Forum:Deleting userpages

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Deleting userpages
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 6 July 2013 by Joeytje50.

Today, Rhys Jones requested all his userpages to be deleted. Currently, this is technically allowed: "Older user pages may be deleted only if the user requests this to be done". There is no rule there that, if someone requests it, not all his pages should be deleted. For now, administrators UCS and don't delete all pages, since there's no valid reason provided.

I think it would be good to have another bullet point on RS:CSD that says that you need a good reason to request deleting large amounts of userpages. I know it's not necessarily needed to have the extra bullet point in the policy for admins not to do it per UCS, but I think it would help for future cases of people requesting all of their pages to be deleted, without good reasoning.

Discussion

Support - As nom. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 15:50, July 1, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Does this apply to entire userspaces, or only to subpages of userpages? Real Nub 16:30, July 1, 2013 (UTC)

I mainly intended it as a simple note that large deletions of userpages would require a good reason. So, it basically applies to any personal pages the user has. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 17:09, July 1, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - First of all, I've never seen an admin UCS when deleting a userspace - all pages requested for deletion are deleted, as long as the author requests it. Second, this is silly. It's their userspace, they can do with it whatever they want. They could go through and blank every page and you wouldn't revert it all saying "you need a proper edit summary to do this" would you? A "good reason" is subjective. The reason is that they created it and they no longer feel the need to have it, whether it be one page or their whole userspace ._. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 18:37, July 1, 2013 (UTC)

So you would have deleted all of BrenRS's pages when he quit and requested all his pages to be deleted, and then when he came back a short while later, you would have undeleted all of his pages? I'm pretty sure every admin Bren asked to delete all his pages UCS'd and didn't delete because it was just a ragequit, and he didn't have any good reasons to delete his pages. I think it's not good to spam the logs only because someone wants to quit. When they want to quit, just leave the pages be. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 22:46, July 1, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - The deletion log isn't made of paper. Dtm142 (talk) 23:26, July 1, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Fergie. Also, RS:UCS: "Common sense takes precedence over any policy. Be reasonable." Temujin 01:55, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - I have no problem if someone wants their user pages deleted. I also have very little interest in what people do with their userpages. If we're worried about spamming recent changes, ask someone with a sysop bot account to do it. I don't see why this is an issue. cqm 01:54, 2 Jul 2013 (UTC) (UTC)

Oppose - Per Temujub. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 02:33, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - Admins can decide for themselves whether to delete masses of userpages or not - and usually they will, since it's up the the user who requested the delete. If they had, say, 10 slayer logs and wanted 9 of them gone, would that require a "good reason" other than "I don't need them anymore."? I hardly think so. In summary; UCS. If someone ragequits and their request to delete user stuff is denied because the admin feels that they're coming back in the following few days, thwt's fine by me. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 09:59, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - The userpage is the domain of the user in question. Thus, he should be able to dispose of it according to his wishes. Administrators should have a duty to honor said wishes if the requests are made in good faith, even if they seem punctilious at first. If an administrator determines that the request is not made in good faith, such as if the user making the request seems to be mendacious, supercilious, or even malevolent, then he can exercise his own judgment as to whether or not to honor the request.

In this particular case, I see no reason not to honor Rhys's request as it seems that it was made in good faith. I may be slightly tendentious in this particular case as I am not entirely convinced of the merits of the original IRC ban, but I would have honored the request. If Rhys does decide to come back and want his pages back, then the burden of proof is on him to show that his actions are in good faith. Otherwise, he will have to recreate all of his pages. If the pages are undeleted and he requests that they be deleted again, that stretches the good faith assumption enough that it becomes a judgment call.

My end point is that administrators should defer to their judgments when making such actions, erring on the side of good faith when dealing with a user's personal pages. --LiquidTalk 19:01, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

What a peculiar use of the word "punctilious," particularly from someone who likes to think he is punctilious with language usage. (wszx) 10:17, July 3, 2013 (UTC)
hi harle Ronan Talk 13:07, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Define how a reason is considered "valid"/"good" before an admin should delete it. --Jlun2 (talk) 21:05, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Fergie. If people want to ragequit, let them ragequit, don't make it so that we give them more reasons to complain if their pages aren't deleted. Ronan Talk 21:11, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Fergie. It's our own userspace, we get to do what we want with it. Just as long as we use common sense, of course. Blaze_fire.png12.png 04:17, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - Matt (t) 21:24, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - The reason people want their user page deleted is practically irrelevant. The page is in their user space and they should be allowed to get rid of it, or have someone else get rid of it, should they so choose. Smithing (talk | contribs) 17:24, July 4, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Fergie. Arbitrary, unnecessary, and whatever makes a reason "good" could be very subjective. --Shockstorm (talk) 02:23, July 5, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - lol User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 19:45, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

Closed - I'll just close this as unsuccessful / withdrawal. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 21:50, July 6, 2013 (UTC)