Forum:Deletion policy

When an admin presses the tab that says "blast" on an article, a notice appears saying that the admin should be sure that the deletion he is about to perform is compliant with the deletion policy. The link to this policy is red. That needs to change. So I'm starting this forum to make concrete guidelines that will distinguish the varied "trash-quality" articles. The following could be put on a new policy page:

Star Wars Fanon's deletion policy is not as simple as it could be with a normal wiki, because in general, only one user is allowed to write substantial content for a given article, and there is a wide range of material that could be potentially acceptable. A policy like "if the article is trash, delete it" can destroy a good-faith user's hard work, even if the user was planning to make it better. While there are obvious articles that should be deleted on the spot, there are many more that could have a better solution to what is wrong than deletion.

Essentially, the quality, or result, of articles should not be the only judge of whether an article should be deleted. The effort put into the article, as well as whether the author is known to be a good-faith contributor, should also be considered when contemplating the fate of an article.

Possible ways to delete an article

 * Speedy delete. Speedy deletion can be done by an administrator spotting an article, such as through recent changes patrolling or random page surfing, and just deleting it. Non-admins can place Template:Delete on the page to place it in a category which admins are to check regularly for articles for speedy deletion.
 * Articles for deletion. Also known as Votes for deletion, placing an article in this category with the Template:DeleteTalk template will put up a short vote by the community in Star Wars Fanon:Deletion page to decide whether the fate of the article. Usually, one can vote for "Keep" or "Delete," but alternative solutions, like merging, reorganizing content, or renaming, can be proposed by adding a header and voting for it. The vote should last at least twenty-four hours, with at least two-thirds of at least six voters supporting its deletion for the article to be deleted.
 * Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense. Moving an article to this page will allow it to be referred to by any user, for hilarity, for preservation of a veteran's work, or other reasons, and still keep it off of the main namespace. This is a solution for bad joke articles that are nonetheless to funny to be deleted.
 * User subpage. Sometimes, an article would not look impressive, and is incomplete, and when reviewing it for deletion some factors are unknown. In these cases, it is best to allot one week to the author to improve the article, which is moved to a subpage of the author's userpage. If the author is not active for a week, the subpage should be deleted.
 * Warning. Sometimes, the article can be kept as it is for at least a week, and the author given constructive criticism. Within the editing policy, other users can even help the author in making the article better. If the author does not respond within one week and all attempts to help the article by other users fail to make it comply with the guidelines of deletion, the article should not be kept as it is.
 * The author's deadline should be extended if the author has informed the community of Star Wars Fanon (preferably by a notice on his/her userpage or talk page) that the author is taking a temporary leave of Star Wars Fanon for various reasons.

Factors to consider when reviewing an article
The following equation can be used when considering an article for deletion.

$$Faith+Effort+Quality=Hesitation$$

The three independent variables here are Faith, Effort, and Quality. The value of these variables can vary from user to user by opinion. Here I'll try to explain the two possible values for each:


 * Good-faith. A good-faith article should rarely be deleted on the spot. If both the contributor and the contribution look like they were meant to help the Star Wars Fanon wiki, one should be hesitant to delete it with few exceptions.
 * Bad-faith. A bad-faith article should never be kept as it is. If the article is bad-faith, it is usually an attempt to mock Star Wars Fanon, make a personal attack, or in any other way harm Star Wars Fanon. Though there are cases in which some bad-faith articles could be preserved in Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense, nobody should vote for "keep as it is" in an AfD thread when the article is obviously bad-faith.
 * Hard-effort. If the contribution obviously had a lot of work put into it, the author will likely be willing to put a bit more effort into the article in fixing any problems or complying with any policies. If the author put hard effort into the article, it should be very seldom that the article is deleted on the spot.
 * Ill-effort. Articles with no effort put into them are not always deletion candidates, but if it is deleted, it won't take much more effort than improving the article as it is to start over from scratch. There shouldn't be too much regret over articles with few sentences, or only an infobox. If stubs are meant, however, to just fill in a redlink on an article with much harder effort, the related topics should also be considered in effort, quality, and faith.
 * Good-quality. A lengthy article that satisfies every criterion for being on Star Wars Fanon, or especially being a Good Article or Featured Article, shouldn't often be put up for deletion in the first place.
 * Bad-quality. If the article never complies with any of the guidelines and criteria for adequacy, and looks unprofessional or unkempt, the article should be considered for deletion, though fixing whatever is wrong should be a prior alternative, reserving deletion as a last resort. Some short stubs that offer information but are not really great to read standing alone do not always mean they are of poor quality; they might exist in order to fill redlinks on larger articles which do need the topic described for comprehension. Keep in mind that not all articles are meant to become featured. In other words, the length of the article does not determine quality; the way it is written, the degree of compliance with Star Wars Fanon policies, and its relevance to higher-quality articles also contribute to the quality. Because so many factors influence this particular variable, judgment will vary greatly between different users. This is another reason that quality should not be the only thing to look for when finding articles for deletion.

Keep in mind that the numerical definitions of some distinguishing variables in quality, effort, and faith are greatly varied when considering articles for deletion, especially when the article is borderline. (This is why an article needs a two-thirds vote any way when in the deletion page.) There are many instances, however, when it does not take a great deal of logical contemplation when deciding the value of the variables, and in these cases, it is sometimes best to let a single admin decide (and execute) the article's fate instead of wasting a whole day on voting one-sided about it.

Values vs. Fates

 * If Good faith+Hard effort+Good quality, the article should not at all be considered for deletion. In fact, nominate it to be a Good Article!
 * If Good faith+Hard effort+Bad quality, the author should be offered constructive criticism, and given a good chance to fix the article. After all, if the author is enthusiastic and worked hard on his article, he should be willing to make it better. Some official ways of doing this are the improvement drive and the High Priests. If the author does not respond to criticism or offers for help within a week, it should be nominated on the deletion page.
 * If Good faith+Ill effort+Good quality, the article should be left alone for the time being. Concise articles can be okay, even if they shouldn't be featured.
 * If Good faith+Ill effort+Bad quality, the article should be put up for speedy deletion. If the author put no effort into a bad article, it won't take too much effort to recreate it as something better.
 * If Bad faith+Hard effort+Good quality, this is what Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense is for. (Yes, there are some articles like this.)
 * If Bad faith+Hard effort+Bad quality, speedy delete. This is probably vandalism.
 * If Bad faith+Ill effort+Good quality, you must have made some kind of miscalculation.
 * If Bad faith+Ill effort+Bad quality, speedy delete.

Note: If ANY of these variables are uncertain, it should be nominated in the deletion page for the community to review.

--C3PO the Dragon Slayer 6,000,000 forms of communication 14:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)