Uncyclopedia talk:Deletion Policy
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Deletion Policy page. | ||
|---|---|---|
|
||
| This article was nominated for deletion on March 13, 2006.
The result of the discussion was Keep.
|
|||
Rewrite
- I recently created a page (Thee) and 3 editors said that it was too short to keep, even though it passed all 6 tests. I made it longer and the complaints were all rescinded. Should we add a 7th test to the Deletion Policy that requires articles to be of a certain length? --Tom Veil 20:00, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Whoa, There's a Discussion Page Here
Tom - this may be a month or so too late, but these are general guidelines based on my 4+ months of experience at VFD. These rules (or 'tests' as you put it) are ignorable - it's not official Uncyclopedia policy. It's more common sense, really. — 
2ND LT. Sir Edward, Grizzly of Wild KUN VFH FP (Oh my God! Grizzly Bear! Nooooo!) 13:25, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Is your article on VFD?
If your article has been listed for deletion, then I can help. Many times, people write stuff, and it is put on VFD, consciously or not, because it looks bad. I can fix grammar and spelling in your article if you want. Just leave a post on my talk page, along with a link to the article, and I can proofread it. Thank you. --goshzillacorrespondence 23:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Unpopulated professions
I made a list of unpopulated professions (=you= try finding a pediatric gerontologist) but it had vanished in 24 hours. It may have not been a sidesplitter, but it was funnier than most poop jokes. Is there some kind of repressed hostility rule about lists here? Denni 02:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- In HTBFANJS, there's a clause that reads, and I quote, "Unadorned lists are not funny." I'll restore the article to your userspace, where you can expand on it in the style of any Worst 100 list on this site that you care to name. —The Right Honourable Major Sir Hinoa KUN UmP UotM Bur MDA NS CM (talk) 02:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for the speedy response. n00b error. sorry. Denni 03:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Protection
I think that all policy pages should be AT LEAST semi-protected. --Riking 23:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Abuse of VFD for repeated submissions without reading the deletion policy
Too many pages keep being resubmitted to VFD, I feel this is a waste of time and energy. I thought there was a policy that prevented that, from what I had read on the forum. A lot of articles that keep being resubmitted to VFD seem like all they need is a rewrite or fixing up or some editing to make them funnier. Most users seem to forget the Deletion Policy or ignore it, and just submit any article they don't like to VFD, even if it was submitted before once or twice or more, and the vote was to keep it. Since VFD's list is limited, it is a waste of time and energy to keep resubmitting deletion survivors to VFD. There needs to be room reserved for articles that really deserve VFD, and not ones that obviously can be fixed. --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 04:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- If you spot an article that's been re-nominated without a good reason for re-nomination, i.e. the page or circumstances have changed, then put a comment on it saying so and it'll probably be removed. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 00:51, 05 May 2008
Protection
Page protected at admin level. --
RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:18, December 30, 2017 (UTC)