Wikipedia:Using deletion as cleanup
This is an essay on Wikipedia:Deletion process. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
This page in a nutshell: If an article is a mess and you suspect it to be non-notable, send it to AfD or other similar deletion procedure. Merely the fact that an article could possibly be deleted is enough for some editors to expand it. Prods can always be withdrawn; AfDs can be withdrawn if no other editors have voted "delete". |
In my experience, the threat of deletion often results in some amount of cleanup being done to the article. For example, my AfD nomination for
In other words, while the proper purpose of the Articles for Deletion process is to list articles that shouldn't be on the site, it does work as an effective method of cleaning up messes. For example, if the author is unresponsive, is inactive or otherwise handicapped in improving the article (such as due to poor command of English), the article should be sent to AfD. The same applies for articles that have had lots of {{
In some cases someone can just point out the fact that there is no reason for the article to be deleted and the nomination can be withdrawn, but simply knowing that an article is being considered for deletion is enough to spur some editors on to expand the article. For example, within an hour of me prodding Mark Brydon, the article was vastly improved with six references.
Remember with some messes, it is better that the article be
...but please do WP:BEFORE checks!
Go through the page history and check its "discussion history"; has it been prodded, was it AfDd and if so what was the consensus.
In addition, it is considered good practice to notify the article creator about the discussion as
Unreferenced articles
The
Articles with an unsatisfactory claim to notability
If the article is CSD/AfD borderline, CSD it. If nothing else, it causes the editor to add references and expand.
See also
- WP:TNT(for truly horrible articles)
- WP:DINC, which disagrees with this essay
- Wikipedia:Deletion to Quality Award