Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Attribution/Poll


 * 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. No one has seriously proposed that the poll pages be deleted, so this only distracts from the real issues. Please discuss what should (or shouldn't) be done at Wikipedia talk:Attribution/Poll‎ (instead of forking the discussion into yet another meaningless vote). —David Levy 16:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * As a previously uninvolved admin, I second this close. --RobthTalk 17:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Attribution/Poll
Per comments on the Talk page here, and in other locales, it appears groups of editors are specifically against Jimbo's specifically requested public poll to gauge thoughts/support on the idea of the ATT merger. As it has been stated that the Poll is "dead" per users such as User:WAS 4.250, I am nominating this. If there is wide spread support to run this poll, this page should be kept. Nominated as if concensus is we will not honor Jimbo's request, we shouldn't waste time on the poll construction. I notice primarily older admins that work on policies heavily are overtly against the poll. AGF, but it has the appearance of their not wanting to yield the semblance of authority/power over policy to the unwashed masses. - Denny 16:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

EDIT: Please don't speedy close this anyone. As this is so wildly contentious I think everyone should have a couple days to weigh in. - Denny 16:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, Denny. I was in the process of doing just that when you posted the above.  I know that you're trying to help, but this only added to the confusion.  —David Levy 16:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per the fact that we are polling on this page's deletion. 16:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep; but this is a perfectly good place to discuss whether it should be marked as historic. I did not see any one against a poll, as such; almost all the proposed wordings for the poll have been opposed by someone as biasing. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The argument here isn't so much whether we should have a poll as which of the 18 slightly different wordings it should take. For the VIE arguers, which are the only group I've seen outright oppose the poll, if voting is evil then having a vote over whether to have the vote sure won't help. --tjstrf talk 16:17, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, the argument IS should we have the vote, hence the nomination. Some do not want to expose ATT to a wide public poll, despite Jimbo specifically asking for it. If the idea is dead against Jimbo's wishes, lets delete it and save time. - Denny 16:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Brimba 16:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Premature. It's not yet clear what we're supposed to be voting on.  Give them a break.  Guy (Help!) 16:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, to avoid complete collapse of the space-time continuum. I'm this close to nominating the MFD page for deletion, so we can have a poll over whether to have a poll over whether to have a poll. :-). --AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Jimbo suggested a poll. For more that a week, we have been telling the community that there is going to be a poll. We posted anouncements at the Pump... we put it at the top of the community discussion page... we even put it on everyone's watchlist. To now decide "nevermind" we are not going to have a poll after all would be very, very wrong.  People are expecting to have a poll.  Even a bad poll is better than no poll. Blueboar 16:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep the page. This isn't about whether to keep the poll. That can be removed and the page marked as an archive without losing useful discussion through unnecessary deletion. Angela. 16:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I oppose deleting of policy development pages in general.  If the community has rejected this idea or this process, mark it as rejected or historical and move on.  Having the history of how Wikipedia got to a particular policy or process is just as important as the process itself.  Furthermore, MFD is not to be used as a "backdoor" to kill something you don't like.  Kelly Martin (talk) 16:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I support the poll/process. I MfD'd to get a decision/concensus on the "poll is dead/we won't poll for this" nonsense. - Denny 16:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict x2)* Keep I'm sorry to see that the attribution policy has become such a sordid fiasco. That being said, it should have its day in court, and the poll should proceed. Somehow people have to agree on which of the five versions is best; any of them is better than none at all. YechielMan 16:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, even if the poll never happens, at least we have a historical record of the near lameness that has surround this whole issue.  Alternately, MfD this page per   (that one cracked me up).--Isotope23 16:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree that I have some concerns about the process, but overall the poll is a good idea, and should be allowed to run. If we can't agree on wording, then let's just make it a simple one-question, "What is your opinion on the Attribution situation?" and let each editor post their own opinion in a single bullet point. That should probably reveal a clear consensus on most of it, and then anything else that's still vague, we can run a separate poll with a more clearly-stated question. --Elonka 16:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Denny, am I understanding that you nominated this for deletion so it would NOT be deleted? What, are you hoping for a precedent? Why couldn't this discussion have been had at the poll's own (talk) page? Kelly Martin (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I nominated it because there is heavy talk on the page that the poll altogether is dead from admins that heavily work on policy, and that there shouldn't be a poll regardless of what Jimbo wants. Based on that, I nominated for deletion. If some admins/users have decided the poll is dead, we can kill Jimbo's request, nuke the work on the poll, and stop having a hundred plus editors fighting over what to do with this poll. - Denny 17:04, 30 March 2007 (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.