Talk:All-nighter

This article was nominated for deletion on 6 August 2007. The result of the discussion was redirect to Sleep deprivation.

Short term memory loss

I have looked on the internet, and at Wikipedia's own sleep deprivation page, and could not find that lack of sleep causes short term memory loss. I am going to change the statement to some other symptoms and add a citation. Indeed123 15:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woops, ignore my first comment. I'll just add a link to the sleep deprivation page Indeed123 15:42, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woops yet again. I apologize to the person who put on the fact about short term memory loss; it was right on the sleep deprivation page, with a very good reference. However, I stil changed the section to a link; I think adding all of sleep deprivation's symptoms would be redundant. Feel free to change it back! Indeed123 16:09, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page Move Proposal

I propose we move this page to something along the line of "voluntary sleep deprivation" or "forced sleep deprivation" or something like that. The topic can be so much more than a slang term (i.e. record attempts, social experiments, etc) for staying up all night. If you oppose the move please make yourself heard in the next couple of days. - Bennyboyz3000 20:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. We already have a page on sleep deprivation. This is about the particular act of staying up all night, which is well-described by "all-nighter". "Voluntary sleep deprivation" or "forced sleep deprivation" - which, I might note, are contradictory - are other phenomena. If the records and experiments are indeed about staying up all night, they fit here anyway. --Alynna 23:09, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, however staying up for 11 days contradicts the term all-nighter (which would imply one night is an accomplishment in itself and is a singular verb - my def. :-P). Perhaps a title stating something about recreation - I have revived a stub section on recreational sleep deprivation at the Sleep deprivation article and proposed a new page on said article's talk page.

All-nighter seems to be a widely used slang term to describe the act of voluntarily (or forcing oneself to) going without sleep, for any extended period of time. Remembering that we are an encyclopedic community (so to speak) and hence try to do things formally and by dictionary or correct definitions and titles, it would make sense to name this article by what it is, not one way it may be spoken in urban vocabulary. Thoughts/comments/death threats at my user talk page appreciated. - Bennyboyz3000 06:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um, people don't mainly stay up all night because it's fun. Speaking as a recent college grad, I can tell you there are plenty of other reasons behind all-nighters. Also, the "widely used" term, rather than the most formal term, is generally what Wikipedia tends to go with. --Alynna 23:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kill it (for the sake of humanity)

Not worthy of its own article and it reads like an Urban Dictionary entry. 216.211.68.140 23:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say, this is the most pointless article I've read in the whole of Wikipedia. Now, I'm not a mod so I doubt I have the authority to do this myself, but I strongly suggest the article's deleted and agree that it's more suited to UrbanDictionary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.52.159 (talk • contribs) 11:19, 27 July 2007

Oppose deletion - Come on guys! An obviously well-documented occurrence - with plenty of media and ways to develop and improve the article. This is one of those cases where you need to look to improve the article rather than just trash it. If you don't like the way it reads, change it - don't delete it! Deleting this article is just sweeping something that does in fact exist and regularly occurs under the rug and pretending such activities don't exist. its a Wiki and an encyclopedia. However I still see plenty of room for improvement - some serious formality changes and possibly even a page move as proposed below could be in order for a successful article. Please don't kill it! - Bennyboyz3000 10:30, 6 August 2007 (UTC) _{Please let me know of developments on my talk page!}[reply]

As the argument seems to have gone cold, and that the deletion notion was made by an anon with 3 edits and backed up by a possible Sock puppet with 0 article edits, I will go ahead and remove the tags. If this article was inappropriate for Wikipedia, it would have been appropriately tagged as such in its infancy, or in any case well before now, by an established editor familiar with the ways of the wiki (I just think the newcomers should cut their teeth on some good article edits rather than housekeeping such as this 'till they get the drift of things :-). - Bennyboyz3000 10:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You do realise that in removing the AFD tag, you prevented those of us who would have defended the article from knowing about the nomination? --Alynna 14:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do now, and for it I am very apologetic. In the mean time, try recreating some of it (but re-writing it so not to annoy the deleting admin) at the new article, Voluntary sleep deprivation. Check this article's history for some relevant info. --Ben 01:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page Move

I propose we move this page to something along the line of "voluntary sleep deprivation" or "forced sleep deprivation" or something of that nature. The topic can be so much more than a slang term (i.e. record attempts, social experiments, etc) for staying up all night. I am holding a poll to establish consensus & ideas (default voluntary sleep deprivation if no other suggestions are made). --Bennyboyz3000 05:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Please voice your opinion here:

I had to restore the content over on this page because it had merely been copy/pasted to the new name, as Bennyboy did not know about moving pages...Now we have to wait for Voluntary sleep deprivation to be deleted, and then we move it there, so don't do anything until then.--十八 12:10, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong again - it was re-written, and I was unable to restore content to move per result of deletion discussion. I 18:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Strong Support As per my comments above. - Bennyboyz3000 05:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

I strongly oppose this having been turned into a redirect to sleep deprivation, where there is indeed no actual coverage of what an "all-nighter" is under "voluntary"; that is, to forgo sleep in order to study all night for a test or to finish a project or paper before a deadline. Currently links to all-nighter bring the reader to a page with no information about the topic. Huw Powell (talk) 21:13, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Protected edit request on 12 October 2014

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

On this page, could the following text:

[[Category:Protected redirects]]

...please be replaced with the following text:

...so that the redirect is is put into the category via a tranclusion in an Rcat template rather than a category transclusion? Thanks! Steel1943 (talk) 05:54, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 11:24, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]