page.
_ _ Here's how that agenda got set: I noted the need (described below) for separating the page where Fu entries belong from the one where Fv-thru-Fz ones belong. As pages with no entries or only a few were on my mind, i turned that need for editing Template talk:List of people F Links and Template:List of people F Links for that purpose into the occasion to also consolidate 6 pairs or triplets of "adjacent" pages into a single page per pair or triplet. Such separations are routine and mandatory; the consolidations are so low-priority that i estimate that i did more of them in those three hours than i have in the last 3 years. (And while doing these consolidations along with a separation is more efficient than doing them separately, the extra effort is great enough and the utility of the consolidations low enough, that i expect to resume leaving the consolidations for the indefinite future.) Ironically, by the way, the utility of consolidations is fairly readily apparent; the utility of separations (in fact their practical necessity) stems from several factors, each exposed by a separate line of reasoning. The speedy nom in question actually seems to stem from that irony.
_ _ The kind of need for separation that applies to the Fu/Fv-Fz split involves two limits:

1. The effort of finding names on LoPbN pages increases substantially when its sections become taller than the main pane of the user's browser. (Users' pane-heights vary; in practice we aim to limit sections to 25 entries, and the respecting of natural break-points means that many sections are less, or even very short.) So as new names are added, the sections containing them periodically must be split (sometimes also involving boundaries between sections shifting, usually along with an increase in the number of sections).
2. The second limit can be described equivalently as either the ToC-width limit or the section-tree depth limit. In either case, the absolute limit imposed by software and the LoPbN design is 6, and i treat the long-term limit as 5. There are two reasons for setting that long-term limit:
   1. Reserving the top level of section headings (e.g., the = Fu = and = Fz = headings that i introduced early this year, in order to accomodate the headings "Fuller, A-I" and "Fuller, J-U" as subsections of "People named Fuller") for temporary use means that the rest of the time an typical editor can do the adjustment, adding the sixth level of heading, without having to understand the template-based mechanisms that underly the creation of new pages (or the merging of pages).
   2. The use top level section headings is generally avoided thruout en: WP, and regarded as ugly or confusing; minimizing their use in LoPbN is thus desirable independent of the "save them for urgent need" logic.
      

_ _ (I will add here explanation of how these factors play into the situation in question, and how the Speedy-nom'g editor disrupted the established LoPbN structure.)
--Jerzy•t 06:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)