On 3/11/08, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
It's a pity our deletion mechanism doesn't distinguish between stuff deleted for "hard" reasons like copyright violation and stuff deleted for "soft" reasons such as notability, it'd make it easier to give access to stuff like this that could still be of value. I recall there's been discussion in the past of creating a "deleted:" namespace for such things, anyone know if anything's likely to come of that?
It was a suggestion I made once in a thread about "soft deletions"
To expand on the idea, "soft deleted" articles could go to a "deleted" namespace which would be made uncrawlable by search engines. The only way to get to a soft deleted article would be to know its name, follow a link from an xfd discussion or specify the "deleted" namespace in an internal search. The "deleted" namespace would also be good for articles temporarily restored for DRV discussions.