![]() | This is a
failed proposal.
Consensus for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please use
the talk page or initiate a thread at
the village pump. |
This proposal, which became Wikipedia:Preliminary deletion, became inactive in October 2004.
The purpose of this page is to propose third category of deletion candidates, beyond the speedy delete and yet not to the level of votes for deletion. These will be Early Deletions.
A number of alarming new developments have emphasized a need for a change in speedy delete and VfD categories.
i) Cause: Propagation to mirrors
ii) Cause: Outside web use
No, NO, NO!
They could not truthfully quote Wikipedia as saying that Kerry "did not deserve a Purple Heart". I'm sure that no Wikipedia article ever said, point blank, that "Kerry did not deserve a Purple Heart". (If there was such an article, please put a link to it here, and I'll apologize for shouting.)
What they could say, and what I'll bet they did say, is that they found information in the Wikipedia which supported their claim that Kerry did not deserve a Purple Heart. Such things as:
Please don't use bad examples to make your case. I might actually accept that we need 'swift deletion policy' (no pun intended), but I cannot and will not support your case if it's based on a bogus example. Please supply a good example. -- Uncle Ed 14:50, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
iii) Cause: "You mean this isn't a speedy delete?"
iv) Cause: VfD is too long
v) VfD is overwhelmed
vi) Cause: Inappropriate CSD tags
Proposed: That there be a new category of deletion entitled Early Deletion. Articles listed on the Managed Deletion page will under no circumstances remain listed for more than 72 hours. Under no circumstances will the listing be removed in less than 48 hours.
Procedure:
Early deletion will be appropriate for any page which fit the following:
Caveat 1: Limiting voting to administrators is less democratic and less in the spirit of Wikipedia than anyone would like. However, Wikipedia:Early Deletion is not intended to be deliberative as much as juried. Therefore, it is not a place for argument. This category is an expansion of the duties of Candidates for Speedy Deletion and not a replacement for VfD. Like it, anyone may nominate, but, like it, the decision to execute the deletion will be administrative.
Caveat 2: Deliberative vs. juried: The purpose of this proposal is to eliminate unilateral deletions by administrators, to ensure that deletions take place with consensus. VfD is and remains afterward the deliberative deletion process, and that is why the default of any lack of consensus is to go to that page. However, managed deletes are juried, in that they require three consenting administrators.
Caveat 3: Timeframes: No listing may be removed in less than 72 hours. If a deleted article has an objector, that objector may undelete the article and refer it to VfD, with a note left on the listing indicating that such action has been taken.
Caveat 4: Criteria debate: Please go to this article's Talk page and follow the wikilinks to the precedents. A discussion of the language to be used for the criteria takes place there.
This policy is in the voting stages. Once voting begins, no wording changes will be acceptable to the policy proposal itself. Amendments and alternatives require a 67% of all voters, total, approval to append.
Voting will begin on Friday, September 24, 2004 and remain open for two weeks (October 8, 2004). The opening of voting will be announced on Village Pump. Geogre 18:48, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Quorum: This proposal will be considered to have failed with fewer than twenty pro votes, regardless of the proportion of pro to con votes.
Page written by Geogre 17:44, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
For II. 2., above, the following is a Jury Pool alternative.
A dynamic jury pool of Wikipedia administrators will be created by means of administrators listing themselves on an alphabetical list. They can remove themselves from this pool, and re-enlist in it, at any time of their choice. The weeks of the year will be divided into 26 segments and numbered (beginning with January 1). Each jury duty will begin with the start of a new 2 week segment and will conclude at the end of that 2 week segment. Each time a new segment starts, the next ten administrators listed at that moment will automatically begin jury duty for the next two weeks.
Note to voters: This alternative is under separate vote. Those voting for the Proposal will be considered as "no" votes to the alternative. Those voting for the Alternative will be considered to have voted "for" the Proposal with this substition.
For a different proposal, see Wikipedia:Categorized Deletion.
Note: Voting has
closed been extended.
