To sum up the current state of the deletion topic.
Several users think it is a good idea that every user
be able to see a deleted page.
The reasons given are 1) transparency (as we claim
Wikipedia respects) and 2) possibility to reuse some
edits in deleted pages.
As already mentionned, it so happens that some banned
users edits are deleted very quickly, without going
through the process of vfd. However, I read several
times (or saw it myself) that parts of the edits of
banned users were good and might be of interest to
keep.
(see for example for Lir
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-May/003689.html)
I suggested that edits of banned users be kept for a
temporary time, either in a boilerplate, or in a
blanked page history...but for the reasons given by
Eloquence and others, I see this proposition is not
good (too much strain on sysop cleaning, not fitting
the requirements of either soft and hard banning). So,
this option can not be kept. And even if the edits
might be good, it is probably better to wait for a
while until picking the stuff up (until the vandal is
gone) and perhaps to put it back under another author
name.
Consequently, because of the good arguments given
against keeping stuff in the article space for longer
than necessary, the only option left, is, to permit
users to see the content of a deleted article.
In short, I think if Wikipedia wants to stay open and
transparent, the deleted stuff should be visible. That
is part of a feedback control which is important in
every system.
-----------
Three persons expressed negativity toward this
proposition.
Jimbo and JeLuf indicated it was not a good idea
because copyrighted material should not be seen from
outsiders. Eloquence indicated it was not good -
probably for this copyright reason, as well as for the
reason it has been already discussed ad nauseum (where
?).
(see
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004028.html
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004132.html
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004143.html)
As far as copyrighted material is concerned, I plainly
agree it should not been seen by others than trusted
people (hence, developers and sysops). I agree it
would be potentially very damaging for Wikipedia that
such an information be visible by others, as it could
lead to legal troubles.
Then, I agree it is not a good idea that non-sysop
users see material that has been deleted because of cp
infringements.
However, as Toby mentionned, copyrighted material is
*not* the only material deleted. Far from it. No good
reasons were, till now, given to justify other-than-cp
deleted pages not to be seen by non-sysop users.
Besides, quite a number of people, including Toby,
Martin, Brion, Oliver, and I, think it would be good
that users see deleted pages
(See
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-May/003490.html
or
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-May/003755.html
or
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004136.html
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004154.html
Consequently, I think the solution is that somehow,
deletions for cp issues and for other issues are just
separated in the big black void (sorry, the deletion
area of the db).
This could be made possible if, when deleting the
page, the sysop was somehow proposed to check a little
box (say), which would automatically classify the
deleted page in the cp category.
Then, the deletion log would be grossly separated in
two types, cp stuff and other stuff.
(I also think it would nice to separate per namespaces
: deletion of encyclopedia article, deletion of users
pages, deletion of meta pages).
When accessing the special:page undeleted, all the
stuff with cp material will be invisible (as now) from
non-sysop users, while other stuff (non copyrighted)
is visible.
On top of that, I also think it is quite weird to keep
forever in this deletion db, all this copyrighted
material (or porn pictures perhaps :-)).
Such a separation might give the developer the
possibility to run a deletion query from time to time
(such as "deletion of all copyrighted articles been in
the deletion db for more than 2 months"). Hence,
Wikipedia liability toward cp, would be reduced.
(see also on similar topic
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004121.html
and
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004140.html)
Anthere
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com
Several users think it is a good idea that every user
be able to see a deleted page.
The reasons given are 1) transparency (as we claim
Wikipedia respects) and 2) possibility to reuse some
edits in deleted pages.
As already mentionned, it so happens that some banned
users edits are deleted very quickly, without going
through the process of vfd. However, I read several
times (or saw it myself) that parts of the edits of
banned users were good and might be of interest to
keep.
(see for example for Lir
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-May/003689.html)
I suggested that edits of banned users be kept for a
temporary time, either in a boilerplate, or in a
blanked page history...but for the reasons given by
Eloquence and others, I see this proposition is not
good (too much strain on sysop cleaning, not fitting
the requirements of either soft and hard banning). So,
this option can not be kept. And even if the edits
might be good, it is probably better to wait for a
while until picking the stuff up (until the vandal is
gone) and perhaps to put it back under another author
name.
Consequently, because of the good arguments given
against keeping stuff in the article space for longer
than necessary, the only option left, is, to permit
users to see the content of a deleted article.
In short, I think if Wikipedia wants to stay open and
transparent, the deleted stuff should be visible. That
is part of a feedback control which is important in
every system.
-----------
Three persons expressed negativity toward this
proposition.
Jimbo and JeLuf indicated it was not a good idea
because copyrighted material should not be seen from
outsiders. Eloquence indicated it was not good -
probably for this copyright reason, as well as for the
reason it has been already discussed ad nauseum (where
?).
(see
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004028.html
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004132.html
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004143.html)
As far as copyrighted material is concerned, I plainly
agree it should not been seen by others than trusted
people (hence, developers and sysops). I agree it
would be potentially very damaging for Wikipedia that
such an information be visible by others, as it could
lead to legal troubles.
Then, I agree it is not a good idea that non-sysop
users see material that has been deleted because of cp
infringements.
However, as Toby mentionned, copyrighted material is
*not* the only material deleted. Far from it. No good
reasons were, till now, given to justify other-than-cp
deleted pages not to be seen by non-sysop users.
Besides, quite a number of people, including Toby,
Martin, Brion, Oliver, and I, think it would be good
that users see deleted pages
(See
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-May/003490.html
or
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-May/003755.html
or
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004136.html
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004154.html
Consequently, I think the solution is that somehow,
deletions for cp issues and for other issues are just
separated in the big black void (sorry, the deletion
area of the db).
This could be made possible if, when deleting the
page, the sysop was somehow proposed to check a little
box (say), which would automatically classify the
deleted page in the cp category.
Then, the deletion log would be grossly separated in
two types, cp stuff and other stuff.
(I also think it would nice to separate per namespaces
: deletion of encyclopedia article, deletion of users
pages, deletion of meta pages).
When accessing the special:page undeleted, all the
stuff with cp material will be invisible (as now) from
non-sysop users, while other stuff (non copyrighted)
is visible.
On top of that, I also think it is quite weird to keep
forever in this deletion db, all this copyrighted
material (or porn pictures perhaps :-)).
Such a separation might give the developer the
possibility to run a deletion query from time to time
(such as "deletion of all copyrighted articles been in
the deletion db for more than 2 months"). Hence,
Wikipedia liability toward cp, would be reduced.
(see also on similar topic
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004121.html
and
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-May/004140.html)
Anthere
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com