This is an
essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
The purpose of deletion debates on Wikipedia is to have a clear process by which the merits of an article are debated before deletion, so that the community has a chance to come to a consensus about the fate of an article. In some cases, however, consensus develops toward a different solution from a mere keep or delete decision. In such cases, it is important to keep in mind that the deletion debate is normally closed by an administrator, who will be tasked with implementing the decision in addition to deciding what the debate outcome was. This process is clearly necessary when the result involves the deletion of pages, since only administrators can do that. However, at a certain point, recommendations cross the line from suggesting a simple solution to a complicated one. Such recommendations are inappropriate: the closing admin is needed for only two things: (1) deciding the outcome of the debate, and (2) performing any necessary administrative actions that arise from the outcome. Administrators are not slaves, so don't ask them to do large amounts of work under the guise of a deletion debate. Also, proposing complex solutions can make consensus much harder to reach; "Too many cooks spoil the broth", as the expression goes.
The following are some behaviors that should be discouraged, based on the above observations.
By far, the most common occurence of administrators being asked to do an unreasonable amount of work in a deletion debate is when the outcome recommended is a merge. Suppose that a minor Star Trek character, Ferengi Anglu, is up for deletion. Some helpful merge suggestions include:
Some unhelpful merge suggestions include:
This is an
essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
The purpose of deletion debates on Wikipedia is to have a clear process by which the merits of an article are debated before deletion, so that the community has a chance to come to a consensus about the fate of an article. In some cases, however, consensus develops toward a different solution from a mere keep or delete decision. In such cases, it is important to keep in mind that the deletion debate is normally closed by an administrator, who will be tasked with implementing the decision in addition to deciding what the debate outcome was. This process is clearly necessary when the result involves the deletion of pages, since only administrators can do that. However, at a certain point, recommendations cross the line from suggesting a simple solution to a complicated one. Such recommendations are inappropriate: the closing admin is needed for only two things: (1) deciding the outcome of the debate, and (2) performing any necessary administrative actions that arise from the outcome. Administrators are not slaves, so don't ask them to do large amounts of work under the guise of a deletion debate. Also, proposing complex solutions can make consensus much harder to reach; "Too many cooks spoil the broth", as the expression goes.
The following are some behaviors that should be discouraged, based on the above observations.
By far, the most common occurence of administrators being asked to do an unreasonable amount of work in a deletion debate is when the outcome recommended is a merge. Suppose that a minor Star Trek character, Ferengi Anglu, is up for deletion. Some helpful merge suggestions include:
Some unhelpful merge suggestions include: