Wikipedia talk:Deletion review/Archives/2015/September
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Deletion review. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I think Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#WP:COP-related CfD closure review belongs at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Would an uninvolved admin review the discussion (initiated 10 August 2015) and either close it or move it to DRV? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:01, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
- I have published this comment in different places before. Hopefully this is finally the right one:
- Unfortunately I've seen this too late, when you started merging, but it affects a lot of pages I use. I had already written a comment in August, but probably in the wrong place. That's why I recopy it here:
- In my daily research Wikipedia Categories are one of the instruments I use most and I have to say that I really do not appreciate the changes decided on this one. The new config makes it much more complicated to find specific persons. Previously it was easy to find a person who died for instance in 333 BC and if my search was for someone who died in the 330s I had to click only a maximum of ten pages. But now, to understand who died in a specific year, I have to click many dozens of pages. This makes my work much more difficult.
- Actually, it is my impression that people discuss and decide these changes who have rarely used the instrument at all. I would therefore prefer a return to the previous situation. And if that is not possible, I'd invite everyone to reflect and and try to understand the function of a useful instrument before you "simplify" it to something much less useful. Unfortunately I have noticed this not only here, but even in other places, where guidelines were forced to "simplify" or "unify" things and the result was the exact opposite. Most features on Wikipedia were introduced for a reason, and the fact that someone doesn't get it on the fly should not be enough for abolishing them. --Lamassus (talk) 22:03, 11 August 2015 (UTC)--Lamassus (talk) 01:23, 12 September 2015 (UTC)--Lamassus (talk) 10:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)--Lamassus (talk) 10:29, 12 September 2015 (UTC)