UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/New Criterion for Speedy Deletion
From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Guidelines — Policy Document This page is a statement of official UDWiki Policies and Rules. See Policy Discussion for policy additions and changes. |
Administration Services — Protection. This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log. |
This policy change would update Speedy Delete Criterion 1 to include un-useful duplication of pages (including images), and add a Criterion 13 to clean up any sub-pages from previous deletions (except where they serve an individual purpose despite being orphaned). The changes would be:
- 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).
Changes to Crit. 1 are in blue italics, Crit. 13 is new.
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
- So that more useless stuff can be legitimately speedydeleted -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 05:12, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- a good policy. it appears it would help make things go more smoothly.--Blood Panther 05:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- More reasons to delete shit. --Cap'n Silly T/W/P/C 05:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Common sense, really. --Hubrid Nox Sys WTF U! B! 05:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Gage 05:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Heh, didn't expect me to do otherwise I hope? -Certified=Insane☭ 05:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- This will make things a lot easier.Vantar 06:18, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sure --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 06:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- --Max Grivas JG / M.F.T. 11:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds great. -- 19:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Good idea. --Unknowen9000 23:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Woo! More excuses to use the nuclear option! --Darth Sensitive W! 02:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it doesn't INCREASE potential abuse, and clarity is good...hope I don't regret this? --MorthBabid 09:42, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- as long as important information doesn't suffer I think it's agreeable. .--nRnRQBBAN 18.30 CET 18th February
- Looks like it clarifies, now if people will just fix Crit 12.--The Envoy 17:31, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Seems harmless enough. --Specialist290♠ 22:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 14:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. --Xtralife | Talk·SCA·FLT | 21:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Bandwagonin'. --Toejam 21:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds good. --Roinator 23:35. 26 Febuary 2007
- -- Pillsy FT 16:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- -- yes -- Asheets 18:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Fine by me --BelmondTMZ 01:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- all good. Muadib 12:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Choo Choo! --CaptainM 22:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Voting closed
Against
Voting closed