Club Penguin Fanon Wiki:Final Solution/2015

According to short pages, there are over 700 articles that are less than 1000 bytes on this wiki. 1000 bites is rather small, and many of these articles are unimportant, haven't been edited in years, created by someone who quit, or all of the above. My proposal is to get rid of all these articles (with the exception of Disambiguation pages and lists) by the end of the year to clean up the wiki.

If someone could create a bot to do so, that would be great, because it would suck to do it manually.

Support

 * Mectrixctic 22:05, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * BluePuffle.pngPerapin 00:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Neutral

 * I think I have some pages I need to work on but I'll get to work on them eventually. ULSK12 &bull; Talk &bull; Contribs &bull; Youtube I KNOW! LET'S THROW MONEY AT IT! [[File:|20px]] 22:38, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe divide small articles in 2 separate groups: ones we can save and ones that we should kill with fire. Then try to improve the ones we can save (and even possibly the ones we should kill with fire). --Ami H. Parkea (Just kidding, it's Fooly! And here's a talk page.) 22:57, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I completely agree with Fooly. We should be able to add on to the ones we save. The ones that we kill off must have no purpose in the wiki whatsoever with the exception of just being there. -Lara Croft (Fine, it's Mr Cow2)

Against

 * CKSig.png Merry  Christmas   22:20, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * --Gottfried Pondering.png User:Swiss Ninja  Clovis Hochstadt Performing.png (My Talk Page) 22:36, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * --CanadaFlag.png Bro  Keep 'Christmas' in Christmas! OHYEAH.png 'Happy Holidays' is for hippies  01:34, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * --Russia_flag.PNGBelarus_flag.jpg Slender  Talk to me   23:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * -  Wonderweez  ( Talk · Contribs ) 05:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Comments

 * I don't see the necessity in deleting 700 articles just because they're small, without even trying to get the community to improve them. My main idea for FS 2k15 is to focus on expanding all of our articles by encouraging editing, article adoption, etc., and at the end of it, we can delete the articles that we must. So for now, I don't really think we should just sentence 700 articles to the virtual guillotine. With that said, we can still always delete those articles at the end of FS2k15 if none are tremendously expanded upon or adopted. CKSig.png Merry  Christmas   22:20, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No one is going to adopt yucky stuff. And too much adoption of LQA's can be unhealthy, resulting in either very little focus to the article or steering the article's focus to build up too much on the adopter's own characters/places/things etc. BluePuffle.pngPerapin 00:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I attempted this before I learned from TS that the Final Solution was supposed to be a one time gig. Hence the name "Final" Solution. Our best alternative would be to actually expand current articles so that they are not LQA's or anything under a certain size. --Gottfried Pondering.png User:Swiss Ninja  Clovis Hochstadt Performing.png (My Talk Page) 22:38, 15 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Basically every article that is on the list is capable of being saved. If they become medium quality by 2015 then they won't be deleted. Mectrixctic 23:13, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Uh, from what I gathered "final solutions" happen towards the end of a year, not the beginning. There's no way we could do a Final Solution in January, that's not nearly enough time to prepare and get users ready for it. Sorry if I wasn't clear about that.I was personally thinking that it could be held sometime between July and September. Also to everyone, this isn't a vote of should we have a final solution, it's just to vote on mectrix's proposal (or so I thought). One last thing, if we do have a "Final Solution" this year, it'd be more of an "article improvement drive" than a deletion spree, we're just keeping the name because it'd still be like saying "Hey, this is the last chance to improve all of these articles or else they face deletion", and hopefully it would boost user participation and editing. CKSig.png Merry  Christmas   04:08, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter if the articles aren't yours. And technically LQA articles which aren't created by you don't give you the right to edit them into AQA's by going OOC. BluePuffle.pngPerapin 00:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Purging over 700 articles just because they are under x-bytes seems to me just impractical and a waste of time. This kind of housekeeping is usually reserved for when you move to a new wikifarm/network, not so much as an "everyday thing." -  Wonderweez  ( Talk · Contribs ) 05:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * IIRC a bot was used last time, so it took a few minutes to purge most of the articles. This isn't an everyday thing, it's once a year.
 * I tend to start off every wiki with small articles, but as time goes on, I add on to them slowly, and soon, they're 5,000+ bytes! -Mr Cow2