Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Astronomer vs Amateur

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 keep. IronGargoyle 01:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Astronomer vs Amateur

Page created in 2005, doesn't return any search results and isn't wikified. Not that funny either. — Taggard (Complain) 02:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, not sure what the purpose of this page is. --Coredesat 03:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Appears to me to be a humourous commentary on the pitfalls of overzealous requests for citations. I found it amusing, but question the value of its inclusion especially 2 years after creation. I do note quite a few users have it linked on their userpage however. Beeawwb 04:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

• I think it would only be funnier if in fact the essay used wikilawyering in its text. Userfy -wizzard2k ^(C•T•D) 23:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• Userfy In the page history, User:Mikkalai moved it from userspace to Wikipedia-space based on "GFDL and general importance." I don't see the relevance of GFDL, nor do I consider the page important. So just undo the move and put it back where it came from. YechielMan 04:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
• Userfy per YechielMan. This page does have a purpose, i.e. to demonstrate the problems that experts face on Wikipedia. I don't necessarily agree with its implicit stance, but it is a valid (albeit personal) reflection on Wikipedia culture. Walton^Assistance! 11:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - quite a funny page which actually has a point, we also have pages like WP:MMORPG and WP:ABF so why not? In urgent need of a wikification though. SalaSkan 15:06, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete This kind of stuff does not belong on wikipedia. It has not value to wikipedia at all.--James, La gloria è a dio 01:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Userfy if you must, but I'm not sure why that would be needed. It just seems like a normal humorous essay. -Amarkov moo! 13:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Will you explain to me the value this has towards wikipedia Amarkov? I fail to see any value that this has but if it does I will be happy to change my vote. Peace:)--James, La gloria è a dio 16:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  • It's a satire of overzealous application of WP:V, thus driving out experts. If you don't think that has value, I think we'll just have to disagree, because I don't know how to explain it any better. -Amarkov moo! 23:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Its also a good example of when IAR might be useful. -wizzard2k ^(C•T•D) 00:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - the problem of expert retention is well recognised. I can't imagine a more succient way to explain the problem. WilyD 19:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep humorous and a good way to bring the point across. -N 19:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, a useful, if exaggerated, example of an unfortunately common situation on Wikipedia. Funny, too. Per Amarkov, userfy if you must, but I don't see this doing any harm where it is. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per above users. -- _Hdt83 ^Chat 22:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I am fine with people making jokes in user space but I am not for having a joke articles in user space. This kind of stuff is for Uncyclopedia.-James, La gloria è a dio 03:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - uh, the point of the page is not humor. Gracenotes^T § 03:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
• Userfy as per Yechiel and Walton. As Amarkov points out, it's about a controversial and clearly relevant issue concerning the implementation of WP:V. Stifling it won't help. Stammer 07:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I'm still going to vote to delete this page.-James, La gloria è a dio 10:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you for demonstrating that you don't understand the difference between article and Wikipedia space. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per above users-—arf! 13:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep or move back to userspace if need be, but don't delete. Despite the humour it has a serious point about expert retention. See this page: User:Jnc for the origin of this piece.--mikeu 20:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep; useful way to explain the problem. John Vandenberg 09:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, and the social sciences are worse. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Entertaining and useful essay. Spacepotato 22:34, 7 June 2007 (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.