Talk:Beth
From Homestar Runner Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
(delete) |
(delete) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:::I have nothing against anonymous edits per se (I did that for a couple years before getting an account), but I feel that if something as major as page creation should be left to those with accounts, or at least anonymous page creations should be more closely scrutinized. Mainly it is about accountability (why was the page made? Is there a point? Does it add something to the Wiki as a whole?). A named user can be held accountable and shown what to do better than an IP address. Vandalism or even frivolous page creations (as it appears this page is) should be discouraged, and it is more likely to come from anonymous contributors. {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 18:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC) | :::I have nothing against anonymous edits per se (I did that for a couple years before getting an account), but I feel that if something as major as page creation should be left to those with accounts, or at least anonymous page creations should be more closely scrutinized. Mainly it is about accountability (why was the page made? Is there a point? Does it add something to the Wiki as a whole?). A named user can be held accountable and shown what to do better than an IP address. Vandalism or even frivolous page creations (as it appears this page is) should be discouraged, and it is more likely to come from anonymous contributors. {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 18:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
'''Delete''': does not measure up to our inclusion guidelines: only two occurrances and not notable.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 19:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC) | '''Delete''': does not measure up to our inclusion guidelines: only two occurrances and not notable.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 19:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
| + | :Not enough appearances. '''DELETE'''. {{User:The Chort/sig}} 14:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 14:50, 21 August 2007
Too minor, far too minor. The instances aren't even linked in any way. It's just a name. delete — Defender1031*Talk 17:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- Moreover, unlike Dan, there are only two instances, so it falls below the notability threshold. Not to mention poor format and creation by an anony. delete wbwolf (t | ed) 17:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- Poor format can be fixed and should not be a concern, and bias against anonnies is intolerable. Please do not put down a page or an edit just because you see some numbers instead of a name, anonnies can be just as good at editing as named users can, and i don't like prejudice. — Defender1031*Talk 17:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- I have nothing against anonymous edits per se (I did that for a couple years before getting an account), but I feel that if something as major as page creation should be left to those with accounts, or at least anonymous page creations should be more closely scrutinized. Mainly it is about accountability (why was the page made? Is there a point? Does it add something to the Wiki as a whole?). A named user can be held accountable and shown what to do better than an IP address. Vandalism or even frivolous page creations (as it appears this page is) should be discouraged, and it is more likely to come from anonymous contributors. wbwolf (t | ed) 18:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- Poor format can be fixed and should not be a concern, and bias against anonnies is intolerable. Please do not put down a page or an edit just because you see some numbers instead of a name, anonnies can be just as good at editing as named users can, and i don't like prejudice. — Defender1031*Talk 17:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete: does not measure up to our inclusion guidelines: only two occurrances and not notable. Loafing
19:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