![]() | This is a
failed proposal.
Consensus for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please use
the talk page or initiate a thread at
the village pump. |
This proposal, which became Wikipedia:Preliminary deletion, became inactive in October 2004.
The purpose of this page is to propose third category of deletion candidates, beyond the speedy delete and yet not to the level of votes for deletion. These will be Early Deletions.
A number of alarming new developments have emphasized a need for a change in speedy delete and VfD categories.
i) Cause: Propagation to mirrors
ii) Cause: Outside web use
No, NO, NO!
They could not truthfully quote Wikipedia as saying that Kerry "did not deserve a Purple Heart". I'm sure that no Wikipedia article ever said, point blank, that "Kerry did not deserve a Purple Heart". (If there was such an article, please put a link to it here, and I'll apologize for shouting.)
What they could say, and what I'll bet they did say, is that they found information in the Wikipedia which supported their claim that Kerry did not deserve a Purple Heart. Such things as:
Please don't use bad examples to make your case. I might actually accept that we need 'swift deletion policy' (no pun intended), but I cannot and will not support your case if it's based on a bogus example. Please supply a good example. -- Uncle Ed 14:50, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
iii) Cause: "You mean this isn't a speedy delete?"
iv) Cause: VfD is too long
v) VfD is overwhelmed
vi) Cause: Inappropriate CSD tags
Proposed: That there be a new category of deletion entitled Early Deletion. Articles listed on the Managed Deletion page will under no circumstances remain listed for more than 72 hours. Under no circumstances will the listing be removed in less than 48 hours.
Procedure:
Early deletion will be appropriate for any page which fit the following:
Caveat 1: Limiting voting to administrators is less democratic and less in the spirit of Wikipedia than anyone would like. However, Wikipedia:Early Deletion is not intended to be deliberative as much as juried. Therefore, it is not a place for argument. This category is an expansion of the duties of Candidates for Speedy Deletion and not a replacement for VfD. Like it, anyone may nominate, but, like it, the decision to execute the deletion will be administrative.
Caveat 2: Deliberative vs. juried: The purpose of this proposal is to eliminate unilateral deletions by administrators, to ensure that deletions take place with consensus. VfD is and remains afterward the deliberative deletion process, and that is why the default of any lack of consensus is to go to that page. However, managed deletes are juried, in that they require three consenting administrators.
Caveat 3: Timeframes: No listing may be removed in less than 72 hours. If a deleted article has an objector, that objector may undelete the article and refer it to VfD, with a note left on the listing indicating that such action has been taken.
Caveat 4: Criteria debate: Please go to this article's Talk page and follow the wikilinks to the precedents. A discussion of the language to be used for the criteria takes place there.
This policy is in the voting stages. Once voting begins, no wording changes will be acceptable to the policy proposal itself. Amendments and alternatives require a 67% of all voters, total, approval to append.
Voting will begin on Friday, September 24, 2004 and remain open for two weeks (October 8, 2004). The opening of voting will be announced on Village Pump. Geogre 18:48, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Quorum: This proposal will be considered to have failed with fewer than twenty pro votes, regardless of the proportion of pro to con votes.
Page written by Geogre 17:44, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
For II. 2., above, the following is a Jury Pool alternative.
A dynamic jury pool of Wikipedia administrators will be created by means of administrators listing themselves on an alphabetical list. They can remove themselves from this pool, and re-enlist in it, at any time of their choice. The weeks of the year will be divided into 26 segments and numbered (beginning with January 1). Each jury duty will begin with the start of a new 2 week segment and will conclude at the end of that 2 week segment. Each time a new segment starts, the next ten administrators listed at that moment will automatically begin jury duty for the next two weeks.
Note to voters: This alternative is under separate vote. Those voting for the Proposal will be considered as "no" votes to the alternative. Those voting for the Alternative will be considered to have voted "for" the Proposal with this substition.
For a different proposal, see Wikipedia:Categorized Deletion.
Note: Voting has
closed been extended.