There is now a formal proposal for a criterion for speedy deletion, worded as follows:
1. unwikified 2. cut-and-pasted verbatim from another website 3. less than 48 hours old (could be relaxed if the source is verified not to be Wikipedia mirror?) 4. no assertion of permission 5. not from a known public domain or GFDL-compatible source
This appears to be an extension of the copyright infringement CSD, which is as follows:
An article that is a blatant copyright infringement and meets these parameters:
* Material is unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider (e.g. encyclopedia, news service) and; * The article and its entire history contains only copyright violation material, excluding tags, templates, and minor edits and; * Uploader makes no assertion of permission or fair use, and none seems likely and; * The material is identified within 48 hours of upload and is almost or totally un-wikified (to diminish mirror problem).
This ignores the statement of permission that is made during posting of the material, and would not require the deleting administrator to make a proper investigation--unless he knows the article to be from a GFDL source or to be in the public domain, the article can be summarily deleted.
In my opinion this is going far too far. Until recently, copyright infringements had been dealt with perfectly well by listing the material of [[Wikipedia:Copyright problems]]. Under this new proposal, articles that are not even copyright infringements would stand to be deleted on mere suspicion, and without any proper investigation.