MeritBadgeDotOrg:Guide to deletion

From MeritBadgeDotOrg

Revision as of 11:52, March 27, 2008 by Scouterdennis (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ←Older revision | Current revision (diff) | Newer revision→ (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
This page documents an official MeritBadgeDotOrg policy, an accepted standard that all users should follow. Before editing a page, please make sure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page of the article in question.
This page in a nutshell:
  • Deletion and undeletion are performed by administrators based on policy and guidelines, not personal likes and dislikes
  • There are four processes for deleting items, and one post-deletion review process
  • Pages that can be improved should be edited or tagged, not nominated for deletion
  • The MeritBadgeDotOrg deletion policy describes how pages which do not meet the relevant content criteria are identified and removed from Wikipedia.

    Reasons for deletion include but are not limited to violation of copyright, content that does not belong in an encyclopedia, content not verifiable in a reliable source, and unreferenced negative content in biographies of living persons.

    Deletion of a Wikipedia article removes the current version and all previous versions from view. Unlike page blanking, which can be performed (or reverted) by any user, deletion can be performed only by administrators. Administrators can also view deleted pages and reverse ("undelete") any deletion. All such actions are logged.


    Alternatives to deletion


    If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion. A variety of tags can be added to articles to note the problem. These are listed here. Some of the more common ones include

    • {{cleanup}} for poor writing
    • {{npov}} for bias
    • {{stub}} for a short article
    • {{unreferenced}} for lack of verifiability
    • {{merge}} for a small article which could be merged into a larger one.

    Pages with an incorrect name can simply be renamed via page movement procedure. Disputes over the name are discussed on the talk page.

    Vandalism to a page's content can be reverted by any user.


    If two pages are duplicates or otherwise redundant, one should be merged and redirected to the other, using the most common, or more general page name. This does not require process or formal debate beforehand.


    Disputes over page content are not dealt with by deleting the page. Likewise, disagreement over a policy or guideline is not dealt with by deleting it. Similarly, issues with an inappropriate user page can often be resolved through discussion with the user.

    The content issues should be discussed at the relevant talk page, and other methods of dispute resolution should be used first, such as requesting comments for further input. Deletion discussions that are really unresolved content disputes may be closed by an administrator, and referred to the talk page or other appropriate forum.

    Other projects

    Articles that can never be other than a dictionary article can be merged as above.


    Deletion should not be used for archiving a page. The developers have indicated that the deleted pages can be cleared or removed from the database at any time.

    Reasons for deletion

    Reasons for deletion include, but are not limited to, the following:

    • Advertising or other spam without relevant content (but not an article about an advertising related subject)
    • Content not suitable for an encyclopedia
    • Content forks
    • Copyright infringement
    • Hoax articles (but not articles describing a notable hoax)
    • Images that are unused, obsolete, violate fair-use policy, or are unencyclopedic
    • Inappropriate user pages
    • Inflammatory redirects
    • Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources
    • Article for which all attempts to find reliable sources to verify it have failed
    • Articles about newly-coined words or terms (i.e. neologisms) not supported by reliable sources.
    • Overcategorization
    • Patent nonsense or gibberish
    • Redundant templates
    • Subject fails to meet the relevant notability guideline (WP:N, WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, WP:CORP and so forth)
    • Vandalism that is not correctable
    Personal tools