Jump to content

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Translation/Urban Network

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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: delete. ♠PMC(talk) 01:54, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Translation/Urban Network (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Incomplete translation from Japanese, abandoned since 2008. Other subpages of Wikipedia:Translation such as Wikipedia:Translation/Tanja Ostojić seem to be requests for translation. TSventon (talk) 10:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't there a CSD criterion for this? There certainly should be. Otherwise, delete. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first half of the page is in English, the second in Japanese. TSventon (talk) 18:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bouzinac, you may be the person most interested in keeping the page. Updating the whole translation would be a major task, particularly as the page (like the 2008 ja article) has no sources. Producing a stub like would be easier and keep the history. TSventon (talk) 10:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Archive. Was used, or was intended to be. Archiving old stuff is what should be done. Ancient project stuff should not be fed through MfD for busywork deletion. Users who do not know how to archive should not be curating old stuff. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SmokeyJoe I have taken this to MFD for advice from more knowledgeable editors. This page seems to be an anomaly as other subpages of Wikipedia:Translation such as Wikipedia:Translation/Tanja Ostojić seem to be requests for translation. TSventon (talk) 10:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My advice is to archive, and if you seek deletion you need are explain why archiving isn’t good enough. I disagree strongly with Andy that any old done stuff should be speediable, records of how things were done are important, and often there can be attribution requirements in not deleting. Users who participated should not have their contribution record hidden from them without good reason. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:14, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.