Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletionism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the Wikiproject Deletion WikiProject, a collaboration area and group of editors dedicated to improving Wikipedia in toto in the area of deletion.

Statement of Purpose

We are dedicated to the opposition of articles that do not belong in the Wikipedia, and we are equally dedicated to not deleting the articles that do. When Wikipedia's deletion process runs smoothly, fairly, and with the policies of the Wikimedia Foundation as it's only rationale, regardless of whether an editor votes keep or delete, then our job is done.

Goals

To organize and discuss rationales and criteria for deletion and inclusion.
To review the outcomes of WP:AfD for inappropiate deletions to more correctly identify articles that should and should not be nominated.
To spread information about the correct reasons for deleting articles and using Speedy Deletions and Proposed Deletion.
To minimize the number of articles that are nominated for deletion simply because they have been improperly sourced, wikified, or written
To improve the policies and guidelines related to deletion and criteria for deletion through discussion.

What this project is not

A substitute for deletion review for articles that some feel are incorrectly kept.
To oppose the goals of Wikipedia:Wikiproject Inclusion or Wikipedia:WikiProject Integration
To promote the tongue-in-cheek attitude of m:Deletionism
To increase the number of articles that are deleted if there is consensus that the topic at hand is worthy of being in Wikipedia. (For example, we should never focus on rewriting policy to single out schools, but we should review school deletions to find out if there is actual consensus that schools are notable).

Scope

By definition, the scope of the project is very literally all articles in Wikipedia with an assessment code of Start or Stub. Articles rated B or higher, or of importance beyond low, should not be addressed by this project.

1 Guidelines
2 Open tasks
3 Participants
4 Resources
5 Templates
6 Categories
7 Resources
- 7.1 Related projects

[edit] Guidelines

Guideline: Analysis using official policy, not personal distaste

The primary focus of the project in dealing with article should be analysis. Is this article worthy of deletion? If so, which policies state this? The primary problem with XfD is too many people vote only on if they think an article is appropiate for deletion, or if an article is not worthy of deletion, based on feelings, and on the topic, rather than on policy. An excellent example of this is Cleveland Steamer (topic is completely not safe for work).

Guideline: Determination based on article as it could LIKELY be, not as it could POSSIBLY be

The use of WP:HEY is a good example of how an article for deletion can be turned into a valuable article, but does not itself suggest that people will work that hard to get it to a Heywood Standard. Thus, the use of WP:HEY or "the article can be improved" should only be considered when the article has a wide likely audience of potentially interested editors. Ironically, types of fancruft, which most Deletionists dislike, are very likely to be improved by fans.

Guideline: Discrimination based on the ideals of m:Immediatism, not so-called potential value

This is different than determination. We must analyze articles based on policy. The ones that currently fail policy have to be determined to be either likely to be improved or likely to be ignored. If they are likely to be ignored, then we discriminate articles that should be deleted from those that should not based on their current condition. An article that fails one or more policy guidelines and is not likely to be improved but is well-written and with an attempt at sourcing and NPOV should thus be improved by us. Articles that fail this last standard should be deleted with maximum prejudice.