SW IRC Deletion policy update

<OmegaTyrant>: toomai, you say you "quickly stomped" on my proposal, yet you gave absolutely no reasoning against it
<Toomai>: If a user already has their userspace off-limits, threatening to delete it is guaranteed alienation.
<Toomai>: Most such users are probably unaware that things can be undeleted, and will therefore conclude "They ruined all my stuff, I'm never coming back". We don't need negative press.
<OmegaTyrant>: if the person already left such as this user http://www.ssbwiki.com/Special:Contributions/Dark_Mai_Valentine There is no alienation
<Mousehunter321>: Can we agree that userpages of registered users that consist only of gibberish can be safely deleted?
<OmegaTyrant>: and they would be given sufficient warning that if they do nothing to get their page unprotected, their page will be deleted. if they cared about their "stuff" and actually helping the wiki, they'll heed the warning and work
<Toomai>: If a user wants to have gibberish on their userpage then let them. If it's clearly spam though we should get rid of it.
<Mousehunter321>: I mean as in "no coherent thought evident".
<Toomai>: If someone wants to parade their lack of coherentness what's the problem?
<Mousehunter321>: The line between spam and gibberish.
<Mousehunter321>: Is not clearly defined.
<Toomai>: By "spam" I'm talking advertisements and such.
<Toomai>: In any case I'd need an example to know what you're getting it.
<Mousehunter321>: http://www.ssbwiki.com/User:Yo_mang
<Mousehunter321>: Not the best example.
<Toomai>: I see no problem with that userpage.
<OmegaTyrant>: that page would get deleted under your proposal anyway
<Toomai>: He was still using it as an example of gibberish.
<OmegaTyrant>: and if that user was legit, such a userpage wouldn't be a problem
<Mousehunter321>: Point is, he wasn't.
<Mousehunter321>: What is your stance on autoconfirmation, Toomai?
<OmegaTyrant>: point is, it would get deleted for that, and not for being gibberish
<Toomai>: You mean, restricting the userspace from new users?
<Mousehunter321>: Yes.
<OmegaTyrant>: something like this user did would be valid grounds for deleting "gibberish" http://www.ssbwiki.com/index.php?title=User:Tjahyadi&action=edit&redlink=1
<Toomai>: I am not aware of any way to restrict specific namespaces from certain usergroups.
<Mousehunter321>: Would someone like Porplemontage know? Because it seems like that it's done on other NIWA wikis.
<Toomai>: If you're thinking of MarioWiki, they actually stop all page creation for non-autoconfirmeds, not just userpages.
<OmegaTyrant>: as i already posted on your proposal, preventing userpage creation until a certain amount of edits are reaches is a bad idea
<OmegaTyrant>: reached*
<Toomai>: Another point about the deleting-userpages-of-people-that-don't-contribute thing: How many other wikis even go as far as protecting the pages of such users?
<Mousehunter321>: I know Wikipedia marks userpages of single-edit users for deletion.
<OmegaTyrant>: what other wikis do or don't do is irrelevant
<Mousehunter321>: We're trying to get some perspective on this issue.
<Toomai>: What other wikis do is far more relevant than people realize.
<Toomai>: People expect things to be at least similar on sites that work similar.
<Zekromega>: Similiar, as strict, or lighter in rules
<Zekromega>: Stricter Wikis allow for less noobs, at the cost of less users to develop
Toomai is looking for this quote from a UX big cheese he remembers somewhere
<VT>: ...
<Mousehunter321>: Zekromega:implying that less restrictions would result in more activity?