Reference
Glossary of Wikipedia deletion, tagging and dispute terms
These are the words that come up when a Wikipedia article is nominated for deletion, tagged, moved back to draft or argued over on its talk page. Each entry gives a plain definition first and names the Wikipedia policy, guideline or help page it was checked against.
- Abandoned draft (G13)
An abandoned draft is a page in draft space, or an Articles for Creation submission kept in user space, that no human has edited for six months. An administrator may then delete it under the speedy deletion criteria without any discussion. The deletion is housekeeping rather than a judgement on the subject, and the draft can be restored on request through the undeletion page for abandoned drafts.
- Articles for Creation (AfC)
Articles for Creation is Wikipedia's review queue for new articles written as drafts. A volunteer reviewer reads each submission and accepts, declines or rejects it. Anyone may submit, and editors with a conflict of interest, paid editors included, are expected to use this route rather than publish directly. They are judged by the same standards as everyone else. Wikipedia sets no fixed waiting time for a review.
- Articles for deletion (AfD)
Articles for deletion is the public discussion in which editors settle an article's fate: keep, delete, merge or redirect. Discussions normally run for a minimum of seven days. It is not a vote: the closer weighs the reasoning offered against policy rather than counting heads. Every discussion has its own page and remains in the archive after it closes, where later reviewers can read it.
- Autoconfirmed user (Autoconfirmed)
An autoconfirmed user is a registered account that has made at least 10 edits to English Wikipedia, with four days passed since its first edit. The software grants the status automatically. It lets the account create articles directly, move pages, upload files and edit semi-protected pages. Until an account qualifies, a new draft has to go through review instead.
- Canvassing (Votestacking)
Canvassing is notifying people about a Wikipedia discussion with the aim of tilting its result. Short, neutral notices to an audience that was not picked for its opinions are allowed. Mass messaging, notices worded to push a position, contacting editors because of their known views and recruiting by email or chat off the site are not. Someone who carries on after a warning can be reported to administrators and blocked.
- Conflict of interest (COI)
A conflict of interest exists when an editor writes about themselves, their family, friends, clients or employer, or about anything where an outside relationship could compete with their duty to the encyclopedia. Wikipedia treats it as a description of circumstances, not a verdict on the person. The guideline strongly discourages such editors from changing the affected article directly and asks them to declare the link and put suggested changes on the talk page.
- Connected contributor notice (Connected contributor template)
A connected contributor notice is a banner at the top of an article's talk page recording that a named editor may have a personal or professional link to the subject. It can show whether and where that link was declared, whether the editor has edited the article, and when a neutral editor most recently checked those edits. Paid editors are listed on a separate version that also names the employer and the client.
- Create protection (Salting, Creation protection)
Create protection, often called salting, is a lock an administrator places on a title so that no page can be started there. It is used mostly where a deleted article keeps being recreated. To get the title released, a user can ask an administrator, preferably the one who applied it, file a request to reduce the protection, or go to deletion review. Showing a draft of the intended article helps.
- Declined and rejected drafts (Declined submission, Rejected submission)
A declined draft is one an Articles for Creation reviewer has returned because its problems look fixable; it can be improved and submitted again. A rejected draft is one the reviewer considered fundamentally unsuitable for Wikipedia, because of its subject or its content, rather than in need of more work. Wikipedia asks submitters not to resubmit repeatedly or press individual reviewers to move a draft up the queue.
- Deletion of unsourced biographies (BLPPROD)
Deletion of unsourced biographies is a form of proposed deletion for articles about living people that contain no sources of any kind. Once tagged, the article may be deleted after seven days. The tag can come off only once the article cites a reliable source for at least one claim about the person. A source of doubtful reliability does not count, and those cases go to a full deletion discussion.
- Deletion review (DRV)
Deletion review is the venue for challenging how a deletion decision was made: a speedy deletion outside the criteria, a closer who misread the discussion, or a serious procedural error. It can review decisions to keep as well. It is not a place to rerun the original arguments, and a review normally runs for at least seven days. Wikipedia suggests raising the matter with the closing editor first, which can settle it faster.
- Draftification (Draftify, Moving to draft)
Draftification is moving a published article out of the encyclopedia and into draft space so it can be worked on before it returns. Editors use it as an alternative to deletion, for example after undisclosed connected editing or where a subject is not yet notable. It should generally not be used on articles created more than 90 days earlier. One editor may do it only once; after an objection, it needs consensus.
