Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Why is Wikipedia losing contributors - Thinking about remedies

 __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 keep. BencherliteTalk 19:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Why is Wikipedia losing contributors - Thinking about remedies


Page is pretty much a duplicate of what has been said on dozens of other pages, no activity for over a year, clutters Wikipedia: namespace without adding anything useful to the encyclopedia. Guy Macon (talk) 11:38, 20 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Just mark it as historical. User essays don't need to lead somewhere, so long as they're on the subject of Wikipedia, and most of the worst bits of this (for instance user:Wnt's typical anti-deletionist screed) have already been removed. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:52, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, redundant to about 40 billion other essays. We gain nothing by keeping this long, rambling filibuster. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 14:11, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Although I generally agree that WP:REDUNDANTESSAYS should not be written, has the subject of the essay been covered on other essays? There's WikiProject Editor Retention, but that's a WikiProject, not an essay. And I believe that redundant essays should be merged, not deleted.--SGCM (talk)  14:23, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Delete or Userfy. Category:User essays says "This category contains essays in the User namespace about Wikipedia and related topics. ... An essay here may be moved categorically into the Wikipedia namespace if it is frequently referenced, as evidenced by becoming an evolving expression of multiple editors." Far from being an "evolving expression of multiple editors" this is a dead page. If it was in userspace I would just mark it as historical, but it is in mainspace. Nobody is adding to it, nobody is referencing it in any recent discussions, and I strongly suspect that it isn't on anyone's watchlist. IOW, cruft. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:06, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Going by that logic, wouldn't that suggest userfying it?--SGCM (talk)  01:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to userfication. The original author appears to be User:Blackvisionit. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep as historical. People shouldn't fear their comments and participation will be deleted as a matter of course after a year or so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wxidea (talk • contribs) 03:38, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Do not delete. Deletion of essays can look like censorship or repression of dissent, with a chilling effect on continued user expression. Discuss a merge and redirect, or userfication, on the essay talk page. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:29, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to userfication. The original author appears to be User:Blackvisionit. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'm sorry, delete why? In fact, you've ironically done us all a favor by bringing this page to everyone's attention. Ego White Tray (talk) 03:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep or userfy. The rationale for deletion is that the subject of the essay is redundant. But redundant with what other essays? Actual examples will have to be presented instead of vaguely implying that they exist.--SGCM (talk)  04:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep No valid rationale for deletion was presented.  Belch fire - TALK  05:04, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - On one hand, there doesn't appear to be many pages that link to this essay in a way that would cite to the essay, and the essay largely is the creation of only two editors. That leans towards user essay and userfying the page. See Wikipedia essays. On the other hand, the essay does contain advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors (more than 20 different editors have contributed to the page) and the information is not a strictly personal viewpoint about Wikipedia. That leans more towards Wikipedia essay rather than user essay. Blackvisionit, who originated the essay, is retired, so it would be odd to userfy the essay to a user subpage of his/hers. The essay is long, so I don't see it being redundant of other essays (assuming some were cited in this discussion). On balance, it seems to qualify as a Wikipedia essay that is fine for project space. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:16, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I was one of those primary editors. HOWEVER, please note that my edits were minimally my ideas, but rather an attempt to document a discussion which involved many people. So this is not a user article, but is really more of a general essay. Wxidea (talk) 15:08, 23 August 2012 (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.