Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:The "real" guide to creating articles

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. — xaosflux ^Talk 05:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:The "real" guide to creating articles

Some suggestions from this "guide":

• "Articles on your subpage still become Google hits and increase PageRank"
• "If you must invite votes, use email"
• "Large contributions are suspected of being original ideas or copyright violations and therefore attract serious scrutiny. To avoid it, keep the starter edit short, and return after a few days to add more."

Overall, it seems like a "how to circumvent policy" guide. Tizio 18:00, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as a big pile of gaming-the-system inclusionist screed that does not belong in Wikipeidia space. Violates so many policies and the spirit of said policies that it isn't even funny. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 18:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete with fire; this has been in the namespace since May?? Creator seems to be on extended wikibreak. -- nae'blis 18:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Highly inappropriate suggestions. --Improv 18:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - idea might be OK, but text as written is definitely not. Badbilltucker 19:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - inappropriate. Jpeob 22:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Yes, you must fight a war against those EVIL deletionists! It's impossible that they object to your article for any good reason! -Amarkov ^blah_edits 23:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

1, 2, 4, 8, 10 and 11 and others are good guidelines (The bolded part), however the entire tone of the articel does seem to be one of very easy misuse, so while I can't vote I do sympathise and understand. 68.39.174.238 00:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete with extreme prejudice and warn its creator (whether they're on a wikibreak or not) harshly for, among other things, attacking people simply for disagreeing with him/her and attempting to elicit vote canvassing. FWIW, if this was an anti-inclusionist essay, I would !vote the exact same way. -- Kicking222 02:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete absolute nonsense, especially that bit about making small edits (if anything, vandals are more apt to leave lasting damage with small changes). Danny Lilithborne 06:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as appalling rubbish. Moreschi 16:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Total destruct. --Folantin 17:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - wow, that's just bad. Creator needs a spanking. Tony Fox (arf!) 21:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Leaning toward keep if it's cleaned up. Take out some of the sour-grapes comments and there's actually some good advice on this page. If it were toned down, maybe it could be useful to some new users. Rossami (talk) 23:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, delete, delete... - Mailer Diablo 07:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete lol tony fox... per above. Cbrown1023 03:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete per nom and above. -- Ned Scott 01:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete This article is like my last cup of coffee... Cold, bitter, and needing to go down the drain... --Jayron32 04:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - I said it on the talk page and I'll say it again: this reads more like a diatribe by someone who was bitter that his article was deleted. It still does, even after the edits that were made. Calling it the "real" guide to creating articles is simply misleading. Crystallina 04:26, 25 November 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.