Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Eagle 101/WikiVoter


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Speedy Keep - enough is enough -- Tawker 04:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Eagle 101/WikiVoter
Is it so onerous to ask a person who wants to participate in AfD to actually read the articles, click on the link to the AfD and then edit the AfD page? This just makes AfD too much of an automatic process, allowing users to fast-edit AfDs without actually bothering to participate in a reasoned manner. User:Zoe|(talk) 02:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep this is a great tool and it is very helpful to many users. If you want to suggest a change suggest it at the discussion place, but not an mfd. And even if the project page is deleted, it is not going to stop people from using the tool. GeorgeMoney (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It will if people revert votes done from the tool. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't like the tool either. I don't like it one bit. However, if I may point out several things: 1) It makes it easier to find single-purpose accounts; 2) shows the article itself prominently, making it easier to perform due diligence; 3) encourages edit summaries; and 4) helps eliminate votes where people say "nn, d" without bothering to do the most elemental Google search. I don't like that the use of the tool is restricted; I think it is absolutely and totally anathema to the spirit of Wikipedia. I also don't like that it encourages the use of those little obnoxious voting graphics, which encourage tallying at the expense of examining the quality of the discussion. However, if people want to use the tool, I see no reason to interfere with that. Captainktainer * Talk 03:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, or as an alternative somehow remedy the concerns over mindless AfD participation. Remember that it's not a vote, either... Ardric47 03:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Zoe, and I'm uncomfortable with the idea of an advantage for its users over regular AfD participants- allowing for a "super-voter" who, able to go through the process more quickly, can have more participation. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 03:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. This userpage is for a Wikipedia-related tool made in good faith. The tool can be, and is apparently, used for making reasonable evaluations of AfDs. The tools mentioned above by Captainktainer seem useful and are independent of any objectionable voting aspect. It is under development and could be changed to specifically prevent the sort of vote-like edits objected to. —Centrx→talk &bull; 03:20, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep The concerns I see above appear to be from editors who may not be familiar with the program. WikiVoter actually encourages more informed AfD participation by presenting relevant decision-making material to the editor. At it's heart, the program essentially helps users with otherwise repetitive manual labor. Please also see Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Eagle 101 for other discussion on the program, including a walk-through overview of the program. --AbsolutDan (talk) 03:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral. I don't see any pattern of abuse, so I can't justify asking for deletion right now. I do think there's a potential for abuse and this should be watched closely. I'd try it out, but it depends on too much unfree software that my system can't run. &mdash;ptk✰fgs 03:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. With all due respect, I think most or all of the delete votes are from people who've forgotten to assume good faith in the efforts of their fellow editors, and who haven't done their homework with regards to how the program works, or what it does. In particular, Zoe's statement, "Is it so onerous to ask a person who wants to participate in AfD to actually read the articles, click on the link to the AfD and then edit the AfD page?" is a bit hypocritical, since she obviously hasn't even tried out the program -- it includes several tabs which allow editors to easily and quickly switch between AfD and article pages for comparison, and to search major search engines in the hope of finding news stories or other reliable sources. That said, I can see why people are concerned, and I respect all of the reasoning -- all I ask is that you put a little more effort into investigating things before coming to a decision. Luna Santin 03:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment If I may please read the following comment I made on this very subject recently below - GI e n 03:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep The author clearly states that the name of the tool is not to be taken literally. Furthermore, the tool requires a minimum of 250 mainspace edits, greatly reducing the possibility of the tool being abused. The tool saves me a lot of time by making it simpler to find AfD's according to the date they were created. Dionyseus 04:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiVoter concerns - examples of use

Hey guys, just saw your concerns here and thought as someone who has tried and used the programme Id give you my $0.02. First of all, WV basically does exactly what popups, javascript or any of the other tools we have here do, and that is increase efficiency. I appreciate your concerns about vote counting, or the programme shortening votes to "per nom", but the fact of the matter is the programme doesnt make, or force you to do anything? The tally for example, well, personally, I use that to determine the activity on each AfD, and, if there are listings that have little or no activity, then I will participate. I could do this by opening each one and looking, but, per my earlier comment, WV makes this process faster. As for the "votes" (for want of a better term) themselves. Will, WV has a huge text field for discussion. Now, you could write, per nom or you could write a 500 report. But, you could do either with or without WV, again, WV just makes this process more efficient. Probably the best thing would be to show you some examples of my use from just the last day or two:
 * Articles for deletion/EDiets.com
 * FYI: All prior votes were Delete
 * Strong Keep —  Let me start by saying that I've been in the nutrition industry for 10 years so this is kinda my thing. Ediets.com easily meets WP:WEB criteria for notability, that is "The website or content has won a well known and independent award, either from a publication or organisation", at http://www.ediets.com/company/pressroom/awards.cfm you'll see its won "Forbes.com's Spring 2005 "Best of the Web" and a "Forbes Favorite" in the Diet and Nutrition category." for the third year, ""Standard of Excellence" WebAward in the 2004 WebAward Competition, which are produced by the Web Marketing Association", "PC Magazine selected eDiets.com its "Editors' Choice", "Nielsen//NetRatings has ranked eDiets.com as the #1 Most Trafficked Health, Fitness & Nutrition Site World Wide" etc. The company is publicly listed on the NASDAQ, and has an Alexa ranking of approx 3000. Hope this helps - Gl e n 14:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I then went on realise the article was a copyvio, tagged it and listed it with possible copyright violations, and rewrote the article at Talk:EDiets.com/Temp


 * Articles for deletion/Reachwell Software Services Private
 * This AfD covered four companies. After investigation USING WIKIVOTER I discovered two were blatant copyvios
 * Comment —  QualEx Systems has just been tagged copyvio - Gl e n 06:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment —  Reachwell is also a copyvio guys. I have left the AfD tags on incase they are not deleted due to copyvio, in which case the outcome here is relevant. Thanks - Gl e n 06:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC) - Gl e n 06:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Articles for deletion/Brendan Burns
 * Mine was the first comment
 * Delete —  If I recognised this a being a notable training center it may be a start, but I live in Auckland (where article's subject teaches) and have never heard of the Media Design School; The address is simply listed as level 10 of an office building. Failure to meet WP:BIO seems pretty but and dried to me. - GI e n 04:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Articles for deletion/All Ohio State Fair Youth Choir
 * Mine was the first comment
 * Comment —  I have just marked the article as a copyvio - word for word from the subject's website. However AfD should continue (I have left tagged) as it may be decided not to delete based on copyvio which would make this discussion then relevant again - GI e n 04:39, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I then tagged it as a copyvio and listed it with possible copyright violations


 * Articles for deletion/Titan Radio
 * Mine was first comment
 * Comment —  Correct it is a copyvio of http://titancom.fullerton.edu/titanradio/support.html - will take care of this now - GI e n 15:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I then tagged it as a copyvio and listed it with possible copyright violations


 * See also


 * Articles for deletion/Necromandus
 * Articles for deletion/Pass-Pirates
 * Articles for deletion/Nintendo's Castle

The tally also proves useful as a rough guide when looking to close AfDs. I hope this helps somewhat in reassuring you. Like any tool, it can be abused, but, it can (and certainly has with me) encourage participation and increase productivity. Thanks, - GI e n 21:21, 20 August 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.