Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people/Archive 2: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment | Biographies of living people Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 18:05, 27 January 2010 view sourceIkip (talk \| contribs)59,234 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit		Revision as of 18:34, 27 January 2010 view source Jack Merridew (talk \| contribs)34,837 editsm Cleaned up using AutoEd Next edit →
Line 3:		Line 3:
	!submission time		!submission time
	!subject		!subject
	!colspan="3"\|current ~~precentages~~		!colspan="3"\|current percentages
	!Stance		!Stance
	\|-font size=50% align=center valign=top		\|-font size=50% align=center valign=top
	\|		\|
	\|		\|
	\|		\|
	\|style="font-size:70%"\|Support<br>'''(S)'''		\|style="font-size:70%"\|Support<br>'''(S)'''
	\|style="font-size:70%"\|Oppose<Br>'''(O)'''		\|style="font-size:70%"\|Oppose<br>'''(O)'''
	\|style="font-size:70%"\|Neutral<br>'''(N)'''		\|style="font-size:70%"\|Neutral<br>'''(N)'''
	\|- align=center valign=top		\|- align=center valign=top
	\|]		\|]
	\|15:58, 21/01/2010		\|15:58, 21/01/2010
	\|"poorly referenced or completely unreferenced should be deleted on-sight"		\|"poorly referenced or completely unreferenced should be deleted on-sight"
	\|53		\|53
Line 21:		Line 21:
	\|Stricter - Delete all		\|Stricter - Delete all
	\|- align=center valign=top		\|- align=center valign=top
	\|]		\|]
	\|16:14, 21/01/2010		\|16:14, 21/01/2010
	\| align=left\|		\| align=left\|
	# Any article that satisfies the ] should be deleted on sight.		# Any article that satisfies the ] should be deleted on sight.
	# ] (BLP) articles that are unreferenced should be ] (prod).		# ] (BLP) articles that are unreferenced should be ] (prod).
	# Prodding should proceed at a reasonable rate to allow interested editors the chance to add sources. The volume of proposed deletions should not be unreasonably large. Discussion can establish what is a reasonable pace.		# Prodding should proceed at a reasonable rate to allow interested editors the chance to add sources. The volume of proposed deletions should not be unreasonably large. Discussion can establish what is a reasonable pace.
	# After <s>five</s> seven days, any article so tagged may be deleted, or moved to the ] if it shows promise.		# After <s>five</s> seven days, any article so tagged may be deleted, or moved to the ] if it shows promise.
	# Prod notices should not be removed, nor should articles be undeleted, unless proper references are added. Anybody who engages in mass de-prodding or undeletion without adding references risks a block for ].		# Prod notices should not be removed, nor should articles be undeleted, unless proper references are added. Anybody who engages in mass de-prodding or undeletion without adding references risks a block for ].
	# All editors are invited to participate in this BLP cleanup campaign.		# All editors are invited to participate in this BLP cleanup campaign.
	\|156		\|156
Line 34:		Line 34:
	\|1		\|1
	\|Stricter		\|Stricter
	\|- align=center valign=top		\|- align=center valign=top
	\|]		\|]
	\|16:22, 21/01/2010		\|16:22, 21/01/2010
	\|align=left\|"The risk reduced--and let's be clear, there certainly will be some--is insufficient to justify the widespread deletion of accurate, useful, and innocuous information, sourced or not, and ultimately damages Misplaced Pages without helping BLP vandalism subjects."		\|align=left\|"The risk reduced--and let's be clear, there certainly will be some--is insufficient to justify the widespread deletion of accurate, useful, and innocuous information, sourced or not, and ultimately damages Misplaced Pages without helping BLP vandalism subjects."
	\|76		\|76
	\|18		\|18
	\|0		\|0
	\|No change		\|No change
	\|- align=center valign=top		\|- align=center valign=top
	\|]		\|]
	\|16:16, 21/01/2010		\|16:16, 21/01/2010
	\|align=left\|"Existence of a person is not, however, controversial nor contentious. WP has policies for deleting articles lacking notability, and no Draconian policy of automatic article deletion should pre-empt the orderly functioning of processes already existing."		\|align=left\|"Existence of a person is not, however, controversial nor contentious. WP has policies for deleting articles lacking notability, and no Draconian policy of automatic article deletion should pre-empt the orderly functioning of processes already existing."
	\|73		\|73
Line 50:		Line 50:
	\|2		\|2
	\|No change		\|No change
	\|- align=center valign=top		\|- align=center valign=top
	\|]		\|]
	\|16:17, 21/01/2010		\|16:17, 21/01/2010
	\|align=left\|"I suggest a PROD-like template - call it BLP-PROD - which says "Find references for this article or it DIES." Five days seems too long, make it two days."		\|align=left\|"I suggest a PROD-like template - call it BLP-PROD - which says "Find references for this article or it DIES." Five days seems too long, make it two days."
Line 59:		Line 59:
	\|Stricter		\|Stricter
	\|-align=center valign=top		\|-align=center valign=top
	\|]		\|]
	\|17:10, 21/01/2010		\|17:10, 21/01/2010
	\|align=left\|"For old articles, a procedure of summary deletion is particularly reckless."		\|align=left\|"For old articles, a procedure of summary deletion is particularly reckless."
