On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 08:34:31 +0100, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
I don't really object to either A7 or G11, but the idea that these bits of jargon justify a deletion is a problem. Especially since when new criteria are added, A7 may become A8, leaving anyone looking at the deletion log in future very confused. (...)
<snipped>
Actualy when new criterea gets added they tend to be given a higher number, also when criterea are removed or merged a placeholder is left spesificaly with links/references from the deletion log in mind (see for example Criterea 4 and 6 for articles).
I do agree that writing just "a7" or "g11" and such in the deletion summary should be strongly discouraged though. It's just plain lazy and extremely confusing to people who are unfamiliar with CSD jargon. Most browsers have various types of auto complete or other ways to insert pre-prepared verbose "boilplate" text into web forms (I particularly love Opera's "notes" feature) with just a few keystrokes, and even without that typing 2-3 words (even if it's just "blatant advertising" or "non notable band" or whatever) or at least typing [[WP:CSD#A7]] rater than just a7 so people can at least follow the link to the actual criterea doesn't take *that* much longer. Maybe creating a "warning" template simmilar to {{Summary2}} to remind admins of this might be in order.