UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Criteria 7 Speedy Deletion Guidelines Change
Administration Services — Protection. This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log. |
Currently the guidelines says that a sysop can delete a page if:
A page has been created by a system operator in the User namespace as a subpage of the administrator's user page, no user other than the administrator has made substantial contributions to the page, and the page is not required for any significant reason. In this case, the system operator should make note of his or her deletion on UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions either before or after he or she has deleted the page.
I propose to drop the requirement that the deleted page be in the User namespace and make the note on UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions optional. After this chage the guideline item would read as follows:
A page or image created by a system operator, that no user other than the administrator has made substantial contributions to the page, and the page is not required for any significant reason. At the system operator discretion a note may be left on UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletion after the page is deleted.
This change is needed because there has been some confusion about whether or not a sysop can currently do this, and no current guideline provides a clear answer. The requirement of leaving a note was dropped in a effort to reduce red tape and unnecessary duplication as the information about any page a sysop deletes is still recorded in the logs.
Voting Section
Voting Rules |
Votes must be numbered, signed, and timestamped. They can take one of two forms:
Votes that do not conform to the above will be struck by a sysop. |
The only valid voting sections are For and Against. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote. |
For
- PLWUSSS ONE111!!-- AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
- Author's vote - Vantar 23:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
- My only qualm would be what Boxy said; but a follow-up policy could allow for a grace period if there are links to the page, for people to copy the information- perhaps something similar to Grim's reconstruction template? Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 04:02, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Against
- I don't think that an individual should be able to delete something, even if it's entirely their own creation without checks. This would allow a sysop to delete an image they uploaded, or a template they made, even if someone else was using it on their page, as long as they could wikilawyer an argument that they didn't need it for any "significant reason". Perhaps if there was a requirement that there were no links to the page -- boxy talk • i 01:44 17 January 2008 (BST)
- Against - I misread it the first time. Hell no.--Karekmaps?! 04:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Against - hell no.----Sexualharrison 05:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Against - I'm with Boxy on this one - there should be something in the Policy that there is a requirement there be no links to the page. --Ryiis 14:47, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Against - I'd rather see that pages that are linked or that could be useful don't get nipped in the bud. Perhaps if pages were put in for consideration of deletion, instead of a note after the fact. A certain number of sysops have to agree that the page isn't worth while instead of just one? Dray 14:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Against - Making a Speedy Deletion request is hardly an onerous task. --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 15:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Against --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 15:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- With shit like this going on, due to our resident rogue-op, this policy would need safe-guards to avoid the baleful call of the drama llama. --Funt Solo QT 16:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Against - Everyone else has to stand in line if they're needing a page they made deleted, so should the Sysops. -- Cheeseman W!RandomTalk 18:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- It's easy enough to send the page to A/SD. --Z. slay3r • Talk 19:54, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Against - Just a bad idea. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 06:37, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not a fan of this Jonny12 talk 16:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- -BOO!!!--/~Rakuen~\Talk I Still Love Grim 01:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Voting closed. Policy fails: 3 For to 14 Against, (18% in favour), did not meet minimum 20 vote requirement. --Funt Solo QT 14:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)