Note: THIS IS NOT YET A POLICY OF THE KONKANI WIKIPEDIA; this page on the speedy deletion policy of the English Wikipedia, and is being adapted for use as a deletion policy for the Konkani Wiki गोंयची कोंकणी / Gõychi Konknni.
There are several templates mentioned on this page for tagging pages for Quick Deletion. Please ignore all of these and only use {{QuickDelete}} to tag pages for Quick Deletion.
सांचो:Offer help
सांचो:Policy सांचो:Nutshell सांचो:Deletion policy list
The criteria for quick deletion specify the only cases in which administrators have broad consensus to bypass deletion discussion, at their discretion, and immediately delete Wikipedia pages or media. They cover only the cases specified in the rules here.
Deletion is reversible, but only by administrators, so other deletions occur only after discussion. Quick deletion is intended to reduce the time spent on deletion discussions for pages or media with no practical chance of surviving discussion.
Administrators should take care not to quick delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases. If a page has survived its most recent deletion discussion, it should not be quick deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations and pages that meet specific uncontroversial criteria; these criteria are noted below. Contributors sometimes create pages over several edits, so administrators should avoid deleting a page that appears incomplete too soon after its creation.
Anyone can request quick deletion by adding one of the quick deletion templates. Before nominating a page for quick deletion, consider whether it could be improved, reduced to a stub, merged or redirected elsewhere, reverted to a better previous revision, or handled in some other way. A page is eligible for quick deletion only if all of its revisions are also eligible. Users nominating a page for quick deletion should specify which criterion/criteria the page meets, and should notify the page creator and any major contributors.
The creator of a page may not remove a quick deletion tag from it. Only an editor who is not the creator of a page may do so. A creator who disagrees with the quick deletion should instead click on the सांचो:Button button that appears inside of the quick deletion tag. This button links to the discussion page with a pre-formatted area for the creator to explain why the page should not be deleted. However, if the sole author blanks a page (other than a userspace page or category page), this can be taken as a deletion request, and the blank page tagged for deletion with {{Db-blanked}} (see G7).
Besides quick deletion, there is Wikipedia:Requests for deletion, which is the normal method of carrying out deletion.
Abbreviations (G12, A3...) are often used to refer to these criteria, and are given in each section. For example, "QD G12" refers to criterion 12 under general (copyright infringement) and "QD U1" refers to criterion 1 under user (user request). These abbreviations can be confusing to new editors or anyone else unfamiliar with this page; in many situations a plain-English explanation of why a specific page was deleted is preferable.
Immediately following each criterion below is a list of templates used to mark pages or media files for quick deletion under the criterion being used. In order to alert administrators to the nomination, place the relevant quick deletion template at the top of the page or media file you are nominating (within <noinclude>...noinclude>
if nominating a Template: page); if the page is protected, place the template on the corresponding Talk page instead, along with an explanation of which page to delete. Please be sure to supply an edit summary that mentions that the page is being nominated for quick deletion. All of the quick deletion templates are named as "Db-X" with "Db" standing for "delete because". A list of the "Db-X" templates can be found at Wikipedia:Criteria for quick deletion/Deletion templates.
If a page falls under more than one of the criteria, instead of adding multiple tags it is possible to add a single {{Db-multiple}} tag to cover them all. For example, if an article seems both to be promotional (G11) and also to fail to indicate significance of its subject (A7) then the tag {{Db-multiple|G11|A7}}
can be used to indicate both of these concerns. Then the article can be quickly deleted if an administrator assesses it and decides that either or both of the criteria apply.
There is strong consensus that the creators and major contributors of pages and media files should be warned of a quick deletion nomination (or of the deletion if not informed prior thereto). All quick deletion templates (using criteria other than U1, G6, G7, and G8) thus contain in their body a pre-formatted, suggested warning template to notify the relevant party or parties of the nomination for quick deletion under the criterion used. You can copy and paste such warnings to the talk pages of the creators and major contributors, choose from others listed at Category:QD warning templates, or place the unified warning template, {{subst:QD-warn|csd|Page name}}
, which allows you to tailor your warning under any particular criterion by replacing csd
with the associated criterion abbreviation (e.g. g4, a7).
Use common sense when applying a quick deletion request to a page: review the page history to make sure that all prior revisions of the page meet the quick deletion criterion, because a single editor can replace an article with material that appears to cause the page to meet one or more of the criteria.
