Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Writ of Wikimedius

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

This page is outdated and was, when current, inaccurate. uc 23:13, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Curious. I was under the impression that out-dated policy was marked thusly, rather than being deleted. Also, the concept (that Jimbo can directly interfere with the workings of the Arbitration Committee), remains true now (as, indeed, it was then); this is merely a somewhat legalistic encoding of such a concept. Keep, as an insight into the discussions on-going under the original drafting of the Arbitration policy. James F. (talk) 01:18, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't believe this was ever policy. It was an essay by Alex756, who did not then believe that the arbitration committee was a good idea.  No one else edited it.  Perhaps it was an attempt a humor.  There was a brief interval where the arbitration committee only accepted cases refered by Jimbo, but I was unaware of the "writ of wikimedius" page until I stumbled across it recently.  Perhaps it could be moved to a subpage of User:Alex756.  uc 18:00, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * If all we do is tag outdated policy, it will rapidly become impossible to locate real policy when you need to find it, amid all the thicket of pages in the Wikipedia namespace. The essential concept cited by James F. is already contained in the arbitration policy, and the historical developments are summarized in the introduction of the Arbitration Committee. As a result, the page serves no purpose. I still support the redirect to Requests for arbitration I suggested on the talk page, but didn't pursue against the vigorous objections of the page's author. I see very little harm in deleting here, and none at all in redirecting. There's nothing to merge; what might be worth keeping already exists elsewhere, as noted. --Michael Snow 18:03, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.