tapir: I would like to delete the whole Artof9x9Go series. When this is done please don't ignore the numerous subpages (and the forum).
kmr - i suggest to move it into Monteo personal page (since it was probably him who created that). It does not make harm to SL, and someone might find it useful.
bugcat: Outright deletion seems a bit much at a glance. Is the project so meritless? How old is it? How long since it was last updated? etc.
Dieter: for a while the user Monteo has logged a number of personal projects on the site, vanity bordering on the absurd; Arno has always been against deletion but making it a subpage of Monteo's homepage seems called for
kmr :The project is rather new, but it looks like abandoned. You would need to search for MonteodaWesti?? personal page, look before removing of all content by author, read it and then you will be in story (i am not sure if its worth to do). Since i was there when it was made, i made suggestion to move all of it context to his personal page since its hardly can be named "official knowledge" and from other point, i disagree with deleting it since someone can (but its rather unlikely) find it interesting and valuable.
tapir: The whole project was Monteo advertising his genius (while playing AI supported 9x9 games) and a non-existing book. There never was evidence for more and never any interaction with others. And "I can't be bothered to read that" should not be a reason and certainly not for keeping. I apologise for every time I resisted cleanup attempts by others (Dieter about defunct homepages), but I blame the extreme aversion to cleaning out yesterdays garbage for the state of SL. Being open to all types of content should not mean we have to waste away our time as custodians of utter vanity, decades old pub talk etc. just because we see merits in other content on SL. If Arno opposes page deletion in general, he is wrong, being founder or not.
bugcat: How about merging the content into just a few articles and then turning them into subpages? A deletion debate can then be given more time to take its course.
kmr - I read again my notes about this case, and i am close to change my mind. Tapir is probably right. There is way way too much advertising. If there would be no advertise part, i would rather fight to keep it, but advertising in such a way is definitely not goal of SL. Also the book seems to dont exist.The best compromise i can think of (taking into account that someone can still find it valuable) is to make note that this article will be deleted in sth like 1 month after next SL archive will be done by Arno/Mortem. If someone is interested, he will dowload it and have it. After that, it will be deleted. How that sounds?
Dieter: I'm naturally on the side of clean & tidy (when data is involved, more so than my house ...) but MortArno had convinced me otherwise. They said server space was hardly the issue, pages of interest will be improved and maintained, pages of low interest will decay and they were fine with it. They clutter the library only if they are easy to find. So if we reduce them to subpages of Monteo's, that's as good as removal. I'm fine with either option.
tapir: And who is going to volunteer for that? I can delete or ignore it, but I am not going to waste any further part of my life on it.
Dieter: I'm fine either way.
bugcat: I have to say I'm a bit puzzled by all the hate on the project. I flicked through a few pages at random and found 9x9 commentaries at a reasonable level, like this one. What's so bad about that?
tapir: you missed out on 5 years of art of 9x9 go, dragging feet, chronic inclusionism etc. stuff like this drained all my will to do library work here. being a janitor, but people push back against even modest attempts at flushing down the worst shit.
bugcat: If you want to delete then delete. I don't have a horse in the race.