Nominating pages for speedy deletion during NPP, I note that sometimes pages come up for deletion review but that it's only the deleting admin that gets a notification - surely it would make sense to also notify the nominator of the deletion review? While the admin is indeed responsible for upholding the nominator's suggestion, surely it's the nom who had a rationale for the deletion in the first place and, at least as a courtesy, should know that a review is taking place - but also may have a contribution to the discussion they, ultimately, triggered? Watching the page doesn't help until the review is done and dusted, BTW... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:06, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
- So as Firefangledfeathers already said over at WT:NPR, notifications are usually done by whoever brings it to DRV, and unless they happen to be an admin they have no way of knowing who nominated it in the first place. We could theoretically do something like ask the deleting admin to pass on the notification to the nominator, or have an admin bot do it or something, but that seems like a lot of hassle to just to slightly reduce feather-ruffling. CSDs rarely make it to DRV, and when they do they're speedily endorsed more often than not. – Joe (talk) 13:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
- It's not really about feather ruffling, as the nominator knows why they made a nomination. Nice that an admin agreed and made the deletion, but I thought there were grounds to include the nominator in the subsequent review discussion, where there was one. If it's too much trouble, well that's just fine. I'll just carry on using this here clay tablet. I'll be fine. It's fine. Fine and dandy Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
I just randomly went through the DRV log for August, and noticed a number of discussions where the {{delrevxfd}} template hadn’t been added above the original XfD discussion. I added the ones I saw were missing, but it made me wonder if the job of adding {{delrevxfd}} notices to XfD pages would be an appropriate task for a bot. It would remove one of the manual tasks needed to list a discussion here, and it would mean that there wouldn’t be any risk of a filer accidentally not adding the template themselves (as there is at present). I’m starting this discussion as I’m keen to hear others’ opinions on this idea.
(If there’s going to be such a bot, there may also be the question of whether or not it should add the result= parameter once the DRV has been closed — the template mentions the parameter exists, but a few unscientific spot checks indicate that it may not be in active use.)
All the best, user:A smart kittenmeow 10:21, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
