Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Chemical ASCII-art

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. T. Canens (talk) 07:49, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Chemical ASCII-art

From the talk page it looks like this used to be in article space back in the mists of time, then got moved into project space as not encyclopaedic but potentially useful. However making chemical diagrams in this way for Wikipedia articles is nowhere encouraged, images are preferred, and there are no significant inbound links. I have notified WikiProject Chemistry of this discussion. the wub "?!" 18:53, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per discussion at WT:Chemical ASCII-art. Of no use on today's Wikipedia. Achowat (talk) 18:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The only usable content is a simple introduction on how to draw linear molecules in ASCII art, which is simple enough to figure out without specific instruction. Drawing molecules in ASCII art on Wikipedia articles is discouraged anyway, because it looks ugly compared to properly generated images. I currently don't know how to generate such images, but that is irrelevant, there are others who do know, and it shouldn't be too difficult for me to ask how to generate them. In conclusion, the information on this page is essentially useless. JIP | Talk 19:51, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mark historical and move to a subpage of WP:WikiProject Chemicals (say WP:WikiProject Chemicals/ASCII structural representation ) 70.49.124.225 (talk) 06:38, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is not useful for Wikipedia or for WP:WikiProject Chemicals because we do not use ASCII art. I don't see any reason to keep and mark this as historical because even back in 2003 when this was written, it wasn't useful - we were trying to avoid ASCII art in favor of image files then.-- Ed (Edgar181) 14:57, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mark as historical. No reason to delete. Wikipedia seems so keen on purging their own history sometimes. Are we ashamed of a time when things were run differently? Buddy431 (talk) 02:43, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's better to waste server space hosting pages that will never be useful again? Achowat (talk) 02:45, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Internet Archive does that and WP:NOTPAPER seems to indicate space isn't that big a problem (not to mention Moore's Law and solid state storage or its analog for harddrives) 70.49.124.225 (talk) 04:01, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting stuff does not save server space. The information is still stored, just not in a publicly accessible manner. It's briefly explained at Wikipedia:Viewing and restoring deleted pages. Buddy431 (talk) 22:31, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So would you be opposed to any deletion? Pages should only be live if they are useful, and this one is not now, nor (it seems) has ever been. Achowat (talk) 00:44, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry/Structure drawing workgroup, to which it is deprecated. Oppose deletion, because it was a serious contribution. Although it has some historical relevance in exploring directions the project did not take, it does not have historical relevance to anythign in mainspace. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:50, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mark as historical - it's history! Sure, it wasn't exactly used, but with a link to the AfD it's kind of interesting and also makes for a nice emphasis of what not to do. Stuffing it into a subpage, not like it'll harm anything. — Isarra ༆ 19:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mark as historical per previous arguments. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 07:18, 3 May 2012 (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.