User:BlackAmerican/deletion reasons

The Deletion Secret Decoder Ring
''Did I delete your article? Would you like to know why, and better yet, know whether I'll undo it? Let's find out!''

To start, when you attempt to look at and edit a deleted article, you'll likely see a pink box, which begins with the phrase Page with this title has previously been deleted. Within that box will be a log entry about the deletion. That log entry will look something like this:

Note that after it says "deleted [article name]" there's an explanation. This one begins "Expired PROD..." In almost every case, that explanation will refer to either "PROD", "BLPPROD", "Articles for deletion", or a letter/number code (such as A7 or G12.) You'll need that information, once you have it, the sections below break out "what's going on" for each case.

PROD ("proposed deletion")
In this first case, it says "Expired PROD", PROD is short for proposed deletion. Proposed deletion is a process in which any editor can propose that an article be deleted, give a reason, and if there's no objection within seven days, the deletion is usually carried out if the reason appears plausible. If I deleted your article via PROD, I have somewhat good news for you, it's probably the case that you can have the article returned to you just by asking, unless there are other serious issues with the article. To ask for such an article to be undeleted, either drop a note on my talk page or leave a request at WP:REFUND. Note that this ONLY applies to articles deleted via PROD.

Now, if I restore your article after a PROD, that doesn't meant that I agree that it should stick around, nor does it mean that I think it should be deleted. If I think the article still may not meet Wikipedia guidelines after restoration, I may restore it but also send the article for a discussion at Articles for Deletion. If I do that, however, I will attempt to explain why I believe that the article doesn't meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

BLPPROD ("biography of living people proposed deletion")
If instead of "Expired PROD" the summary says something like "WP:BLPPROD: Nominated for ten days with no sources present in the article)", well, that's a different process. In a BLPPROD, an editor has tagged an article about a living person for deletion because the article contained no reliable sources on the subject. After a ten-day waiting period, the article is then eligible to be deleted unless such sources have been added to the article in the meantime. By reliable sources I mean things like newspaper articles and books, not press releases, not blogs, not Facebook pages, not the official band or artist web site, not even IMDB. You can ask me to undelete articles I've deleted by BLPPROD, but if you do, be prepared for me to ask you to show me a reliable source about the subject of the article, otherwise I'll likely be forced to say no.

Articles for Deletion (also called "AfD")
If the deletion summary says something like "(Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ArticleName)", then the article was deleted by me after a separate group of editors, in my opinion, reached a consensus that the article should be deleted under Wikipedia policy. That discussion process is referred to as Articles for Deletion, or AfD for short.

If I deleted your article after a discussion at AfD, you can go read the explanation as to why different editors argued for or against the deletion of the article by going to the link in the deletion log, that is, put "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hussein Talib" in the wikipedia search bar and it will take you to Articles for deletion/Hussein Talib.

That discussion should explain the "why?" of why the article was deleted, but honestly, it's probably written in a bunch of impenetrable jargon and shorthand. Just ask me, I'll be happy to try and translate, and I apologize that the way AfD works is sometimes very off-putting.

If I deleted your article after an AfD discussion, I won't have (or at least shouldn't have!) been an active participant in that discussion, just the person who judged the result of that discussion. In most cases I will not (and should not) restore the article for you even if you ask super-nice, because in that case, I've deleted it to enforce the decision of those other editors. Unless something has really changed, that addresses, completely uncontroversially, whatever reason the article was deleted for.

If you think that I've made a mistake, or that those other editors have made a mistake,just ask, and I'll be happy to help sort it out. However, unless it's really clearly a mistake on my part, or it's really clear the deletion rationale no longer applies, I'll probably have to ask you to take it to deletion review. But I'll be glad to help you weave through that process, too.

Speedy Deletion (A1, A2, A3... G1, G2, G3, ..., "CSD" or "Speedy deletion")
If the deletion summary stars with a code, a letter (usually A, G or U) followed by a number (1-13 or so), that's one form or another of "Speedy deletion".

The narrowly-defined reasons an article can be speedy deleted are here. For example, "G12" in the example above refers to deletion having to do with clear-cut copyright infringement issues.

As with Articles for Deletion, ask me first, but often we'll have to go to deletion review.

A couple comments on particular codes:

G8: If I delete something G8 it's because it is the talk page of, or a redirect to, an article which I have deleted for some other reason. So, if you see I've deleted a talk page under the G8 criteria for speedy deletion, G8 doesn't tell you why I deleted the article itself, you'll to look to the article itself to learn why I deleted the article, the G8 only indicates that "I deleted the talk page because I already deleted the article."

G12: G12 refers to deletion due to copyright issues. The most common case here is a biography of an artist or musician copied from the artist's home page, Wikipedia can't use that copyrighted text without permission to use and redistribute that content. If you believe that content is really appropriate for an encyclopedia (and it usually isn't, the language is typically far too promotional to have a neutral point of view), ask me and I'll point you at OTRS, where you will be able to provide evidence that you are the copyright owner and are willing to sign away your copyright to Wikipedia. In fact, that's precisely what happened in the example at the top of this section, which is why that article now exists.

General Advice

 * In general, always feel free to ask me about a deletion. I process a lot of deletions, I'm human, and if I've screwed up, I'd like to make it right.
 * If I say "no", I will still, always, be happy to show you which page or pages to post at to follow-up if you want to appeal my decision, e.g., deletion review, etc.