Wikipedia:Miscellany For Deletion
Skip to: Table of contents / current discussions / old business (bottom). |
Please do not nominate your user page (or subpages of it) for deletion here. Instead, add {{db-userreq}} at the top of any such page you no longer wish to keep; an administrator will then delete the page. See Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion for more information. |
Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates and modules |
Files |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
Miscellany for deletion (MfD) is a place where Wikipedians decide what should be done with problematic pages in the namespaces which aren't covered by other specialized deletion discussion areas. Items sent here are usually discussed for seven days; then they are either deleted by an administrator or kept, based on community consensus as evident from the discussion, consistent with policy, and with careful judgment of the rough consensus if required.
Filtered versions of the page are available at
Information on the process
What may be nominated for deletion here:
- Pages not covered by other XFD venues, including pages in these namespaces: Draft:, Help:, Portal:, MediaWiki:, Wikipedia: (including WikiProjects), User:, TimedText: and the various Talk: namespaces
- Userboxes (regardless of namespace)
- Pages in the File namespace that have a local description page but no local file (if there is a local file, Wikipedia:Files for discussion is the right venue)
- Any other page, that is not in article space, where there is dispute as to the correct XfD venue.
Requests to undelete pages deleted after discussion here, and debate whether discussions here have been properly closed, both take place at Wikipedia:Deletion review, in accordance with Wikipedia's undeletion policy.
Before nominating a page for deletion
Before nominating a page for deletion, please consider these guidelines:
Deleting pages in your own userspace |
|
Duplications in draftspace? |
|
Deleting pages in other people's userspace |
|
Policies, guidelines and process pages |
|
WikiProjects and their subpages |
|
Alternatives to deletion |
|
Alternatives to MfD |
|
Please familiarize yourself with the following policies
- Wikipedia:Deletion policy – our deletion policy that describes how we delete things by consensus
- Wikipedia:Deletion process – our guidelines on how to list anything for deletion
- Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – a how-to guide whose protocols on discussion format and shorthands also apply here
- Wikipedia:Project namespace – our guidelines on "Wikipedia" namespace pages
- Wikipedia:User page – our guidelines on user pages and user subpages
- Wikipedia:Userboxes – our guideline on userboxes
How to list pages for deletion
Please check the aforementioned list of deletion discussion areas to check that you are in the right area. Then follow these instructions:
Instructions on listing pages for deletion:
| ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
To list a page for deletion, follow this three-step process: (replace PageName with the name of the page, including its namespace, to be deleted) Note: Users must be logged in to complete step II. An unregistered user who wishes to nominate a page for deletion should complete step I and post their reasoning on Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion with a notification to a registered user to complete the process.
|
Administrator instructions
V | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 43 | 43 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 5 | 85 | 90 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
Administrator instructions for closing and relisting discussions can be found here.
Archived discussions
A list of archived discussions can be located at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates.
Current discussions
- Pages currently being considered for deletion are indexed by the day on which they were first listed. Please place new listings at the top of the section for the current day. If no section for the current day is present, please start a new section.
