156:- you may well be right but as the author I just though I would tell you how this list came about. I spend most of my time on disambiguation pages and came across one for schedule 1 (or maybe 2 or soemthing similar). In the course of looking into this it became obvious that schedule 1 drugs is a term used all over the world but with different meanings in different countries; many links were to the wrong country's code. This applied to schedule 2 and 3 etc. I decided that the best way round this was to have a central point where general links would arrive and the reader would simply select the country they wanted. I presume you have noticed how many articles link to this page ... and how many of these links are via schedule 1 schedule 2 ... etc. I have no emotional attachment to this page but would simply like to feel that the effects of its disposal/replacement had been considered thoroughly. You seem to know more about categories than I do so I certainly will not fight what you decide.
376:
As Panyd's adopter, and a sysop, I think something needs to be done about this page. Whatever it should be, it shouldn't be how it is at the moment - it doesn't conform to the Manual of Style, and perhaps a series of
Disambig pages, or a complex(ish) DAB page, would be best. At the very least, it's
346:
Sadly it doesn't make sense. The current situation brings everyone who wants schedule 1,2,3 etc to this page for onward transmission to a country-oriented article that will help them. Individual dab pages for each schedule would all look much the same as this page and would all need maintaining
314:
Sorry, I thought from your original defense of the article that there was a dab page for
Schedule 1. Seeing as there isn't one though, maybe this could be made into one? (I'm new here so extra apologies if this is ridiculous)
432:
386:
361:
Maybe make it in to a category then? I just think it looks very untidy as it is, and it doesn't seem to conform to WPs usual layout. Or even make it in to a consolidated dab instead of just a list page.
87:
82:
91:
74:
120:
127:...and this is why we have categories. This isn't an article, and can never be in its current format - which is an internal link farm. This is begging to be a category -
461:
78:
428:
382:
200:
based on
Abtract's explanation. This is a disambiguation page so that different countries drug schedules can be kept seperate in a clear manner.
70:
62:
424:
378:
479:
451:
413:
371:
356:
341:
324:
301:
284:
267:
250:
233:
209:
190:
165:
147:
56:
178:
only from me now. Looks likely it will be kept, given the other comments on this page, and I'm certainly not going to complain if it is.
17:
404:
I have converted it to a set index article which may, or may not, help. Just for interest what does "Panyd's adopter" mean?
495:
36:
347:
separately; what's the point of that? Just to be clear, this page was created by combining the separate dab pages.
227:
494:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
170:
OK - that makes sense. I'm quite happy for this to be kept if others agree that it seems sensible, but I'm not
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
442:. Abtract's explanation makes sense. It is a useful page and directs readers right where they want to go. --
447:
474:
329:
That would make a lot of sense - converting this into separate dab pages for
Schedule 1, 2, and 3 etc.
219:
205:
335:
184:
141:
420:
443:
409:
352:
297:
161:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
468:
263:
241:- categories and lists cannot duplicate each others functions. Viable, encyclopaedic list.
367:
320:
280:
258:. The page could certainly use fleshing out - but the concept is valid, as per Abtract. --
245:
201:
330:
179:
136:
405:
348:
293:
157:
50:
108:
259:
363:
316:
276:
242:
377:
not an article and it never can be - so it shouldn't be classed as one.
423:. Panyd is a new user whom I am 'adopting' to show her the ropes.
488:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
174:
convinced enough to withdraw this nomination - consider it a
115:
104:
100:
96:
275:- Could this be merged with the disambiguation page?
217:. Abstract's explanation sounds quite reasonable.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
498:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
462:list of Lists-related deletion discussions
460:: This debate has been included in the
71:List of schedules for drugs and poisons
63:List of schedules for drugs and poisons
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
129:let's put it out of its misery and
24:
425:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry
379:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry
135:- see my further comment below.
1:
480:23:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
452:00:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
433:03:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
414:00:37, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
387:23:36, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
372:21:04, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
357:08:52, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
342:03:00, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
325:21:59, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
302:21:09, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
285:20:58, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
268:00:50, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
251:00:46, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
234:00:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
210:00:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
191:09:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
166:23:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
148:23:15, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
133:it (if there is such a word)
57:14:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
515:
491:Please do not modify it.
364:The muffin is not subtle
317:The muffin is not subtle
277:The muffin is not subtle
32:Please do not modify it.
292:- Which dab page?
44:The result was
482:
465:
338:
187:
144:
506:
493:
477:
471:
466:
456:
336:
248:
226:
185:
176:very weak delete
142:
118:
112:
94:
53:
34:
514:
513:
509:
508:
507:
505:
504:
503:
502:
496:deletion review
489:
475:
469:
273:Comment/Thought
246:
224:
114:
85:
69:
66:
51:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
512:
510:
501:
500:
484:
483:
454:
436:
435:
402:
401:
400:
399:
398:
397:
396:
395:
394:
393:
392:
391:
390:
389:
307:
306:
305:
304:
270:
253:
236:
212:
195:
194:
193:
125:
124:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
511:
499:
497:
492:
486:
485:
481:
478:
472:
463:
459:
455:
453:
449:
445:
441:
438:
437:
434:
430:
426:
422:
418:
417:
416:
415:
411:
407:
388:
384:
380:
375:
374:
373:
369:
365:
360:
359:
358:
354:
350:
345:
344:
343:
340:
339:
332:
328:
327:
326:
322:
318:
313:
312:
311:
310:
309:
308:
303:
299:
295:
291:
288:
287:
286:
282:
278:
274:
271:
269:
265:
261:
257:
254:
252:
249:
244:
240:
237:
235:
232:
231:
230:
223:
222:
216:
213:
211:
207:
203:
199:
196:
192:
189:
188:
181:
177:
173:
169:
168:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
151:
150:
149:
146:
145:
138:
134:
132:
122:
117:
110:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
67:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
490:
487:
457:
444:Andrew Kelly
439:
403:
334:
289:
272:
255:
238:
228:
220:
218:
214:
197:
183:
175:
171:
154:Urge caution
153:
140:
130:
128:
126:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
470:Fabrictramp
476:talk to me
131:Categorify
202:Edward321
421:WP:ADOPT
331:Grutness
290:Question
221:Linguist
180:Grutness
137:Grutness
121:View log
406:Abtract
349:Abtract
294:Abtract
158:Abtract
88:protect
83:history
52:MBisanz
116:delete
92:delete
229:Large
172:quite
119:) – (
109:views
101:watch
97:links
16:<
458:Note
448:talk
440:Keep
429:talk
419:See
410:talk
383:talk
368:talk
353:talk
337:wha?
321:talk
298:talk
281:talk
264:talk
260:moof
256:Keep
243:Wily
239:Keep
215:Keep
206:talk
198:Keep
186:wha?
162:talk
143:wha?
105:logs
79:talk
75:edit
46:keep
467:--
464:.
333:...
182:...
139:...
473:|
450:)
431:)
412:)
385:)
370:)
355:)
323:)
300:)
283:)
266:)
225:At
208:)
164:)
107:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
81:|
77:|
48:.
446:(
427:(
408:(
381:(
366:(
351:(
319:(
296:(
279:(
262:(
247:D
204:(
160:(
123:)
113:(
111:)
73:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.