- I think that the spoiler policy should be removed. I think that this should be done because the content that it's telling users not to add was released four years ago, so it's not still a new thing that people might not have gotten a chance to watch yet; if they wanted to watch it when it was new, they've had four years to do it in.
- I think that the user blogs policy should be removed, as it basically reiterates the blocking policy (don't spam and don't vandalize).
- I agree with the user page policy on most points. However, I'd suggest two changes. One would be to allow people to use infoboxes, as I see no particular point in not letting them do so. The other is that, instead of this being a policy that specifically says not to spam or be derogatory on user pages, this don't-be-derogatory-rule should be extended to the whole site and simply made one of the main rules of what not to do to avoid blocking (along with spamming and vandalizing).
- I think that the general disclaimer should be removed, as it's basically stating the obvious; I'm pretty sure that no one needs to be told that this content might be fallible, might be objectionable, that LEGO has the LEGO name and characters copyrighted, etc., and if they do, they're not going to be the ones who look at the policy pages.
- I think that the Articles for Creation policy should be deleted, as there are 1) most likely no articles left to create and 2) there aren't reliably enough users on the site to vote for anything. If someone wants to make an article, they should be allowed to do so, and if it's problematic, it'll get deleted.
- I think that the deletion policy and the Articles for Deletion policy should be merged and changed somewhat. I think that the process for deleting an article should be as follows:
- If an admin sees an article and deems it to violate any of the wiki's policies, the admin can delete it.
- If a non-admin user sees an article and deems it to violate any of the wiki's policies, the user can nominate it for deletion with a Delete template. If it indeed does violate a policy, an admin can delete it immediately.
- If anyone—admin or not—sees a page that doesn't violate a policy, but that seems unnecessary or otherwise problematic in a way that the policies don't cover, the user can nominate the article for deletion with a Delete template, explaining why the article should be deleted either within the template (I'll add a field to the deletion template to state deletion reasoning if this change goes through) or on the article's talk page. If no one objects within a week, an admin can review it; if the admin decides that it should be deleted, the admin can delete it. Otherwise, if someone objects to the article's deletion, the nominating user and the objecting user (along with anyone else who wants to pitch in) should attempt to find consensus, at which point the article should be kept or deleted based on consensus.
If you have any opinions on what changes that I suggested should be made, what changes that I suggested shouldn't be made, or what changes that I didn't suggest should be made, let me know in the comments below! Otherwise, I'll go through with these changes in about a week if I don't get any comments.
Update: It's been a week (two weeks, actually), so I'm just going through with these changes.
2nd Update: Changes 1 through 4—as well as change 6—have been implemented in this edit (with this edit and this edit providing what little extra was needed to help implement change 6). Change 5 has been implemented through the deletion of the Articles for Creation page. If you have any questions about this policy revamp, please let me know. Thanks!