Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Basic wiki info

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sango 123 23:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Basic wiki info

Could not quite find a Speedy criteria that fit. Wikipedia already has a Help page. This article, which seems to pass itself off as wiki policy, is almost a duplicate of the original editor's user page. Agent 86 22:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This was made by a new user it seems (not that being a new user qualifies your pages for deletion) and doesn't have much info on it... ? Lsjzl 22:29, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not sure exactly who this guy thinks he is or what he thinks he's doing. He listed his own article (which is just copied from numerous WP guidelines) as a good article. He claims that he's not a new user, but he also claims to be the "owner" of an article. He changed the article Help (not help on WP, just the article on the word "help") and linked it to his own userpage (edit summary regarding Mr. Mod). Seriously, does he think he's the Wikipedia god? -- Kicking222 22:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- By the way, I'm not trying to WP:BITE or anything like that... I'm honestly amazingly confused about whether or not this guy thinks he has some sort of power. At one point, he even states on the talk page for this article, "Thanks, WIKIPEDIA." Either this guy is Jimbo Wales on a bender, or he's got some amazing illusions of grandeur. -- Kicking222 22:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP already has plenty of help pages —M e ts501^talk 22:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I see nothing on this page or Mr. Mod's user page to make this article better or more useful than Help. And I seriously doubt that anyone other than him labeled it as a good article. BuckRose 23:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, of course nobody else labeled it as such. Nobody else has even edited the talk page for this article. -- Kicking222 23:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am the owner of Basic wiki info

I do not mean this to be a duplicate. I am Mr. Mod. Before you want to delist an arcticle, check who created this one and who created Mr. Mod. They are the same.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Mod (talk • contribs)

- What?! Delete. Danny Lilithborne 01:14, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there are already plenty of help pages for Wikipedia, seems a bit silly a newbie making a page to help other users.--Andeh 23:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -999 00:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Gently and kindly, as I suspect this user of being fairly youthful, but delete. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:17, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as Daniel PB Smith, only with extra kittens and loveliness. -- GWO
Delete per above. What's the point of duplicating the help pages?
Delete redundant, in the wrong namespace Gnewf 09:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. From the article: "If you want to fool around and test things out, use the Sandbox." User should take his own advice. Also, Wikipedia articles are not "owned" by their creator. Barno 14:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Gnewf --Zoz (t) 17:54, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete on the grounds of redundancy... if I'm to understate a bit. This sort of articles belong to Help: and Wikipedia: namespaces, which already happen to be chock full of basic editing help. I suggest the author to improve existing articles before undertaking the ardourous task of creating some new article. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 19:52, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOT a how-to, but someone perhaps should contact him and let him know why this is on AfD and explain the lack of "ownership" here. WP:AGF, his heart is in the right place.--Isotope23 20:15, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. That was done - I didn't want to bite. If you followed the previous version of the link in the "unsigned" entry above, it took you to a non-existent user. I've fixed the link and you now can see the conversation there. Agent 86 20:46, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah yes, I see that now. Thanks!--Isotope23 11:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - 'nuff said. --Ixfd64 20:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.