CZ Talk:Article Deletion Policy

From Citizendium, the Citizens' Compendium
Jump to: navigation, search

Suggestions and corrections in bold:


Articles deletable by constables acting on their own recognizance

In general, an article may (and in some cases should) be deleted by a constable, acting on his or her own recognizance, if:

  • it was copied from Wikipedia or some other online source (where it can now be read) over one week ago, and no one has made any substantive revisions to it then or since then, regardless of whether it was marked "CZ Live" or not. Exception to this rule may be if the author clearly indicated in the comments to the article or in the talk page that the version is solely or almost solely her/his work. Even then, any later edits and additions by other authors in Wikipedia must be removed.;
  • it was drafted solely by a contributor and then blanked by that contributor;
  • it consists of two sentences or less, or 50 words or less, which have been left on the wiki for more than two hours; exception: if the article was created as a placeholder to "de-orphan" an existing CZ article.
  • it is for some reason evidently worthless, as in the case of vandalism; or
  • it is partly (and thus presumably could be entirely) the result of a copyright violation.
  • The content of the article is entirely or almost entirely non-article material, as in cases where the article contains only a template, a list of names, a to-do list, a table, and similar cases.

Articles deletable only after editor instruction

While at present only constables have the system permissions to delete articles, deletion of article on certain other grounds requires an instruction from the relevant discipline workgroup.

Deletion requires workgroup instruction if the proposed grounds for deletion include:

  • the article is of such low quality (in terms of inaccuracy, bias, poor writing, or whatever) that it would be more efficient to start over than to try to clean up the current one (this also can be achieved by blanking, if one does in fact wish to start over);
  • there is another entire article, of higher quality, that should replace the current one (note, this also can be achieved simply by pasting the new article over the old one); or

(Note that deletion in both of the above cases is not strictly necessary, except to delete the page history and to make links to the article turn red.)

  • the article is not maintainable;
  • either the topic or the contents of the article constitutes original research; or
  • the article is unduly near in subject matter to another related article (so that one of the two articles "must go").

==

What is still lacking is a deletion process I would suggest the following:

  1. If an article should be deleted in the opinion of an author, s/he should do the following:
    1. State this clearly in the talk page.
    2. Add an entry in Articles deletion suggestion with a clear, succinct explanation.
  2. Constables will go to the Articles deletion suggestion, and, unless the article should be summarily deleted (as in the case of vandalism) notify the author of the deletion suggestion and encourage him to stat her/his reservation in that talk page.
  3. If within 2 days the suggestion for deletion is not drawn by either the original author or the author who suggested it be deleted (after reaching some mutual agreement in the talk page) the article will be deleted by a constable.


I also have some reservation about having an open door policy, where every article about every subject matter is allowed, without discriminating between articles and data-content. That's asking for trouble, but perhaps here is not the place to further discuss this.

Ori Redler 03:21, 16 February 2007 (CST)

Re: deletion process - strongly agreed. I fear I cannot flag Organosilicon for speedy deletion in good faith, but cannot justify its continued existence. 'Dragon' Dave McKee 15:46, 18 February 2007 (CST)


Why are articles about countries being deleted?

I have noticed that articles about countries are being deleted. What's the reasoning behind this? I saw no sense at all in deleting the article about Rhodesia and Nyasaland, yet the article wrongly titled 'United Kingdom' (when it should be Great Britain) has been retained. To me, that is a very inconsistent policy. - (Aidan Work 22:20, 18 February 2007 (CST))

Articles have been deleted when there has been no substantive editing beyond the Wikipedia version. Authors can reimport material in order to develop an article further, but if they don't in fact do so they are likely to be deleted. The UK article appeared to have had some activity so wasn't immediately deleted.Gareth Leng 05:53, 2 March 2007 (CST)

Articles written in other than English

...should be deletable acting on own recognizance - obviously, this but this needs saying in the list. Stephen Ewen 01:05, 2 March 2007 (CST)

Links to, and searches for, problem articles

I believe it should be our policy that the general search tool does not return links to articles in Cold Storage or user pages. Further, when it is found necessary to move articles there, the Redirects resulting from the Move operation should be deleted.

There is, in my opinion, still a place for a Warm Storage namespace, accessible to registered Citizens only and not externally searchable, for articles that have promise but need much improvement. In particular, this is a place for abandoned drafts by Citizens who have left. Howard C. Berkowitz 18:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)