Category talk:Tagged for deletion

Notes regarding pages tagged for deletion

Just for one place to put all these. Please chip in with opinions. I will remove bullet points as they are resolved.

• Can I delete Bill Gates achievement (and associated pages) along with Expensive_Geohash (and associated pages)?

support -- relet 08:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Against Bill Gates. It's humor. Expensive can go though. -- Wmcduff 12:30, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I say keep expensive as a way of recording unusually expensive adventures mykaDragonBlue [- i have no sig -] 01:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Keep Bill Gates, because it makes for a good laugh (and well illustrates the impossibility of cheating the algorithm which is doubted by almost everyone once in a while). "Expensive" was supposed to be turned into a "subjective" achievement, a task that's more served by the gratutious ribbons nowadays. I don't like to think of this as a regular achievement but would like to keep the ribbon available. --Ekorren 08:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

• Category:Meet-up achievement still has a whole bunch of pages in it

I will check if someone has renamed the achievement.. if yes, have reletbot move them to the renamed category. If not, the delete tag is wrongly placed. -- relet 08:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Tagged as duplicated of Category:Meetup geohash achievement - which is empty. Barring naming problems, I vote we delete the second one, and keep the first. --joannac

seconded mykaDragonBlue [- i have no sig -] 10:12, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Support deletion of Category:Meetup geohash achievement. -- Benjw 11:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

• Category:National Parks got moved to Category:Houston parks - is there some meaning of Houston I'm missing?

Not that I am aware of. I guess that's just a better classification for the pages that got categorized in the first place -- relet 08:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

None of those parks are in Houston (or Texas). Not sure why the name change

• All the old expedition pages with various levels of detail. We need to decide which to delete, and which to keep (and remove delete tags from)

IMHO all that is either a) replaced by a correct page or b) expedition planning (unless it is very elaborate and worth reading) -- relet 08:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

See also discussion here

• Canandaigua-Corning, New York should probably only have one name.

And a more pronounceable name in general, yes. :P -- relet 12:21, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

• HOLY CRAP World

Yeah, that was created by some avid (anonymous? I don't remember) scripter.. I never saw the point, given that we have the Map statistics with clickable graticules. -- relet 12:21, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Support deletion. It's totally outdated and dawidi's map serves the purpose much better. --Ekorren 08:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Support deletion. It doesn't seem to be linked anywhere, takes an age to load and I really doubt anyone uses it. Or will use it. -- Benjw 11:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

• Fort Worth, Texas is moved to Ft. Worth; all the other "Fort" cities are unabbreviated. Ditto "Saint" cities.

I suspect the official name is "Fort Worth", so I'd support renaming the graticule back to "Fort Worth, Texas". If this doesn't happen then the Fort Worth page should be turned into a redirect for the graticule page, rather than deleted. -- Benjw 11:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

• Someone hit me over the head and tell me that keeping spam pages around when I have the most points is a BAD idea.

• Main Page - should be Main page? (yes, i'm just getting really picky now)

Probably. And All Graticules should be All graticules. I just didn't dare to move them, because someone else's code relies on them. -- relet 08:30, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Set up a redirect, at least, if the code can't be changed. -- Benjw 11:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Will add more as I discover them. --joannac 01:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)