Select Page

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Amulet Heart/secret page

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Amulet Heart/secret page

These pages are listed here. The arguments for deleting secret pages are summarized in the essay Wikipedia:Why secret pages should be deleted.

WP:UP#GAMES states that examples of unrelated content to writing an encyclopedia are "Games, roleplaying sessions, secret pages and other things pertaining to "entertainment" rather than "writing an encyclopedia". Such activities are generally frowned upon by the community. Facetious games of no educational value relevant to the project are routinely deleted at MfD." WP:NOTMYSPACE states that "[t]he focus of user pages should not be social networking or amusement, but rather providing a foundation for effective collaboration."

To the creators: in a July/August 2010 policy discussion (at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not/Archive 34#Does WP:NOTMYSPACE apply to secret pages?), community consensus was that the policy Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not does prohibit secret pages. The deletion of this page is not a reflection on you; instead, it is a reflection of the changing community consensus that secret pages set an inappropriate ethos at Wikipedia. In that policy discussion, I wrote here about why all secret pages should be treated equally; whether a user social networks or does not social network on Wikipedia has no bearing on the fact that all secret pages should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 05:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Then you don't understand analogies. Let me try again: people want to be allowed to do whatever they want. Newbies have no power, so they get held to a stricter interpretation of permitted behaviour. → ROUX ₪ 06:30, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh no! Not that! Can't have people doing stuff they want to do!!! Seriously though, the only areas where we should be mega rigid in applying the rules is in the content the encyclopedia presents, and in maintaining cordial and respectful relations between the editors. Reyk YO! 07:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all so we can forget about this silly issue. I was against deleting those pages of established editors several months ago, but I think now that it's not worth bothering. Established users should know better, but I don't see why we need a double standard. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 02:11, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all except those shown to be of encyclopedic relevance (if any). FT2 (Talk | email) 03:56, 12 October 2010 (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.