|
|}
==Deletion discussions needing action before their end date==
===সংরক্ষণ এবং অপসারণ===
===মনোনয়ন ত্রুটি ও সমস্যা===
{{anchor|Common outcomes}}
{{anchor|Procedural closure}}
{{See also|Wikipedia:Guide to deletion#Recommendations and outcomes|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes}}
In certain situations, a deletion discussion may require acorrecting, "proceduralmoving closure"—aelsewhere, or a null outcome based("'''procedural onclose'''"), thedue circumstancesto ofissues with the deletion nomination rather than the merits of the page being discussed. Situations where a procedural closure may be appropriate includeitself: ▼A deletion discussion may end with one of a number of distinct outcomes, with certain outcomes being more common at certain deletion discussion venues. However, three outcomes are common to all venues: ''keep'', ''delete'' and ''no consensus''.
{| class=wikitable
A '''keep''' outcome reflects a [[Wikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators#Rough consensus|rough consensus]] to retain (i.e. not delete) a page, though not necessarily in its current form. To implement a 'keep' outcome: close the deletion discussion as 'keep'; edit the page to remove the deletion notice; and record the outcome on the page's [[Help:Talk page|talk page]] using one of several venue-specific templates (see '[[#Step-by-step instructions|Step-by-step instructions]]' for details).
|-
*| The'''No nominateddeletion pagenotice''' wason notnominated taggedpage with a corresponding deletion notice.|| The best course of action is to add the tag and note that you've done so . - theThe time youof place the tagtagging would then be treated as the nomination time. ▼A '''delete''' outcome reflects a rough consensus to remove (i.e. not retain) a page, including its entire revision history. To implement a 'delete' outcome: close the deletion discussion as 'delete'; delete the page, and link to the deletion discussion in the deletion summary; and, if the page should not be recreated, remove incoming links in other pages (except in discussions, archives and tracking pages).
|-
*| The'''Currently linked from [[Main Page]]''' || If the nominated page is currently linked from the [[Main Page ]], remove any tag from the page itself. IfThen, if there are legitimate concerns, please use [[Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors]] to have the link removed before nominating the article . If there are clearly none, or the nomination is disruptive, the nomination page should be closed early (see 'speedy close'). ▼A '''no consensus''' outcome reflects the lack of a rough consensus for any one particular action. To implement a 'no consensus' outcome: close the deletion discussion as 'no consensus'; edit the page to remove the deletion notice; and record the outcome on the page's talk page using one of several venue-specific templates (see '[[#Step-by-step instructions|Step-by-step instructions]]' for details).
|-
| '''Nomination is an immediate objection to a prior deletion outcome''', more appropriate for [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]] || List it at deletion review on the nominator's behalf, and link it appropriately (including linking it from the closed discussion), notify the nominator, and close the deletion discussion.
'''Note:''' Deletion discussions concerning [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|biographies of living persons]] who are relatively unknown, non-public figures, where the subject has requested deletion ''and'' there is no rough consensus to keep, may be closed as 'delete' per the [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion policy]].
|-
**When| doing'''Venue suchinappropriate''' (e.g., a closefile hosted on [[Commons:|Commons]], firstcategory listor redirect at AFD, or discussions that the chosen venue is unable to address) || List the topic at the correct venue ., Thennotify the nominator, and close the discussion and provide a link to the new discussion. Never close a discussion as a wrong venue without opening a discussion at an appropriate one. ▼===প্রক্রিয়াগত অবসান===
|-
▲In certain situations, a deletion discussion may require a "procedural closure"—a null outcome based on the circumstances of the deletion nomination rather than the merits of the page being discussed. Situations where a procedural closure may be appropriate include:
| '''Page does not exist''' or has already been deleted prior to the nomination || Close the discussion, and place a notice on the nominator's talk page. It is entirely possible that they may have mistyped the page name, or that the page was already deleted before they could start the deletion discussion. If the former was the case, politely tell the nominator to properly start a new discussion with the correct title, and the time they start the new discussion will be treated as the nomination time.
▲* The nominated page was not tagged with a corresponding deletion notice. The best course of action is to add the tag and note that you've done so - the time you place the tag would then be treated as the nomination time.
|}
▲* The nominated page is currently linked from the [[Main Page]]. If there are legitimate concerns, please use [[Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors]] to have the link removed before nominating the article.
* A subsequent deletion discussion which immediately challenges the outcome of the prior deletion discussion, where a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]] clearly would be more appropriate. List it at deletion review on the nominator's behalf first, then close the deletion discussion.
* The deletion discussion is listed at the incorrect venue, e.g., a discussion for a file that is hosted on [[Commons:|Commons]], or for a category listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]. This includes discussions that the chosen venue is unable to address.
▲**When doing such a close, first list the topic at the correct venue. Then, close the discussion and provide a link to the new discussion. Never close a discussion as a wrong venue without opening a discussion at an appropriate one.
A deletion discussion that is poorly formatted should not be closed for this reason alone, in order to avoid [[WP:BITE|biting]] new users. Instead, [[WP:SOFIXIT|fix it]].
