Dates are based on the day they were added to the Archived SCPs list page. May not reflect actual post date; details should be included when available.
|SCP-452-ARC||21 May 2009||Featured in a Fishmonger piece, deleted with his stuff||The timeline suggests that, at least|
|SCP-138-ARC||21 May 2009||Deemed a Jackie Chan ripoff, Gears wrote Perfection as basically a decomm tale, it got -ARC'd instead, specific reasons unknown (possibly was a -J for a while?)||No vote on this one|
|SCP-781-ARC||23 Nov 2009||Referenced in Security Breach Report X23 prior to revision 6 on 4 Feb 2010; apparently deleted after reference was removed?||No other records exist|
|SCP-494-ARC||25 Mar 2010||Posted by carriontrooper on 30 Dec 2008 (SCP Series I list, revision 353); deleted sometime between 1/23/10 and 2/23/10 (Wayback); no explanation exists||Last occupation of mainlist slot via Wayback|
|SCP-215-ARC||25 Mar 2010||Posted by Bijhan on 15 Sep 2008 (SCP Series I list, revision 120); connected to various since-deleted IRG tales (I.215.02, .04, and .11, deleted simultaneously on 15 Feb 2012)||Bijhan removed this link himself, 14 Oct 2011 (ARC page, revision 27); -ARC'd page deleted without documentation sometime that month.|
|SCP-376-ARC||25 Mar 2010||Fishmonger. Referenced in his Black Queen stuff.||Deleted because Fishmonger.|
|SCP-431-ARC||25 Mar 2010||Fishmonger. Referenced in his Black Queen stuff.||Deleted because Fishmonger.|
|SCP-1023-ARC||25 Mar 2010||Created for the sole purpose of being used in Clef/Kondraki. (Compare creation of SCP-1012 at 10:02, 10 Nov 2008, with first appearance in Clef/Kondraki at 10:03, 10 Nov 2008.) Added to Log of Anomalous Items, 4 Jun 2009 (revision 5). -ARC'd without documented staff vote, 3 Dec 2009. Not removed from Anomalous Items until 8 Jun 2014 by Rewrite Team (revision 678).||Link to current ARC.|
|SCP-244-ARC||27 Mar 2010||The Egg Walker. Used in Clef/Kondraki and some other Olympia stuff.||ARC vote|
|SCP-515-ARC||27 Mar 2010||Created for the sole purpose of being used in Clef/Kondraki. (Compare creation of SCP-515 on 5 Nov 2008 with the first reference to Kondraki carrying a "highly modified camera" in revision 9 of Clef/Kondraki the day before.) -ARC'd without documented staff vote, 9 Nov 2009.||Link to current ARC.|
|SCP-776-ARC||27 Dec 2010||Had a brief cameo in Clef/Kondraki. Came up for deletion, was opposed by AFG and Bright. Random newbie suggests ARC; staff vote confirms.||Suggestion of ARC|
|SCP-157-ARC||15 Feb 2011||Saved from Mass Editing at Bright's discretion. Deletion vote started. Yoric told staff that 157 was "referenced by several Foundation tales" (no evidence exists for this) and they agreed to -ARC. Article is briefly mentioned in the SCP-516 testing log.||Deletion/ARC vote|
Much respect for research. I didn't get a Bachelor's in history to shittalk due diligence. Kudos.
Shortest possible iteration of the soul of this post:
Option #2 gets rid of the shitty writing. I support this because I just think that when you want a wiki full of good writing, it's not good policy to keep shitty writing on it.
This isn't a tl;dr; I spent literally all day writing this and doing research that went into it, because I do sincerely feel that a wiki that keeps shit material around, and that ignores its primary quality-control mechanism as a method of keeping that shit around, is worse off for it.
1. Articles that fall below deletion range should be deleted. (simplification of policy3)
1.a. Articles that fall below deletion range but meet the exemptions listed above for "emergency" stays of deletion (rewrites and downvote brigades) should be preserved temporarily while the purpose of that stay is fulfilled.
2. The -D articles fell below deletion range. (assertion by implication)
3. The -D articles should be deleted. (from 1 and 2, MP)
4. Articles that fall below deletion range have received a significant number of downvotes in excess of upvotes. (assertion by definition)
5. Articles receive a significant number of downvotes because they have failed to meet the expectations or standards held by the wiki in some way, with the exception of those identified in 1.a. (assumption)4
6. Articles that fall below deletion range failed to meet the expectations or standards held by the wiki. (from 4 and 5, MP)
7. The -D articles fell below deletion range. (from 2)
8. The -D articles failed to meet the expectations or standards held by the wiki. (from 6 and 7, MP)
9. "In order to maintain our standards of quality, pages [failing to meet the expectations or standards held by the wiki] are deleted." (assertion of policy, rephrased and adapted from Deletions Guide).
10. The -D articles should be deleted. (from 8 and 9, MP).
There are other options as well, either within or outside of Troy's three-part system.