Deleted Unless Defended

I want to delete this page. I can't find backlinks, and it doesn't seem to have much content. But I'm a wuss and don't want to go deleting things willy-nilly; they may be more relevant than I realize. Using this tag says 'I don't think this is useful, and I will delete the content unless somebody tells me otherwise. However, if you wish to keep the content, I'm just as happy'.

Should this be changed to DeleteUnlessDefended? to put it in line with other deletion tags such as DeleteNoContent and DeletedButWelcomeToWiki? Or is the extra "d" more of a WabiSabi thing?

This might also be another case (like AreYouThere) where breaking the WikiRule? of not dating edits might be of use for the benefit of the WikiGnomes. Something like:

: DeletedUnlessDefended, as of 28 August 2003

Some of the WikiGnomes are getting a little huffy about the proliferation of WikiBadges, but I like this one. It's a good way to avoid EditWars.

WikiShouldDoWhatItDoesBest.

I'm glad you like it. I've lurked the Wiki for about two or three months. Two weeks ago, I took the plunge and started some good-natured deleting and editing. Then I found out I still had very much to learn about Wiki. Among other things, I wasn't correctly finding out how many other pages linked to the pages I was deleting. So I created this badge sort of as a way of saying 'I would delete the page this appears on, but I'm not experience enough yet to be sure I'm doing the right thing.

Sometimes I wish I could AdoptaWikiMentor?.

I know they've been pretty much deprecated, but OneMinuteWiki had a number of sequels: OneDayWiki, OneWeekWiki, OneMonthWiki, OneYearWiki, and OneDecadeWiki, that (somewhat facetiously) talked about the progress from first pageview to WikiMaster, and suggestions for what you should try to do at each step. Your experience sounds a lot like these pages.

I have started to put DeletedUnlessDefended tags, most often on OnTopic pages. My intentions are to come back to do the actual deletes later on, say a month's time. Yes links will be examined, and in at least one case I have put a AreYouThere tag on the authors homepage.

I have found in at least one instance the marked page has subsequently changed, and the tag removed. This is good too as it meant the page has got a renewal certificate from somebody.

Wish we can have a way to search for pages that have been inactive for a long time, and then draw attention of these pages to the rest of the community for renew/update/delete.

What about good pages that go undefended? Some people might not even see a page.

Some good pages are not defended, but there are still some checks and balances. One is that any change brings it to RecentChanges, and provided there are no EditWars going on, then hopefully more people of varying background will have a tendency to open up to have a look. Second point is there is no need to delete the marked pages. If a page has lots of good content, maybe a different tag (e.g. WhatHappened) would have been applied. And even if the DeletedUnlessDefended tag is set, it does not have to be deleted in a month. I keep a separate list of pages I have set DeletedUnlessDefended, some of which I may not want to action in a month. If over a reasonably period of time a page is not defended by ANYBODY, then what is the purpose of that page?

The example given was for an on-topic page that talked about an "upcoming" event - that had occurred two years ago. DeletedUnlessDefended means, "it looks like this page is stale... anyone care if I get rid of it?"

[suggestion from banned individual that this WikiBadge is silly]

Quite agree. It puts the burden of "proof of validity" on whomever is currently on Wiki. Kind of reminds me of "guilty until proven innocent". What happens if current users are ignorant of a page's topic or concept?

As a rule, contributors to Wiki don't edit pages on topics unfamiliar to them. Very few (if any) valuable pages have ever been marked DeletedUnlessDefended.