RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Wiki (português)

Wiki (português) | Result: Deleted

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Delete

 * 1) Most of this page is made up of a "how to guide" on wiki editing and several lists which seem to name every wiki that the article's creator knows, including Wikivoyage, a Portuguese "WikiBirds" and Pornopedia. Then there's all the stuff that used to be on the deleted "Wikipédia (português)" page and more of the same, including a cartoon which shows Jimbo Wales himself stopping most of the world from editing Wikipedia so he can keep it for himself and his friends. There's not much of any relevance to our mission here. Spud (talk) 14:16, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) Not missional, impossible for just about any other established editor to collaborate on it or to meaningfully check out its quality. Purge this and all other similar articles. Show this guy how to start his own wiki. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 14:20, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm the other one person that can understand anything LTR is saying, but frankly it takes more than one person for assessing quality. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ [[image:Red rose 02 -.jpg.svg|12px|link=Special:Block/Raysenn]] ''We exist in different epistemological paradigms, fuckpants! 12:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Per AgingHippie; frankly I'm quite a lot put out that this keeps on coming up over and over again. PacWalker 14:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) Can we just not have his articles anymore? We don't have a portugese community, and so many of the articles are delete worthy it seems. -- Mie kal  01:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 3) I agree with Miekal. One person does not constitute a Portuguese community. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ [[image:Red rose 02 -.jpg.svg|12px|link=Special:Block/Raysenn]] ''I reject your reality. 12:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 4) I hearby cede the "this user is adding more negative than positive" point. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 14:31, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 5) I was prepared to stand up for this lone Brazilian but I read (Google translate) the article. A list & carping is all there is. Delete with extreme prejudice Scream!! (talk) 14:59, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Keep

 * 1) Sou o autor do verbete. Por coerência voto por manter o verbete no RationalWiki. Discordo em alguns pontos: A Wikipédia em português possui verbetes sobre religião (exemplos: Madre Teresa de Calcutá, Chico Xavier, Testemunhas de Jeová etc.), sobre astrólogos (exemplo: Olavo de Carvalho) e sobre outros assuntos combatidos no RationalWiki. Além disso, o verbete é sobre qualquer Wiki (exemplos: CriaçãoWiki, Conservapedia, Metapedia etc.). Eu entendo que a Wikipédia (em português) é truculenta, partidária da Ditadura Militar (no Brasil), com administradores oportunistas que possuem motivações estranhas aos objetivos do Wikimedia Foundation. LeandroTelesRocha (talk) 16:42, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm hoping that makes more sense to you than it did to Google, because all I got were these tidbits: they have articles on notable subjects and there are Brazilians. PacWalker 16:45, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Translation:
 * I'm the author of this entry. For reasons of consistency, I vote to keep this article at RationalWiki. I disagree on various points: Portuguese Wikipedia has articles about religion (e.g. Mother Theresa, Jehova's Witnesses), astrologists (Olavo de Carvalho) and other subjects we deal with here at RationalWiki, besides entries about miscellaneous wikis. I understand that Portuguese Wikipedia is antagonistic, supports the military dictatorship of Brasil (TL Note: wut) and is ruled by opportunistic admins who possess motivations outside the goals of Wikimedia Foundation.
 * Verdict: Bitter Wikipedia banee. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ [[image:Red rose 02 -.jpg.svg|12px|link=Special:Block/Raysenn]] ''Jet Fuel Can't Melt Steel Beams 12:25, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * But after all a project which punishes editors for defending the good names and reputations of living people from vicious Internet trolls does not deserve to survive, amirite? Right? Right? PacWalker 12:34, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Did he say that we need to cover the wiki because it has articles on stuff we cover? If so, wtf kind of logic is that?-- Mie kal  14:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I'm more amused by the "supports the military dictatorship of Brasil" bit. Is it like Brazilian Godwin's Law? Who is the "military dictatorship of Brasil"? Does he hate Rousseff that much? |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ [[image:Red rose 02 -.jpg.svg|12px|link=Special:Block/Raysenn]] ''Yo man, I got a Bust A Nut. 14:18, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * She probably talked about religion at some point. PacWalker 23:35, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Goat
The aforementioned how-to guide is no longer there, so look in the fossil record if you must see it; I chopped it. PacWalker 23:20, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I noticed that. And the unfair cartoon of Jimbo has been deleted. (Thank you, Miekal). If this article only dealt with wikis that are relevant to our mission, like Conservapedia, CreationWiki and Metapedia and, yes, even Wikipedia (minus the out of context quotes), then I wouldn't have a problem with it. RationalWiki is not the right place for posting lists of every wiki you know. I know I complained about Portuguese articles being short, but making a page longer doesn't always mean making it better. Spud (talk) 03:39, 28 April 2015 (UTC)