Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Longevity: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Wwew345t (talk | contribs)
Wwew345t (talk | contribs)
Line 34: Line 34:
:Longevity biographies are usually deleted because they fail [[WP:BIO1E]], [[WP:NOPAGE]] and/or [[WP:ANYBIO]]. In the past such bios were padded with longevity fanfluff including [[WP:OR]], [[WP:SYNTH]] and [[WP:TRIVIA]]. The deleted bios do not increase in notability over time, in fact quite the opposite. Removing a redirect to resurrect such an article without addressing the relevant guidelines is, at the least, not constructive. [[User:DerbyCountyinNZ|<span style="background:orange; color:blue">DerbyCountyinNZ</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:DerbyCountyinNZ|Talk]] [[Special:Contribs/DerbyCountyinNZ|Contribs]])</sup> 07:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:Longevity biographies are usually deleted because they fail [[WP:BIO1E]], [[WP:NOPAGE]] and/or [[WP:ANYBIO]]. In the past such bios were padded with longevity fanfluff including [[WP:OR]], [[WP:SYNTH]] and [[WP:TRIVIA]]. The deleted bios do not increase in notability over time, in fact quite the opposite. Removing a redirect to resurrect such an article without addressing the relevant guidelines is, at the least, not constructive. [[User:DerbyCountyinNZ|<span style="background:orange; color:blue">DerbyCountyinNZ</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:DerbyCountyinNZ|Talk]] [[Special:Contribs/DerbyCountyinNZ|Contribs]])</sup> 07:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::While in some cases it would make sense there should atleast be pages for every person who held the title "worlds oldest person" if that's not notable enough for a article then nothing in the topic is there are serval supercentenarians that get way more coverage then 80% of the athletes that have pages here I'm sure if you looked you would see that for yourself [[User:Wwew345t|Wwew345t]] ([[User talk:Wwew345t|talk]]) 14:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::While in some cases it would make sense there should atleast be pages for every person who held the title "worlds oldest person" if that's not notable enough for a article then nothing in the topic is there are serval supercentenarians that get way more coverage then 80% of the athletes that have pages here I'm sure if you looked you would see that for yourself [[User:Wwew345t|Wwew345t]] ([[User talk:Wwew345t|talk]]) 14:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Take for instance misao okawa who was worlds oldest person for almost two years the oldest Japanese person ever at the time of her death and in the top ten oldest people ever if you looked her up youd see she got significant coverage about her by multiple news sources yet her article got deleted without so much as a consideration there are many more instances of this where a supercenarian article seems to have been dogpiled by 4 editors (who dont even edit in the topic anymore) without a glance with some of the basis being "just because your the oldest person alive it doesnt matter" "so what if they were it isnt notable" occasionally they would atleast attempt to give a reason that makes a little sense but more often then not it was just 4 users teaming up to get rid of articles in a topic and not caring otherwise [[User:Wwew345t|Wwew345t]] ([[User talk:Wwew345t|talk]]) 14:36, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:36, 26 July 2023

WikiProject iconLongevity NA‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Longevity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the World's oldest people on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
NAThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Another non-article. Will go to Afd when I have time. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 22:12, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And done: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tekla Juniewicz. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 22:49, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Marie Brémont and Wwew345t

After being merged into List of French supercentenarians, I noticed that this user has unilaterally removed the redirect which retained consensus for five years (and IMO was a good merge), then reverting a restoration of the redirect by Sam Sailor. A look at the user's contributions, at Special:Contributions/Wwew345t shows that they are new, with less than 100 edits, and have done the same thing on many other longevity redirects, reverting editors such as Technopat, Devonian Wombat, and DerbyCountyinNZ, and even having gotten blocked for edit-warring by Ponyo, although disruptive behavior continues since the block expires. Ponyo, perhaps an indef is in order. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 10:21, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wwew345t's return to edit warring right after their block expired is, well, less than ideal, but it seems to have stopped now. Try to hammer out some sort of consensus on the redirects on the relevant talk pages if possible.-- Ponyobons mots 18:25, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I havent reverted any pages that have had a afd but I would like to know how I can try to restore a page that did Wwew345t (talk) 18:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Their familiarity with Wiki terminology suggests they have had previous user profiles. Possibly a sockpuppet of a blocked user. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 10:36, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I am experienced in being a editor in longevity (on a differnt site) I'm not. sock Though Wwew345t (talk) 13:26, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
there are some pages deleted in 2018 that can be expanded to look better with more sources and some new pages that could be added my intention only is to expand the topic of longevity here because there is a severe lack of info Wwew345t (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Longevity biographies are usually deleted because they fail WP:BIO1E, WP:NOPAGE and/or WP:ANYBIO. In the past such bios were padded with longevity fanfluff including WP:OR, WP:SYNTH and WP:TRIVIA. The deleted bios do not increase in notability over time, in fact quite the opposite. Removing a redirect to resurrect such an article without addressing the relevant guidelines is, at the least, not constructive. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 07:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
While in some cases it would make sense there should atleast be pages for every person who held the title "worlds oldest person" if that's not notable enough for a article then nothing in the topic is there are serval supercentenarians that get way more coverage then 80% of the athletes that have pages here I'm sure if you looked you would see that for yourself Wwew345t (talk) 14:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Take for instance misao okawa who was worlds oldest person for almost two years the oldest Japanese person ever at the time of her death and in the top ten oldest people ever if you looked her up youd see she got significant coverage about her by multiple news sources yet her article got deleted without so much as a consideration there are many more instances of this where a supercenarian article seems to have been dogpiled by 4 editors (who dont even edit in the topic anymore) without a glance with some of the basis being "just because your the oldest person alive it doesnt matter" "so what if they were it isnt notable" occasionally they would atleast attempt to give a reason that makes a little sense but more often then not it was just 4 users teaming up to get rid of articles in a topic and not caring otherwise Wwew345t (talk) 14:36, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]