Board Thread:Suggestions/@comment-30109486-20170127095409/@comment-30109486-20170127211029

ChromastoneandTabby wrote: Migster7 wrote: ChromastoneandTabby wrote: I mean it's literally explained in the first sentence but I edited it again. We already consider a shitton of users "gone" we just don't delete their shit right off the bat unless they're permabanned. Is the suggestion that we delete their shit right off the bat if we consider them "gone"?

Also "literally explained" sure right do you want a goddamn play-by-play because that's what I'm doing We already do that. How Irrelevant. The hell is the idea supposed to be? We already do the shit you're suggesting wtf is this? This suggestion is asking for users (that have been absent for an undetermined amount of time) to be considered to have left the wiki, allowing for their article stubs to be marked for deletion, which makes cleanup easier due to the reduced amount of work. Also, do we actually do this? Article stubs are only marked for deletion if they were made by an anon, a user that has been blocked, or a user that has announced that he or she has left the wiki. Yes, I can see how this part of my suggestion is irelevant. This idea was probably confusing due to a lack of organization in what I originally suggested.
 * I personally think considering users to be gone after a certain amount of time (that is determined by this wiki's administration)
 * will make article stub cleanup easier
 * as the majority of users have been inactive for a very long time.
 * I don't really see any cons to this idea.