August 21, 2024
Wikipedia:WikiProject Noongar has 5 talk page disscussions, 3 are automated and for the remaning two they were never replied to by anyone. This project has never been active. Since Noongar are indigenous Australians, there really is no reason to have another project when Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of Australia exists. Gonnym (talk) 12:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- keep preserve, lots of activity around Noongar topics with discussions taking place on articles more than the project page. Number of discussion on a project page a poor criteria when the project covers 1,000's of articles Gnangarra 13:36, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- No one is arguing that any articles regarding Noongar should be deleted, the argument was that the project itself is and was always dead, as evidence by the extreme lack of any activity on the project pages, including yours. Gonnym (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- The project was not always dead, but many people suffer racial attacks trying to work on content so editors were driven away by the community. Contributors to noongar content and of noongar knowledge are driven into hiding even now, racial attacks on Indigenous Australian communities is not a sexy bias thats gets global attention. Wikimedia Australia still reports condiserable issues with access of accurate Indigenous Australian knowledge including global events to favour colonial perspective over Indigenous ones. The Project serves a very important way for those editors to contact people like me who are willing to stand out on the these matters. Arvhicing and redirectings isnt ideal and just adds another barrier to participation. Gnangarra 08:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Of the "two [talk page discussions that] were never replied to by anyone", one of them ("categorizing Noongar people") explicitly asks editors to join a discussion on another page (to avoid fragmenting the discussion), which they did. So it is incorrect to say that the post was never replied to. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- No one is arguing that any articles regarding Noongar should be deleted, the argument was that the project itself is and was always dead, as evidence by the extreme lack of any activity on the project pages, including yours. Gonnym (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Do whatever is done to inactive WikiProjects: There is a talk page archive at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Noongar/Archive 8 (which is not listed on the main talk page) which shows that there was at least some degree of collaborative activity years ago. This isn't a dead-on-arrival project but just one that has become inactive. As such it should not be deleted, but instead be archived or marked historical or marked inactive or whatever is done to such inactive projects. Curbon7 (talk) 22:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've moved the archive to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Noongar/Archive 1 and fixed the archiving instructions on the main talk page. I have no opinion on what should happen to this project (but I live in a geographical area covered by it). Graham87 (talk) 04:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Mark historical or Redirect to Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of Australia - This project is completely dormant at present. In the year 2023, there were 141 pagesview of the project page; that is annual pageviews, or approximately 0.5 daily pageviews. Most of the work of a WikiProject is done on its project talk page. In 2023, there were 11 pageviews of the project talk page; that is total annual pageviews. One of those was a mass message, and at least two of them were for archival. In 2024, there were 20 pageviews, and some of them were for archival. Looking back, the project was lightly used between 2015, when it was created, and 2017, and has been essentially unused from 2018 on. Maybe we need a discussion about what should be done with dormant WikiProjects when. This project was never very active, because it always should have been a task force, but was not completely unused. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:54, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- The Project serves a very important way for Noongar editors to contact people like me who are willing to stand out on the these matters. Archiving and redirecting isnt ideal and just adds another barrier to participation. Gnangarra 08:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
August 19, 2024
Wikipedia:Requested lists (2nd nomination)
All prior XfDs for this page: |
This page for requesting the creation of lists in articlespace has been largely ignored; there are requests on this page which have been pending for 12 years. It would be better to delete this page and redirect it to Wikipedia:Requested articles instead, as the subpages corresponding to that process appear to be somewhat better noticed. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:32, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Blank and mark historical: As is done with such redundant/inactive project pages, pointing to WP:Requested articles through the comment parameter of {{historical}}. Curbon7 (talk) 22:32, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with marking as historical. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 03:26, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Home Living/Article Guidelines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
No useful content. This page was written in 2009 and has gotten no attention since. There's nothing here worth keeping. Daask (talk) 15:22, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- You are not listed as a member of the WikiProject. Why are you trying to manage a WikiProject that you are not a member of?
- If the WikiProject is inactive, maybe it should be archived wholesale. Selective archiving by deletion is not a good idea.
