Hostingcomparison

If you happen to end up here because you are looking for the table of Comparison of one-click hosters, have a look at filesharing.wikidot.com -> currently under construction.

Re: Could you explain the deletion review

Hi, i don't know if you are the right person to ask, but it seemed you closed the deletion review of this page, Comparison_of_one-click_hosters and I don't quite understand the result. Could you just give a small explanation please. This is what i understand from it:

There is an extensive list with hosters with their details on a page. One admin merges 10% of the content into another page and redirects it there. People complain about the lost content, and want or revert ( im not an adept at wikipedia histories ) the page back. This goes back and forth, so the admin puts the page up ask for deletion. The result is keep. The admin waits a year, and then deletes the page, discussion and all history of it. This I disputed by asking a deletion review where most people seemed to go for overturn, after which the admin only restores the history, not the talk, and does not restore the redirection.

The result now is that the content is not deleted, but it is buried somewhere in history logs. Basically thats like killing it softly, no? Redirection is like delete in reality? What should we do now? Should I put up a page called Extensive comparison of one-click hosters?

Could you please clarify one and other, thanks.

naja -- Hostingcomparison (talk) 12:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Contesting a closure involving a merge and redirect or non-merge and redirect to an Articles for Deletion debate is not an issue for Deletion Review. Merge, as an AfD close, is equivalent to a keep close plus an editorial decision to merge. Keep closes don't prevent editorial merges and merge closes don't prevent the merge being editorially undone to become a keep. Each change is an editorial decision for the two article's talk pages (with an eye on the prior AfD input), not something that requires a deletion review to bless. Merge closes only need to go to DRV if:-

1. ...the history was deleted and lost for GFDL purposes,
2. ...the redirect was protected and the admin won't unprotect, or
3. ...the AfD should have closed as delete.

You rightly went to DRV when #1 occured. Now that has been overturned, we're back to it being a purely "merge and redirect" scenario. Per what I said above, it is now an editorial issue which should be hashed out on article talk pages; DRV is not the appropriate venue for contesting merge and redirect actions. Daniel (talk) 02:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC) Note: Some of this comment has been copied from this close by User:GRBerry. :)

Thanks for the explanation. We are now at 2, because the admin did protect the redirect. Whether there has been discussion about the merging of a part of the info i can't tell, because the admin also deleted the talk page and didn't restore it. Nevertheless, im but a user of this page, not the original creator and Im making a site at filesharing.wikidot.com to provide this kind of information. Im not interested where the info is as long as it's not gone, and i don't want to waste my time quarreling with other users here at wikipedia...

Hostingcomparison (talk) 12:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)