Template talk:Delete

Candidates for Deletion

I don't think a page reserved for deletion candidates and the discussion surrounding them is really necessary in a wiki this small. There's just not enough articles to warrant dealing with them on anything but an individual basis. It's just a lot of administrative overhead that most people aren't even aware of and I don't see why the discussion can't just take place on the talk page. Agree, disagree? (Ironically, this discussion could result in the potential deletion of SmashWiki:Candidates for deletion!) --RJM ^Talk 21:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I think this is a good idea. It's confusing having to look at both the talk page for an article and at the other page to determine what should or shouldn't be deleted. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 22:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. However, there does need to be a page somewhere (I'm not sure if there is) listing what makes an article of deletion quality. It could be as specific or as non-specific as wanted. --Sky (t · c · w) 22:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Reason for deletion

I move to remove the "reason for deletion" in this template (and, eventually, all others). Reasons for deletion (or cleanup, etc.) provided through the template are often terse and sometimes unsightly, with editors exhibiting poor spelling/grammar or writing something that for some reason would be better off on a talk page rather than an article's main page. Since deletion tags are not supposed to be removed until consensus is reached and the discussion is closed, such text must remain for the duration of the discussion (yes, someone could potentially edit it, but that might be considered improper). In addition, the one reason that may be cited in the template may or may not be a valid or prominent reason to delete an article, regardless of whether or not the suggested action is reasonable.

The other major problem is that when editors add a delete tag with their reason within the template, it puts the burden on everyone else to start the talk page discussion, since (in my experience) nominators frequently do not argue their case in any greater detail on the talk page (or at all). This seems silly, as the onus of starting the discussion should be on the person proposing deletion, and it makes the ensuing talk page discussion more difficult to follow after the tag has been removed. I think anyone who adds a deletion/merge/cleanup/similar tag should be required to post their reasoning on the talk page (or as otherwise directed), or else any other user may simply remove the tag without comment. You can't argue against a case that isn't made, and it's unreasonable to expect people to actively defeat deletion proposals when the person proposing deletion won't even enter the discussion.

This is a pretty wordy way of making my point, and I could probably name some other reasons, but in short: adding deletion reasons to the delete tag is a bad idea. --Kirby King 05:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Sounds fair to me. Even I'm guillty of not telling the complete story when tagging things for deletion, but to put the onus of starting a discussion on the "tagger" is probably a good idea. I still feel that there's obviously some room for discretion (i.e. we don't need to open a discussion and reach consensus to delete an article on MuppetSmasher's Infinite Team Super Sudden Death Falcon Punch Combo) but I suppose that's what "speedy deletion" is for. --RJM ^Talk 14:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Legitimate reasons — it's unfortunate that template:d doesn't get a fair bit more use, as that's usually how most of the deletions can be handled on a wiki of this size. --Sky (t · c · w) 17:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Reasoning

When did having to think become depreciated and need to be removed? --Shadowcrest 23:36, 20 October 2008 (UTC)