Revision as of 20:08, 4 October 2005 editThryduulf (talk | contribs)Oversighters, Administrators98,871 editsm →The proposed guidelines: I forgot to put <nowiki> around the oldafdfull template← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 22:14, 6 October 2024 edit undoCryptic (talk | contribs)Administrators41,598 editsm Reverted edit by 2A02:3030:A9C:546B:EBC0:301C:9D99:6FA2 (talk) to last version by CrypticTag: Rollback | ||
(334 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Misplaced Pages deletion guideline}} | |||
{{Proposed}} | |||
{{hatnote|This is a deletion guideline on entire articles. For the editing policy about keeping information in an article, see ].}} | |||
==Preamble== | |||
{{redirect|WP:KEEP|any comments used as just "'''keep'''"|Misplaced Pages:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions}} | |||
This is a proposed policy with the intention of generating agreement on when closing debates at ] before the normal discussion period ends. This proposal will only apply to closing such discussions with a "Keep" result - i.e. it is intended to be complementary to ]. | |||
{{redirect|WP:SK|text=You may be looking for ] or ]}} | |||
{{Misplaced Pages subcat guideline|deletion guideline|{{PAGENAME}}|WP:SK|WP:KEEP}} | |||
{{nutshell|In certain circumstances, a deletion discussion can be closed with a result of "speedy keep" before the normal discussion period ends.}} | |||
'''Speedy keep''' is the process of closing deletion discussions with a result of "speedy keep" before the normal discussion period ends, but without unlisting or deleting the actual discussion. This guideline applies ''only'' to "speedy keep" closures; the ] cover the circumstances under which pages may be deleted immediately. | |||
Also proposed are a set of associated ''guidelines'' to acompany the policy. The guidelines are independent of the policy and so one or both may be accepted or rejected. | |||
==Applicability== | |||
This is not about ], the policy and guidelines are intended to work for the current system only, and in that way can be considered interim. Whether they are relevant to a future system or wanted by the community in a future system is irrelevant. | |||
{{shortcut|WP:SKCRIT|WP:CSK}} | |||
Reasons for a ''speedy keep'' decision are: | |||
#{{anchor|1}} Absence of delete rationale. Normally the nominator will provide grounds for deletion in the delete rationale, but if (a) the nominator withdraws the nomination, perhaps because of improvements to the article that happen during the AfD, or (b) the nominator failed to give intelligible grounds for content deletion (i.e. arguments that would support deletion, userfying or redirection, perhaps only proposing an alternative action such as moving or merging) ''and'' no new delete rationale appears in the deletion discussion.<ref>An example of this includes posting a nomination in response to a ] but advocating a keep position. (If you want to record a rationale for the PROD-tag removal, see {{Section link|Misplaced Pages:Proposed deletion#Objecting}}.)</ref> Exceptions:{{ordered list |list_style_type=decimal | |||
|{{anchor|1.1}} If the nominator indicates that the nomination is procedural in nature, then the nomination is ineligible for speedy keep. This includes a "relist" result from ], fixing errors in the nomination process, or if a user stated a page should be deleted on a talk page without actually nominating it. | |||
|{{anchor|1.2}} If the nomination would otherwise qualify for close to ] then suggestions to redirect the page are treated the same as moving or merging. | |||
|{{anchor|1.3}} Where the nominator withdraws their nomination, check whether other editors still recommend a '''delete''' or '''redirect''' outcome before speedily closing. If a good-faith editor in good standing recommends '''delete''' or '''redirect''', the AfD should not be speedily closed using this ground.}} | |||
#{{anchor|2}}The nomination was unquestionably made for the purposes of vandalism or disruption '''and''', since questionable motivations on the part of the nominator do not have a direct bearing on the validity of the nomination, no uninvolved editor has recommended deletion or redirection as an outcome of the discussion. For example: {{ordered list |list_style_type=lower-alpha | |||
|{{anchor|2.1|2a}}obviously ] nominations (such as recently featured content or April Fools jokes) | |||
|{{anchor|2.2|2b}}nominations which are made solely to provide a forum for disruption, e.g. when a contestant in an edit war nominates an opponent's userpage solely for harassment | |||
|{{anchor|2.3|2c}}making nominations of the same page with the same arguments immediately after they were strongly rejected in a recently closed deletion discussion | |||
|{{anchor|2.4|2d}}nominations that are clearly an attempt to end an editing dispute through deletion, where ] is a more appropriate course | |||
}} | |||
#{{anchor|3|}}The nomination is completely erroneous. ''No'' accurate deletion rationale has been provided. | |||
#{{anchor|4}}The nominator was ] or ] at the time of making the nomination, so they were not supposed to edit. In that case, the ''nominated page'' is speedily kept while the ''nomination'' can be removed from the log, tagged with {{tl|db-banned}} and speedily deleted as a banned contribution. However, if subsequent editors added substantive comments in good faith before the nominator's blocked or banned status was discovered, the nomination may ''not'' be speedily closed<ref>Unless all such comments support keeping the article, in which case the discussion may be closed as a speedy keep.</ref> (though the nominator's opinion will be discounted in the closure decision). | |||
#{{anchor|5}}{{anchor|policy}}The page is a policy or guideline. The deletion processes are not a forum for revoking policy. | |||
#{{anchor|6}}The page/image is currently linked from the ]. In such cases, please wait until the link is no longer on the Main Page before nominating. If the problem is urgent, consensus should be gained at ] to remove the link before nominating for deletion. | |||