	\|59		\|59
Line 67:		Line 67:
	\|No change		\|No change
	\|-align=center valign=top		\|-align=center valign=top
	\|]		\|]
	\|18:12, 21/01/2010		\|18:12, 21/01/2010
	\|align=left\|"The real problem is unsourced contentious info, not unreferenced articles. The proposal will do nothing or little to the real problem, and at the same time incur tremendous costs."		\|align=left\|"The real problem is unsourced contentious info, not unreferenced articles. The proposal will do nothing or little to the real problem, and at the same time incur tremendous costs."
Line 75:		Line 75:
	\|No change		\|No change
	\|-align=center valign=top		\|-align=center valign=top
	\|]		\|]
	\|19:25, 21/01/2010		\|19:25, 21/01/2010
	\|align=left\|"The arbcom motion is not to be understood as changing or superseding general deletion policy and process as applied to the biographies of living persons, and it should be considered void if and insofar as it might have been intended to have that effect. Instead, any policy change should be decided by community consensus, starting with this RfC."		\|align=left\|"The arbcom motion is not to be understood as changing or superseding general deletion policy and process as applied to the biographies of living persons, and it should be considered void if and insofar as it might have been intended to have that effect. Instead, any policy change should be decided by community consensus, starting with this RfC."
Line 83:		Line 83:
	\|N/A		\|N/A
	\|-align=center valign=top		\|-align=center valign=top
	\|\|]		\|\|]
	\|15:14, 25/01/2010		\|15:14, 25/01/2010
	\|align=left\|"Starting with everything which has been unreferenced for more than 3 years, a three-month notice time starting February 1st, before they are deleted on May 1st. 2. Starting with everything which has been unreferenced for more than 2 years, a three-month notice time starting May 1st, before they are deleted on August 1st. 3. Starting with everything which has been unferenced for more than 1 year, a three-month notice time starting August first, before they are deleted on November 1st.		\|align=left\|"Starting with everything which has been unreferenced for more than 3 years, a three-month notice time starting February 1st, before they are deleted on May 1st. 2. Starting with everything which has been unreferenced for more than 2 years, a three-month notice time starting May 1st, before they are deleted on August 1st. 3. Starting with everything which has been unferenced for more than 1 year, a three-month notice time starting August first, before they are deleted on November 1st.

Revision as of 18:34, 27 January 2010

submission	submission time	subject	current percentages			Stance
			Support (S)	Oppose (O)	Neutral (N)
MZMcBride	15:58, 21/01/2010	"poorly referenced or completely unreferenced should be deleted on-sight"	53	137	1	Stricter - Delete all
Jehochman	16:14, 21/01/2010	Any article that satisfies the attack page criteria should be deleted on sight. Biographies of living persons (BLP) articles that are unreferenced should be proposed for deletion (prod). Prodding should proceed at a reasonable rate to allow interested editors the chance to add sources. The volume of proposed deletions should not be unreasonably large. Discussion can establish what is a reasonable pace. After ~~five~~ seven days, any article so tagged may be deleted, or moved to the Misplaced Pages:Article incubator if it shows promise. Prod notices should not be removed, nor should articles be undeleted, unless proper references are added. Anybody who engages in mass de-prodding or undeletion without adding references risks a block for disruption. All editors are invited to participate in this BLP cleanup campaign.	156	30	1	Stricter
Jclemens	16:22, 21/01/2010	"The risk reduced--and let's be clear, there certainly will be some--is insufficient to justify the widespread deletion of accurate, useful, and innocuous information, sourced or not, and ultimately damages Misplaced Pages without helping BLP vandalism subjects."	76	18	0	No change
Collect	16:16, 21/01/2010	"Existence of a person is not, however, controversial nor contentious. WP has policies for deleting articles lacking notability, and no Draconian policy of automatic article deletion should pre-empt the orderly functioning of processes already existing."	73	17	2	No change
David Gerard	16:17, 21/01/2010	"I suggest a PROD-like template - call it BLP-PROD - which says "Find references for this article or it DIES." Five days seems too long, make it two days."	63	40	1	Stricter
DGG	17:10, 21/01/2010	"For old articles, a procedure of summary deletion is particularly reckless."	59	5	3	No change
Power.corrupts	18:12, 21/01/2010	"The real problem is unsourced contentious info, not unreferenced articles. The proposal will do nothing or little to the real problem, and at the same time incur tremendous costs."	46	13	0	No change
Sandstein	19:25, 21/01/2010	"The arbcom motion is not to be understood as changing or superseding general deletion policy and process as applied to the biographies of living persons, and it should be considered void if and insofar as it might have been intended to have that effect. Instead, any policy change should be decided by community consensus, starting with this RfC."	71	5	3	N/A
Jimbo Wales	15:14, 25/01/2010	"Starting with everything which has been unreferenced for more than 3 years, a three-month notice time starting February 1st, before they are deleted on May 1st. 2. Starting with everything which has been unreferenced for more than 2 years, a three-month notice time starting May 1st, before they are deleted on August 1st. 3. Starting with everything which has been unferenced for more than 1 year, a three-month notice time starting August first, before they are deleted on November 1st. In all cases, biographies deleted for being old and unreferenced should be put onto a list for those who wish to come behind and work on them further. After that, we can consider how long is a reasonable life span (I would say one week, but one month could be fine as well) for new biographies to exist in a sad state before they are deleted.	32	19	0	Stricter
			S	O	N