Consumer Rights Wiki talk:Moderators' noticeboard: Difference between revisions

@@ Line 279: / Line 279: @@
 just curious lol [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|<i><b>AnotherConsumerRightsPerson</b></i>]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 20:20, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
+== Appeal deletion - Amazon fraudulent product page ==
+The article [[Amazon allows fraudulent product page after manual review]] has a deletion request that says "old aigen article that has not seen any use."
+The article
+# Has several paragraphs of meaningful content (not a stub).
+# Has several references
+# Is about an issue that I have heard of and seems noteworthy (Fraud against consumers by one of the largest retailers in the US).
+What exactly are the criteria that this article violates that it should be deleted?
+* The "seen any use" seems to indicate that there is some criterion on how much people read an article, which this one hasn't met.  What is the use benchmark articles have to pass?  How can we see how much use an article gets?
+* AI generated - how is this determined?  I have skimmed the article, it doesn't seem overly painful to read.  (It isn't Kippling or Hemmingway, but it isn't bureaucrateese either.)
+I am appealing the deletion of this article, since it meets all the inclusion criteria of which I am aware.
+If there are policies that it violates, which are not spelled out in the rules, please spell them out.
+Thanks.  [[User:Drakeula|Drakeula]] ([[User talk:Drakeula|talk]]) 08:40, 6 November 2025 (UTC)