Wikipedia:Deletion review/Purpose 29 May 2021

Deletion review may be used for:
 * 1: Disputed deletions. For example,
 * 1a: The closer of a deletion discussion interpreted consensus incorrectly (old DRVPURPOSE#1)
 * 1b: a speedy deletion was done outside of the criteria or is otherwise disputed; (old DRVPURPOSE#2)
 * 1c: there were substantial procedural errors in the deletion discussion or speedy deletion; (old DRVPURPOSE#5)
 * 2: Requests for re-creation, where the case is controversial. (old DRVPURPOSE#3)

Deletion review is not for:
 * 1: Reversing a WP:PROD deletion, PRODs will be undeleted on request (Go to WP:REFUND) (old DRVPURPOSENOT#4a)
 * 2: Non-controversial re-creations where the reasons for deletion have been overcome. (Go to WP:REFUND) (old DRVPURPOSENOT#9)
 * 3: For a history-only undeletion, such for where the article is already re-created (see WP:Requests for history merge) (old DRVPURPOSENOT#4b)
 * 4: To undelete to convert to a redirect and to merge the deleted material into another article (WP:ATD-M; Go to WP:REFUND, and be clear about the redirect target and intention to merge). (old DRVPURPOSENOT#7)
 * 5: To continue the WP:XfD arguments. (old DRVPURPOSENOT#5)
 * 6: For new or improved arguments for deletion, instead see WP:RENOM (old DRVPURPOSENOT#1)


 * (old DRVPURPOSENOT#3) is just a poor deletion argument, and there is no history of it at DRV.
 * (old DRVPURPOSENOT#6) is covered by 1c above.
 * (old DRVPURPOSENOT#8) needs not be said, not here specifically, it is true everywhere.
 * (old DRVPURPOSENOT#9) is covered by new #2 above.

Advice:
 * Asking the deleting admin is not required, but is certainly polite, and often a useful first step. It's policy that admins must explain their deletions to good faith users who enquire of them.
 * DRV may not be the ideal venue, but we will always listen to friendly and collegial enquiries about deletion decisions from good faith users who are trying to build an encyclopaedia. In some cases it could be our role to signpost you to somewhere else.
 * For controversial re-creation requests, drafting is not always required, but is certainly very helpful.

Copyright violating, libelous, or otherwise prohibited content will not be restored.