Category talk:Pages with corresponding pages at EvoWiki which need to be deleted

Why do the EvoWiki pages need to be deleted? 141.134.75.236 (talk) 16:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)


 * User:FuzzyCatPotato/RationalWiki:Project_Creationism Userpage/Talk 16:35, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * That's why you're porting them over, but it doesn't answer my question. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 16:39, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Why keep two copies of a page?--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 16:52, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Why delete information from EvoWiki because we're copying it over? Are there copyright issues or is it just a matter of hiding that it's not original RW content? 141.134.75.236 (talk) 17:09, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Conspiracy theories abut us being dishonest isn't how you should be going into this argument. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 17:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Port Section

Awaken someone with ability to grant curator rights

Get people curator

Port

Delete ported pages

Userpage/Talk 17:36, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Also, EvoWiki is currently owned by the RMF.

Userpage/Talk 17:37, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It's like how we don't keep multiple copies of articles here on RW -- just the one. Since EW is essentially an extension of RW now, might as well treat it the same. Plus, if an article is deleted, then peole know it's already been ported over. Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 17:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * So the eventual goal is to delete all of EvoWiki and redirect it to RW? I'm not against that, but if that's not the goal and you actually want to keep EvoWiki around in some function, then deleting parts of it because we copied them over doesn't seem particularly useful. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 17:56, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It isn't that useful to keep copies on the dead site either.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 18:07, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Someone could come across EvoWiki and look something up there, unaware that it's basically a dead wiki now with all activity instead focussed on RW. Now, if they are met with soft redirects to RationalWiki, or a straight domain redirect to RW, then I wouldn't object. But if all they find is a void of mysteriously deleted articles, then I find the usefulness of the deletion approach questionable. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 18:16, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * That's the ultimate goal. After EvoWiki's life juices have all been sucked out, the URL can simply become a redirect to RW. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 18:12, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, fair enough. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 18:16, 28 June 2015 (UTC)