Alemas2005 wrote:

Benboy755 wrote:

Alemas2005 wrote:

Drew1200 wrote:
I'm going to give a strong no. As in, continue using Candidates for Deletion. I've seen multiple candidates for deletion that in some way met the criteria. A lot of times, a user will have had a high enough rank on the old LMBs to have a page here, but wasn't very active after the update. Candidates for Deletion takes a couple extra days before a page can be deleted, but it does help filter through some candidates that shouldn't necessarily be deleted. I'm far more comfortable having multiple people look at candidates than one admin making the decision, even if it's a slight headache.

"User must be Rank 5 or higher, unless he/she is known from the old MBs (look for high post count and a "Ye [rank] of Olde" badge).".

As I said, we'd be careful with that. We'd just have to check the badges a user has. Nothing too difficult.

<noscript></noscript>

Make it Masterbuilder for the old rank, the current sentence is vague.

I smell a possible vote on that.

IMO we should have Craftsman for old rank and Minotaur for new, but I know everyone would whine so I don't even suggest it

But keep the current articles that are at least rank 5 or 150 posts grandfathered in

I don't see why we need to delete articles that are already in existence, just don't make any more.

It's a no from me.

Benboy755 wrote:

Alemas2005 wrote:

Benboy755 wrote:

Alemas2005 wrote:

Drew1200 wrote:
I'm going to give a strong no. As in, continue using Candidates for Deletion. I've seen multiple candidates for deletion that in some way met the criteria. A lot of times, a user will have had a high enough rank on the old LMBs to have a page here, but wasn't very active after the update. Candidates for Deletion takes a couple extra days before a page can be deleted, but it does help filter through some candidates that shouldn't necessarily be deleted. I'm far more comfortable having multiple people look at candidates than one admin making the decision, even if it's a slight headache.

"User must be Rank 5 or higher, unless he/she is known from the old MBs (look for high post count and a "Ye [rank] of Olde" badge).".

As I said, we'd be careful with that. We'd just have to check the badges a user has. Nothing too difficult.

<noscript></noscript>

Make it Masterbuilder for the old rank, the current sentence is vague.

I smell a possible vote on that.

IMO we should have Craftsman for old rank and Minotaur for new, but I know everyone would whine so I don't even suggest it

But keep the current articles that are at least rank 5 or 150 posts grandfathered in

<noscript></noscript>

I think Craftsman and Roman Soldier.

Alemas2005 wrote:
"User must be Rank 5 or higher, unless he/she is known from the old MBs (look for high post count and a "Ye [rank] of Olde" badge).".

As I said, we'd be careful with that. We'd just have to check the badges a user has. Nothing too difficult.

<noscript></noscript>

Yet these articles still got nominated for deletion before, and even got voted against by multiple people. Surely someone would have tried to be careful then, which makes me very reluctant to believe that caution would be exercised in any greater amounts now.

Again, candidates for deletion is hardly a big deal at all. I'm far more comfortable using it as a precaution rather than just trusting the judgement of a single user. It only takes a couple days for an article to go through candidates for deletion, and it hardly qualifies as an inconvenience. I don't think it should be too big of a deal to continue using this method.

I would like to change my vote to no because I think it would be best to keep under rank user articles if they contain content you personallly would read and obviously has acceptable content. If not, it should be deleted or put on hold till it has enough content to consider it as an complete article. 

Going to give a fairly strong "No," there are plenty of complete, relevant, well-written articles that do not necessarily meet the MoS (especially the Rank 5 requirement) that have no reason to be deleted. Granted, we shouldn't make any more of them, but there's nothing bad about them that we need to get rid of. 

I honestly don't see the necessity in getting rid of them.