Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Votes for deletion


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Speedy keep as per Wikipedia talk:Votes for deletion. Uncle G 18:46, 2005 Mar 28 (UTC)

Votes for Deletion
''This never made it to the VfD page. Might be speediable but I'll stick it on here anyway.'' &mdash; Xezbeth 13:07, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

I propose to delete this page and start over again on a new process, to be determined, after a substantial pause and reassessment.
 * VfD is by its very nature destructive to wikipedia, its aim is to destroy rather than create. Clearly there are objectives which VfD aims to solve, feel free to list those here. Among them:
 * There is nonsense.
 * There are stubs, which can be expanded.
 * There are copyright violations, which need to be removed.
 * However Wikipedia is not paper - the "importance" criteria is used far too often. While yes, you may believe something is unimportant, so what, the article does you (and wikipedia) no harm so long as it is factually correct and verifiable.
 * The process is unwieldy, only insiders to the VfD process can figure it out, it drains energy from other contributors having to fight rear-guard actions on already created content from rampant deletionists.
 * Delete dml 01:39, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * It's not April 1 yet. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 13:29, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * RENAME to Articles for Deletion and turn VfD into a deletion clearing house for unresolved deletions in the various deletion pages :) 132.205.15.43 14:50, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion. Not the proper place to discuss deletion policy. Eugene van der Pijll 14:51, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete subject to following comment: Please let us relative newcomers know where is the proper place to discuss deletion policy. I, personally, was a bit surprised at how strict the guidelines are (or seem to be). Might I suggest updating VfD template to include a PROMINENT link to the "proper place". --Smithfarm
 * There's no need to update it. It's the very first hyperlink on the notice.  And it's in boldface.  The last hyperlink on the notice, to the guide, is strongly recommended reading, too.  Uncle G 18:46, 2005 Mar 28 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wrong namespace to discuss Wikipedia policy. Smithfarm: the best places to look for policy discussions are on those policies' talk pages&mdash;just like for the regular articles.  Try Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy to get a sense of what is being (and has been) discussed. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 15:27, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * strong donkey delete --Smooth Henry 18:28, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirects belong on WP:RFD. This one would probably be kept, despite being an Evil Cross-namespace Redirect.  As for vfd itself, see also Wikipedia talk:Votes for deletion.  (The move of vfd to Articles for Deletion is tempting&mdash;it might help to work against the "it's all about the number of votes" mentality&mdash;but probably impractical.) &mdash;Korath (Talk) 18:38, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Whilst I agree that "Articles for deletion" would be more in line with "Templates for deletion", "Categories for deletion", "Images for deletion", and "Redirects for deletion", it's not that pressing an issue, and the procedure given at Requested moves is best for that, anyway. This was WP:POINT made by User:DavidLevinson on March 1.  It was discussed and the nomination rolled back a while ago.  See Wikipedia talk:Votes for deletion.  I'm going to close this discussion to prevent further people helpfully "rescuing" it in the future. Uncle G 18:46, 2005 Mar 28 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.