When applicable, the following criteria may be used to delete pages that have survived their most recent deletion discussions:
These criteria may only be used in such cases when no controversy exists; in the event of a dispute, start a new deletion discussion. However, newly discovered copyright violations should be tagged for G12 if the violation existed in all previous revisions of the article.
These apply to every type of page with exclusions listed for specific criteria, and so apply to articles, redirects, user pages, talk pages, files, etc. Read the specifics for each criterion to see where and how they apply.
This applies to pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history. It does not cover poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, implausible theories, vandalism or hoaxes, fictional material, coherent non-English material, or poorly translated material. Nor does it apply to user sandboxes or other pages in the user namespace. In short, if you can understand it, G1 does not apply.
This applies to pages created to test editing or other Wikipedia functions. It applies to subpages of the Wikipedia Sandbox created as tests, but does not apply to the Sandbox itself: it does not apply to pages in the user namespace, nor does it apply to valid but unused or duplicate templates (although criterion T3 may apply).
This applies to pages that are blatant and obvious misinformation, blatant hoaxes (including images intended to misinform), and redirects created by cleanup from page-move vandalism. Articles about notable hoaxes are acceptable if it is clear that they are describing a hoax.
This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion. It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies, and content that has been moved to user space or converted to a draft for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy). This criterion also does not cover content undeleted via a deletion review or quick deletion (although in that case the previous quick criterion, or other quick criteria, may apply).
This applies to pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and that have no substantial edits by others. G5 should not be applied to transcluded templates or to categories that may be useful or suitable for merging.
This is for uncontroversial maintenance, including:
|rationale=
parameter of the tag.
If requested in good faith and provided that the only substantial content to the page was added by its author. (For redirects created as a result of a page move, the mover must also have been the only substantive contributor to the pages prior to the move.) If the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page, a category page, or any type of talk page, this can be taken as a deletion request.
Examples of this criterion include talk pages with no corresponding subject page, subpages with no parent page, image pages without a corresponding image, redirects to invalid targets, such as non-existent targets, redirect loops, and bad titles, and categories populated by deleted or retargeted templates. It excludes any page that is useful to Wikipedia, and in particular deletion discussions that are not logged elsewhere, user pages, user talk pages, talk page archives (except article talk page archives where the corresponding article and main talk page have been deleted and the page is not otherwise useful to Wikipedia – check for page-moves and merges before using G8 on article-talk-page-archives, the parent article might still exist under a different name), plausible redirects that can be changed to valid targets, Articles for Creation drafts using the prefix Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/NAME, talk pages for images that exist on Wiki Commons, and pages that should be moved to a different location. Exceptions may be sign-posted with the template {{G8-exempt}}.
The Wiki Foundation office reserves the right to quickly delete a page temporarily in cases of exceptional circumstances. Deletions of this type must not be reversed without permission from the Foundation.
Examples of "attack pages" may include libel, legal threats, material intended purely to harass or intimidate a person or biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced. These pages should be quickly deleted when there is no neutral version in the page history to revert to. Both the page title and page content may be taken into account in assessing an attack. Articles about living people deleted under this criterion should not be restored or recreated by any editor until the biographical article standards are met. Redirects from plausible search terms are not eligible under this criterion. For example, a term used on the target page to refer to its subject is often a plausible redirect – see Wikipedia:RNEUTRAL.
This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text that complies with neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. Note: Any article that describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. However, "promotion" does not necessarily mean commercial promotion: anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc. See Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION for the policy on this.
This applies to text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a compatible free license, where there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. For equivocal cases that do not meet quick deletion criteria (such as where there is a dubious assertion of permission, where free-content edits overlie the infringement, or where there is only partial infringement or close paraphrasing), the article or the appropriate section should be blanked with {{subst:Copyvio}}, and the page should be listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Please consult Wikipedia:Copyright violations for other instructions. Public-domain and other free content, such as a Wikipedia mirror, do not fall under this criterion, nor is mere lack of attribution of such works a reason for quick deletion. For images and media, see the equivalent criterion in the "Files" section here, which has more specific instructions.
This applies to rejected or unsubmitted सांचो:Plainlinks that have not been edited in over six months (excluding bot edits). This criterion applies to all WikiProject Articles for creation drafts in project space and project talk space, as well as any userspace drafts and drafts in the Draft: namespace that are using the project's {{AFC submission}} template.
Note: Not all numbers are used as some criteria have been repealed.
