UDWiki talk:Administration/Policy Discussion/New Criterion for Speedy Deletion

Administration Services — Protection. This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

Hm?

We usually just abuse Crit 1. for this. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 07:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

...or we just use the scheduled deletion system we already have set up. This policy is a dupe.--Gage 07:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

That too. :P –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 07:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed that there's no criteria for obvious errors (like spelling the pagename wrong) and other instances where a page is duplicated (maybe this policy could be hijacked for that if not needed for unused images?) -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 07:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I think we should change Crit 1 to read;

1. No Content: The page contains no more than a line or two of content that cannot clearly be expanded, consists of random or incoherent content, is duplicated elsewhere, or is an unused image (more than a month old). Pages created by Spambots typically fall under this category.

changes made are in italics -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 06:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

That sounds good. However, you can't really relate the age of a file and the time it has been unused. Though typically if it's not new, and it's unused, it won't be used again. -Certified=Insane^☭ 22:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, unused images are a bit of a problem, IMO, you can't tell how long they've been unused for, and their deletion is permanent, at the moment. So a page could get speedydeleted, and the images become unused, and also speedydeleted soon afterwards. The page can get undeleted if it turns out to be useful, but the images will be gone for good. But there's nothing we can do about that, other than forcing all images through M/D, or have them wait in yet another M/SD queue -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 00:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think this should be attached to criterion 1. Either make it criterion 14 or just use the scheduled deletion policy. I prefer the latter since it wont clog M/SD.--Gage 06:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, but keep the duplication clause? -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 09:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, keep the duplication part in criterion 1.--Gage 16:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Group sub-pages

Once a group page gets Crit 12, speedydeleted, we should have an avenue to speedydelete any sub-pages that turn up without putting them through Crit 12 or M/D, I think. Perhaps expand Crit 5 to include them?

5. Missed Talk Page: The page is a Talk: Page from a previous deletion request, or a sub page of a deleted group page, that has not been deleted with the request (please note the relevant deletion request if this is so).

Changes made are in italics -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 00:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Just make it criterion 13.--Gage 00:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

13. Missed group sub-page: The page is a sub-page from a previous Crit 12 deletion request that has not been deleted with the request (please note the relevant deletion request if this is so).

Fairy nuff -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 00:43, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Wait, change it to where it doesn't have to be just a group subpage. Make it any subpage.--Gage 02:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Ditto ... what Gage said. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 04:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I guess... but some ordinary sub-pages may contain info that is independent from the reason the main page was deleted. Perhaps a clause to ensure the page itself is useless?

13. Missed sub-page: The page is a sub-page from a previous deletion request that has not been deleted with the request, that serves no individual purpose (Please note the relevant deletion request).

-- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 09:11, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I like it.--Gage 00:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

New version

New posts spread in the two other headings are confusing the hellout of me... So yeah... If there's anything to change, please say so here. -Certified=Insane^☭ 00:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I think we've settled on the following, so far at least...

1. No Content: The page contains no more than a line or two of content that cannot clearly be expanded, consists of random or incoherent content, or is duplicated elsewhere to no purpose. Pages created by Spambots typically fall under this category.

13. Missed sub-page: The page is a sub-page from a previous deletion request that has not been deleted with the request, and that serves no individual purpose (please note the relevant deletion request).

Images remain off A/SD, and are handled via scheduled deletions, as they do now. Unless you want to include a criterian 14? -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 02:51, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Arrrrghhh no. That would kill me.--Gage 02:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Just say no to crit 14. Other than the occasionally over zealous SD provocateurs, scheduled deletions handle themselves nicely. --Max Grivas ^{JG / M.F.T.} 04:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to agree with Max in that respect; I think we can leave some abitration unspecified in terms of your alteration here, as most abuse (intentional or otherwise :) ) gets caught. This policy isn't so much a dupe as it is...un-needed redefinition? Something already apparent in the spirt of the existing policies, if not the letter? --MorthBabid 20:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I realised that a while back, which is why I don't really mind much about this suggestion... However, if you feel the suggestion might help, atleast slightly, then feel free to put it up for voting. -Certified=Insane^☭ 21:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)