George Herbert wrote:
Random idea to throw into pot:
We use AFD right now to cover a whole lot of different reasons by
which one might want to delete an article.
Possible improvement: Develop separate processes for each reason one
might have for deleting an article.
Some ideas along these lines:
Unreferenced and thought to be unreliable - something like Prod, with
a longer timeout, see if anyone will come along and provide suitable
refs, else it goes. Soft deletion (can be restored if someone comes
along with good refs)
Notability - still a sticking point.
(and so on)
I've favored something like this for a long time, even when it was still
called Votes for deletion. I figured it would be the most sensible way
to keep the process organized when the date pages became unmanageable.
Categories could have been a helpful tool in this regard, but instead
people have used them to group the deletion nominations by the subject
matter of the article. We could do both, I suppose.
This approach has several benefits. It requires people seeking deletion
of an article to figure out and articulate why they want it deleted,
which is sometimes done poorly or not at all. It also would allow those
who want to salvage worthwhile material to focus their efforts on the
justifications they find most problematic. Experience would further help
us better shape the acceptable grounds for deletion.