| Revision as of 01:32, 19 October 2005 editTony Sidaway (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers81,722 editsm →Purpose: sp← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:35, 19 October 2005 edit undoAaron Brenneman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users19,683 edits rv - Please stop. Edit warring is unhelpful, use talk page, worj WITH other contributors, not against them.Next edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| == Purpose == | == Purpose == | ||
| <table style="border-style:solid;border-width:2px;border-color:black" align=center><tr><td> | <table style="border-style:solid;border-width:2px;border-color:black" align=center><tr><td> | ||
| Deletion Review is the process to be used by editors wish to challenge the outcome of '''any''' deletion |
#Deletion Review is the process to be used by '''all''' editors, including administrators, who wish to challenge the outcome of '''any''' deletion debate or a speedy deletion unless: | ||
| #*They are able to resolve the issue in discussion with the administrator (or other editor) in question; | |||
| * It is always best to approach the deleter asking him to explain why he deleted the article. | |||
| #*In the most exceptional cases, posting a message to ] may be more appropriate instead. Rapid correctional action can then be taken if the ensuing discussion makes clear it should be. | |||
| * If you don't get a satisfactory response you could try other methods in the ] process. | |||
| #*An administrator (or other editor) is correcting a mistake of their own, or has agreed to amend their decision after the kind of discussion mentioned above. | |||
| * Deletion can be challenged here under two policies: | |||
| #Deletion Review is also to be used if significant new information has come to light since a deletion ''and'' the information in the deleted article would be useful to write a new article. | |||
| ** ] the chief precept of which is "if in doubt, don't delete" | |||
| :This process should ''not'' be used simply because you disagree with a deletion debate's reasoning — only if you think the debate was interpreted incorrectly by the closer. This page is about ''process'', not content. | |||
| ** ], the chief precept of which is that we should ask whether "Misplaced Pages would be a better encyclopedia with the article restored" | |||
| * There are also provisions under the undeletion policy to permit the immediate undeletion of articles that were deleted out of process (that is, not in accordance with the deletion policy). | |||
| * If you think that an article nominated for deletion should have been deleted and it wasn't, you may consider approaching the closer of the AfD debate and explaining your case, but remember that deletion policy adopts the approach of not deleting when in doubt. In extreme cases, you may always nominate the article for deletion a second time. | |||
| </td></tr></table> | </td></tr></table> | ||
Revision as of 01:35, 19 October 2005
Shortcut- ]
Articles and multimedia are sometimes deleted by administrators if they are thought to have a valid reason for deletion. Sometimes these decisions are completely correct, and undisputed. Sometimes, they are more controversial. Before using this page, please read the Misplaced Pages:Deletion policy and undeletion policy.
The archive of deleted page revisions may be periodically cleared. Pages deleted prior to the database crash on 8 June 2004 are not present in the current archive because the archive tables were not backed up. This means pages cannot be restored by a sysop. If there is great desire for them it may be possible to retrieve them from the old database files. Prior to this, the archive was cleared out on 3 December 2003.
If a short stub was deleted for lack of content, and you wish to create a useful article on the same subject, you can be bold and do so. You don't have to get the stub undeleted, and as long as your new version has content it should not be redeleted. If it is, then you should list it here.
Purpose
|