Forum:AfD revamp

The Articles for Deletion page gets into a real mess when it's not tended to. It took me about 45 minutes to close and archive it, because it got in such a mess. For an idea look here → Call of Duty Wiki:Articles for Deletion/Archive 9

So, I think we should format Articles for Deletion in the same way as requests for adminiship, it would make everything so much easier to vote on, close, and archive. Putting it straight to a vote... comments can go in the comments section.

I made a prototype page here. Also, check out the quick nominate button on that page, it should make your lives easier should this "complex" redesign go through.

Support
19:52, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Even though I think the idea's overcomplex for something which should be comparatively simple, it's the lesser of two evils. YuriKaslov 19:53, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

20:09, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * How is it more simple than say, RfAs? You're still simply providing a vote... it's exactly the same procedure. --Callofduty4 20:12, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Because you can just put in a new heading and write your reasoning. Whereas, you need to create a subpage, navigate back and forth, and add links to the main AfD page anyway. The voting is only 1/3rd the process. YuriKaslov 20:13, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well that will encourage people to think through their AfDs first, rather than just posting one of the top of their heads. 20:54, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * But it could also have the reciprocal effect of making people not nominate articles that actually need to be deleted. YuriKaslov 20:55, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well that would just be laziness on their part then. 20:56, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

 Shotrocket6  Talk 02:42, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose
Far too complicated for what should be a simple(ish) process. Sgt. S.S. 20:24, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Are you seriously going to oppose this because it's "too complicated"? Quit being lazy and do something which makes an improvement. All this is, is voting. RfAs are on separate pages, and that's just voting as well! I can even make a box where you type in a page, click submit, and it makes the page for you, if you're going to be so lazy and frankly disrespectful to oppose this because it makes something a million times better at the expense of being slightly more complex. --Callofduty4 20:33, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * What if, rather than voting, I want to start an AfD of my own? Why should I have to go through the long, tedious process of making a subpage, laying out the code so the subpage appears on the RfA page, and link all that to the article I want deleted, instead of making a simple subheading? Sgt. S.S. 21:08, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * It would encourage you to actually think over the AfD rather than just posting it after one quick thought. 21:10, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * I can still think over an AfD with the current system, and I always do think over an AfD. Your point? Sgt. S.S. 21:13, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * While you may, there are many other users who hang around in the AfD page who may not. 21:16, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * So? If they want to make a rubbish nomination and embarrass themselves, that's their prerogative. Sgt. S.S. 21:18, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * "So?" isn't a valid argument. It shouldn't be such an inconvenience that it causes you to drop what you're doing altogether, if it does the AfD mustn't be that important. And they're more than welcome to do so. 21:21, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

--Scottie theNerd 10:20, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

 * Nice changes, thankyou. --Callofduty4 02:46, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

--Scottie theNerd 10:29, February 15, 2011 (UTC)