8 ms·

I can understand why wiki articles get deleted. What I cannot understand is why their edit history is also deleted. If part of an article is deleted, one can st

I can understand why wiki articles get deleted. What I cannot understand is why their edit history is also deleted. If part of an article is deleted, one can still find it in the article history. But if the article is deleted entirely, there is no way to check what used to be there.

justincormack 4y ago
The history isn't removed, but its only visible to Wikipedia admins.
- andrew_ 4y ago
  Factually accurate, but not any better for the public.
- Snowworm 4y ago
  Do you think an admin, with some programming knowledge, could write a program to scrape all of the deleted pages on Wikipedia and store them in some public archive for people to view? I'm sure it goes against their terms of service, but it would be really great for getting rid of censorship.
  - Snowworm 4y ago
    Btw. I was asking this in case deletionpedia hadn't managed to copy all of the articles.
    - Kim_Bruning 4y ago
      See some of the other comments here, there's actually a procedure to request deleted pages (that are otherwise not problematic).
  - lelandfe 4y ago
    The trickiness comes from the deleted articles that really ought to stay dead – things like copyright infringement, doxxing, etc. Were I an admin, I'd be loath to cast the net too wide when resurfacing those removed pages. That's the reason, I'm sure, even Deletionpedia has a removal process: https://deletionpedia.org/en/Deletionpedia.org:Removal_requests https://deletionpedia.org/en/Deletionpedia.org:Removal_reque...
- car_analogy 4y ago
  That is even more damning - it does not even allow the "saving storage space" excuse.
  - mlyle 4y ago
    Do note that there's backups/dumps at approximately monthly intervals, too, that could have helped.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    "Saving storage space" has literally nothing to do with any of Wikipedia's policies. If you thought that's why articles got deleted, you don't understand the policy, and Chesterton's Fence controls.
    - hollerith 4y ago
      I know what Chesterton's Fence means, but wish you would elaborate a little on how it relates to the policy.
      - tptacek 4y ago
        The rationale for deleting articles on Wikipedia has nothing to do with saving storage space, as I just said. Your comment implies that they do; in fact, you essentially argue that losing the "save space" excuse is fatal to the policy. You need to understand those policies before you can plausibly critique them. You evidently don't, and your critique is consequently implausible.
        aspenmayer 4y ago
        I read their comment differently. I think they were saying the admins can’t even use the excuse that any specific deletions or deletions generally are necessary to save space, because deleted items are not erased completely, but are still available to admins.
        Veen 4y ago
- kens 4y ago
  The motivation for hiding the history of deleted Wikipedia articles is to minimize legal complaints. E.g. if something is libelous or a copyright violation, they want to remove it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Viewing_deleted_content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Viewing_deleted_cont...
  - car_analogy 4y ago
    Yet the vast majority of articles are deleted for reasons other than legal.
donatj 4y ago
I found this remarkable irritating myself. I created a Wikipedia page recently for a former TV host, and current podcaster I really enjoy. He's written several books and is cited by other people. I've certainly seen much less noteworthy people having Wikipedia pages. I spent several hours gathering sources and put together a decent little Wikipedia page. It was voted as being not-noteworthy and removed. I didn't realize all my citations were going to go with it. Wasn't up long enough even to get picked up by the wayback machine.
- twam 4y ago
  For future reference, you can instantly archive a page via: https://web.archive.org/save https://web.archive.org/save. If you create an account and log in, it will also give you an option to archive any page linked to by that page, as well.
- cesarb 4y ago
  If all you want is to have a copy of what you wrote, you can ask a Wikipedia admin to temporarily undelete the page (perhaps moving it to your user space). If the reason for deletion was just that the subject was not notable enough, I see no reason for not doing that.
- dqpb 4y ago
  There will always be self righteous gatekeepers. This is the inevitable result of centralized control.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    I liked Metallica better before the Black album and think they're kind of a caricature of themselves now, but to each their own.
- mormegil 4y ago
  I think you could ask an admin for a copy of the deleted article. On my small home wiki, such a request would be fulfilled without any trouble.
- 4y ago
pwdisswordfish9 4y ago
Because otherwise there’s no point in removing anything.
moomin 4y ago
A little story some may find amusing and possibly pertinent: many years back one of the Wikipedia editors said something really silly. Silly enough it got reported on. So… I went to see if they had a Wikipedia page. And, of course they did. Despite the fact that they were, objectively, not notable. So, I did the decent thing and, in a “Haha, only serious” fashion updated the article to include easily the most notable thing they had ever done. Even provided multiple citations and everything. I mean, everyone here knows what happened next. I didn’t expend any more energy on it. (For the record, when I say silly I mean it, it was mildly embarrassing, offended no-one and wasn’t problematic in any way.)
- manholio 4y ago
  This story is elliptical to the point of unintelligibility. Nobody knows what happened next. We can guess a page was deleted from the context of this thread, but we have no idea why.
  - noobermin 4y ago
    This is being downvoted, but I too want to know more explicitly what happened. Even link said page because I am now curious.
  - repsilat 4y ago
    > We can guess a page was deleted My interpretation was "the edits were quickly reverted and the editor's page remained flattering and devoid of evidence of notability."
    - moomin 4y ago
      Exactly right. If there was a point I had (and let’s be honest, I was being an arsehole or is have linked the page) it was the policies are ignored when it’s personally inconvenient. That’s why you see very little on Wikipedia about how they spend the donations…
- Kim_Bruning 4y ago
  Were you trying to Disrupt Wikipedia To Make A Point of some sort? %-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Do_not_disrupt_Wikipedia_to_illustrate_a_point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Do_not_disrupt_Wikip... You probably got into a modicum of trouble then. I'd love to look up what you actually did. (If only to learn what not to do)
mschuster91 4y ago
Simple: keeping deleted stuff actually deleted / invisibled keeps Wikipedia from a bunch of lawsuits - in particular, DMCA and libel/defamation laws.
mattl 4y ago
Wiki or Wikipedia?
tpoacher 4y ago
Echoing a similar concern over Talk pages. Often enough, particularly in "controversial" topics, the information I want is in the Talk pages rather than the heavily guarded article. This worked great in the past. More recently I discovered some sort of policy must have changed, which allows Talk pages to be archived/deleted, effectively destroying any evidence of a controversy.

