LPedia:Requests for Deletion/Talk:Abortion: Difference between revisions
m (AMK152 moved page LPedia:Requests for Deletion/Abortion to LPedia:Requests for Deletion/Talk:Abortion) |
(→Discussion: This is what seems to have happened here.) |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
{{Keep}} It seems like the abortion page was deleted by one of our maintenance bots - perhaps the original page should never have been deleted? I suggest we restore the abortion page and see what it says and make a decision after that. [[User:CarynAnnHarlos|CarynAnnHarlos]] ([[User talk:CarynAnnHarlos|talk]]) 23:36, 16 October 2017 (CDT) | {{Keep}} It seems like the abortion page was deleted by one of our maintenance bots - perhaps the original page should never have been deleted? I suggest we restore the abortion page and see what it says and make a decision after that. [[User:CarynAnnHarlos|CarynAnnHarlos]] ([[User talk:CarynAnnHarlos|talk]]) 23:36, 16 October 2017 (CDT) | ||
{{Restore}} We need a Restore template for this, don't we. There: made one. One day before [[User:WHUMP|WHUMP]] deleted the article at this location it was deleted by [[Special:Contributions/BrianHoltz|Brian Holtz]], and the log entry for that deletion shows an except of text about some wonderful issue (?) about an Fda [sic] approved capsule. Because of the cleanup earlier this year the actual text is no longer in our database, but the indicated text doesn't look like anything submitted in good faith. That first deletion, however, looks like it involved collateral damage: http://web.archive.org/web/20110816083124/http://lpedia.org/Abortion -- I suspect that the article was completely overwritten with garbage and was then mistaken for an article that never had valid content. Our hypothetical of spelunking into our old, 30+GB pre-cleanup database has now ceased to be a hypothetical if we want the proper edit history. If not, [http://lpedia.org/Special:Contributions/BrianHoltz this] is what we can get from the Internet Archive to try to rebuild it, but note that I've still not completed this for the Carol Moore article, even though I've created a template for the non-recoverable edits in its reconstructed edit history: ([[:Template:Lost Edit]]). -- [[User:Strangelv|Strangelv]] ([[User talk:Strangelv|talk]]) 01:13, 17 October 2017 (CDT) | |||
{{DiscussionBoxEnd}} | {{DiscussionBoxEnd}} | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ |
Revision as of 06:13, 17 October 2017
Request for Deletion Discussion
The following is an ongoing deletion discussion. Please feel free to voice your opinion on whether you think the page should be kept, deleted, merged, etc. You can use any of the following prior to your comments to show your opinion. |
Talk:Abortion
Abortion article page already has been deleted. This shows up in search engines.
Discussion
Haven't done a request for deletion in a while and accidently put in full URL. So this page probably needs deletion too. In any case, the page Abortion already was deleted, but not the talk page. And Talk:Abortion shows up in search engines. LP-1979 (talk) 13:57, 16 October 2017 (CDT)
- Keep It seems like the abortion page was deleted by one of our maintenance bots - perhaps the original page should never have been deleted? I suggest we restore the abortion page and see what it says and make a decision after that. CarynAnnHarlos (talk) 23:36, 16 October 2017 (CDT)
- Restore We need a Restore template for this, don't we. There: made one. One day before WHUMP deleted the article at this location it was deleted by Brian Holtz, and the log entry for that deletion shows an except of text about some wonderful issue (?) about an Fda [sic] approved capsule. Because of the cleanup earlier this year the actual text is no longer in our database, but the indicated text doesn't look like anything submitted in good faith. That first deletion, however, looks like it involved collateral damage: http://web.archive.org/web/20110816083124/http://lpedia.org/Abortion -- I suspect that the article was completely overwritten with garbage and was then mistaken for an article that never had valid content. Our hypothetical of spelunking into our old, 30+GB pre-cleanup database has now ceased to be a hypothetical if we want the proper edit history. If not, this is what we can get from the Internet Archive to try to rebuild it, but note that I've still not completed this for the Carol Moore article, even though I've created a template for the non-recoverable edits in its reconstructed edit history: (Template:Lost Edit). -- Strangelv (talk) 01:13, 17 October 2017 (CDT)