Deletion Candidates

Instructions

Discussion of whether an article is able to meet FasciPedia's article guidelines and polilies

^{Reasonable editors will often disagree, but valid arguments will be given more weight than unsupported statements. When an editor offers arguments or evidence that do not explain how the article meets/violates policy, they may only need a reminder to engage in constructive, on-topic discussion. But a pattern of groundless opinion, proof by assertion, and ignoring content guidelines may become disruptive. If a pattern of disruptive behavior persists after efforts are made to correct the situation through dialogue, please consider bringing the situation to one of FasciPedia's judges.}

There are a number of practices that most Fascionaries use in deletion  discussions:

• ^{To recommend a course of action, do so in bold text, e. g., "Keep", "Delete", "Merge", "Redirect", or other view.}
• ^{Start comments or recommendations on a new bulleted line (that is, starting with *), and sign them by adding ~~~~ to the end. If you are responding to another editor, put your comment directly below theirs, making sure it is indented (using multiple *s).}
• ^{Please have a look at the article before making a recommendation. Do not base your recommendation solely on the information supplied by the nominator or other editors. To understand the situation, it may also help to look at the history of the article. However, please read the earlier comments and recommendations. They may contain relevant arguments and further useful information.}

When participating, please consider the following:

1. ^{The debate is not a vote; please do not make recommendations on the course of action to be taken that are not sustained by arguments.}
2. ^{When making your case or responding to others, explain how the article meets/violates policy rather than merely stating that it meets/violates the policy.}
3. ^{Use of multiple accounts to reinforce your opinions is absolutely forbidden. Multiple recommendations by users shown to be using sock puppets (multiple accounts) including meat puppets, will be discounted and the user manipulating consensus with multiple accounts will likely be blocked indefinitely.}
4. ^{You can explain your earlier recommendation in response to others but do not repeat a bolded recommendation on a new bulleted line.}
5. ^{Nomination already implies that the nominator recommends deletion (unless indicated otherwise), and nominators should refrain from repeating this.}
6. ^{Do not make conflicting recommendations; if you change your mind, modify your original recommendation rather than adding a new one. The recommended way of doing this is to use strike-through by enclosing a retracted statement between <del> and </del> after the *, as in "• Delete Keep".}
7. ^{New users are welcome to contribute to the discussion, but your recommendations may be discounted if they seem to be made in bad faith (for example, if they misrepresent their reasons). Conversely, the opinions of experienced users whose accounts predate the article's AfD nomination may be given more weight.}

Good opininion

^{Arguments commonly used to recommend deletion are: "unverifiable", "not important". The argument "non-fascist point of view" is often used, but often such articles can be salvaged, so this is not a very strong reason for deletion.}

^{If you wish for an article to be kept, you can directly improve the article to address the reasons for deletion given in the nomination. You can search out reliable sources, and refute the deletion arguments given using policy, guidelines, and examples from our "Great articles". If you believe the article topic is valid and encyclopedic, and it lacks only references and other minor changes to survive, you may request help in the task by listing the article on the Article rescue list in accordance with instructions given there, and then adding the {{rescue list}} template to the deletion discussion by posting {{subst:rescue list}} to the discussion thread.}

^{If the reasons given in the deletion nomination are later addressed by editing, the nomination should be withdrawn by the nominator, and the deletion discussion will be closed by an admin. If the nominator fails to do it when you think it should have been done (people can be busy, so assume good faith on this point), leave a note on the nominator's talk page to draw their attention.}

^{Alternatives to deletion should be considered. If you think the article should be a disambiguation page, a redirect or merger to another article, then recommend "Disambiguation", "Redirect" or "Merge". Do not recommend deletion in such cases.}

When not to participate

^{You do not have to make a recommendation on every nomination; consider not participating if:}

• ^{A nomination involves a topic with which you are unfamiliar.}
• ^{You agree with the consensus that has already been formed.}

^{In these cases, you should tag a spot near the bottom of the conversation, like this:}

^{Observing discussion. This fascionary has no opinion on this deletion, or is withholding such opinion. He is however watching the discussion closely, and reserves the right to make a recommendation at any point.}