justincormack 4y ago

The history isn't removed, but its only visible to Wikipedia admins.

andrew_ 4y ago
Factually accurate, but not any better for the public.
Snowworm 4y ago
Do you think an admin, with some programming knowledge, could write a program to scrape all of the deleted pages on Wikipedia and store them in some public archive for people to view? I'm sure it goes against their terms of service, but it would be really great for getting rid of censorship.
- Snowworm 4y ago
  Btw. I was asking this in case deletionpedia hadn't managed to copy all of the articles.
  - Kim_Bruning 4y ago
    See some of the other comments here, there's actually a procedure to request deleted pages (that are otherwise not problematic).
- lelandfe 4y ago
  The trickiness comes from the deleted articles that really ought to stay dead – things like copyright infringement, doxxing, etc. Were I an admin, I'd be loath to cast the net too wide when resurfacing those removed pages. That's the reason, I'm sure, even Deletionpedia has a removal process: https://deletionpedia.org/en/Deletionpedia.org:Removal_requests https://deletionpedia.org/en/Deletionpedia.org:Removal_reque...
car_analogy 4y ago
That is even more damning - it does not even allow the "saving storage space" excuse.
- mlyle 4y ago
  Do note that there's backups/dumps at approximately monthly intervals, too, that could have helped.
- tptacek 4y ago
  "Saving storage space" has literally nothing to do with any of Wikipedia's policies. If you thought that's why articles got deleted, you don't understand the policy, and Chesterton's Fence controls.
  - hollerith 4y ago
    I know what Chesterton's Fence means, but wish you would elaborate a little on how it relates to the policy.
    - tptacek 4y ago
      The rationale for deleting articles on Wikipedia has nothing to do with saving storage space, as I just said. Your comment implies that they do; in fact, you essentially argue that losing the "save space" excuse is fatal to the policy. You need to understand those policies before you can plausibly critique them. You evidently don't, and your critique is consequently implausible.
      - aspenmayer 4y ago
        I read their comment differently. I think they were saying the admins can’t even use the excuse that any specific deletions or deletions generally are necessary to save space, because deleted items are not erased completely, but are still available to admins.
      - Veen 4y ago
kens 4y ago
The motivation for hiding the history of deleted Wikipedia articles is to minimize legal complaints. E.g. if something is libelous or a copyright violation, they want to remove it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Viewing_deleted_content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Viewing_deleted_cont...
- car_analogy 4y ago
  Yet the vast majority of articles are deleted for reasons other than legal.