This applies to articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Example: "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh." It applies only to very short articles. Note that context is different from content, treated in A3. Don't use this tag in the first few minutes after a new article is created. This excludes coherent {{Non-English}} material, and poorly translated material. If any information in the title or on the page, including links, allows an editor, possibly with the aid of a web search, to find further information on the subject in an attempt to expand or edit it, A1 is not appropriate.
This applies to articles having essentially the same content as an article on another Wiki project. If the article is not the same as an article on another project, use the template {{Not English}}
instead, and list the page at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English for review and possible translation.
This applies to articles (other than disambiguation pages, redirects, or soft redirects to Wiki sister projects) consisting only of external links, category tags and "See also" sections, a rephrasing of the title, attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, chat-like comments, template tags, and/or images. This may also apply to articles consisting entirely of the framework of the Article wizard with no additional content. However, a very short article may be a valid stub if it has context, in which case it is not eligible for deletion under this criterion. Similarly, this criterion does not cover a page having only an infobox, unless its contents also meet another quick deletion criterion. This criterion excludes poor writing, coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material. Don't use this tag in the first few minutes after a new article is created.
This applies to any article that consists only of a dictionary definition that has already been transwikied (e.g., to the Wiktionary), a primary source that has already been transwikied (e.g., to Wikisource), or an article on any subject that has been discussed at requests for deletion with an outcome to move it to another wiki, after it has been properly moved and the author information recorded.
This applies to any article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works. This criterion does not apply to species of animals, only to individual animal(s). The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, or list the article at requests for deletion.
This applies to any article about a musical recording or list of musical recordings where none of the contributing recording artists has an article and that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant (both conditions must be met). This is distinct from questions of verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion does not apply to other forms of creative media, products, or any other types of articles.
This applies to any recently created article with no relevant page history that duplicates an existing English Wikipedia topic, and that does not expand upon, detail or improve information within any existing article(s) on the subject, and where the title is not a plausible redirect. This does not include split pages or any article that expands or reorganizes an existing one or that contains referenced, mergeable material. It also does not include disambiguation pages. (When the new title is a reasonable term for the subject, converting the new article to a redirect may be preferable to deletion.)
This applies to any article that plainly indicates that the subject was invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and does not credibly indicate why its subject is important or significant. The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify under Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Note: This is not intended for hoaxes (see QD G3).
For any articles that are not quick deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Requests for deletion.
For redirects created by User:Neelix, see the "special note" in criterion G6.
Note: Not all numbers are included as some criteria have been repealed.
This applies to Redirects, apart from shortcuts, from the main namespace to any other namespace except the Category:, Template:, Wiki: , Help: and Portal namespaces.
This applies to recently created redirects from implausible typos or misnomers. However, redirects from common misspellings or misnomers are generally useful, as are sometimes redirects in other languages. This criterion does not apply to redirects created as a result of a page move. It also does not apply to articles and stubs that have been converted into redirects, including redirects created by merges, or to redirects ending with "(disambiguation)" that point to a disambiguation page.
For any redirects, including soft redirects, that are not quick deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. Redirect pages that have useful page history should never be quick deleted. In some cases it may be possible to make a useful redirect by changing the target instead of deleting it. Redirects that do not work because of software limitations, such as redirects to special pages or to pages on other wikis, may be converted to soft redirects if they have a non-trivial history or other valid uses.
For reversal of redirects, use {{Db-move}}
, a special case of {{Db-g6}}
.
For any categories that are not quick candidates, use Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.
Note: Not all numbers are used as some criteria have been repealed.
For any user pages that are not quick deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
Notes:
…
tags.
For any templates that are not quick deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.
For any portals that are not quick deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
विकिपीडिया चर्चा:Criteria for quick deletion/Common requests
The following are not by themselves sufficient to justify quick deletion.
Make sure to specify the reason for deletion in the deletion summary. Also, in general the article's creator and major contributors should have been notified.
Before deleting a page, check the page history to assess whether it would instead be possible to revert and salvage a previous version, or there was actually a cut-and-paste move involved. Also:
सांचो:Quick deletion navbox सांचो:Wikipedia community
This article uses material from the Wikipedia गोंयची कोंकणी / Gõychi Konknni article विकिपीडिया:Quick deletion, which is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license ("CC BY-SA 3.0"); additional terms may apply (view authors). हातूंतलो मजकूर CC BY-SA 4.0च्या अंतर्गत उपलब्ध आसा जे मेरेन हेर नोंदी करूक नात. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
®Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wiki Foundation, Inc. Wiki गोंयची कोंकणी / Gõychi Konknni (DUHOCTRUNGQUOC.VN) is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wiki Foundation.