Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theory and Practise of Wiki - Lesson 1


 * 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 userfy. Johnleemk | Talk 15:25, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Theory and Practise of Wiki - Lesson 1
Appears to be a school project / debate forum about WP on WP, but is unencyclopedic in itself. WP not webhosting. Delete. Squiddy | (squirt ink?)  11:16, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete un-encylcopedic MLA 11:45, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello!

This article is really unencyclopedic in a sense. But it is aimed to teach a certain number of people the main concepts of wikipedia and its use. It has a certain user-group of people who want to learn this in order to make their own, encyclopedic entries. You might call it something like help. And here we have various examples of help...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Policy_trifecta says:

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia created by a community using a wiki. Those three basic characteristics suggest three basic guiding principles for editors, of which all others are corollaries:

* as an encyclopedia: Neutral point of view - our basic editorial policy o Corollaries: Conventions on verifiability, citation, original research, style, deletion, etc.

* as a community: Don't be a dick - our basic social policy o Corollaries: Be civil, Keep your cool, assume good faith, avoid personal attacks. o Strongly implied are the one revert rule and consensus as opposed to voting

* as a wiki: Ignore all rules - the suggested personal policy o Corollaries: Be bold, avoid instruction creep

As I surfed looking for answer to your deletion request, I haven't found anything that would be against my course! It has neutral point of view, it serves the community ... it is natural to have a course on what is wikipedia and how to use it inside wikipedia!

btw, there are several undeleted courses: a very similar content! Just take a look, please... http://www.jerryslezak.net/wiki/tiki-index.php?page=AdvancedMacro

Sincerely,

Petar
 * Comment: But it is unencyclopedic. Fetofs 12:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Transwiki to Meta -- Astrokey44 |talk 12:31, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Could you explain me a little more in detailed what is the problem with my "unencyclopedic" entry? I don't want to bother the community; if you think that my content really doesn't belong here I'll move it somewhere else. But isn't it crazy to move a content on wikipedia outside wikipedia?

Petar
 * Delete as unencyclopedic, original research, self reference.   &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-02-01 14:10Z 

Thank you for the first positive answer! What others think, would it be ok to transwiki to meta?

Petar
 * Petar. It would be very helpful if you created an account for yourself as it is hard to communicate with you otherwise. However if you go to Talk:Theory and Practise of Wiki - Lesson 1 I will attempt to explain what people mean. DJ Clayworth 17:38, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Belongs on meta or WP space, not article space.  Also, please sign you comments by type ~ .  preface your response to others' comments with : to indent.  Peyna 17:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Peyna. Youngamerican 18:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * If the creator has a user account, move to their user space. Else Delete. smurray  inch   e  ster  ( User ), ( Talk ) 22:45, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The simple and obvious answer is to userfy it. --kingboyk 23:30, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete really has no value. Arbustoo 09:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * 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.