If a page is nominated for deletion on the '''wrong forum''' (for example, a template on ] or an article on ]), the misplaced discussion may be ''']''' and the page renominated on the correct forum, with the original nomination, and any comments made so far, copied over to the new nomination. The closing comment should indicate where the discussion has been moved. This does not strictly count as a speedy keep, since the page still remains nominated for deletion. | |||
==The proposed policy== | |||
Debates at ] (AfD) can be closed with a "Keep" result before the standard discussion period has elapsed in the following circumstances only. | |||
#The nomination is obviously bad faith. Examples of this inlcude: | |||
#*nominating an extremely high profile article (e.g. ], ]) | |||
#*nominating a "key article" that unquestionably belongs in an encyclopaedia (e.g. ], ], ]) | |||
#*the reason given for nomination is entirely unrelated to Misplaced Pages (e.g. "] should not exist because it has broken the international law that created it"{{ref|Israel}}) | |||
#At least two of the first few good-faith expressions of opinion call for a speedy-keep, AND | |||
##there are no good-faith votes for actions other than Keep (inlcuding "strong keep", etc) | |||
##there are no good-faith objections to it being a speedy-keep (e.g. "Keep, but don't speedy it"). | |||
##at least four different users acting in good-faith have expressed their opinions. | |||
*"Good-faith" means those opinions, votes and comments that would be taken into account at the close of an AfD debate after the standard discussion time has elapsed. | |||
*Criterion 1 supercedes criterion 2. | |||
Please realize that while you may personally dislike having a deletion tag on your favorite article/template/image/etc, the harm it does is minimal, and either the article or the tag will be gone in around a week. Also be aware that the speedy keep criteria, particularly the first three, are not to be used to express strong disapproval of the nomination: a rationale that you don't agree with is still an argument for deletion, is not necessarily vexatious, and does not imply the nominator has neglected to read the page. | |||
When a discussion is closed as a speedy-keep the following actions MUST be completed: | |||
#subst the {{tl|at}} and {{tl|ab}} templates at the top and bottom respectively of the AfD sub-page. The outcome of the debate should be listed as "Speedy keep" | |||
#remove the afd tag from the nominated article, noting in the edit summary that the outcome of the debate was a speedy keep (e.g. "Removing AfD Tag - SPEEDY KEEP"). | |||
*The AfD subpage should '''not''' be deleted. | |||
===What is not a speedy-keep=== | |||
==The proposed guidelines== | |||
{{Anchor|NOT}} | |||
#Although closing AfD discussions that end in keep votes can be done by non-admins, it is recommended that only administrators close discussions as speedy-keeps. Normal users are encouraged to vote "speedy keep" instead. | |||
{{Nutshell|title=This section|A "snowball clause" is not a speedy keep close, and the two should not be confused.|shortcut=WP:SK#NOT}} | |||
#Whether a record of the nomination is added to the talk page of the article is at the discretion of the closing user. If it is noted, it is recommended that '''<nowiki>{{subst:oldafdfull|date=date of nomination|result=Speedy Keep|votepage=article name}}</nowiki> | |||
The "]" is a valid criterion for an ''early'' close, and is not subject to any of the other criteria necessary for a speedy keep, but it is not a speedy keep criterion itself. Specifically, discussions must meet specific criteria to be ''speedily'' kept. "Snowball closes" are justified by "]" and "]" as opposed to a specific set of guidelines. For that reason, "snow closes" may be controversial and additional care is warranted. Though the two may ''seem'' similar, closes under the snowball clause should never be closed as "speedy keep." | |||
#''Featured articles'' that appear on the ] qualify for criterion 1. | |||
#Articles should not be kept under criterion 2 until at least two hours after the AfD tag is added to the article. | |||
#The afd tag can be removed from articles that meet criterion 1 if no AfD subpage has been created within 30 minutes of the tag being added. | |||
#Articles meeting either criterion can be kept if the discussion has not been linked to the apropriate AfD day page within 30 minutes of the sub-page being created. | |||
== |
==== Notes ==== | ||
{{reflist}} | |||
All discussion on the talk page please. | |||
==When closing a debate as speedy-keep== | |||
==Voting== | |||
When a discussion is closed as a speedy-keep, close the debate as you would a ], but use the result "'''speedy keep'''" instead of "keep". The procedure for administrators closing AfD discussions are laid out at ] and for limited cases of non-administrator closings, at ] or ]. | |||
Users eligable to vote are those that have at least 50 edits when the voting opens.<br> | |||
'''Voting is not yet open, please discuss the proposals on the talk page instead.''' | |||
== |
== See also == | ||
#{{note|Israel}} Paraphrased from an actual nomination. | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 22:14, 6 October 2024
Misplaced Pages deletion guideline This is a deletion guideline on entire articles. For the editing policy about keeping information in an article, see WP:PRESERVE. "WP:KEEP" redirects here. For any comments used as just "keep", see Misplaced Pages:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. "WP:SK" redirects here. You may be looking for Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Slovakia or Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Saskatchewan.This page documents an English Misplaced Pages deletion guideline. Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this guideline's talk page. | Shortcuts |
This page in a nutshell: In certain circumstances, a deletion discussion can be closed with a result of "speedy keep" before the normal discussion period ends. |
Speedy keep is the process of closing deletion discussions with a result of "speedy keep" before the normal discussion period ends, but without unlisting or deleting the actual discussion. This guideline applies only to "speedy keep" closures; the criteria for speedy deletion cover the circumstances under which pages may be deleted immediately.
