Wikipedia:Deletion policy
The deletion policy describes how articles, media, and other pages that do not meet the relevant criteria for content of the encyclopedia are identified and removed from Wikipedia.
The content issues should be discussed at the relevant talk page, and other methods of dispute resolution should be used first, such as listing on Wikipedia:Requests for comments for further input.
Deletion discussions that are really unresolved content disputes may be closed by an uninvolved editor, and referred to the talk page or other appropriate forum.
Naming disputes are discussed on the articles' talk pages or listed at requested moves.
Certain tags are known to produce VRT complaints from the article's subject; for instance {{notability}}, because it may be interpreted as Wikipedia passing judgement on the person.
[2] Recently created articles that have potential, but do not yet meet Wikipedia's quality standards, may be moved to the draft namespace ("draftified") for improvement, with the aim of eventually moving them back to the main namespace, optionally via the articles for creation (AfC) process.
Because abandoned drafts are deleted after six months, moving articles to draft space should generally be done only for newly created articles (typically as part of new page review) or as the result of a deletion discussion.
An editor who believes a page obviously and uncontroversially does not belong in an encyclopedia can propose its deletion.
These processes are not decided through a head count, so participants are each encouraged to explain their opinion and refer to policy.
A nomination that gets little response after the discussion period has ended can be relisted if the closing editor believes that more time would be likely to generate a clearer consensus.
It is considered inappropriate to ask people outside of Wikipedia to come to the discussion to sway its outcome; such meatpuppet comments may be ignored.
Therefore, if there is no rough consensus, the page is kept and is again subject to normal editing, merging, or redirecting as appropriate.
If a page was obviously deleted "out of process" (per this policy), an administrator may choose to undelete it immediately.
It is especially wasteful to go to deletion review over an unsourced stub when the alternative of creating a sourced article is available.
The deletion review process is not decided solely by head count but by consensus.
Be aware that pages restored to articlespace may immediately be subject to a deletion discussion.
However, they remain in the database (at least temporarily) and are accessible to administrators, along with their edit history unless they are oversighted, a form of enhanced deletion which, unlike normal deletion, expunges information from any form of usual access even by administrators.
This generally is not done except under rare circumstances, such as where public view of the discussion may cause harm to some person or organisation.
To avoid having such text in the most recent version and thus being indexed by search engines, the debate will be blanked out of courtesy.
When either courtesy blanking or xfd-blanking is used, the actual content remains accessible via the edit history.
Selective undeletion still has a few valid uses that Revision Deletion cannot cover (such as complex history merges).
However, due to its relative lack of transparency and poor efficiency, selective undeletion is no longer used to remove revisions from page histories.
