Category talk:Lists of Wikimedians

From Meta:Requests for deletion

Everything on Category:Lists of Wikipedians

These lists don't add anything to the Wikimedia and are mostly silly. Sorry for what may seem as a lack of sense of humor, but even the funny bits have become cliche. I haven't added {{rfd}} on any of these since I didn't want to waste my time in case even those here would oppose. I'll add them if no-one objects (if you don't want to vote Delete before the tag, just vote Tag first or something). --Swift 00:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Strongly keep Those pages are helpful to involve people to our community. --Aphaia 03:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

  How are they so helpful? Irish_Wikipedians has two wikipedians and hasn't been touched since September 2005. That page also shows a great weakness in the pages. These pages seem to have been transwiki-ed from Wikipedia as is evident from the number of red userpage links since no-one seems to have bothered with giving the links a "w:" prefix (in the example mentioned, w:User:Brendanconway doesn't have a userpage on Meta). Given that these seem so lacking, I suspect no-one would grieve these greatly.

  Possible exceptions are pages like BiDi_workgroup (untouched since January, this year, with only eight days of edits) since it is a workgroup community. But even these aren't justified here. Their members should rather create project pages on Wikipedia than place idle unmaintained pages on Meta.

  Finally, there are so many other sources of community involvement — Village pumps, project forums etc. ‐ which, in my opinion, do a far better job of involving people than letting them list themselves alongside other wikipedians who share their favorite colour (before promptly forgetting that page). Even if warranted, this would be a duplicate effort to the userbox effort. Meta is not a dustbin for the other WM projects! --Swift 03:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, anythig related to community is important for Wikimedia. MaxSem 07:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

  Even if it's out-dated, unmaintained and many of the links don't work? If I set up the page Wikibookians who had a can of soda for breakfast in 1985 and populate it, you would defend it against deletion?

  Sorry for the extreme arguments. No, they don't help unblurring the line between a possible well warranted list of wikipedians. I think they do, however, illustrate what I maintain; that there are pages that "relate to community" that aren't important for Wikimedia.

  Finally, as I mention in a comment to the vote above, userboxes already do this job (all too well some might say). --Swift 08:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

  Outdated? Probably yes, some of users mentioned there aren't wikimedians anymore for a long time, but they're definitely interesting to users from different projects, and all those lists are pretty alive and still growing[1]. Yes, anyone can create a really stupid list, but it should be cared on case-by-case basis, not like that[2]. So we delete lists that really shouldn't be there, but delete all of them? Too tough on my liking. MaxSem 17:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

  OK, I'll go through them one by one. --Swift 22:56, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sj (talk • contribs) 06:27, 29 September 2006 (UTC).
• Delete. Simply being related in some way to the community does not make them useful if they have no particular purpose. // [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 16:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
• Move to Category:Lists of Wikimedia users or similar. Meta is base for all WMF projects, not only Wikipedia. --Dbl2010 05:17, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

  The analogue would be 'Wikimedians'. // [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 14:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

• Move to Category:Lists of Wikimedians --Nick1915 13:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
• Move to Category:Lists of Wikimedia users. -- mzlla 13:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

  Comment Deleting everything on that category, as proposed originally here does seem extreme. I would oppose that. There are, however, certain lists on the category that seem inappropriate. I agree that lists that help provide a broader understanding of the community do have their importance, but depending on the focus of the list any benefits it may bring could be overshadowed by its divisiveness and controversial nature. Examples would be the list of Wikipedians by religion, or by race and ethnicity. On many projects, lists such as those have been deemed inappropriate. Perhaps we should shut down this "all-inclusive" deletion proprosal and work on a more "selective deletion" idea. Redux 18:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Outcome

I'm moving this to the talk page since there's no consensus for deletion. Perhaps someone with a bot could move them all if they want to. Angela 02:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I could do it (btw, where's Meta's RFBOT?), however I'd like to see more input on exact name: Lists of Wikimedians, Lists of Wikimedia users, etc. MaxSem 08:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

There's not a specific requests for bots page, but there is Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat. Wikimedians sounds better than Wikimedia users since users includes the readers and third party re-users who aren't part of the community likely to be listing themselves here. Angela 10:23, 12 November 2006 (UTC)