Wiki Community/Deleting when Leaving

InfoInfo
Search:    

As a Wiki Community we should discuss the processes by which people who are leaving the area can feel like they are closing their account and page here (if they feel the need) without deleting their user pages.

This is sometimes called a [c2]wiki mind wipe.

One way is to use [[Include(Departed User)]] to include the contents of Departed User.

Please add your ideas and suggestions

Note: You must be logged in to add comments

2006-06-26 09:45 It would be nice to figure out a good way for those who want to "close their accounts" to do so without leaving a gaping hole where their page used to be. I can see a desire to leave behind the edits of the past, particularly if leaving college to apply for a first job. I'm not even sure if we could make a macro that would contain an ACL (Access Control) string and a picture indicating "moved on" that would allow users to clean up their page and "archive it in place". — JasonAller


2006-06-26 12:22:35   I take it this was triggered by the Jones page deletion? While non-user pages about people aren't something they should necessarily have such control over - for the sake of them remaining unbiased, giving those people the option to eliminate them once they leave Davis is something I would support for the sake of their privacy. Along the same lines though, at the moment are people who don't wish to have non-user pages about themselves on the wiki able to have them deleted if they ask? —JosephBleckman


2006-06-26 12:30:09   Part of it was that the Jones page had a reference to Jesse the Cat. Jesse is now sort of abandoned. Do we delete Jesse as well? How much should be deleted when a user deletes themselves? —JasonAller


2006-06-26 15:07:10   Mmmm. I never saw much point in having a pet page, so I'd say eliminate any that are left behind by them on the Wiki, as they bare far less relevance than the original deleted pages. —JosephBleckman


2006-10-27 08:18:58   It's one thing to delete your personal user page upon departure and I think that's perfectly fine. However, eliminating all edits you've made to other pages is lame and undermines the historical value of other pages — it's something that affects the rest of the community, not just the user who's leaving. What if Germans insisted that all references to Hitler were deleted from all documents? I'm opposed to users systematically removing their edits/comments to pages other than their own. Perhaps the expectation that those comments remain will be a reminder to people that the things they say have long-term value and speak to who they are... being a jerk on the wiki is not something to be taken lightly. —AlphaDog


2006-10-27 09:29:03   For privacy reasons, especially related to job hunting, someone might want to rid their name from the wiki. In such a case, I agree that it's lame to remove all of one's previous comments, I'd recommend that someone instead re-attributed all of their comments to a sockpuppet user upon departure. —CraigBrozinsky


2006-10-27 09:33:37   Many people regret posting certain things to usenet. People learned to deal. The same kind of thing should apply to the Wiki. The information is out there and there is no taking it back. —WilliamLewis


2006-10-27 12:12:08   Comments are comments. People can remove their own if they want. If it was something worthwhile, then integrate it into the page. If people want to delete their presence and remove references to themselves, and they are not some sort of public figure, then by all means let them. It's a little different when JoeSchmoe wants to delete his restaurant ratings and comments on businesses for a variety of reasons (maybe internet privacy), and I think it's a joke you wanted to even attempt to make that analogous to Germans and Hitler, don't you? What the hell kind of scale is that? I think the best course is as I said. Let people remove what they want. if it's important, someone else can edit/integrate it. And personal pages arepersonal pages. —ES


2006-10-27 12:13:58   I don't think it messes with the historical value at all. The vast majority of comments are restaurant or business related anyway. Besides, those stale with time. Is saying hte service sucked three years ago still worth noting? I know there was a wiki argument for that on a diff page, about time lapse stuff. I agree with Craig in that if something isn't integratable but you really want to keep it, attribute it to a sockpuppet or 'DepartedUser' or something. —ES


2006-12-06 14:10:43   RE Deleting Comments: Recent deletions from the Ground Zero Boardshop as well as ES's systematic comment redactions prompt me to comment on this again, though I *do* see a difference between the two situations. In the case of Ground Zero, comments made by the business owner were part of an extended discussion; by removing his comments, he distorts the historical context of the discussion. However, EdWins's redactions seemed fairly harmless, though I find it in poor form and something that seems to be occurring with greater regularity, especially as users begin to either seek political office on campus or jobs in the real world. Personally, I find it a bit deceitful with the difference between the two types of redaction analogous to a white lie versus any other type of lie. My additional two cents, yet for now I'm content to simply observe. —AlphaDog


2007-11-14 23:40:05   If you feel like deleting a comment, remember that a horizontal rule is added above every comment so delete that too. If you don't the horizontal rule above the next comment will make two together, marking in the page that a comment was incompletely removed there. So delete the whole thing if you don't want to make people curious or suspicious. —NickSchmalenberger

This is a Wiki Spot wiki. Wiki Spot is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that helps communities collaborate via wikis.