Anonymous user
Forum:Reforming the deletion process: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
imported>K6ka mNo edit summary |
imported>LostInRiverview No edit summary |
||
Line 186:
''Discussion begins below this line.''
----
I agree that a change to our deletion process would be good. There should be a formal standard for putting pages up for deletion, taking pages out of consideration for deletion either after consensus or vote in opposition or after a sufficient length of time, and an accepted criteria for speedy deletion. The only real issue I have with this proposal is the use of the shorthand "code" reasons for speedy deletion (i.e. G1 = patent nonsense, G2 = test pages, etc)... my concern is that a given page may be tagged for deletion with a given shorthand code but no explanation of what the code stands for or how the article fits it. The shorthand seems very forbidding to new users who may be unfamiliar with the codes, and seems like something added that, to my mind, doesn't yield any significant benefit. Aside from that, it looks good and very well thought-out. -- '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<span style="color:navy;">LiR</span>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">talk</font>]] · [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">blog</font>]] · [[Special:Contributions/LostInRiverview|<font color="green">contribs</font>]]</sup>''' 05:08, March 19, 2017 (UTC)
| |||