This clause '''should not be used''' to close a discussion when a particular outcome is merely "likely" or "highly likely", and there is a genuine and reasoned basis for disagreement. This is because deletion discussions are [[WP:NOTAVOTE|not a vote]]; it is important to be reasonably sure that there is little or no chance of accidentally excluding significant input or perspectives, or changing the weight of different views, if closed early. Especially, closers should beware of interpreting "early pile on" as necessarily showing how a discussion will end up. This can sometimes happen when a topic attracts high levels of attention from those engaged (or having a specific view) but slower attention from other less involved editors, perhaps with other points of view. It can sometimes be better to allow a few extra days even if current discussion seems very clearly to hold one opinion, to be sure that it really will be a snowball and as a courtesy to be sure that no significant input will be excluded if closed very soon.
|}
===কোরাম নয়===
{{redirect|WP:Soft Deletion|the failed proposal|WP:Soft deletion (failed proposal)}}
{{shortcut|WP:QUORUM|WP:NOQUORUM|WP:NPASR|WP:SOFTDELETE}}
{{Anchor|Soft deletion}}
If a nomination has received no comments from any editor besides the nominator (or few in the case of AfDs), the discussion may be closed at the closer's discretion and best judgment. Common options include, but are not limited to:
* relisting the discussion (see the section '[[#Relisting discussions|Relisting discussions]]');
* closing as "no consensus" with '''n'''o '''p'''rejudice '''a'''gainst '''s'''peedy '''r'''enomination ('''NPASR'''); and
* closing in favour of the nominator's stated proposal.
* '''Soft deletion''' is a special kind of deletion which may be used after an article's deletion discussion. If a deletion discussion sees very little discussion even after being relisted several times, the administrator can close the discussion as soft delete and delete the page. However, in this case, the article can be restored for any reason on request. If your article was soft-deleted, you can request it be restored at [[Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion|Requests for undeletion]].
===অন্যান্য ফলাফল===
Other possible outcomes include, but are not limited to:
*'''[[WP:Disambiguation|Disambiguate]]''' - Used for articles and redirects. If the discussion concludes that the title can refer to many topics, it can be changed to a disambiguation page to list all of them.
*'''[[Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Incubation|Incubate]]''' - Used at articles for deletion. This changes the article into a draft to be improved so that it meets inclusion requirements.
*'''Delete but allow undeleting with [[Wikipedia:File copyright tags|an appropriate licence]]''' - Used for files. If a file is only deleted due to copyright issues, it could be re-uploaded if these issues are resolved
*'''[[WP:Lists|Listify]]''' - Used for categories. This means to delete the category and create a list article instead.
*'''[[WP:Merging|Merge]]''' - Used for articles, categories and templates. This combines two separate pages into a single page. Merge votes should be [[WP:Merge what?|specific and clear]]. If you wish to merge templates or categories, use the deletion discussions. If you wish to merge articles, do not use a deletion discussion, but instead discuss it on the talk page.
*'''Redirect''' - Used for articles and templates and sometimes other pages. This would be used if the page has no unique and usable content, but information about the topic is found in another article.
*'''Rename''' - Used only for categories, where deletion is required to change the name. Other pages may be renamed without deletion by using the [[WP:MOVE|move]] function.
*'''Retarget''' - Used for redirects. This means that the redirect should lead to a different page.
*'''Userfy''' - Used for articles, templates and miscellaneous pages. This would move the page into the creator's userspace so that they may make improvements. If [[WP:Essays|Wikipedia essays]] are nominated, they will sometimes be moved to userspace if they are found to violate policies or guidelines.
==<span id="AFD" /><span id="AfD" />নিবন্ধ অপসারণের প্রক্রিয়া==
{{shortcut|WP:DELPRO#AFD|WP:DPR#AFD}}
{{seealso|উইকিপিডিয়া:নিবন্ধ অপসারণের প্রস্তাবনা}}
{{উইকিপিডিয়া:নিবন্ধ অপসারণের প্রস্তাবনা/প্রশাসকদের নির্দেশাবলী}}
===কোরাম নয়===
* There is consensus among the community that problematic or likely-problematic articles<ref>Usually articles unreferenced for years</ref> with an appropriate redirection target may be [[WP:BLAR|blanked and redirected]] by any editor if there are no objections. This similarly applies to deletion nominations as well; if no editor suggests that the corresponding article should be kept, then redirection is an option.
== Closing discussions that run their full time==
==সমাপ্তি আলোচনা==
Discussions are usually closed after seven days. If there is a lack of comments, or the action to take is unclear, the discussion may be relisted for an addition seven days. Usually, both closing and relisting are administrator actions.
===প্রক্রিয়া===
* Do not close discussions in which you have offered an opinion, or for a page in which you have a [[Wikipedia:Vested interest|vested interest]] (i.e. a page that you have edited heavily). Exception: closing your own withdrawn nomination as a [[Wikipedia:Speedy keep|speedy keep]], when all other viewpoints were for keep as well.
* Non-admins should indicate their non-admin status with the {{t|nac}} ("non-admin close") template, which should always be <code>subst</code>ituted e.g.
**<code>{{Tlxs|Afd top}} <nowiki>'''সংরক্ষণKeep''' per [[WP:SNOW]] অনুযায়ী।. {{subst:nac}} ~~~~</nowiki></code>
If an administrator has deleted a page (including by speedy deletion) but neglected to close the discussion, anyone may close the discussion provided that the administrator's name and deletion summary are included in the closing rationale. This is unnecessary at [[WP:FFD]], where a bot already performs closes of this sort.
| 