We are dedicated to the opposition of articles that do not belong in Wikipedia, and we are equally dedicated to not deleting the articles that do. When Wikipedia's deletion process runs smoothly, fairly, and with the policies of the Wikimedia Foundation as its only rationale, regardless of whether an editor votes keep or delete, then our job is done. We advocate the responsible use of deletion policy, not the deletion of articles.
To organize and discuss rationales and criteria for deletion and inclusion.
To review the outcomes of WP:AfD for inappropriate deletions to more correctly identify articles that should and should not be nominated.
To spread information about the correct reasons for deleting articles and using Speedy Deletions and Proposed Deletion.
To minimize the number of articles that are nominated for deletion simply because they have been improperly sourced, wikified, or written
To improve the policies and guidelines related to deletion and criteria for deletion through discussion.
What this project is not
A substitute for deletion review for articles that some feel are incorrectly kept.
To increase the number of articles that are deleted if there is consensus that the topic at hand is worthy of being in Wikipedia. (For example, we should never focus on rewriting policy to single out schools, but we should review school deletions to find out if there is actual consensus that schools are notable).
By definition, the scope of the project is very literally all articles in Wikipedia with an assessment code of Start or Stub. Articles rated B or higher, or of importance beyond low, should not be addressed by this project.
We aren't concerned with governance councils, charters, or elections. There is no leader. Any Wikipedian in good standing is welcome. We have no positions. We don't have notice boards, and we don't have barnstars. (FFS, giving out barnstars for deleting articles would get us tarred and feathered.)
We DO have an IRC room at #deletion. Feel free to come in.
We only have three rules here.
We are not here to organize the Crusade against Cruft. While we will usually look at neglected AfD's, WikiProject Deletionism members should consider recusing themselves from any discussion that is highly controversial.
We are not here to overturn policy against consensus. While we want to examine policy, especially notability guidelines and deletion criteria, we must work within the guidelines of the community.
We are not here to go after huge swaths of badly written articles. The icon of scissors is to remind us to trim carefully. Whenever possible, FIX. Whenever possible, SOURCE. Whenever possible, FIND THE NOTABILITY. Before nominating for deletion it is a good idea to check for notability and to make some attempt at finding reliable sources. If there are some, then include them and try to improve the articles. If there is truly nothing there, then and only then go ahead with the nomination for deletion.