Editing Dwarf Fortress Wiki talk:Deletion Policy

== Current Rules for Deletion ==

Here's the current rules we have, with references. I'll start attempting to move all this to the regular page, but I figured people might like to know I'm not pulling this stuff out of my ass.

[[Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki:Community_Portal#E|One]]: Eliminate fluff. This includes redirects that aren't linked to and wouldn't be typed in the search box. The {{[[Template:deletion|deletion]]}} template is your friend. 

[[Template:Deletion|Two]]: This page is marked for deletion. Reasons could include a nonsense title, superfluous information, irrelevant/lack of material or the article could be outdated/duplicated.

[[Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki:Community_Portal#I|Three]]: Images and [[screenshot]]s should use the default [[tilesets]] for clarity. Exceptions are pages ''about'' tilesets and story pages like [[:Category:Bloodline Games|bloodline games]]. ''This implies images that do not use the default tileset, and are not one of the exeptions, should be deleted.''

[[Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki:Community_Portal#O|Four]]: Original research is good! Forget what you've seen on That Other Wiki; personal experience is perfectly fine here. ''On several wikis a page based in original research could be deleted, so this deserves at least a mention.''

[[Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki:Community_Portal#W|Five]]:Wit can be hard to recognise once it has been written down. It is best if it is used on clearly humour or story related pages, talk or user pages, but kept to a minimum in fact-based articles like [[Dwarf]] or [[Summer]]. ''Humourous pages are not worthy for deletion, but humour should be kept confined. This is a fairly important distinction.''

Anyway, as for tools for deletion, there's already the {{[[Template:deletion|deletion]]}} template, and the [[Category:Pages_that_break_Community_Portal_rules|Pages that break Community Portal rules]] template. Obviously they should be included in the page.

If I'm missing anything, feel free to clue me in. Just don't tell me about rules we should have, only rules we already have. --[[User:SenorPwnage|Señor Pwnage]] 21:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 [[Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki:Community_Portal#W|Five]]:Wit can be hard to recognise once it has been written down. It is best if it is used on clearly humour or story related pages, talk or user pages, but kept to a minimum in fact-based articles like [[Dwarf]] or [[Summer]]. ''Humourous pages are not worthy for deletion, but humour should be kept confined. This is a fairly important distinction.''
-Anyway, as for tools for deletion, there's already the {{[[Template:deletion|deletion]]}} template, and the <nowiki>[[Category:Pages_that_break_Community_Portal_rules]]</nowiki> category. Obviously they should be included in the page.
+Anyway, as for tools for deletion, there's already the {{[[Template:deletion|deletion]]}} template, and the [[Category:Pages_that_break_Community_Portal_rules|Pages that break Community Portal rules]] template. Obviously they should be included in the page.
 If I'm missing anything, feel free to clue me in. Just don't tell me about rules we should have, only rules we already have. --[[User:SenorPwnage|Señor Pwnage]] 21:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
-:Well, I tried to make a page based on what we had so far, so that we'd have something more than the current placeholder. Hopefully this will be alright until we've got everything finalized. --[[User:SenorPwnage|Señor Pwnage]] 23:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
-::Good job!--[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 03:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
-:::It sounds good to me, but I'd like to suggest that we replace images that don't use the default tilesets, rather than just deleting them right away and maybe allow alternate images.  Honestly, any of the major graphical tilesets are more readable to me than the ANSI, and I play all my other roguelikes in ASCII or ANSI.  [[User:Uristocrat|Uristocrat]] 04:14, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
-== Deletion of outdated pages ==
- Outdated Information: If it's outdated - update it. Keep the wiki up to date.
- Pages based entirely in outdated information may qualify for deletion.
-If a page is needed, but 100% of the content is outdated, it should be rewritten, or perhaps blanked, rather than deleted. ''(And we might soon need a new special template to call attention to those!)''  If deleted, then the loss may not be noted. However, if the premise of the page is outdated (such as will happen with many current concepts when [[Dwarf Fortress 2010|DF 2010]] is released), then - yes - those should be tossed off the fire escape with full military honours.  (Altho', even then, the organization/formatting of the page may lend itself to its successors - they should be marked, but the deletion itself should not be over hasty, just as currently is done.) --[[User:Albedo|Albedo]] 03:04, 24 February 2010 (UTC)