Talk:Hemovanadin

Physiology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to blood.

Molecular Biology: MCB

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Andrea James (2017-02-14). "Watching Wikipedia's extinction event from a distance". BoingBoing.
Dariusz Jemielniak (2017-03-06). "The Wikipedia Battle Over Really Short Articles". Slate. It may sound like a small matter, but it could have significant ramifications for the internet encyclopedia.

Boing Boing edit

Latest comment: 11 months ago5 comments5 people in discussion

Just an FYI: this article has been linked to from Boing Boing. There is an associated Hacker News discussion as well. cc Gyrofrog, KDS4444, RHaworth, Cabayi. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 17:30, 14 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for replying there, Ed. I saw the Boing Boing story. - Dank (push to talk) 23:22, 14 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

The deletion was against Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia:Copyright violations#Dealing with copyright violations says

"If all of the content of a page appears to be a copyright infringement or removing the problem text is not an option because it would render the article unreadable, check the page history; if an older non-infringing version of the page exists, you should revert the page to that version".

Wikipedia gets a lot of cut-and-paste copyright violations, and keeping up with removing them is a tedious and thankless job. That does not excuse failing to check the page history as required by Wikipedia policy.

That being said, when the article was deleted, it was replaced with a notice that says:

"A page with this title has previously been moved or deleted. If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below."

The original author did not contact the person who deleted the article, nor did he click on our help button and ask for help. Instead, he went straight to Boing Boing and posted his complaint. When he did, the improper deletion was quickly undone,[1] just as it would have been quickly undone if he had let someone here know that there was a problem. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:18, 16 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

A lot of people have tired of dealing with Wikipedia's asinine bureaucracy. 112.215.174.239 (talk) 04:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

added a stub tag, as the author who wrote the boingboing article described it as such, and it's very short, and I don't know more about the topic myself.Rusl (talk) 21:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Add topic