![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hey it has always stumped me, when coming to deletion review, to figure out what the heck is the decision that is being reviewed. There needs to be a link provided in obvious salient fashion. Someone points out to me that the "XfD" link, although obscure, might be what I would be looking for, but that is not labelled as being the decision to review, and I am not sure it always is the answer.
What is given, saliently/first is a link to an article, which is definitely not the decision. And by now that link might be a redlink, or it might be a new article, or it might be a redirect, and there might or might not be any clue in its edit history of where is the AFD or whatever. And the XfD link is 9th out of 10 links provided! (E.g. count to 9 within: "John Iadarola" / "John Iadarola" ("talk"|"edit"|"history"|"logs"|"links"|"watch") ("XfD"|"restore"))
This has to be confusing to many editors besides me. -- Doncram ( talk) 18:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Good Ol'factory, Nothing personal but there simply has to be a better way to let people know of proposed deletions. I'm thinking of Category:People of Huguenot descent which I have just discovered. Absolutely No chance of recording objections at all. A very bad job. Eddaido ( talk) 23:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC) (of no known Huguenot descent)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hey it has always stumped me, when coming to deletion review, to figure out what the heck is the decision that is being reviewed. There needs to be a link provided in obvious salient fashion. Someone points out to me that the "XfD" link, although obscure, might be what I would be looking for, but that is not labelled as being the decision to review, and I am not sure it always is the answer.
What is given, saliently/first is a link to an article, which is definitely not the decision. And by now that link might be a redlink, or it might be a new article, or it might be a redirect, and there might or might not be any clue in its edit history of where is the AFD or whatever. And the XfD link is 9th out of 10 links provided! (E.g. count to 9 within: "John Iadarola" / "John Iadarola" ("talk"|"edit"|"history"|"logs"|"links"|"watch") ("XfD"|"restore"))
This has to be confusing to many editors besides me. -- Doncram ( talk) 18:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Good Ol'factory, Nothing personal but there simply has to be a better way to let people know of proposed deletions. I'm thinking of Category:People of Huguenot descent which I have just discovered. Absolutely No chance of recording objections at all. A very bad job. Eddaido ( talk) 23:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC) (of no known Huguenot descent)