I find it useful on Wikidata - when if an item is deleted, there's nothing left for non-admins to see but a QID and this short bit of text, which basically gives the label (the same as you'd see just from the page name of the deleted article on Wikipedias).

I think that it is useful is finnish wikipedia and 99% of the the times the feature is usefull. Last 1% is that there is vandalism which would be reverted / hidden if it would be visible in wikitext. Biggest useases are that users can get some hint what was deleted so admins don't need to tell it (ie. it is good for transparency). In admin point of vier it is also useful for finding deleted pages afterwards if you need undelete it.

I raised similar concerns without success here. T239012: Remove autogeneration of Deletion summary.. Not sure whether views have changed. But it's good we are back here. For me, I still believe this feature is no longer useful.

T239012#5687527 still stands.

The feature has been subverted in several large Wikipedia projects (English, German, Italian) for many years. On English Wikipedia, we subverted it because the automatic summary would include the very material that was the cause of the deletion in the first place; that is, libelous, offensive, or otherwise seriously problematic information (often about a real person). The alternative workaround (suppression and/or revision deletion of multiple logs) is very cumbersome. This may be a reflection of some of the editing on these projects (i.e., a proportionately high degree of deleted articles with highly inappropriate content in the autosummary) or simply a heavier volume of editing on these projects. There is generally almost no useful information in the summaries of any deleted article on a Wikipedia; a deletion reason should be sufficient.

Very useful and actually used on English Wiktionary, principally for watchlists and recent changes. Is there an important storage cost issue?

Merge to subscribe users from previous task.

In T299351#7626078, @Mike_Peel wrote:

I find it useful on Wikidata - when if an item is deleted, there's nothing left for non-admins to see but a QID and this short bit of text, which basically gives the label (the same as you'd see just from the page name of the deleted article on Wikipedias).

Yeah. For Wikidata this is pretty important. We even put work into making it work for Lexemes not too long ago: T263435

The method of blanking a message is quite hacky. It would be nicer to make this feature optional using a configuration variable.

Some weeks ago the same approve was added to hide the header on the main page (more context: T298715).
This sounds not like hacky. There are other messages for the comunity which are empty by default and there to fill in to get a feature.

Keep unchanged.

In T299351#7629507, @Umherirrender wrote:

The method of blanking a message is quite hacky. It would be nicer to make this feature optional using a configuration variable.

Some weeks ago the same approve was added to hide the header on the main page (more context: T298715).
This sounds not like hacky. There are other messages for the comunity which are empty by default and there to fill in to get a feature.

Keep unchanged.

See also: T199651: New magic word to remove the title of a page

On Commons, I don't think I've ever seen this feature be useful. In pretty much every situation where a drop-down reason is sufficient to delete something, without an additional comment, the page content should not be publicly displayed. Commons has not disabled the interface message, but I think most admins regularly doing deletions remove it, either manually or with the script. I've only ever seen template markup or spam/vandalism/copyvio/LTA attack names be prefilled.

I would support it being off by default.