Category talk:Candidates for deletion/Archive 1

Creating Empty Articles
(merged from User:Ollj, chanded into 3rd person singular)

Ollj, please stop creating empty articles. This takes them off the "Wanted Pages" and so we no longer know what we need. If you have content to provide please do so. But to just create an ampty article means it will look like its there but when someone goes to read it they will find it empty. And only people who don't know info come look for it, so they won't be able to fill it up.

I would also like to ask that this massive creation of empty articles be rolled back. --Karlos 19:46, 28 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * I will fill them. but i want to sort them in stubs first, then categorize, then fill. You can still find them as dead-end pages


 * They do NOT appear on the "dead-end" paged. Have you looked there? All that has is 60 articles. You have created like 1000 in the past two days. :) (Example: Damned Cleric is not there.) the pages you create are not "dead-end" because you have category links at the end.
 * Wanted Pages is for "wanted pages." Now, maybe you will fill out all those articles or maybe you won't. We are not going to render all those articles dependant on whether or not you remember to do them. I do not question your resolve nor your intentions. You could simply die tomorrow. :) I believe you are breaking the process. At least wait and see what the admins say instead of doing all that work and then having it rolled back. --Karlos 20:04, 28 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * I agree, [...] 22:09, 28 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * Creating stubs that have no info is bad idea. [...] I see you have also been creating a lots of new categories. I think we dont need those either, there only should be few major categories, dont one for each little detail. --Geeman 01:13, 29 Jul 2005 (EST)

added to all created articles that are still almost empty.

Ollj, Please stop!
(merged from User:Ollj, chanded into 3rd person singular)

I have noticed that Ollj has been creating a lot of new pages and stuff. I think he should stop making them. Lots of your stuff has no info and the little info they have is formatted badly. It's not helping. Others have keep fixing them all the time and you just make more of them.--Geeman 01:17, 29 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * theyre all stubs, im filling and formating them.
 * Better way would be make one page at the time complete. Not start 1000s of pages at once and not finish them..
 * most filled, or at least categorized, some became "Category:Candidates for deletion"
 * Add, don't put them in a new category.  Better would have been to not make them in the first place.  --Fyren 06:49, 29 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * I agree, I feel uncomfortable deleting articles without the full blown template, I am currently the only active sysop and I can't trawl through every article and figure out whether it deserves to exist or not. In future please use this template.  02:21, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)

Don't take any of this personally, Ollj, but the reason everyone's asking you to stop is that by creating your empty "stubs", you render the Special:Wantedpages utterly useless. Just in case you missed it, that page lists all references from all the articles in the wiki that don't have their own articles yet. by creating an empty article of a certain subject, the wiki removes it from the wanted pages list. This makes it really difficult for us to find out which articles need writing up and which don't. We don't want that. Nuble 07:53, 29 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * Filled hundreds of articles with content. Using template on all empty articles created (and not only mine)


 * that's just the thing with wikis. it's much easier to create articles than it is to delete them. now that the articles are already there, might as well start filling them. start with basic informations for certain articles, like maybe NPCs(quests given by NPC, NPC's role in the story, pictures, etc), and redirecting others to more relevant articles(armor dealer NPC redirected to the Armor article, maybe). i haven't really gone through all of the articles you created, but i'd like to help. if you don't mind, start a list on your userpage of all the articles Ollj has created so far. we'll sort them out, somehow. and no more bickering please. that goes to all of you. Nuble 03:07, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)

added on all canditates for deletion that are almost empty to get them back to wanted pages.

Why is Ollj marking huge sections of the Wiki as deletion candidates because they're Empty? They need to be filled in, not deleted! Ambassador Zain is a Major NPC early on, he needed to be filled in, not randomly marked as a worthless article. --Talrath Stormcrush 02:19, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)

oh wasnt that clear? Ambassador Zain was mean to me, so all memories to his existance must be deleted! :)

Delete Empties or Not?
Well, all the empties were tagged with. Should they all actually be deleted, or shall we retag them with or something? I think they probably aught to be removed, since they'll reappear on Special:Wantedpages that way. Please approve or dissent here (since Ollj's talk page has been scattered to the winds and I'm not sure where everybody stands). &mdash;Tanaric 20:30, 3 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * I don't think any harm will be done if they are deleted while there is no content. All that will happen is that they'll appear on wanted pages again. 02:49, 4 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * I'm neutral on this. I would have preferred if they had never been created, of course... --Fyren 04:02, 4 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Does anyone have any idea what to do with those links created by Ollj that are currently in most wanted? Specifically Cast. Should the page be produced? Or should all those linking to it be corrected? Or both? 10:34, 4 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * There's another discussion about cast somewhere else. I'm pretty sure everybody but Ollj agreed it's not article material, so I'd delink. &mdash;Tanaric 15:39, 4 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Okay, I'll delete then. To be fair, a lot of those empties weren't actually created by Ollj, they were merely tagged by him. &mdash;Tanaric 15:39, 4 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Horay

Build Stubs for Deletion?
I was just looking through some of the itms under Category:Build_stubs, like, , and , and I have to wonder if those really qualify as Wiki material... Sure, there may be some good advice here and there, but most of the pages give mediocre to downright bad skill and attribute suggestions, coupled with bizzare names. I'd say that at least 3/4 of the build stubs could be deleted without anyone ever missing them. Alternately, the names of some of the builds could be changed and the articles edited for content... Any thoughts? --Kiiron 16:30, 18 October 2005 (EST)


 * If you believe an article (any artilce) should be zapped away, feel free to mark it with:
 * And state the reason. If it's something most people agree with, no one will refute your claim and the article will be deleted. If others disagree, they'll discuss it in the talk page. Do not marka page for deletion as a way to talk about changes. Only mark it if you feel it has no good to offer.
 * Most of the build articles were done by Ollj, they seem to be more experimental than fact. Like any article, feel free to edit it, mark it for deleteion or discuss on the talk page what you think should be done with it. --Karlos 21:11, 18 October 2005 (EST)
 * Most of the build articles were done by Ollj, they seem to be more experimental than fact. Like any article, feel free to edit it, mark it for deleteion or discuss on the talk page what you think should be done with it. --Karlos 21:11, 18 October 2005 (EST)

Certain deletions
If you're SURE an article will be deleted (such as when it's misnamed or contains only redundant information) please fix links to the article when you add the delete tag. Go to the article's "what links here" page to see which other articles need to be fixed. There's a link on the left navbar and in the delete template to "what links here." --Fyren 08:45, 20 October 2005 (EST)

Delete lots of images
Could an admin please look at the images, many have credits on/in the names, and even more annoying are the images of armour uploaded in the icon field, thanks Skuld  09:30, 4 May 2006 (CDT)