Revision as of 18:34, 27 January 2010 view sourceJack Merridew (talk | contribs)34,837 editsm Cleaned up using AutoEd← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:21, 28 January 2010 view source Dronkle (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers12,793 edits Update to today's figuresNext edit → | ||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
!submission time | !submission time | ||
!subject | !subject | ||
!colspan="3"|current |
!colspan="3"|current numbers | ||
!Stance | !Stance | ||
|-font size=50% align=center valign=top | |-font size=50% align=center valign=top | ||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
|"poorly referenced or completely unreferenced should be deleted on-sight" | |"poorly referenced or completely unreferenced should be deleted on-sight" | ||
|53 | |53 | ||
| |
|145 | ||
|1 | |1 | ||
|Stricter - Delete all | |Stricter - Delete all | ||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
# 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. | ||
| |
|158 | ||
| |
|32 | ||
|1 | |1 | ||
|Stricter | |Stricter | ||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
|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." | ||
| |
|77 | ||
|18 | |18 | ||
|0 | |0 | ||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
|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." | ||
| |
|78 | ||
| |
|18 | ||
|2 | |2 | ||
|No change | |No change | ||
Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
|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." | ||
| |
|64 | ||
| |
|43 | ||
|1 | |1 | ||
|Stricter | |Stricter | ||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
|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." | ||
| |
|60 | ||
|5 | |5 | ||
|3 | |3 | ||
Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
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. | 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. | ||
| |
|34 | ||
| |
|22 | ||
| |
|1 | ||
|Stricter | |Stricter | ||
|-align=center valign=top | |-align=center valign=top |
Revision as of 16:21, 28 January 2010
submission | submission time | subject | current numbers | Stance | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Support (S) |
Oppose (O) |
Neutral (N) | ||||
MZMcBride | 15:58, 21/01/2010 | "poorly referenced or completely unreferenced should be deleted on-sight" | 53 | 145 | 1 | Stricter - Delete all |
Jehochman | 16:14, 21/01/2010 |
|
158 | 32 | 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." | 77 | 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." | 78 | 18 | 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." | 64 | 43 | 1 | Stricter |
DGG | 17:10, 21/01/2010 | "For old articles, a procedure of summary deletion is particularly reckless." | 60 | 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. |
34 | 22 | 1 | Stricter |
S | O | N |