Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Xiwonder Li/sandbox

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous 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 discussion was: Reset sandbox (effectively blanking). — xaosflux  Talk 16:38, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

User:Xiwonder Li/sandbox


Year-old draft that looks like a Chinese translation of the page we have for PG Tips. Since the mainspace page already exists, there is nothing gained by keeping a translation of that page as a draft or for other reasons. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:12, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Nomination statement is not a reason for deletion but for redirecting. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Yet again another moron who doesn't understand what "English Encyclopedia" means, Pointless translation, Better off deleting it. – Davey 2010 Talk 00:25, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Looking at the user's global contributions (https://tools.wmflabs.org/guc/?user=Xiwonder+Li), it is obvious that the editor has translated en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PG_Tips so as to create the Chinese zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/PG_Tips. Translating articles between the different articles has been identified as a huge remaining desirable task, and doing so should be encouraged, not discouraged.  Deletion smacks of disapproval.  The editor did nothing wrong.  No that the translation is completed, the thing to do would be to soft delete to zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/PG_Tips.  There should be no requirement of admin action for every inter-wikipedia translation.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * - So hang on is the editor copying the ZH article to here, and then trying to translate it in to English to improve the English article ?, If that's the case then I'm more than happy to keep... – Davey 2010 Talk 20:53, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * If the editor was doing it to improve this Wikipedia I too would be "more than happy" to keep the records, I'd be adamant. It was for improving the zh Wikipedia. Ideally, the edits would be done at zh but making a big deal of that smacks of excessive rules. These are sister projects and en is the dominant one. To preserve the edit history (for the perogative of the editor) but to best reveal its purpose, I recommend converting it to a soft redirect pointing to the result. In any case, the editor is not a moron, I have leant to never call someone a moron in cold sobriety, but only after at least two beers (and that's beer, not wine; wine drinkers calling others morons are overly pretentious). --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:26, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment. You can apply Inactive userpage blanked to this type of page with a lot less waiting and usually zero drama. Save your MfD nominations for pages with BLP issues or other hazards. --RL0919 (talk) 20:43, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You may aswell say apply "Inactive userpage blanked" to every single page on this MFD ...... Deletion is always preferred over adding a pointless template. – Davey 2010 Talk 20:53, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * That's right. Templated blanking in the back pages is almost always the solution. Exceptions are where an actual reason to delete can be articulated. Eg BLP or WP:NOT. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:30, 15 September 2016 (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.