- Edit request (Edit COI request)
An edit request asks other editors, through a post on the article's talk page, to make a specific change that the requester cannot or should not make. It is used for protected pages and by editors with a conflict of interest, each with its own template. A good request says exactly what should change, for instance replacing one phrase with another, and supports it with a reliable source where needed.
- Edit warring (Edit war)
Edit warring is editors who disagree about a page repeatedly overriding each other's changes instead of resolving the dispute by discussion. It does not need a breach of the three-revert rule; Wikipedia says plainly that someone can edit war while staying within it. Reverting obvious vandalism is exempt. Reports go to a dedicated administrators' noticeboard, and editors who edit war are liable to be blocked.
- Maintenance template (Maintenance tag, Cleanup tag)
A maintenance template, usually called a tag, is a notice placed on an article to flag a problem such as missing citations, promotional tone or doubts about neutrality. Tags do not disappear when the problem is fixed; someone has to remove them by hand. Editors with no conflict of interest may do that once the issue is resolved or if the tag was added in error. Connected editors generally should not.
- Meatpuppetry (Meatpuppet)
Meatpuppetry is recruiting other people to edit or join a discussion on your side so that a position looks more widely supported than it is. Wikipedia prohibits bringing in like-minded people, whether on the site or off it, to create accounts or edit in order to sway a decision. It falls under the same policy as sockpuppetry, and suspected cases go to the same investigations page.
- No indication of importance (A7)
No indication of importance is a speedy deletion criterion for articles about a real person, an individual animal, an organisation, web content or an organised event that give no reason why the subject is important or significant. It does not apply to educational institutions, nor to products, books, films or other creative works. The bar sits below notability: a credible claim of significance is enough to avoid it.
- Notability (GNG, General notability guideline)
Notability is Wikipedia's test of whether a subject should have an article of its own, and the general guideline presumes it once reliable sources independent of the subject have given it significant coverage.
- Noticeboards (Noticeboard)
Noticeboards are Wikipedia pages where editors raise a problem and ask for help from people who know a particular policy well. Separate boards handle conflicts of interest, the reliability of sources, neutrality, edit warring, and incidents that need an administrator. Wikipedia describes posting to the right board as an appropriate early step in resolving a dispute.
- Page protection (Semi-protection, Extended confirmed protection, Full protection)
Page protection is a restriction an administrator places on a page to limit who may edit it. Semi-protection admits only autoconfirmed accounts. Extended confirmed protection requires an account with 500 edits that is at least 30 days old. Full protection leaves editing to administrators alone. Anyone can ask for protection on Wikipedia's requests page, but only an administrator can apply it.
- Paid-contribution disclosure (PAID)
Paid-contribution disclosure is the English Wikipedia policy that obliges anyone paid for their edits to state who pays them, who the edits benefit and any other relevant affiliation. The statement can go on the editor's user page, on the talk page of the article concerned or in an edit summary. The rule derives from the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, and editors who fail to disclose are prohibited from editing.
- Pending changes (Pending changes protection)
Pending changes is a form of protection under which edits from unregistered and new accounts are saved but kept out of public view until a reviewer accepts them. Readers see the latest accepted version in the meantime. Reviewers look for obvious problems such as vandalism and copyright violations. Accepting an edit makes it visible but does not mean the reviewer endorses what it says.
- Proposed deletion (PROD)
Proposed deletion removes an article without a discussion when nobody is expected to object. An administrator looks at it once the tag has been in place for at least seven days. Any editor, the article's creator included, can cancel the proposal by removing the tag, and the article cannot then be proposed this way again; deletion would need a full discussion. A page deleted by this route can be restored on request.
- Recreation of deleted material (G4, Repost)
Recreation of deleted material is the speedy deletion criterion for a page that is substantially similar to one removed by its most recent deletion discussion or deletion review, where the reason for that removal has not been addressed. It lets an administrator delete the repost without reopening the debate. It does not apply to content that was removed by proposed deletion or speedy deletion.
- Reliable sources (RS)
Reliable sources, in Wikipedia's sense, are published sources known for checking facts and getting them right, and the guideline asks that articles rest on reliable, independent, published sources of that kind. Reliability is judged in context: a source can be sound for one statement and unsuitable for another. Editors who disagree about a particular source can take it to a dedicated noticeboard.
