Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Signature Poll
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Signature Poll
Time wasting, doesn't help build the encyclopedia, apparently an attempt by users with long signatures to "justify" their disruption. Polls are evil, Don't be a dick.
From the Community portal: A new helpful poll has been created for users with long signatures to justify themselves. For example, if someone has a 20-line signature, and they win one of the polls, then when someone complains about it, the user can just link to their poll, and the people can't complain anymore. Read More: Wikipedia:Signature Poll. --Commander Keane 18:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, but no long-signatured people win the polls. That was just meant to attract people, like an advertisement. It wasn't actually meant to help long-signatured people, just attract them to nominate their own sig, then they will lose. --GeorgeMoney T·C 19:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
-
Neutral. I can see how this is unencyclopedic, but using 'Don't be a dick' as a nomination reason? That's excessive and uncalled for. — 
nathanrdotcom (Got something to say? Say it.) 20:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Wait a minute. I didn't vote yet. So, I vote keep --GeorgeMoney T·C 02:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Delete.Seems far too m:instruction creepy. If you think someone has too long a signature, ask him/her to change it. If he/she doesn't want to, ask around on the pump or something. We don't need such a bureaucratic process for such a simple procedure. Johnleemk | Talk 14:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)- I wouldn't mind deprecating it, actually. Come to think of it, that might even be a better idea, considering this page has been used quite a bit already. It wouldn't make sense to keep the subpages but delete the main page, and I think it'd be a bad idea to delete them all. Johnleemk | Talk 15:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Delete If User:GeorgeMoney's explanation is accepted, then this page exist to make a sarcastic point at the expense of other editors. Even if the first few "nominees" are in on the fun, I worry about the day someone is nominated without understanding the poll's humorous intent. (I agree this doesn't amount to a WP:DICK, but I think that is where CommanderKeane's worry originates, and the worry is valid one.) Also, per Johnleemk, an unnecessary poll is instruction creep. Xoloz 15:30, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Delete ot at least mark it as historical. Not funny, could spread bad sentiments and the like. Does not advance the encyclopedia. Etc. BrokenSegue 19:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Close polls and mark {{rejected}}... it's funny as in bad. Ashibaka tock 04:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, per Brokensegue. If kept, then reject and archive. If deleted, transwiki to BJAODN. Stifle (talk) 15:57, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as per everyone else. --Mark J 19:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Suggested Compromise. Userfy to User:GeorgeMoney/sigpoll --GeorgeMoney T·C 15:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- This is pure time wasting idiocy that serves no purpose in a project to write an encyclopedia. It should die a quick death.--Sean Black (talk) 07:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Delete Delete Delete - I moved it to User:GeorgeMoney/Signature Poll. --GeorgeMoney T·C 07:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete. CSD G7. It has now been moved to user space. DarthVader 23:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- Delete unless binding policy comes into place. Computerjoe's talk 20:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- 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.
