Jump to content

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Brescia IP

Add links
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: no consensus. WP:DENY grounds denied by other participants. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 08:14, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Brescia IP

[edit]
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Brescia IP (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)​

Report unfinished after about a year. From link, vandalism appears to be obvious so LTA case is not needed and discouraged per WP:DENY PHANTOMTECH [TALK] 20:19, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Keep - In the absence of a guideline on deletion of LTA files, the general guideline of Deny Recognition should be interpreted to mean not to open LTA files unnecessarily, but that leaving abandoned files open is a better denial of recognition than deleting them. The MFD for a deleted LTA file will still exist, so you aren't really hiding or covering up anything. Maybe there should be a guideline to avoid creating unnecessary LTA files, but deleting them seems like the wrong answer. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:24, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Robert McClenon Though it isn't very easy to find, here is the criteria for deletion of LTA pages Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Detailed instructions#Criteria_for_removal which includes both inactive and improper reports. The same page also includes criteria for LTA cases which the nominated page fails, like Only add vandals who need to be pointed out. The current page hasn't been accepted and is still pending per the infobox so in some sense it has never been "open". PHANTOMTECH [TALK] 02:33, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • What a bullshit opinion. "Vandalism is obvious, so there's no need for an LTA page." Exactly where did you learn your logic from? The purpose of an LTA page is to highlight vandalism and consolidate information about it, and that's what this page does. WP:DENY has nothing w=whatsoever to do with it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:05, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beyond My Ken On WP:LTA read the section "Don't use LTA unless needed" PhantomTech[talk] 09:26, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's totally irrelevant, because their edits definitely fall into the categories for which LTA is recommended. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:38, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Beyond My Ken Recommended where and by who? That section is part of what defines the categories for which LTA is recommended. The heading "Don't use LTA unless needed" is a direct instruction to not use LTA with the text below it explaining when that instruction applies. PhantomTech[talk] 00:57, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The LTA fulfills the requirements necessary. Your analysis is obviously incorrect. Please return to making edits you actually understand. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:27, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Beyond My Ken Again, are you able to provide any source or are you going to stick to personal attacks? PhantomTech[talk] 08:30, 22 July 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Brescia_IP&oldid=1100314723"