Valve Developer Community:Reasons for speedy deletion: Difference between revisions
Mailmanmicky (talk | contribs) m (Candidate 'Category:Glossary has been disregarded due to User:Lxm6 being overly taciturn.) Tag: Replaced |
Mailmanmicky (talk | contribs) m (Undo revision 294283 by Mailmanmicky (talk)) Tag: Undo |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{discussion_page}}{{toc-right}} | {{discussion_page}}{{toc-right}} | ||
== Category:Glossary == | |||
{{Message | |||
| user = Mailmanmicky | |||
| edited = 2:26, 9 Apr 2023 | |||
| time = 2:07, 9 Apr 2023 | |||
| {{tint|color=comment|RDC:}} {{tint|color=red|This category does not meet the criteria for deletion.}} The reasoning provided: ''"Too generic and horrible"'' is inapt, incorrect and lacks sound, formal reasoning. | |||
# '''This category is not generic'''<br>The term generic is employed here improperly. Calling this category generic would imply that it pertains to a large class or group of things, but it clearly doesn't. For example: 'Flu' is used as a generic term for viruses, but category and/or glossary do not classify as generic because they are, by nature, inherently specific. | |||
# '''Calling this category horrible is biased and unacceptable.'''<br>Pages should not be marked as a candidate for deletion through bias. Not only is this partisan, but this also forces unmerited opposition which could have been easily prevented through basic impartiality. | |||
I believe that it is in our best interests that this issue is solved diplomatically. So, if you disagree with the above information, then feel free to provide your counterargument below. Else, make sure to promptly remove the delete template from the associated page. | |||
If a counterargument cannot be provided within an apt timeframe, then the delete template will be removed regardless. | |||
}} | |||
{{Message | |||
| user = Mailmanmicky | |||
| time = 8:09, 9 Apr 2023 | |||
| I've got a proposition that I believe can solve this issue. | |||
So all the pages in [[:Category:Glossary]] are Source Engine related right? How about we just move every single term in [[:Category:Glossary]] to [[:Category:Source]] and then mark [[:Category:Glossary]] for deletion afterwards. Thoughts? | |||
}} | |||
Revision as of 02:18, 9 April 2023
Comments on talk pages should be signed with "~~~~", which will be converted into your signature and a timestamp.
Category:Glossary
(using Template:Message) RDC: This category does not meet the criteria for deletion. The reasoning provided: "Too generic and horrible" is inapt, incorrect and lacks sound, formal reasoning.
- This category is not generic
The term generic is employed here improperly. Calling this category generic would imply that it pertains to a large class or group of things, but it clearly doesn't. For example: 'Flu' is used as a generic term for viruses, but category and/or glossary do not classify as generic because they are, by nature, inherently specific. - Calling this category horrible is biased and unacceptable.
Pages should not be marked as a candidate for deletion through bias. Not only is this partisan, but this also forces unmerited opposition which could have been easily prevented through basic impartiality.
I believe that it is in our best interests that this issue is solved diplomatically. So, if you disagree with the above information, then feel free to provide your counterargument below. Else, make sure to promptly remove the delete template from the associated page.
If a counterargument cannot be provided within an apt timeframe, then the delete template will be removed regardless. --Mailmanmicky (talk) 2:07, 9 Apr 2023 (UTC)
(using Template:Message) I've got a proposition that I believe can solve this issue.
So all the pages in Category:Glossary are Source Engine related right? How about we just move every single term in Category:Glossary to Category:Source and then mark Category:Glossary for deletion afterwards. Thoughts? --Mailmanmicky (talk) 8:09, 9 Apr 2023 (UTC)