Applicability
ShortcutsReasons for a speedy keep decision are:
- Absence of delete rationale. Normally the nominator will provide grounds for deletion in the delete rationale, but if (a) the nominator withdraws the nomination, perhaps because of improvements to the article that happen during the AfD, or (b) the nominator failed to give intelligible grounds for content deletion (i.e. arguments that would support deletion, userfying or redirection, perhaps only proposing an alternative action such as moving or merging) and no new delete rationale appears in the deletion discussion. Exceptions:
- If the nominator indicates that the nomination is procedural in nature, then the nomination is ineligible for speedy keep. This includes a "relist" result from deletion review, fixing errors in the nomination process, or if a user stated a page should be deleted on a talk page without actually nominating it.
- If the nomination would otherwise qualify for close to speedy redirect then suggestions to redirect the page are treated the same as moving or merging.
- Where the nominator withdraws their nomination, check whether other editors still recommend a delete or redirect outcome before speedily closing. If a good-faith editor in good standing recommends delete or redirect, the AfD should not be speedily closed using this ground.
- The nomination was unquestionably made for the purposes of vandalism or disruption and, since questionable motivations on the part of the nominator do not have a direct bearing on the validity of the nomination, no uninvolved editor has recommended deletion or redirection as an outcome of the discussion. For example:
- obviously frivolous or vexatious nominations (such as recently featured content or April Fools jokes)
- nominations which are made solely to provide a forum for disruption, e.g. when a contestant in an edit war nominates an opponent's userpage solely for harassment
- making nominations of the same page with the same arguments immediately after they were strongly rejected in a recently closed deletion discussion
- nominations that are clearly an attempt to end an editing dispute through deletion, where dispute resolution is a more appropriate course
- The nomination is completely erroneous. No accurate deletion rationale has been provided.
- The nominator was blocked or banned at the time of making the nomination, so they were not supposed to edit. In that case, the nominated page is speedily kept while the nomination can be removed from the log, tagged with {{db-banned}} and speedily deleted as a banned contribution. However, if subsequent editors added substantive comments in good faith before the nominator's blocked or banned status was discovered, the nomination may not be speedily closed (though the nominator's opinion will be discounted in the closure decision).
- The page is a policy or guideline. The deletion processes are not a forum for revoking policy.
- The page/image is currently linked from the Main Page. In such cases, please wait until the link is no longer on the Main Page before nominating. If the problem is urgent, consensus should be gained at WP:ERRORS to remove the link before nominating for deletion.
If a page is nominated for deletion on the wrong forum (for example, a template on AfD or an article on MfD), the misplaced discussion may be procedurally closed and the page renominated on the correct forum, with the original nomination, and any comments made so far, copied over to the new nomination. The closing comment should indicate where the discussion has been moved. This does not strictly count as a speedy keep, since the page still remains nominated for deletion.
Please realize that while you may personally dislike having a deletion tag on your favorite article/template/image/etc, the harm it does is minimal, and either the article or the tag will be gone in around a week. Also be aware that the speedy keep criteria, particularly the first three, are not to be used to express strong disapproval of the nomination: a rationale that you don't agree with is still an argument for deletion, is not necessarily vexatious, and does not imply the nominator has neglected to read the page.
What is not a speedy-keep
This section in a nutshell: A "snowball clause" is not a speedy keep close, and the two should not be confused. | Shortcut |
The "snowball clause" is a valid criterion for an early close, and is not subject to any of the other criteria necessary for a speedy keep, but it is not a speedy keep criterion itself. Specifically, discussions must meet specific criteria to be speedily kept. "Snowball closes" are justified by "Ignore all rules" and "Misplaced Pages is not a bureaucracy" as opposed to a specific set of guidelines. For that reason, "snow closes" may be controversial and additional care is warranted. Though the two may seem similar, closes under the snowball clause should never be closed as "speedy keep."
Notes
- An example of this includes posting a nomination in response to a proposed deletion but advocating a keep position. (If you want to record a rationale for the PROD-tag removal, see Misplaced Pages:Proposed deletion § Objecting.)
- Unless all such comments support keeping the article, in which case the discussion may be closed as a speedy keep.
When closing a debate as speedy-keep
When a discussion is closed as a speedy-keep, close the debate as you would a standard close, but use the result "speedy keep" instead of "keep". The procedure for administrators closing AfD discussions are laid out at WP:AFD/AI and for limited cases of non-administrator closings, at nominator withdrawal or here.