Wikipedia:Speedy keep

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
This is a deletion guideline on entire articles. For the editing policy about keeping information in an article, see
WP:PRESERVE
.
"WP:KEEP" redirects here. For any comments used as just "keep", see Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions.
"WP:SK" redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:WikiProject Slovakia or Wikipedia:WikiProject Saskatchewan.

Speedy keep is the process of closing deletion discussions with a result of "speedy keep" before the normal discussion period ends, but without unlisting or deleting the actual discussion. This guideline applies only to "speedy keep" closures; the criteria for speedy deletion cover the circumstances under which pages may be deleted immediately.

Applicability

Shortcuts

Reasons for a speedy keep decision are:

  1. Absence of delete rationale. Normally the nominator will provide grounds for deletion in the delete rationale, but if (a) the nominator withdraws the nomination, perhaps because of improvements to the article that happen during the AfD, or (b) the nominator failed to give intelligible grounds for content deletion (i.e. arguments that would support deletion, userfying or redirection, perhaps only proposing an alternative action such as moving or merging) and no new delete rationale appears in the deletion discussion.
    deletion review, fixing errors in the nomination process, or if a user stated a page should be deleted on a talk page without actually nominating it.
  2. If the nomination would otherwise qualify for close to speedy redirect
then suggestions to redirect the page are treated the same as moving or merging.
  • Where the nominator withdraws their nomination, check whether other editors still recommend a delete or redirect outcome before speedily closing. If a good-faith editor in good standing recommends delete or redirect, the AfD should not be speedily closed using this ground.
  • The nomination was unquestionably made for the purposes of vandalism or disruption and, since questionable motivations on the part of the nominator do not have a direct bearing on the validity of the nomination, no uninvolved editor has recommended deletion or redirection as an outcome of the discussion. For example:
    1. obviously
      dispute resolution
      is a more appropriate course
  • The nomination is completely erroneous. No accurate deletion rationale has been provided.
  • The nominator was
    db-banned}} and speedily deleted as a banned contribution. However, if subsequent editors added substantive comments in good faith before the nominator's blocked or banned status was discovered, the nomination may not be speedily closed[2]
    (though the nominator's opinion will be discounted in the closure decision).
  • The page is a policy or guideline. The deletion processes are not a forum for revoking policy.
  • The page/image is currently linked from the
    WP:ERRORS
    to remove the link before nominating for deletion.

    • If a page is nominated for deletion on the wrong forum (for example, a template on

    MfD), the misplaced discussion may be procedurally closed
    and the page renominated on the correct forum, with the original nomination, and any comments made so far, copied over to the new nomination. The closing comment should indicate where the discussion has been moved. This does not strictly count as a speedy keep, since the page still remains nominated for deletion.

    Please realize that while you may personally dislike having a deletion tag on your favorite article/template/image/etc, the harm it does is minimal, and either the article or the tag will be gone in around a week. Also be aware that the speedy keep criteria, particularly the first three, are not to be used to express strong disapproval of the nomination: a rationale that you don't agree with is still an argument for deletion, is not necessarily vexatious, and does not imply the nominator has neglected to read the page.

    What is not a speedy-keep

    The "

    Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy
    " as opposed to a specific set of guidelines. For that reason, "snow closes" may be controversial and additional care is warranted. Though the two may seem similar, closes under the snowball clause should never be closed as "speedy keep."

    Notes

    1. ^ An example of this includes posting a nomination in response to a proposed deletion but advocating a keep position. (If you want to record a rationale for the PROD-tag removal, see Wikipedia:Proposed deletion § Objecting.)
    2. ^ Unless all such comments support keeping the article, in which case the discussion may be closed as a speedy keep.

    When closing a debate as speedy-keep

    When a discussion is closed as a speedy-keep, close the debate as you would a

    here
    .

    See also

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Speedy_keep&oldid=1247587914"