Forum:VFD Teeth

Forums: Index > Village Dump > VFD Teeth

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5633 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.

VFD is, in my rather drunken opinion, a little bit on the ridiculous side at the moment. I can understand different people having different ideas of what’s funny or not funny; but there seem to be a whole load of other criteria which pop their ugly purple head out of the deletion trousers copiously at the moment.

A recent comment on VFD for the Dr Dre article had a keep with the comment ‘Notable, far better to rewrite these as they will get re-created. As will most articles put on VFD’. If it’s notable then why not delete it and let someone rewrite it better. If it’s recreated craply with nearly the same content then it can be QFD’d, or whatever it’s called.

Another favourite is ‘it will only come back worse’. Anything could come back worse. If you go to a bad restaurant, you don’t return to it next week, justifying your second visit by commenting, ‘well at least the waiter didn’t pull down his pants and shit on the middle of our table.’

Another one that seems to be around quite a bit all of a sudden is changing from 'delete' to 'keep' with the comment 'Bandwagon keep'. This is justified by arguing that because several other people have voted keep, they should force the issue. mAttlobster. (hello) 23:13, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I think what I’m asking is, should VFD voting be based purely on the quality of the article or should other criteria be taken into consideration, if so what should this criteria be? mAttlobster. (hello) 23:04, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

In my humble opinion if the article can be rewritten just stick the rewrite tag on it instead of deleting it. Many of the Professional Wrestling articles got deleted because I guess people didn't understand the jokes because they don't watch the Wrestling shows? Also stuff of USian nature gets voted for deletion by people in the EU and other parts of the world that don't get the US/American humor (humor without the "u" if it was humour they would get it). --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 01:28, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

The "bandwagon keep" is based on the idea that is somebody cares about the article don't delete it, (usually, I have some exceptions) as there are hundreds if not thousands of bad articles that nobody cares about. And, if 6 people think something is funny and I don't, odds are I'm missing the joke.

The "it will only come back worse argument" is based on the idea that sometimes blank slates are better than a horrid base to rewrite from. (Hence the deletion of articles in the first place) And sometimes the horrid base is better, as its probably already been cleaned up a bit, while the ip-created version that will rise in its place will be worse.

Thinking about this, we probably should write a guide about why we delete stuff in the first place. --Mnb'z 04:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Only if we put it on VFD afterwards. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 05:28, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

As in have the guide on the VFD page, or nominate the guide for deletion? --Mnb'z 05:35, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

What? I have no idea what's going on here... MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 06:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

The latter. Obviously. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 06:45, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

On a related note, I don't like how VFD is working. Can I nominate VFD for deletion in hopes that someone will invent a better way of deleting articles to replace it? --Mnb'z 16:41, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Craply? -OptyC Sucks! CUN13:16, 30 May

Crap-in-the-pants-ly? —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 13:17, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Mordillo usually says "focus on writing stuff, instead. This is shpilkus" or some other Jewism.   Le Cejak • <14:06 May 30, 2009>

Gah, writing stinks. Reviewing and VFDing ftw. Saberwolf116 14:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I just want to point out that I am a wrestling fan and thought the wrestling articles that I've seen on VFD were all awful. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  18:53, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

VFD works pretty well here. I haven't detected a 'E.U.' bias either. If I don't understand the joke because I lack the necessary cultural understanding of say..basketball , I will abstain normally. If it is a complete moronic mess - then I will go VFD unless it has a saving quirk. --Romartus 18:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Abstaining because you have no knowledge of the subject I agree with (I for example would not vote on any article related to sexual intercourse or 'tidying up'), it's just the votes for the reasons of 'it'll only come back worse' or 'bandwagon keep' and similar which mess VFS up. mAttlobster. (hello) 08:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think bandwagon keeps or "it will only come back worse" mess VFD up. If 5 want to keep an article, its probably not that bad. As for the "it will only come back worse" theory, its a valid reason to keep. For notable subjects, its better to weak article than none at all, and for certain subjects, the new article that will arise will probably be worse than the current version.

You think that's bad? I'm always spamming this picture everywhere. Take that, whatever ICarly is! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 12:29, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, deleting a notable subject risks "de-containment", i.e. the subject matter gets spammed across several articles instead of being contained with-in one. As an example, 2 days after ICarly was VFD'd a "rouge episode" article was created. --Mnb'z 12:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)