Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/WP100 and WP200


 * 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 debate was keep, per the snowball clause. I see no way that this MFD could have any alternate result but to keep. Non administrative closure. Steve Crossin  (talk)  (email)  04:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:100 and WP:200

 * Times that 100 Wikipedians supported something and
 * Times that 200 or more Wikipedians supported something===

These pages serve no useful purpose that I can see. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - I think that it's great that we have pages like this so we can remember great Wikipedia milestones in its history. Scarian  Call me Pat!  19:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - If a user were to be warned by that admin, if that person searched this up and check his adminship and he were to find that admin's name, he knew he could trust that admin, while an admin with lets say, 25 yes' would be less to me, unless all or most of the yes' were well justified. DA PIE EATER (talk) 19:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep- If this gets deleted, the next time it happens someone will think it is the first time and have the wrong impression. Zginder 2008-06-03T20:04Z (UTC)
 * Speedy keep It's been around for a while, first of all, so it's not like it's done any harm. It's a usefull page to document milestones, and as Zginder mentioned, if it gets deleted, people might think the next one is the first. 20:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliancolton (talk • contribs)
 * Keep. No reason to delete. --Carnildo (talk) 20:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep but with some reservations. Statistics are allowed and I'd argue they have inherent value but, as with anything that's fun, it does have the potential to become a magnet for immaturity.  Some users, it seems to me, get so excited about "setting records" that they don't perform due diligence in forming their opinions at discussions, particularly RFA.  I always cringe when someone at RFA says "Support per WP:100!"  But humans enjoy round numbers and crossing thresholds--from Y2K to the price of crude topping $135 a barrel to whatever--and I suspect you'd see these exact same uninformed bandwagon supports if WP:100 were a redlink.  You'd see bandwagoning even if RFAs were bulleted instead of numbered.  The current DHMO RFA has led to a little bit of circus behavior on these pages, but I've had them watchlisted for a long time (as a way of tracking huge discussions) and the activity on the pages the past week has been an exception rather than the rule.  I say keep, but perhaps do more to remind the well-meaning, but overenthusiastic, that we're maintaining a historical record here for the purposes of history, not trying to set records for their own sake.  --JayHenry (talk) 22:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This serves the purpose of checking the RfAs that had large quantites of support. Captain   panda  23:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The following pages are also somewhat similar and serve a similar service of primarily being a recorder of history: WP:WBE, WP:WBRE. Gary King ( talk ) 00:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I really don't think that saying the pages "don't serve any useful purpose" is a valid reason to delete. I look around a lot of user pages, and there are a lot of things that "don't serve any useful purpose". Also, I don't think Wikipedia should be so stuck-up as to not include anything interesting. It is definitely interesting to look over the pages (although at some point they may become obsolete, with more editors joining in all the time). But anyway, definitely keep. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 01:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - The usefulness of a certain page isn't a valid reason for deletion, therefore keep. A page that has the milestones of certain events, and I have to agree with Zginder here as well. Steve Crossin   (talk)  (email)  02:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Its pages like this that help build a sense of community on wikipedia, without the community, wikipedia is nothing. Five Years 03:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Just keep it, please. Useful as a source of info. Bstone (talk) 04:15, 4 June 2008 (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.