Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/New criteria

This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.
Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

The following new speedy deletion criteria, or modifications to existing criteria, have been suggested on CSD talk. This is just a summary and nothing here is a formal proposal, but if people think it's a good idea a part of it may become a formal proposal. Note that some of the below are weaker or stronger versions of one another, some are redundant, and some may be bad ideas.

Please discuss on the talk page.

Now applicable criteria

An article about a website that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject.
An article about a company that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject.
Blatant Advertising

Suggestions

An article about one or more animals that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject(s).
An article about one or more objects that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject(s).
An article that asserts to be a hoax.
An article about a subject that is counterintuitive and unverifiable (intended to remove obvious hoaxes)
An article that labels itself as fiction - that is, it of a short story, a script, a transcript of an animated cartoon, etc.
An article that clearly fails the criteria for staying on the encyclopedia/blatantly unencyclopedic.
Modify A8 from "Material is unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider (e.g. encyclopedia, news service) " to "Material is unquestionably copied from a commercial website"
An article about minor bits of local geography, such as bus stops and shops
A redirect that serves no purpose but to disparage the subject(s) whose name appears in the title of the current page or in the redirect-to page.
An article that is an obvious attempt to coin a protologism.