Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of teaching

 __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: Speedy Delete (G7). — xaosflux  Talk 00:42, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of teaching


Outline from November 2007 with little added. Outline of education already exists in mainspace and both teaching and History of teaching redirects to education and history of respectively. Outline_of_education is already bad enough in terms of unsourced commentary about different teaching methods, we don't need another topic on the same material to create another content fork that also must be monitored so that it too is accurate and not reflecting any WP:FRINGE material or the like. And yes, while I understand that the WikiProject's position is that because the project has created it, it should get free reign but it seems like the project just kind of WP:OWNs the rest of the project if people have to discuss and debate how teaching and education are organized for articles but Outlines are decided solely by a single WikiProject's made-up organizational structure posted based entirely on personal opinions. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:46, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The project's position is to develop outlines, a type of article subject to the scrutiny of the wider community, as all articles are, whether they join a particular WikiProject or not. As for how articles are named, and/or redirected, that's done on a case by case basis subject to consensus reached on the talk pages of those articles, whether they be outlines or not. If you are saying that the navigational systems of Wikipedia, such as Outlines, Categories, navigation footers and the like must mirror the sometimes haphazard and arbitrary redirection patterns of the main namespace, then I have to disagree. Because we have a Category:Teaching, and an apparent reason that we don't have an article on teaching may be that nobody has written one yet. It looks like a valid topic for an article, one for which there is a great deal of coverage on Wikipedia.  But because I have no time to work on this specific outline (as there are others in greater need of attention), and because it has no content except headings, and since I was the author, I've requested speedy deletion below.  Thank you.  The Transhumanist 23:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I think Ricky makes valid criticisms of Outlines in general, if they are allowed to contain unsourced free prose. I don't think the solution is to delete the worst drafts individually, and certainly is not to move the existing very drafty outline drafts to draftspace.  These worst cases seem to illustrate that something more drastic should be done.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:37, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The unsourced prose is an old criticism, it's nothing new. In this case, I'm suggesting deletion because this outline, even if completed, would likely be deleted or at least merged into the education one because the mainspace versions do that. Unless you propose that outlines should have no relationship to the articles in terms of structure, naming conventions or other things, we should not be having multiple, repeated debates about the same issues. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Smokey Joe, the worst cases are simply in need of being fixed. Please point them out to me, at the project page or my talk page, so I can see what is concerning you.  Thank you. The Transhumanist 23:47, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment For what it's worth, I suggested here a move for the draft WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of biological engineering based on the redirect for the mainspace version. To me, the same idea applies on whether to have a separate outline if the subject are merged in mainspace. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:14, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * But a redirect isn't always a merge. Sometimes it is a holding action until an article can be written. The Transhumanist 00:00, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. DexDor(talk) 19:08, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Request speedy deletion – as author of the page, per WP:G7. The only other edits besides mine were page moves or search/replaces via AWB. Nothing substantial, but there's nothing substantial on the page at all anyways &mdash; zero content, just a skeleton of headings. And I don't have the time right now to flesh it out.  Please speedy delete it.  Thank you.  The Transhumanist 19:36, 5 July 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.