Wikipedia deletion policy explained

What is Wikipedia's deletion policy?

It is the English Wikipedia policy that describes how pages which do not meet the encyclopedia's standards are identified and removed, and how those decisions can be reversed. The policy covers articles, drafts, files, templates, categories and other pages, though this guide concentrates on articles about people and organisations.

A few principles run through it. Deleting a page removes its current version and all earlier versions from public view. Any user can blank a page, but only administrators can delete one, view deleted pages or undelete them, and each deletion and restoration is written to the public deletion log. When administrators are in doubt about whether there is consensus to delete, they will not normally do so.

The policy sits at the top of a group of pages. The detailed rules for each process live on their own pages: the criteria for speedy deletion, the proposed deletion policy, the Articles for Deletion instructions, the deletion process guideline used by closers, and the pages for deletion review and undeletion. This guide maps how they fit together and links to our more detailed guides for each.

What are the reasons for deleting a Wikipedia page?

The policy gives a list of reasons, which it says is not exhaustive, with one overriding condition: if improving the page or deleting the offending section is practical, that is preferable to deleting the whole page. For articles about people and organisations, the reasons that come up most often are these:

The policy is equally clear about what is not a reason. It is inappropriate to request deletion because of an editorial dispute, which should go through dispute resolution, and an article on a notable subject with too many unverifiable or non-neutral claims may be reduced to a stub instead of deleted. Our guide Why was my Wikipedia page deleted? explains how to read the reason recorded for a particular deletion.

What are Wikipedia's deletion processes?

The policy describes four basic processes for deletion and two for reviewing and overturning deletions. For articles, the three that matter day to day are speedy deletion, proposed deletion and deletion discussion. Copyright problems have their own handling, which overlaps with speedy deletion for blatant cases.

A newer variant applies where the community has found that an editor misused AI tools. Under the guideline on presumptive removal of AI-generated content, articles where that editor is the only significant contributor can be put through a special proposed deletion known as LLMPROD, and their other edits can be reverted without review.

The detail of each process is in our guides to proposed and speedy deletion and to Articles for Deletion.

How do the deletion processes interact?

Through a short set of precedence rules in the policy. They explain many outcomes that otherwise look inconsistent:

• A deletion discussion takes precedence over proposed deletion, so a page listed on both is decided by the discussion.
• Pages that meet a speedy deletion criterion can be deleted regardless of other processes, and if a page under discussion is speedily deleted, the discussion closes.
• If there is doubt about whether a page qualifies for speedy deletion, a discussion takes precedence. In practice a page kept, or closed as no consensus, at a deletion discussion should not then be speedily deleted, apart from a few exempt criteria such as newly discovered copyright violations.
• Once anyone objects to a proposed deletion, the page can never be proposed for deletion again. Any further attempt has to go to a discussion.
• After a discussion ends in keep or no consensus, a reasonable amount of time should pass before the page is nominated again. Quick renominations are generally closed, and repeated nominations in the hope of a different result can be treated as disruptive.
• Pages nominated through the wrong process are simply moved to the right one.

How are deletion discussions decided?

By consensus judged on policy, not by counting votes. The deletion policy says these discussions are not decided by a head count, and asks participants to explain their opinions and refer to policy. A discussion lasts at least seven full days, after which an administrator, or in some cases an experienced editor, assesses it and closes it.

The deletion process guideline adds the mechanics. A discussion with few participants or little policy-based argument can be relisted for another week, and in general should not be relisted more than twice. If there is no rough consensus to delete, the page is kept. A nomination that attracts very few comments can be closed as a soft deletion, which deletes the page but allows it to be restored on request.

Two adjustments apply to biographies. Where a relatively unknown person who is not a public figure has asked for their biography to be deleted and there is no clear consensus to keep it, the discussion may be closed as delete. And the policy says it is inappropriate to bring in people from outside Wikipedia to sway a discussion: such comments may be ignored, and may be tagged as coming from accounts with few or no other edits. Our guide to who decides Wikipedia deletions looks at the people involved.

What are the alternatives to deletion?

Editing, tagging, merging, redirecting, moving to draft and partial removal. The policy's starting point is that if editing can address every reason given for deletion, it should be done instead of deleting the page.

• Editing and discussion. Content disputes are handled on the talk page and through dispute resolution, not by deletion, except in severe cases.
• Tagging. Maintenance tags flag problems for others to fix. The policy says they are not meant as permanent solutions, and notes that some, such as the notability tag on a biography, are known to prompt complaints from the subject. Our guide to maintenance tags covers them.
• Merging. Short articles unlikely to grow can be merged into a larger article. Merging needs no formal process.
• Redirection. A page can be blanked and redirected to a suitable target. If that is disputed, the policy says consensus should be sought, preferably at the deletion discussion venue for the content.
• Moving to draft. Recently created articles with potential can be moved to the draft space. The policy says this must not be used as a back door to deletion, and that articles older than about 90 days should not be moved without agreement at a deletion discussion. Drafts left unedited for six months become eligible for speedy deletion.
• Partial removal. Copyright problems can often be cured by removing or rewriting the copied material, which must happen as soon as it is noticed.

For a subject facing deletion now, our guide on how to stop a Wikipedia page being deleted covers which of these to propose and when.

How are deletions reviewed or reversed?

Through a conversation with the deleting administrator, then either requests for undeletion or deletion review, depending on how the page was deleted. The policy says to start with the administrator who deleted the page or closed the discussion, on their talk page.

An administrator may also restore a page that was plainly deleted outside the policy, though the policy cautions that doing so without consensus can be seen as disruptive. A page overturned at deletion review can still be nominated for a discussion by anyone who wants it deleted. The practical steps are in our guide to restoring a deleted Wikipedia page.

What happens to a page's history after deletion?

It is hidden from the public but not destroyed. The policy explains that deleted pages cannot be viewed generally, because many contain defamatory or legally doubtful material, but they remain in the database and are accessible to administrators with their full history. Only oversight, a stronger form of deletion, removes material from administrators' view as well.

Someone with a genuine reason to see a deleted page can request a temporary review or ask an administrator for a copy. The policy warns that these requests are likely to be refused if the page was deleted on legal grounds, such as defamation or copyright, or if no good reason is given.

The discussion that led to a deletion is a different matter. Deletion discussions stay public and are archived at a fixed address. Only in rare cases, where public view could cause harm to a person or organisation, is a discussion courtesy blanked, and even then its text remains in the page history. For biographies of living people, the biographies policy asks that protracted public argument over sensitive deletions be avoided. How that record affects a later attempt is the subject of our guide to what a failed Wikipedia attempt leaves behind.

Where does specialist knowledge make a difference in a deletion?

Mostly in choosing the process and the moment. Wikipedia's deletion system is a set of separate routes with separate rules, and much of the wasted effort around deletions comes from using the wrong one: taking a proposed deletion to deletion review, which is not for proposed deletions; asking for review to recreate an article that could simply be rewritten; renominating too soon; or arguing content in a venue that only examines process. Each of these is logged, and each leaves a closed request on the record for the next reviewer to find.

Some steps are well within reach on your own. Asking for a page deleted by proposed deletion to be restored is a short, routine request. A contested discussion, a deletion review or a page with an earlier deletion history is a different kind of task, where the outcome depends on how the sources are presented and whether the case fits the venue.

Our page repair work covers pages under deletion pressure and pages already deleted: reading the record, choosing the route, assessing the sources honestly and preparing the case. Our free page health check identifies the process that applies to your page and what its record shows.