- How did you come across this page? SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:32, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Historical page of an inactive WikiProject. There's nothing here worth discussing.—Alalch E. 15:29, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - The nominator appears to be ragpicking. Maybe the WikiProject should be marked historical. Is that what SmokeyJoe means by archived, or do they have a different concept of archival? If the nominator had some reason to come across the page other than ragpicking, maybe they should explain, or maybe not. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Home Living/Collaboration (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
No useful content. This page and its talk page have never been used. Daask (talk) 15:20, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Doesn't matter.—Alalch E. 17:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Maybe the WikiProject should be marked historical, but that is not what we are here for. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
August 17, 2024
Okay, so quite a while ago I nominated this for speedy deletion but changed my mind since it was just a draft. I am doing a normal deletion discussion, as I have decided that this obviously not an actual thing. Nowhere can I find evidence for Eiichiro Oda creating a show called Terminator. This article, as far as I can tell, is a blatant hoax. It is made even more suspicious as it has the word "fanfic" in the title. Gaismagorm (talk) 19:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- whoops, I think speedy deletion was actually the right choice, probably should've read Wikipedia:Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity before submitting this. My bad! Gaismagorm (talk) 19:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as G3. No results for "Dawn Island Arc" "Terminator" on Google which leads me to believe it is a hoax. I would've just left it if it weren't still being actively edited. C F A 💬 23:29, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral at this time, only because I am assuming good faith that good-faith editors think that this is a hoax. Otherwise I would have said Weak Keep. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:26, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: as a probable hoax. As it is being actively edited, it is a good idea to bring it to MfD for deletion as a hoax. SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:10, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete hoax.—Alalch E. 15:30, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
August 16, 2024
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Bonnie Tyler |
---|
The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 23:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC) Project was created in 2015 and has 1 member (the creator) and zero non-automated talk page discussions. This never was a project. A single singer or band don't need a stand-alone project and usually not even a task force as the amount of articles isn't that big. Gonnym (talk) 19:08, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
|
Old business
Everything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began 07:09, 17 August 2024 (UTC) ended today on 24 August 2024. Editors may continue to add comments until the discussion is closed but they should keep in mind that the discussion below this marker may be closed at any time without further notice. Discussions that have already been closed will be removed from the page automatically by Legobot and need no further action. |
August 13, 2024
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's Premier League (cricket) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Unnecessary WikiProject that was created in spite of the objections of a number of users at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 94#Wikiproject WPL notice. As predicted there, this WikiProject has immediately become dormant, because it is a tournament that runs for less than 1 month a year (and so WikiProject will be dormant for most of the rest of the year). Women's Premier League (cricket) is a cricket tournament, and so a breakaway WikiProject from WP:WikiProject Cricket is not required. Note: I do not support any of the existing breakaway WikiProjects (WP:IPL, WP:PSL, WP:BPL, WP:LPL etc), and will be considering nominating them for merging with WP:CRIC too. As per WP:OSE, the existence of these other WikiProjects is not a reason to keep this one. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:29, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with Joseph and also, accept that I made a mistake as discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 94#Wikiproject WPL notice. I have been thinking about this for a while and was actually going to make a proposal this weekend, which would've been for these WikiProjects to be superseded by respective taskforces of WP:CRIC. Current WikiProjects can be renamed and reworked into new taskforces as shown below.
- Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 16:51, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have just started a discussion about these taskforces at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket#Merge WikiProjects back into this project, and would personally be more than happy for WPL to have a representative task force. (I was drafting the text for that discussion before I saw Vestrian24Bio's reply here, but agree with what they have said). Please anyone feel free to contribute there. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:55, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Joseph2302 just summed up what's wrong with Wikipedia as a whole with the statement
because it is a tournament that runs for less than 1 month a year (and so WikiProject will be dormant for most of the rest of the year).
There's a shit-ton more to "the sum total of human knowledge" than merely regurgitating yesterday's headlines and trending topics. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 19:05, 13 August 2024 (UTC) - Delete per the nom's opening statement. Recreate if there is consensus to add it as a taskforce.—Alalch E. 15:24, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
August 10, 2024
Spam page Andy Dingley (talk) 14:49, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral at this time. We should not be encouraging ragpicking, or the reviewing of new drafts to delete. This is a biography of a living person with no reliable sources, and would be a candidate for deletion in its present state. But with new drafts, which the originator might (even if it is unlikely) be about the improve, do not bite the newbies applies. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep: It was just created yesterday. They may well have been working on it until the deletion notice popped up. I agree, I can't find any sources that would establish notability, but deleting it seems excessively harsh. C F A 💬 02:22, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Move to draft and let the creator continue expanding it, if they don't it can then be deleted after x amount of months. No valid reason for deletion. –Davey2010 17:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Unsourced BLP.—Alalch E. 15:22, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete No point in this page's continued existence. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:18, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
July 22, 2024
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Stale unfiled RfAs | ||
---|---|---|
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. To be more specific, it is Keep for Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/AndrewSE19 and No consensus for the rest. Aside from one where the nominations was withdrawn already and the one keep (where the editor in question showed to comment), there was mostly divided opinion, and the proposed alternatives were vague. RL0919 (talk) 23:16, 23 August 2024 (UTC) Stale unfiled RfAs
Each of these has either been languishing since
|