Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health Wikispace
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete both. howcheng {chat} 19:07, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unilateral attempt by a single user to change Wikipedia's policies without discussion or consensus, publicity for an external site, wrong article space. Delete Plus a bonus autobiography page, Health wikispace, nn-bio.
- Delete. -- The Anome 14:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom - FrancisTyers 16:07, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Nice idea, but Sam needs to start his own HealthWiki if he wants to pursue this. KillerChihuahua?!? 16:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Surely an "invitation only" wiki is a contradiction of terms. Endomion 16:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Huh? Lots of organizations have limited-access wikis that are "invitation-only." rodii
- He can do whatever he likes elsewhere -- however, blending it into Wikipedia as a privileged source is definitely not allowed here. See his edits to bipolar disorder, and the intention to protect Wikipedia pages containing his content, is certainly not allowed here. -- The Anome 21:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Is that a response to me? I'm only rebutting the claim that an "'invitation only' wiki is a contradiction [in] terms." I said nothing about what any user did or should do on Wikipedia, and my vote (see below) was to delete. rodii 00:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- He can do whatever he likes elsewhere -- however, blending it into Wikipedia as a privileged source is definitely not allowed here. See his edits to bipolar disorder, and the intention to protect Wikipedia pages containing his content, is certainly not allowed here. -- The Anome 21:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Huh? Lots of organizations have limited-access wikis that are "invitation-only." rodii
- Delete though. rodii 21:05, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I will explain, but not now. Please make sure you are looking at the most current version of the article. I removed the bio immediately after posting it. I reported the problem to #wikimedia-tech that the article kept reverting itself. My father thinks that some intermediate caching server is at fault. The current Wikipedia article on this topic does not contain the bio. I wholeheartedly agree that a bio of that sort violates Wikipedia's policies.
But unbenowkst to whoever nominated this article for deletion, I invited discussion in my edits to bipolar disorder repeatedly (these invitations and due process provisions were deleted).. and tried to give the community adequate due process (according to my perception of Wikipedia's customs and courtesies (that all changes that may offend someone or aren't self-explanatory (the exception that I thought I was falling into), however when the requests for due process were deleted from the article with nary a notice on my talk page, or on the article's talk page, which is where I first saw Anome, and got to know Anome a little bit, I decided to simply put a link inside the cleanup tag. I created the Health Wikispace because someone complained on the Bipolar disorder talk page that they were reading about bipolar disorder for the first time, or something to that effect.
Modifying the cleanup tag is not vandalism -- it is providing remedial sources in response to feedback left on the talk page; it is merely responding to the needs of a sub-community within Wikipedia (the sub-community the talk page represents), in a way that does no permenant damage to the page. When the cleanup tag is removed, the links to alternative sources will be removed with it, because those links are inside the cleanup tag. This is not vanity or publicity of an external site for the purposes of muckracking. It was responding to the needs of the mentally ill, who may have trouble finding the appropriate resources in crisis. I would prefer that the cleanup tag contain a link to Answers.com, or medicinenet.com -- but the Answers.com link [also inside the cleanup tag] was removed. Wikipedia already has discussed Answers.com before, and decided Answers.com could include Wikipedia on their site, so I think it is an appropriate link to include inside the cleanup tag Wikipedia is not intended to do harm to someone indirectly by way of not giving them the best information first when they are in a really bad state and may be about to do things which for triggering reasons I will not list. I do not want somebody to read about bipolar disorder, and feel that marijuna is the best choice of treatment (illicit drug use will delay treatment),for example. (The TLC reference is still being debated on the talk page). Given the exigent circumstances for someone who is mentally ill, I really feel that at least until the article is cleaned up, we should provide links to more credible sources in the cleanup tag. I will cease modifying the article itself. I look forward to a decision being made, however I would request that we wait until after I have sorted out any caching issues that may be affecting people from accessing the article, and until after Hanukah.
Navigating the Internet
- 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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.