User:Okip/Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people/Phase III

Below are all proposals which received 48 or more supports. Grouped together in two categories. No technological proposals, which came later in the RFC, got more than 30+ supports. Jimbo's proposal was garnered 36. More proposals can be added.

Questions on how this may work on the talk page...

{| style="background-color: transparent;"
 * valign=top|

Existing policy is not adequate to address the problem
Alternative 2: BLP-PROD template - which says "Find references for this article or it DIES." Five days seems too long, make it two days.
 * 1) Any article that satisfies the attack page criteria should be deleted on sight.
 * 2) Biographies of living persons (BLP) articles that are unreferenced should be proposed for deletion (prod).
 * 3) Prodding should proceed at a reasonable rate to allow interested editors the chance to add sources. The volume of proposed deletions should not be unreasonably large. Discussion can establish what is a reasonable pace.
 * 4) After five seven days, any article so tagged may be deleted, or moved to the Article incubator if it shows promise.
 * 5) Prod notices should not be removed, nor should articles be undeleted, unless proper references are added. Anybody who engages in mass de-prodding or undeletion without adding references risks a block for disruption.
 * 6) All editors are invited to participate in this BLP cleanup campaign.

Alternative 3: Any biography that is poorly referenced or completely unreferenced should be deleted on-sight. If a user wishes to re-create the biography, they may request undeletion (or simply re-create the page) as long as they provide adequate sourcing.
 * valign=top|

Existing policy is adequate to address the problem
The risk reduced--and let's be clear, there certainly will be some--is insufficient to justify the widespread deletion of accurate, useful, and innocuous information, sourced or not, and ultimately damages Wikipedia without helping BLP vandalism subjects.

Existence of a person is not, however, controversial nor contentious. WP has policies for deleting articles lacking notability, and no Draconian policy of automatic article deletion should pre-empt the orderly functioning of processes already existing.

The real problem is unsourced contentious info, not unreferenced articles. The proposal will do nothing or little to the real problem, and at the same time incur tremendous costs. For old articles, a procedure of summary deletion is particularly reckless.
 * }