Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject WikiStandards


 * 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 speedy delete per creator's request. Max S em 10:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject WikiStandards
"WikiPolice"? Let me be the first to say that this is an incredibly stupid idea, and just asking for trouble – Gurch 03:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sounds like a good idea to me. The nominator provides no rationale for deletion, nor does s/he explain why it's an "incredibly stupid idea". Plus, they evidently have a similar project on Wikiversity - if it works there, there's a chance it may work here. I don't know why there's so much resistance on Wikipedia to anything involving pseudo-military ranks, hierarchies, or insignia - the reason these things are used in the real world is because the military structure is the most efficient form of organisation. Certainly we shouldn't try to restructure Wikipedia itself along military/hierarchical lines, but if a private group (which no one is compelled to join) wants to use such ranks and insignia, then let them. WaltonOne 08:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You & I have so much in common ;-) -- Pump  me  up  09:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete. This is inherently a bad idea. We don't need a group of police going around trying to involve themselves in our processes that run just fine on their own. Essentially you're lumping administrative tasks into one group under the banner of being police. Similar as many aspects of it are, administrators are not police officers. ^demon[omg plz] 13:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep with serious reservations. This project apparently seeks to make its officers de facto admins, which strikes me as being potentially a very bad idea. I acknowledge that it is still incomplete, and would like to give it a chance to be completed before we decide whether the completed project has similar problems. If so, then I very definitely will indicate that I think it should be deleted then. But I would like to have a better feel for what it's trying to do than I do now. John Carter 13:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Temporal Keep - This page is still under construction. It would be interesting to see how it turns out, whether or not it becomes an aggressive police force of power-hungry admins, or simply a collection of editors wishing to gently enforce WikiSpirit.--WaltCip 14:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. We already have the Anti-Vandalism Project and various quality control projects. In any case, the people who actually police Wikipedia just get on with it quietly without the need for projects. The idea of ten ranks was mildly amusing - can we have a specimen of one of the coloured modules please? -- RHaworth 19:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - per User:^demon. --  ¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤   15:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep but restructure. It's a good idea, but it's bureaucratic and cabal-like. We should have a classroom of sorts, aside from the VC (which seems to be more admin-coach focused), but this isn't really the way to go about it. J- ſtan TalkContribs 19:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - per User:^demon and RHaworth. --Bduke 02:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep it is in it's infancy at wikiversity, and has since been restructured to remove all the authoritarian notations. I will update it here -- Pump  me  up  04:47, 27 October 2007 (UTC) Changed to delete -- Pump  me  up  09:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: viewing the master page at Wikiversity will provide many answers as to what it is all about, and the references to police have all been removed (stupid idea to start with). There are currently 2 modules nearing completion available for viewing there. -- Pump  me  up  05:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * delete Divisive and against the spirit of WP "All users must abide by the project standards, and we have a qualification (levels) system which shows a member's competence and knowledge." --and military-looking badges.  (I suspect by "users" they mean "project members"). All WP projects are open to whoever joins in good faith--they are not entitled to set qualifications. They would do better to design teaching modules and self-testing, and rely on the users more than the certifiers. I see no reason why Pumpmeup (or myself) has the right to go around certifying user's abilities. Let them submit a new project when they have one--this is the wrong way to go--but, yes,  I would like to see their teaching material. 06:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as author, not needed here until wikiversity project expands anyway-content here does not reflect the integrity of that on wikiversity -- Pump  me  up  09:03, 27 October 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.