Different deletion types[]
Do we really need different types of deletion? It's not like we are so bogged down in things to delete that images and pages couldn't be treated the same (with the nice easy to remember single template:Deletion). -- 8of5 07:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
- I am starting to believe that we would be better with the one deletion template (and one page) to deal with the deletion of pages and images, but keep seperate templates for speedy deletion and any copyright violations issues we have. --The Doctor 09:06, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
New proposal for immediate deletion[]
I propose that the speedy or immediate deletion of any articles that are added that has just been a straight cut-and-paste job from Memory Alpha, with no effort to rewrite or restructure the article to conform to our style and focus. --
VOTE SAXON Adm•Tlk 01:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- I usually remove all the copied material and replace it with a minimal stubbed article. Chances are unless it's something really obscure we'll end up wanting it in the long run and a sentence long page to build on is better than nothing. That said sometimes I can't be bothered with that so I'd support this policy. -- 8of5 01:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. Usually with a small article I would do the same, but creating a proper article for a large article like the rules and regulations page take time and attention, and I've got to many eggs in my basket. --
VOTE SAXON Adm•Tlk 01:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. Usually with a small article I would do the same, but creating a proper article for a large article like the rules and regulations page take time and attention, and I've got to many eggs in my basket. --
Deletion versus turning into a redirect[]
The last section, "to delete or not to delete" has language regarding how, rather than deleting a short meaningless article, it should instead be redirected to an appropriate article that takes it's place -- I believe this was the policy I was following when I redirected "starship classes" to "category:starship classes" -- it seemed to be a better idea than beginning a deletion dialogue for what seemed like a basic definition article that would be more useful leading to a list -- does anyone have any reservations about how this policy was applied? I did of course immediately begin talk pages, both on the article and on the user working on the article, to explain why the article was not "working" for the database. -- Captain MKB 00:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)