This is a proposed rule to added to Wikipedia:Votes for Deletion. This is not a solution for VfD's problems, but it will lessen the load:
Any editor may close a VfD discussion by replacing the deprecated article by a redirect to a named article. There are three steps to this proceedure:
The editor may choose to add content to [[Articlename]], so the redirection is more intelligible. This is a normal edit, done at his discretion.
The present policy, that any editor may close a consensus to keep, will remain in effect. If both apply, the VfD should be closed: keep. Once closed, the difference between keep as is and keep as redirect should be resolved like any other editing dispute.
This will require making Template:speedy redirected, and removing the word "merge" from Template:vfd.
The intention is that this policy be used chiefly on articles with negligible content; partly so the article doesn't sit on VfD waiting around for deletion or redirection.
Like anything this can be abused. The following abuses and fixes occur to me.
If your good article has been VfD'd and speedy redirected, you have three options:
The change to CSD has been deleted by present consensus, but I would be tempted to consider straight unilateral reversion of a speedy redirect to a text with no notable content to be vandalism.
I would be content to see this approved without the safeguards; but better to disucss them now than after abuse.
Much of the good of this proposal would be accomplished by simply removing "merge" from Template:vfd; or even by making clear that it does not prohibit conversion to redirects. The rest is just recordkeeping. Septentrionalis 19:39, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
This is a proposed rule to added to Wikipedia:Votes for Deletion. This is not a solution for VfD's problems, but it will lessen the load:
Any editor may close a VfD discussion by replacing the deprecated article by a redirect to a named article. There are three steps to this proceedure:
The editor may choose to add content to [[Articlename]], so the redirection is more intelligible. This is a normal edit, done at his discretion.
The present policy, that any editor may close a consensus to keep, will remain in effect. If both apply, the VfD should be closed: keep. Once closed, the difference between keep as is and keep as redirect should be resolved like any other editing dispute.
This will require making Template:speedy redirected, and removing the word "merge" from Template:vfd.
The intention is that this policy be used chiefly on articles with negligible content; partly so the article doesn't sit on VfD waiting around for deletion or redirection.
Like anything this can be abused. The following abuses and fixes occur to me.
If your good article has been VfD'd and speedy redirected, you have three options:
The change to CSD has been deleted by present consensus, but I would be tempted to consider straight unilateral reversion of a speedy redirect to a text with no notable content to be vandalism.
I would be content to see this approved without the safeguards; but better to disucss them now than after abuse.
Much of the good of this proposal would be accomplished by simply removing "merge" from Template:vfd; or even by making clear that it does not prohibit conversion to redirects. The rest is just recordkeeping. Septentrionalis 19:39, 15 August 2005 (UTC)