Wikipedia:Essays in a nutshell/Deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Essay.svg Nutshell.png This essays in a nutshell page summarizes the gist of user written essays on Wikipedia. Essays can also be navigated via categories, navigation templates, or Special:Search. For more information on navigating essays, see Wikipedia:About essay searching.

Essays may represent widespread norms or minority viewpoints. Consider these views with discretion. Essays are not Wikipedia policies.

Shortcut:
WP:NUTDEL
Essay In a nutshell Shortcuts Impact
Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions

Always try to make clear, solid arguments in deletion discussions, avoid short one-liners or simple links, and explain why an article does or does not meet specific criteria, guidelines or policies.

WP:AADD, WP:ATA, WP:VM

High

Arguments to avoid in deletion reviews

Always try to make clear, solid arguments in deletion reviews, avoiding short one-liners or simple links. Explain why the closing administrator's decision does or does not meet specific criteria, guidelines or policies. Keep in mind the deletion review is not AfD Round 2.

WP:ATADR

Mid

Arguments to avoid in image deletion discussions

Deletion decisions about non-free content at the English Wikipedia are governed by Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria, thus the strongest arguments are those that explain clearly how they are based upon that policy.

WP:AAFFD, WP:AAIFD, WP:AAXFD

Unranked

Arguments to make in deletion discussions

These are arguments, based on Wikipedia's guidelines and policies, that have successfully saved articles from deletion in the past.

WP:GOODARG

Mid

Articles for deletion is not a war zone

AfD discussions should remain calm and civil, avoid adhering too strongly to either deletionism or inclusionism.

WP:NWZ, WP:WARZONE, WP:NOTWARZONE

Mid

Avoid repeated arguments

Avoid repeating statements previously made in AfD discussions.

WP:REPEAT, WP:WABBITSEASON, WP:DUCKSEASON

Low

Blow it up and start over

A page can be so hopelessly irreparable that the only solution is to blow it up and start over.

WP:TNT, WP:TNTTP, WP:DYNAMITE, WP:BLOWITUP, WP:NUKEANDPAVE

Unranked

But there must be sources!

Don't just insist there must be sources out there somewhere, prove it by providing them.

WP:MUSTBESOURCES, WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES

Unranked

Closing Administrator is not an Edit on Demand Service

A closing administrator's job in an XfD is determining if the consensus is to keep or delete. Editors should boldly improve articles themselves.

WP:DEMAND

Low

Content removal

When removing content from a page, it is important to be sure there is consensus to do so.

WP:REMOVAL, WP:CRV, WP:RMV

Low

Delete the junk

Wikipedia lacks articles on a lot of notable subjects. We don't need to keep an article with no merit in itself just because it might, theoretically, be possible to make a good article on the subject.

WP:NORESCUE, WP:JUNK

Mid

Don't build the Frankenstein

Be careful to verify, when adding references to an article to establish notability, that the subject referenced is actually the one the article is about, and not someone or something else with the same name.

WP:DBTF, WP:FRANKIE

Low

Don't follow the leader

It's not necessary to agree with the nominator or the first editor to comment, do not be ashamed to be in the minority

WP:LEADER

Mid

Don't move articles at AfD

An article listed at AfD might need a better title than it currently has, but it can wait.

WP:NOMOVE

Unranked

Encourage full discussions

Editors are encouraged to fully discuss all arguments in AfD discussions. If you bring up a point in the discussion, it is okay if someone else responds to it.

WP:ALLARGUMENTS

Low

How to save an article proposed for deletion

Don't panic, discuss, familiarize yourself with the deletion process, and address the issues.

WP:SAVE

High

I just don't like it

Liking or not liking the topic is not a strong argument in a discussion.

WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT, WP:JDLI, WP:IDONTLIKETHEM

Mid

Kittens

Stub articles can be useful, but avoid mass creating stub articles.

WP:KITTENS

Unranked

Liar, liar, pants on fire

Calling an editor a liar is not a valid argument in AfD discussions (or anywhere else, for that matter).

WP:LIAR, WP:LIARLIAR

Low

No big loss

Deletion of any article is a loss for the wider community and the encyclopedia in the long term, as that's knowledge lost because one person forgot to add references.

WP:NOLOSS, WP:NOBIGLOSS

Mid

Non-admin closure

Administrators close most deletion discussions; regular editors may close some non-controversial discussions with "keep", "merge" or "redirect" closure when they can.

WP:NAC, WP:NADC

High

Nothing

Wikipedia is not about everything, but that, by itself, is not argument for deletion.

WP:NOTHING

Mid

Overzealous deletion

Overzealous deletion goes against Wikipedia's assume good faith principle

WP:OVERZEALOUS, WP:ZEAL

Mid

Quote your own essay

In deletion discussions, editors should feel free to quote their own essays provided that they do not hold them out as policy or consensus. Sometimes, there may be reasons not to quote your own essay.

WP:SELFQUOTE, WP:QUOTEYOURSELF

Low

Relisting can be be abusive

Avoid relisting a deletion discussion if a consensus has been firmly and recently established.

WP:RELISTINGISEVIL

Low

TenPoundHammer's Law

If you don't even know the name of an upcoming album, you probably don't know enough about it to write an article.

WP:HAMMER, WP:CRYSTALHAMMER, WP:HAMMERTIME, WP:TPHL

Mid

Why was the page I created deleted?

Deletion, like everything else in Wikipedia, is about consensus between editors. Deletion does not always have to be permanent.

WP:WWMPD, WP:WMD, WP:DUDE

Mid

Wikipedia is not Whac-A-Mole

Don't rush in and suggest an article has no reliable sources without taking time out to find them.

WP:WHACAMOLE

Mid