- Request for comment (RfC)
A request for comment invites editors from beyond an article to give their view on a disputed question, most often what the article should say. It opens with a brief, neutrally worded question on the talk page and a template that lists it centrally. There is no fixed length, though seven days is typically the minimum and after 30 days it is considered ripe for closure, often with an uninvolved editor summarising the outcome.
- Requests for undeletion (REFUND)
Requests for undeletion is the page where anyone can ask an administrator to restore a page removed without real controversy, such as by proposed deletion, certain speedy deletion criteria or a discussion closed as a soft delete. A page can also be restored as a draft, or into user space, for improvement. Challenges to the result of a full deletion discussion belong at deletion review instead.
- Revert (Reversion, Undo)
A revert is an edit that undoes another editor's change, usually returning a page or section to an earlier version. It can be made with the undo link in the page history, by republishing an old revision or by retyping the earlier text by hand, and each method counts the same. Wikipedia expects a short reason in the edit summary, polite and reasoned where the disagreement is about content.
- Sockpuppetry (Sockpuppet, Socking)
Sockpuppetry is the misuse of more than one Wikipedia account, for instance to deceive other editors, inflate apparent support in a discussion or get round a block. Editors are generally expected to use a single account. Suspected cases are reported to the sockpuppet investigations page, where specially authorised checkusers may compare technical evidence. Confirmed sockpuppets are normally blocked indefinitely, and the main account may be blocked as well.
- Speedy deletion (CSD, Criteria for speedy deletion)
Speedy deletion allows an administrator to remove a page at once, without a discussion, when it meets one of a published list of narrow criteria. Anyone can nominate a page by adding a speedy deletion tag, but only an administrator can carry out the deletion. Any editor other than the page's creator may remove the tag as a sign that the case is disputed, and another deletion process should then be used.
- Talk page (Article talk page)
A talk page is the discussion page attached to every Wikipedia article, reached through the Talk tab, where editors work out how the article should be improved. It is for discussing the article, not for debating its subject. Contributions are signed and dated, and on busy pages older threads are moved into archives, so earlier discussions remain available to anyone who looks.
- Third opinion (3O)
A third opinion is an informal request for an outside view when exactly two editors disagree about content or sourcing. A volunteer who is not involved reads the existing discussion and offers a view. Taking part is voluntary and the opinion is not binding. The disagreement must already have been discussed thoroughly on the article's talk page before a request is made.
- Three-revert rule (3RR)
The three-revert rule limits each editor to three reverts on any one page in a 24-hour period; a fourth breaches it. Partial reverts count, while a run of consecutive edits undoing someone else's work counts as one. Exemptions include reverting obvious vandalism and taking out contentious, poorly sourced material about living people. An editor who breaches the rule is liable to be blocked.
- Unambiguous promotion (G11, Unambiguous advertising)
Unambiguous promotion is the speedy deletion criterion for a page that is entirely promotional and would have to be rewritten from the ground up to become an encyclopedia article. Promotion here is not only commercial: a person, a charity or a point of view can be promoted too. Where the subject is notable and a neutral rewrite is plausible, Wikipedia prefers the rewrite to deletion.
- Vandalism (Vandal)
Vandalism means edits made on purpose to obstruct or defeat what Wikipedia is for. Intent is the test, so a mistaken edit made in good faith is not vandalism, and neither is an edit war over content. Wikipedia warns that labelling good-faith edits as vandalism can drive editors away. Persistent vandals are usually warned several times and then reported to the administrators' noticeboard for vandalism.
Questions people ask
Why does Wikipedia use so many abbreviations?
Its processes are run by volunteers who discuss them constantly, so long names are shortened to labels such as AfD or PROD. Knowing what each label means makes notices on a page, and the discussions behind them, far easier to follow.
Where do these definitions come from?
Each entry summarises the Wikipedia policy, guideline or help page it links to. Those pages are the authority, and they change from time to time, so check the linked page before relying on a detail.
Which terms matter most if my page is in trouble?
Usually the deletion terms (Articles for deletion, proposed deletion, speedy deletion), the tag terms (maintenance template, conflict of interest) and the edit request. The guides linked from each entry explain what to do next.
Not sure what has happened to your page?
Send us the page name. We read its history, talk page and logs, and reply with a plain account of where it stands and what can realistically be done. No charge and no obligation.