Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh? It is a “cop out answer” to suggest reading the research literature as a general practice? It is an “unnecessary and infuriating UI change” to roughly follow UI guidelines written down by experts with decades of experience? I am recommending that instead of just making something up based on the developer’s speculation and personal preference (which in your particular example happens to be terrible, as you would…
which in your particular example happens to be terrible, as you would discover if you actually tested it in a real-world setting My points all come from real-world experience, both as a user and developer. These unwanted UI changes irritate me enough to complain about them, but apparently my opinion doesn't count at all, because these so-called "experts" will only parrot their vague "studies show that X, therefore yo…
You said “In fact, I'd say this is even clearer, putting the question at the end and immediately following it with the two choices:”
Did you ever test this explicitly vs. the recommended alternative of using verbs for labels? (Ideally by doing a user study, but heck, I’ll take anything...)
I claim that this has been empirically tested and found to be inferior (i.e. result in higher error rate) in a variety of studies, both in published research and internal to various large companies which then got baked into their design guidelines. This was a subject of active research in the 1970s–1990s (and perhaps before).
You can find reasonably good advice about the subject in any number of introductory interface design textbooks, etc.
In this particular case, where user data is being irrevocably deleted, errors are especially harmful.
Edit: Maybe the word “terrible” in my previous comment was unfair. Sorry to be inflammatory.
