Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikipedia Alert Message Encoding
Now that it's tagged with "humorous", it doesn't qualify as a hoax anymore, so I'm taking it here. But it's still unnecessary and I think could be confusing to new members. Inks.LWC (talk) 02:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete it's not humor. It clearly lays out a process:
Warnings, when used, should be given 12-24 hours in advance. Watches should be used 24-48 hours in advance. For example, if consensus on a WP:AfD is to delete and debate ends within 24 hours, it would be proper to post a Deletion Warning on their talk page.
- That is a serious suggestion lacking in humor. In short it's an unnecessarily complex suggestion completely devoid of humor. (Also, G3 didn't apply to begin with.) LiteralKa (talk) 02:13, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep The process itself is followed in humor, as the warnings have no real force. --Bowser the Storm Tracker Chat Me Up 02:34, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Comment - The problem is that you're not just using the page as a humorous essay. You've also tried to use the actual tags (albeit unsuccessfully) on talk pages of AFD'd articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Severe_Thundersnow_Warning&diff=prev&oldid=441101414 Inks.LWC (talk) 02:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Correction - *on my OWN AFD'd article --Bowser the Storm Tracker Chat Me Up 02:46, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- But you're still using it on articles. What difference does it make if it's on an article you created? You're taking it past the level of humorous essay and making it something that you're actually using. Inks.LWC (talk) 02:48, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Answer this. It is stated in policies that unless an article is causing real harm (copyvio, attack page, hoax, non-notable, etc) it should be modified rather than deleted. Is this page causing real, significant harm or danger to wikipedia or its users? Y/N? --Bowser the Storm Tracker Chat Me Up 02:49, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Yes. I believe that it, along with your use of the tags you've created for the page could be confusing to editors, especially new ones. There's no need for this article. There's no reason to have it to modify it. It serves no purpose, and I only see it as potentially causing harm. That is why I think it should be deleted. Inks.LWC (talk) 02:51, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Answer this. It is stated in policies that unless an article is causing real harm (copyvio, attack page, hoax, non-notable, etc) it should be modified rather than deleted. Is this page causing real, significant harm or danger to wikipedia or its users? Y/N? --Bowser the Storm Tracker Chat Me Up 02:49, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- But you're still using it on articles. What difference does it make if it's on an article you created? You're taking it past the level of humorous essay and making it something that you're actually using. Inks.LWC (talk) 02:48, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Correction - *on my OWN AFD'd article --Bowser the Storm Tracker Chat Me Up 02:46, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Comment - The problem is that you're not just using the page as a humorous essay. You've also tried to use the actual tags (albeit unsuccessfully) on talk pages of AFD'd articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Severe_Thundersnow_Warning&diff=prev&oldid=441101414 Inks.LWC (talk) 02:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete - the "Humor" tag was clearly applied to game the system in order to circumvent the speedy tag. The page attempts to establish a non-consensus driven process change to the deletion process - it's obviously not intended as humor. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:03, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Comment - I wouldn't go quite that far, but I do believe that this page is inappropriate for the wiki, namely because we have individual "warning" systems in place for each of these already (the serious ones, that is.) LiteralKa (talk) 03:06, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- Read the new modifications. They address the serious issues which have been brought up. --Bowser the Storm Tracker Chat Me Up 03:13, 24 July 2011 (UTC)