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. |
The purpose of this page is to propose a third category of deletion candidates, beyond the speedy delete and yet not to the level of votes for deletion. These will be Preliminary Deletions, to be organised on a page tentatively titled Wikipedia:Purgatory (thanks to Jens Ropers [1]).
A number of alarming new developments have emphasized a need for a change in speedy delete and VfD categories.
A) Cause: "You mean this isn't a speedy delete?"
B) Cause: VfD is too long
C) Cause: VfD is overwhelmed
4) Cause: Inappropriate Speedy Deletion tags
5) Cause: VFD can't be centralised forever
Proposed: That there be a new category of deletion entitled Preliminary Deletion. Articles listed on the Purgatory page will remain there for 72 hours.
Note: Part of this procedure was originally under a different optional section, but as this proved to be the most popular in the first round of voting, it was merged with the proposal directly.
Procedure:
If you didn't bother reading all that, what it means is that this will be just like VFD, except the discussion is over after three days, and the moment a single article gets two or more keep votes not from its creator, which are at least 10% of the total vote, it goes to VFD. Yes, this proposal can be boiled down to one sentence!
Jens Ropers has suggested that instead of VFD-style voting, the only permissible vote be keep; if nobody votes to keep, the article is deleted, thus not necessitating delete votes. A possible caveat would be not being able to judge how many people actually support deletion, a foundation of current deletion policy.
Anthony di Pierro has proposed that once an article has undergone a major rewrite, all votes be nullified should the article's listing move on to VFD. This is to avoid a mass number of delete votes overwhelming the keep votes for an article that has greatly changed.
Preliminary deletion will be appropriate for any article which fits the following:
Preliminary deletion is explicitly not for any pages in the user namespace (userpages, talkpages, or user subpages).
Note: Purgatory is strictly NOT a replacement for VFD, and should never be the default place for requesting deletion of an article; if unsure, list the article on VFD. You see, if you doubt whether the article falls under any of the above criteria, it probably doesn't. Therefore, people are summarily allowed to move requests that they feel don't meet the above criteria for listing to VFD.
1) Why not expand speedy deletions instead?
2) This proposal is too complex and too bureaucratic / contains instruction creep!
3) We have too many avenues for solving problems already.
4) Why not centralise deletion on one page?
5) But isn't having different types of deletions confusing?
6) This problem's not that bad, is it?
7) Why allow only two options?
8) This won't scale.
9) Why not replace speedy deletion with this?
Voting closed at 00:00 UTC November 5 12 2004.
The first question posed was: "Should Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion become official Wikipedia policy?"
The possible choices were:
If consensus was not reached, votes for choices 2 until 4 would be added to the total for the first choice.
The second question to be posed was: "Should a month-long trial of the policy outlined at Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion be held before a permanent implementation?"
Note: The trial's implementation would be based on the outcome of the first question; if pure "yes" or "no" wins a consensus, then the implementation will default to the pure policy without the alternatives; otherwise, the implementation will be based on the choice which wins consensus. Should a trial be held, a second poll will be held at the end of the trial run to judge whether the implementation shall be permanent.
The possible choices were:
Voting opened at /Vote2 from 00:01 9 December UTC and close at 11:59 23 December UTC.
The vote failed in almost all senses of the word.
The first question posed was: "Should Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion become official Wikipedia policy?"
The possible choices were:
If a minimum voting tally was not reached, the votes for choices two until four would be added to the tally for the first choice.
The second question to be posed was: "Should a two-week trial of the policy outlined at Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion be held before a permanent implementation?"
Note: The trial's implementation would be based on the outcome of the first question; if pure "yes" or "no" wins a consensus, then the implementation will default to the pure policy without the alternatives; otherwise, the implementation will be based on the choice which wins consensus. Should a trial be held, a second poll will be held at the end of the trial run to judge whether the implementation shall be permanent.
The possible choices were:
Round 3 is likely to be held some time in late 2005 or later, but will definitely not be held any earlier than June 2005 without some sort of extraordinary circumstance.
The proposed structure of voting will be something akin to the following:
"Which parts of Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion should become official Wikipedia policy?"
Possible choices:
Voters will be permitted to vote more than once.
