User:ChrisG/Deletion

ChrisG's proposal: Shift the burden
The thing that strikes me looking through vfd is that multiple people waste a lot of time saying something needs to be deleted. In the majority of cases there are no keep votes, so why do people waste their time putting down delete votes and explaining? The burden should then be on someone to justify the article should exist, since someone else has already put the effort in to justifying deletion.

So I suggest:
 * 1) An article is added to vfd and the reason(s) is given.
 * 2) If after 7 days it has attracted no keep votes it is deleted.
 * 3) If a single keep vote is given and the reason(s) is given, then voting starts.
 * 4) Normal processes apply.

Benefits
 * Only one person criticises an article which will be less painful for new editors.
 * The page length will be substantially reduced. Looking at the historic vfd pages I would guess by 50 to 75%.
 * Unanimious deletions will happen without people wasting effort.
 * Attention is focused on those articles that someone has voted to keep and has justified why that should be the case; which should result in better peer review. :ChrisG 18:48, 2 August 2005 (UTC)