Requested feature overview description.:

When a janitor+ deletes an image with a scripted reason such as artist, pirated, trace ect. The reason that is shown in the deleted notice at the top of the post has a link to wiki entries which describe what the deletion reason means in-depth, and why a post would be deleted for said reason.

Why would it be useful?

Users and artists frequently can be found inquiring in both blips and forums looking for further answers upon deletion reasons for their posts, with feature would aid in clearing up this confusion for most people giving the information they are looking for. This would probably also aid staff, as they wouldn't find them selves repeating the same thing over to different users nearly as often as what they currently would have to.

What part(s) of the site page(s) are affected?

Assuming that the staff have deletion reasons available to them that are pre-set, it would update the reasons or otherwise provide staff with a scripted answer button that has attached text link to a wiki entry, maybe [[example]] which contains the deleted reason, and detail of it.

As partially mentioned this would also implement a few new wiki entries, or an updated section which is more detailed of the current site wiki which describes the quality standards of e621.

Staff don't have pre-set reasons. I'm pretty sure someone, maybe Mairo, said they just have a text box and copy/paste text in, so they don't have to keep writing the same message. Really this is more a request asking them to change what they type in, than a site feature.

Pupslut said:
Staff don't have pre-set reasons. I'm pretty sure someone, maybe Mairo, said they just have a text box and copy/paste text in, so they don't have to keep writing the same message. Really this is more a request asking them to change what they type in, than a site feature.

I mean, it is a feature if the programmers do the part I request of implementing scripted answers for the staff. The feature I request just isn't really a user side one. It's more of an expansion of site knowledge with a few implements that would in hope make things a little easier for both sides of the fence.

like, if [[Does_not_meet_minimum_quality_standards._(Artistic)]] and [[Trace_of_another_artistis_work]] and other such deletion reasons led to wiki entries on site that would describe the reason of deletion and what it means it could save a lot of questions from userbase

Versperus said:
I mean, it is a feature if the programmers do the part I request of implementing scripted answers for the staff. The feature I request just isn't really a user side one. It's more of an expansion of site knowledge with a few implements that would in hope make things a little easier for both sides of the fence

I feel implementing scripted answers wouldn't help too much as they'd still be posting the same message every time regardless, it'd just make it so every janitor's response was the same.

Really if someone sets up a wiki page, then staff could just include it in their deleted reasons regardless, but there's already a forum thread for "why was my post deleted."

A lot of people that ask in forum threads, such as in forum #275118, aren't asking for a link to a standard answer of, "quality standards means the quality wasn't good enough," as that's kind of obvious, the ones I've seen are often wanting a bit more depth and don't understand why their art wasn't considered good enough.

For example, with that thread I linked Mairo goes into a bit more detail, but at the beginning it's "I don't understand what (artistic) means" and gets the reply, "the artistic quality wasn't good enough." Which is certainly true, but it doesn't leave the poster any the wiser, and if you're posting your own art I imagine it would be frustrating if it gets deleted and you don't have a clue how to improve.

So, understandably, it'd have to be a big wiki page to cover a lot of basic artistic principles that people might miss, having sections for 2D art, 3D art, and then several subsections for different things like shading, lighting, anatomy, composition, and probably a lot more. It'd help people make better art, and probably be less confused, but the problem then is that you'll just get posts saying "I did the stuff on the wiki and it still got deleted, why?"

It'd be a big project, but it could still be worth it, having a large wiki page going into depth on common artistic reasons posts get deleted.

Versperus said:
like, if [[Does_not_meet_minimum_quality_standards._(Artistic)]] and [[Trace_of_another_artistis_work]] and other such deletion reasons led to wiki entries on site that would describe the reason of deletion and what it means it could save a lot of questions from userbase

Sorry, started replying before your edit.

I agree with the principle but I feel that, as I said in the previous post, just explaining that "quality standards (artistic)" means that it was lacking in artistic quality, probably wouldn't help too much, but to fix that you'd almost need to create a guide with examples of different artistic reasons a post could be deleted and how to improve/correct them.

Quick edit:
And although I'd like to see a page like that, I'm guessing a few people would argue that this isn't a place to learn basic artistic skills, and if people want to improve they should instead post on a different site.

It won't stop people from creating blips, forum threads, etc. People do not read.