We already have a list of general criteria on page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Delete which is based on someone’s experience, but it is more general. I hoped we could limit it to the proposals for now, because they seem to be very controversial.
The difference between mailing lists and the wiki is that ML are a historical source, but the wiki is a documentation based upon such sources (ironically the proposals serve as a source themselves). We seem to keep a distinction between the two kinds of pages with counters on feature (documentation) pages like https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:office%3Demployment_agency and proposal boxes on the proposal pages like https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tree. This is done to avoid the people changing the proposal after the vote or getting irritated.
Thank you for the list, Polarbear. You find my opinion below:
To delete
-
I have the feeling that it rather kills the administrators’ time, so I would prefer redirects, but oh well…
-
+1
-
+1
-
+1 → I think that should be okay even if others request deletion after a discussion or a long time of no activity.
-
wording seems okay, but I think this is really tricky: in my list above, there were two proposals about mapping flowers, but we do map trees, right? Maybe the length of the discussion could be an indicator?
-
would limit this to hoaxes (I remember something like cuisine=high_quality, which was supposed to be a joke)
-
+1 (like in case a. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/employment_agency)
To keep
-
+1
-
Well, what if the proposal mentions the tags but they were used before the proposal already, so the proposal effectively did not influence the tagging?
-
This would relate to failed or cancelled proposals only. I am undecided in this case, because I also see the task of the wiki or encourage common tagging, so that we do not need to document tons of alternatives and discourage users to choose the less used one.
-
I guess you refer to significant content additions (excluding categorisations and spelling corrections). Adding this criterion would mean that proposals set up by multiple people would be less likely to be deleted than the others. I fear that people confuse proposals with the documentation and therefore change the proposals, not because they want to contribute.
-
Age should be a criterion (same opinion as Adamant1), because some users start with a proposal page that has a very low quality and then improve this over time while discussing the content on the mailing list. Since it is rather difficult to check every list (thinking of foreign languages), age is a good criterion to estimate if something is a draft or abandoned.
-
I prefer to value the quality of the links, because essentially every proposal is linked to a category like “Proposals with status x”. Apart from that, wiki users create links to make it easier to find a proposal relating to a specific topic. We once had a page version of Types of relation listing basically every proposal that could include a relation and even ideas of non-existing proposals. This would have basically blocked every relation proposal from deletion. In addition, “delinking” is part of a deletion process, you find better pages and finally figure out that the page itself is useless and request deletion.
Agree, current example: Bag_shop (this also compares different ones, so I would discuss first)