On 9/21/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm starting to think that maybe we should
just leave everything in that
isn't immediately speediable, let things be merged and redirected at the
will of the people, and finally let Wikipedia 1.0 sort it all out.
I don't think that's a good idea. The speedy criteria are purposely
limited to specific cases. Most people won't argue the fact there's
definitely articles in existence that should clearly be deleted, but
don't fit a particular speedy criterion because we couldn't come to an
agreeable phrasing of such a criterion.
I agree that we still need to delete hoax entries and copyright violations.
Copyvios are fairly straightforward. We list the article and its source for
a few days and then delete it, replacing with the rewrite if one has been
made in the meantime. AfD is not involved in this unless a copyvio occurs
during the discussion.
There is no reason why hoaxes should not be treated in a similar manner.
They're quite rare.
A highly unscientific survey I just carried out suggests that non-notability
is the most frequent reason given by the nominators of AfDs, "gamecruft" the
next. Neither of these is a reason for deletion; they can be dealt with by
redirects and merges.
ads can usually be dealt with by deleting the promotional material within
the article.