On 2/13/07, Ron Ritzman <ritzman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Just an idea I have been bouncing around for deletion nominations.
If a user, any user either with an account or anonymous wants to
nominate an article for deletion. Instead of posting directly to AFD,
he instead enters the name of the article and the reason he thinks it
needs to be deleted into a web form. The nomination then goes to a
"deletion preview" team who can take one of several actions...
1. Speedy delete. Only for obvious no doubt speedy deletion
candidates, nonsense pages and troll pages. Example "Jimbo Wales is a
bonehead" or "list of glups that glip".
2. Speedy keep. Article is definitely not a candidate for deletion ie
some bozo nominates "George W. Bush" or "Star Wars". Also could be
used to keep articles with a strong keep consensus from being
constantly renominated by a troll.
3. Bounce back. The nominator (if a registered user) will be asked to
resubmit the nom. ie "please be more specific then "fancruft" or
"unencyclopedic""
4.Pass to ADF. Only then does the nomination go to AFD and only then
does the article get tagged.
5. Rewrite by previewer. The nomination as written is invalid but the
previewer notices something else about the article that bugs him.
I think such a system would reduce the load on AFD but still allow us
to deal with problem articles promptly.
I really don't see how this reduces the load on AFD. As it stands now any
admin can speedy delete an article on AFD, and a speedy keep is usually
pretty obvious. What makes me uncomfortable about this proposal is that it
removes these powers from the community at large and puts it in the hands of
a special team.
It certainly makes deletion a lot more difficult. As I understand it, too
much crap is more of a problem than too much unsupervised deletion. AFD is
tends to get overwhelmed - making everything go through a few hands before
getting to AFD will only make this problem worse.