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. |
The purpose of this page is to propose a third category of deletion candidates, beyond the speedy delete and yet not to the level of votes for deletion. These will be Preliminary Deletions, to be organised on a page tentatively titled Wikipedia:Purgatory (thanks to Jens Ropers [1]).
A number of alarming new developments have emphasized a need for a change in speedy delete and VfD categories.
A) Cause: "You mean this isn't a speedy delete?"
B) Cause: VfD is too long
C) Cause: VfD is overwhelmed
4) Cause: Inappropriate Speedy Deletion tags
5) Cause: VFD can't be centralised forever
Proposed: That there be a new category of deletion entitled Preliminary Deletion. Articles listed on the Purgatory page will remain there for 72 hours.
Note: Part of this procedure was originally under a different optional section, but as this proved to be the most popular in the first round of voting, it was merged with the proposal directly.
Procedure:
If you didn't bother reading all that, what it means is that this will be just like VFD, except the discussion is over after three days, and the moment a single article gets two or more keep votes not from its creator, which are at least 10% of the total vote, it goes to VFD. Yes, this proposal can be boiled down to one sentence!
Jens Ropers has suggested that instead of VFD-style voting, the only permissible vote be keep; if nobody votes to keep, the article is deleted, thus not necessitating delete votes. A possible caveat would be not being able to judge how many people actually support deletion, a foundation of current deletion policy.
Anthony di Pierro has proposed that once an article has undergone a major rewrite, all votes be nullified should the article's listing move on to VFD. This is to avoid a mass number of delete votes overwhelming the keep votes for an article that has greatly changed.
Preliminary deletion will be appropriate for any article which fits the following:
Preliminary deletion is explicitly not for any pages in the user namespace (userpages, talkpages, or user subpages).
Note: Purgatory is strictly NOT a replacement for VFD, and should never be the default place for requesting deletion of an article; if unsure, list the article on VFD. You see, if you doubt whether the article falls under any of the above criteria, it probably doesn't. Therefore, people are summarily allowed to move requests that they feel don't meet the above criteria for listing to VFD.
1) Why not expand speedy deletions instead?
2) This proposal is too complex and too bureaucratic / contains instruction creep!
3) We have too many avenues for solving problems already.
4) Why not centralise deletion on one page?
5) But isn't having different types of deletions confusing?
6) This problem's not that bad, is it?
7) Why allow only two options?
8) This won't scale.
9) Why not replace speedy deletion with this?
Voting closed at 00:00 UTC November 5 12 2004.
The first question posed was: "Should Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion become official Wikipedia policy?"
The possible choices were:
If consensus was not reached, votes for choices 2 until 4 would be added to the total for the first choice.
The second question to be posed was: "Should a month-long trial of the policy outlined at Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion be held before a permanent implementation?"
Note: The trial's implementation would be based on the outcome of the first question; if pure "yes" or "no" wins a consensus, then the implementation will default to the pure policy without the alternatives; otherwise, the implementation will be based on the choice which wins consensus. Should a trial be held, a second poll will be held at the end of the trial run to judge whether the implementation shall be permanent.
The possible choices were:
Voting opened at /Vote2 from 00:01 9 December UTC and close at 11:59 23 December UTC.
The vote failed in almost all senses of the word.
The first question posed was: "Should Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion become official Wikipedia policy?"
The possible choices were:
If a minimum voting tally was not reached, the votes for choices two until four would be added to the tally for the first choice.
The second question to be posed was: "Should a two-week trial of the policy outlined at Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion be held before a permanent implementation?"
Note: The trial's implementation would be based on the outcome of the first question; if pure "yes" or "no" wins a consensus, then the implementation will default to the pure policy without the alternatives; otherwise, the implementation will be based on the choice which wins consensus. Should a trial be held, a second poll will be held at the end of the trial run to judge whether the implementation shall be permanent.
The possible choices were:
Round 3 is likely to be held some time in late 2005 or later, but will definitely not be held any earlier than June 2005 without some sort of extraordinary circumstance.
The proposed structure of voting will be something akin to the following:
"Which parts of Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion should become official Wikipedia policy?"
Possible choices:
Voters will be permitted to vote more than once.