donatj 4y ago

I found this remarkable irritating myself. I created a Wikipedia page recently for a former TV host, and current podcaster I really enjoy. He's written several books and is cited by other people. I've certainly seen much less noteworthy people having Wikipedia pages. I spent several hours gathering sources and put together a decent little Wikipedia page. It was voted as being not-noteworthy and removed. I didn't realize all my citations were going to go with it. Wasn't up long enough even to get picked up by the wayback machine.

twam 4y ago
For future reference, you can instantly archive a page via: https://web.archive.org/save https://web.archive.org/save. If you create an account and log in, it will also give you an option to archive any page linked to by that page, as well.
cesarb 4y ago
If all you want is to have a copy of what you wrote, you can ask a Wikipedia admin to temporarily undelete the page (perhaps moving it to your user space). If the reason for deletion was just that the subject was not notable enough, I see no reason for not doing that.
dqpb 4y ago
There will always be self righteous gatekeepers. This is the inevitable result of centralized control.
- tptacek 4y ago
  I liked Metallica better before the Black album and think they're kind of a caricature of themselves now, but to each their own.
mormegil 4y ago
I think you could ask an admin for a copy of the deleted article. On my small home wiki, such a request would be fulfilled without any trouble.
4y ago

pwdisswordfish9 4y ago

Because otherwise there’s no point in removing anything.

moomin 4y ago

A little story some may find amusing and possibly pertinent: many years back one of the Wikipedia editors said something really silly. Silly enough it got reported on. So… I went to see if they had a Wikipedia page. And, of course they did. Despite the fact that they were, objectively, not notable. So, I did the decent thing and, in a “Haha, only serious” fashion updated the article to include easily the most notable thing they had ever done. Even provided multiple citations and everything. I mean, everyone here knows what happened next. I didn’t expend any more energy on it. (For the record, when I say silly I mean it, it was mildly embarrassing, offended no-one and wasn’t problematic in any way.)

manholio 4y ago
This story is elliptical to the point of unintelligibility. Nobody knows what happened next. We can guess a page was deleted from the context of this thread, but we have no idea why.
- noobermin 4y ago
  This is being downvoted, but I too want to know more explicitly what happened. Even link said page because I am now curious.
- repsilat 4y ago
  > We can guess a page was deleted My interpretation was "the edits were quickly reverted and the editor's page remained flattering and devoid of evidence of notability."
  - moomin 4y ago
    Exactly right. If there was a point I had (and let’s be honest, I was being an arsehole or is have linked the page) it was the policies are ignored when it’s personally inconvenient. That’s why you see very little on Wikipedia about how they spend the donations…
Kim_Bruning 4y ago
Were you trying to Disrupt Wikipedia To Make A Point of some sort? %-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Do_not_disrupt_Wikipedia_to_illustrate_a_point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Do_not_disrupt_Wikip... You probably got into a modicum of trouble then. I'd love to look up what you actually did. (If only to learn what not to do)

mschuster91 4y ago

Simple: keeping deleted stuff actually deleted / invisibled keeps Wikipedia from a bunch of lawsuits - in particular, DMCA and libel/defamation laws.

mattl 4y ago

Wiki or Wikipedia?

tpoacher 4y ago

Echoing a similar concern over Talk pages. Often enough, particularly in "controversial" topics, the information I want is in the Talk pages rather than the heavily guarded article. This worked great in the past. More recently I discovered some sort of policy must have changed, which allows Talk pages to be archived/deleted, effectively destroying any evidence of a controversy.