The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was archive to Wikipedia:Historical archive (non-admin closure). equazcion � | 20:03, 8 Oct 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:How to draw a diagram with Microsoft Word[edit]

Old, unmaintained, missing images, and probably not something we want to encourage. Word is hardly the best option when there are free (gratis and libre) alternatives such as Inkscape available, which can produce much better results and in the superior SVG format.

Move to Meta:Meta:Historical/Archives index. This page was created by User:Theresa knott in the ancient days before MediaWiki. It should be retired to the archives instead of thrown out with the trash. I'm sorry to see the above two OpenOffice pages were simply deleted with so little discussion. Theresa was one of the first handful of people to create new diagrams specifically for Wikipedia, which was mostly a mass of unillustrated text at the time, and these tutorials were very important in that they helped people begin to illustrate articles themselves. I realize I'm a crotchety old man in Wikipedian terms, but it disturbs me that there is so little concern for history here. -- Stephen Gilbert (talk) 21:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Archive per Stephen, but Wikipedia:Historical archive would be a far more appropriate location. In fact all the older diagram tutorials should go there, and I'd be quite happy to set that up. I've history merged the Microsoft Word page to show that Theresa was in fact the primary author; the page wasn't created pre-MediaWiki, but it's still pretty old, and worth archiving for that reason. Also see Wikipedia:Graphics tutorials, and its early history. Graham87 06:53, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed. Graham87's location suggestion is better, and his page history archaeology is more reliable than my memory. :) -- Stephen Gilbert (talk) 12:42, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Archive to Wikipedia:Historical archive. Good stuff. It shows what editors at Wikipeidia felt they needed in March 2003. It couldn't hurt to archive How to draw a diagram with OpenOffice.org Writer and Wikipedia:How to draw a diagram with OpenOffice.org Draw as well. -- Jreferee (talk) 01:30, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wikiversity. And then archive to all the suggested locations. -- 65.92.182.123 (talk) 03:33, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and don't transwiki. Anything tagged with ((historical)) should never be deleted except for housekeeping purposes (barring an ancient undiscovered copyvio). There's no good reason to get rid of this page, and while its primary purpose is no longer useful (i.e. we don't use it to teach wannabe graphics creators), it works well for the secondary purpose of documenting Wikipedia history. Move it somewhere like Wikipedia:Historical archive and retain the redirect. Undelete the other pages as well, because they're equally useful. Such pages are a great example of how Wikipedia worked in its earliest years, and unless you're in academia, you may not be aware of the extent to which researchers will go to find a topic (and resources) for primary-source research. Nyttend (talk) 23:04, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment shouldn't they atleast be copied to Wikiversity with their full edit histories? -- 70.24.249.39 (talk) 10:42, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - That's Wikiversity's decision, not ours. What use would they have for these pages, anyway? Graham87 14:09, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - It's our decision to transwiki over or delete or not. And Wikiversity is supposed to teach you things, like how to develop a website, and these would be methods to use tools at hand. -- 70.24.249.39 (talk) 07:50, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Archive to Wikipedia:Historical archive. I didn't know that existed until this week, but it seems like a useful spot for something this egregiously outdated. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:32, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.