Wikipedia:Deletion reform/Proposals/Prioritization and Noticeability

In my mind, two factors are primarily responsible for the ineffeciency of the current VFD process. One is prioritization, and the other is noticeability. My proposal will be a minimalistic approach, and could serve as a preliminary (possibly permanent) step before jumping into a drastic reform of the entire system.

Noticeability
One problem is that VFDs are being submitted so frequently, that many are being swept under the carpet; many VFDs come to a decision with minimal votes, and therefore a lack of consensus. Others sit inactive for weeks before reaching a final decision, and some never do reach a consensus. An obvious improvement would be an increase in activity amoung the VFDs, helping to bring the articles in question to a confident consensus in, I expect, a day. h In this regard, may I suggest two things. First, create a new page, much like the community portal that focuses specifically on VFDs. The page would display several lists, categorizing and prioritizing the VFDs: Oldest VFDs, Highest Priority VFDs, VFDs with Nearly Equal Votes, etc. A team could be assigned to maintain the page constantly, but a script would handle all the categorization automatically, and in real-time. Second, simply add a link to this page on the main navigation menu. Much like the other links listed there, 'Community Portal' for instance, the 'Votes for Deletion' link would be visited regularly by a bulk of the users, and viewers - which will in turn guarantee a boost in voting.


 * why do you consider a day is an appropriate time period for such a debate? Interested parties are very unlikely to notice the deletion proposal, or is that the intention?Sandpiper 20:55, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Prioritization
Another plus this system will deliver is the ease of integration. The current VFD process itself will stay essentially the same. But something needs to change, and that is prioritization. A system can be implemented in which each VFD is placed into priority levels. For instance, Red, Yellow, and Green. We could mark more critical articles, like ones based on current events, or political and religious articles RED. We could mark vanity, and non-notability VFDs YELLOW. Or simply prioritize them based on the amount of time they've been in the voting process. I think you get the picture. Icons for each priority level could be photoshopped real quick, and used to mark the actual article, and VFD. Finally, the user intiating the process submits the VFD in Votes_for_deletion under categories labeled for each priority level. A simple script could be designed to recognize each category and submit the VFDs in question to a list in the "Votes for Deletion" community page mentioned above.

Sound complicated? I don't think so. I expect all this, aside from the script could be setup in a day. To repeat myself, its a minimalistic approach, it could serve as a preliminary step to a larger, more complex system. I think its worth a shot. What do you all think?

- R Lee E (talk, contribs) 07:12, August 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * Again, what is the point of prioritisation? Why is it more important to conclude some debates faster than others? Why are any of them 'urgent'. Surely deletion is mostly just a housekeeping exercise. Sandpiper 20:59, 20 August 2005 (UTC)