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.
A filtered version of the page that excludes nominations of pages in the draft namespace is available at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion no drafts.
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:, Gadget:, Gadget definition:, and the various Talk: namespaces
- Userboxes (regardless of namespace)
- Files 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 | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 94 | 87 | 181 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 2 | 12 | 14 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 33 | 33 |
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.
June 16, 2022
User:Tennisuser123/Hemisphere Airlines
- User:Tennisuser123/Hemisphere Airlines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
This is a hoax and so unlikely to be useful for the project per WP:UP#GOALS and WP:FAKEARTICLE. The US doesn't have a flag carrier (it does have three primary airlines but they are not flag carriers). It most definitely does not have an airline named Hemisphere Airlines.
I would understand if the page were being used to test infoboxes, wikitables, or article writing. I'm also aware that we generally give wide latitude to pages in userspace. However, per WP:FAKEARTICLE, "Userspace is not a free web host and should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles ... Actual fake articles should be deleted as incompatible with the purpose of the project."
There seems to be a not-insubstantial amount of prose devoted to the destinations and fleet of this fictitious airline. It contains fake statistics like "Hemisphere and its subsidiaries employ 70,000 people worldwide. The airline reported $17.2 billion in annual revenue in 2017 and consistently places on the S&P 500 Index. The airline transports over 16 million passengers per year, averaging approximately 380,000 passengers per day, or approximately 13.8 million per year." These statistics are easily debunked by a quick search online. Since this user subpage exclusively contains information about a fictitious airline, I believe this falls under WP:FAKEARTICLE. Epicgenius (talk) 22:28, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Fiction presented as fact is never ok. We quickly delete fictitious history pages. This looks no different. One thing different is the user has a long history of contribution. Maybe they can explain? SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:52, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as a fake article and as a hoax, without commenting on whether it is an obvious hoax calling for G3, but both obvious and unobvious hoaxes can be deleted at XFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:49, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
User:Tennisuser123/Levittown Branch
- User:Tennisuser123/Levittown Branch (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
This is a hoax and so unlikely to be useful for the project per WP:UP#GOALS and WP:FAKEARTICLE. The Long Island Rail Road has no such branch. The stretch of railroad in question is described as Central Railroad of Long Island#Garden City–Mitchel Field Secondary - it is a freight line, not a passenger branch.
I would understand if the page were being used to test infoboxes, wikitables, or article writing. I'm also aware that we generally give wide latitude to pages in userspace.
However, per WP:FAKEARTICLE, "Userspace is not a free web host and should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles ... Actual fake articles should be deleted as incompatible with the purpose of the project." Since the track in question has no stations and is a freight line, statements like "Currently, the Levittown Branch is the sixth-busiest on the LIRR, serving over 20,000 passengers daily and over 7.3 million annually, with ridership up by 6.8% since 2007" evidently cannot be true. This user subpage has been around for five years without any edits and, since it mainly contains information about a fictitious passenger railroad branch, I believe this falls under WP:FAKEARTICLE. Epicgenius (talk) 22:07, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Draft:Bromyard Cricket Club
- Draft:Bromyard Cricket Club (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
miss-use of Wikipedia as a web host, we are not a permanent repository of random non notable cricket club details, user clearly has no intention of submitting for review. Theroadislong (talk) 21:47, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- (Comment) This is a wholly incorrect statement to make and unfounded. The user Theroadislong clearly has no cricket specialist knowledge and to suggest my edits are ‘random non notable cricket club details’ is offensive. This club has had notable players that have played International and First Class cricket for them. To suggest they are non notable suggests that the user has decided he will remove edits without careful understanding of what they contain. This cricket club plays in the same division as Old Hill Cricket Club that have their own Wiki page. I challenge the thoughtless process this user has used to suggest it be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Writerupdate (talk • contribs) 22:06, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Then why do you not submit it for review? Theroadislong (talk) 06:49, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NDRAFT. It looks like a draft. There is no evidence presented of NOTWEBHOSTING. Pageviews indicate no NOTWEBHOST abuse. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:57, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NDRAFT. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 00:42, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The subject does not meet either NCRICK or GNG, therefore it is entirely fair and correct to describe this as non-notable. The draft was declined nearly 11 months ago for inadequate referencing, and nothing has been done to address that. Instead, the creator keeps updating the statistics and other content which has no bearing on this issue, very much suggesting that there is no attempt to get the draft ready for publication; nor, indeed, has it been resubmitted since last July. The ultimate aim of a draft must surely be to produce a published article, otherwise we are merely providing a web hosting service, as the nom asserts. (And finally, just to point out that WP:NDRAFT is an essay, not a notability guideline.) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:55, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
June 12, 2022
Draft:Hamek War
- Draft:Hamek War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Was suspected to be a hoax by Nythar (talk · contribs), but they removed their own {{db-hoax}} tag without further comment. The draft is unsourced and with vague timeframe, and I found zero search engine results that mention something called Hamek in relation to Najmadin Shukr Rauf. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete No sources; I did a search and didn't find evidence for such a war. Nythar (talk) 19:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
June 10, 2022
Draft:Murat Arik
- Draft:Murat Arik (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Draft for promotional purposes. Kadı Message 19:41, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Most drafts start out looking like this one and this was created by a very new editor who is learning about Wikipedia norms and policies. I support giving them a chance to improve this draft. Their first days on Wikipedia have been colored by a series of allegations that, if untrue, were a very bumpy introduction to the project. Liz Read! Talk! 21:41, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - It's a draft. Drafts are not deleted at MFD for being promotional. They may be deleted as being purely promotional via G11, but this is not a G11 draft. There are three ways to deal with drafts that are not ready for article space: ignore them; advise the author how to improve them; improve them. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:57, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Deletions for promotional / notability etc. concerns don't apply to drafts. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 03:04, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Did you see the external links, @Liz @PerfectSoundWhatever @Robert McClenon? Kadı Message 07:20, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- What is the issue with them? Just looks like improperly formatted references to me. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 13:57, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @PerfectSoundWhatever, Unreliable websites, Instagram link and his website for backlink. Kadı Message 20:09, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- It's a draft. Please read Wikipedia:Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity. A majority of drafts have similar issues; we don't delete drafts for reliability of sources. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 20:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Wow, interesting! I understood the problem now. I am from Trwiki and there is no draft process there. I realized that I mixed the tr and enwiki's rules :) Thanks for pointing out, @PerfectSoundWhatever. Kadı Message 20:19, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Glad I could help!
— PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 23:41, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Glad I could help!
- Wow, interesting! I understood the problem now. I am from Trwiki and there is no draft process there. I realized that I mixed the tr and enwiki's rules :) Thanks for pointing out, @PerfectSoundWhatever. Kadı Message 20:19, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- It's a draft. Please read Wikipedia:Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity. A majority of drafts have similar issues; we don't delete drafts for reliability of sources. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 20:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @PerfectSoundWhatever, Unreliable websites, Instagram link and his website for backlink. Kadı Message 20:09, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- What is the issue with them? Just looks like improperly formatted references to me. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 13:57, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Did you see the external links, @Liz @PerfectSoundWhatever @Robert McClenon? Kadı Message 07:20, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Drafts are generally isn't deleted in MfD for being promotional (if it is eligible for deletion then we just go CSD G11). The draft in question has some puff and the author has some COI issues, however, which is fixable. MarioJump83 (talk) 08:59, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Draft is fixable, and it isn't exclusively promotional. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 00:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - It's a draft, and moreover even the nominator seems to concede that the reason for deleting the draft is not entirely cromulent here. --WaltCip-(talk) 12:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Draft:Murat Arık Photographer
- Draft:Murat Arık Photographer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Draft for promotional purposes. Kadı Message 19:39, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Basically a copy of Draft:Murat Arik which is also been nominated at MFD. I support leaving the best version alone and turning the other draft into a redirect. By the way, I look at expiring drafts all day long and it isn't uncommon for brand new editors to create several versions of the same article with different titles. They need to learn that this is unnecessary. Liz Read! Talk! 21:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Draft:Murat Arik. This is not a Speedy Redirect because that only applies to redirects to articles, but this is similar in that it should also be redirected. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:59, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Draft:Murat Arik, per Robert McClenon. MarioJump83 (talk) 08:54, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Terrorism/List of Templates/doc
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Terrorism/List of Templates/doc (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
The templates this documentation page is referring to: Template:Al-Odah, Template:14HighValue, Template:CSRT, Template:CSRT-No, and Template:CSRT-Yes, have all been deleted, so it is no longer useful to keep around a doc page stating that these templates are controversial. Hog Farm Talk 13:45, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as an unused and obsolete template documentation page. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 15:15, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Either Delete or Mark Historical - Why not mark historical? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:21, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing much to mark historical, as it doesn't seem to have been widely used in its time and it doesn't contain much wisdom for future generations. I'm not familiar with the old history here, but it doesn't seem useful to retain, and I've never really undestood the idea behind marking old superseded junk as historical when it was never widely used and lacks any clear future benefit. Hog Farm Talk 16:31, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Per the guidance on this, WP:HISTPAGES,
They are kept as records of past Wikipedia processes to give context to historical discussions and to inform future discussions on similar topics
. - Marking stuff as historical is intended to be used when there is a continued need to access pages after they has ceased being active, e.g. keeping records of old dispute resolution processes or obsolete policies that were cited in discussions. I agree there is nothing here that would justify keeping as a historical page, all the discussions where the usability of these templates was decided are archived at TFD. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 16:42, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Per the guidance on this, WP:HISTPAGES,
- I'm not seeing much to mark historical, as it doesn't seem to have been widely used in its time and it doesn't contain much wisdom for future generations. I'm not familiar with the old history here, but it doesn't seem useful to retain, and I've never really undestood the idea behind marking old superseded junk as historical when it was never widely used and lacks any clear future benefit. Hog Farm Talk 16:31, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Celebrities sets bad example for the young generations to follow |
---|
The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 03:42, 17 June 2022 (UTC) Draft:Celebrities sets bad example for the young generations to follow
Clear WP:NOTWEBHOST violation that wouldn't stand a chance in article space. Nothing worth keeping here. Was prodded by @Demt1298: but prod cannot be used on drafts. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:21, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
|
June 9, 2022
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Zhxy 519/sandbox |
---|
The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 03:43, 17 June 2022 (UTC) User:Zhxy 519/sandbox
Per Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1097#m:Requests_for_comment/Global_de-adminship_for_Jusjih, there are concerns that this sandbox looks like an attack page and tones are inappropriate for us, shouldn't we encourage that user to re-write to avoid too strong tones? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:37, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
|
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shivprasad1966/sandbox |
---|
The result of the discussion was: speedy delete as promotional content under WP:G11. RL0919 (talk) 04:41, 17 June 2022 (UTC) User:Shivprasad1966/sandbox
Business promotional draft relying mainly on self-sourcing, passing mentions, and Wikipedia links. No indication of notability. Blue Riband► 16:33, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
|
Draft:Memgraph
- Draft:Memgraph (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Procedural move of a PROD by Autorko with reasoning "Duplicate of existing article" (Memgraph). Proposed deletion is not for articles. If in article space, this might qualify as a CSD A10. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:29, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- I've moved the old page to new as it was suggested to me. Can I revoke this request for deletion since there is no need for it anylonger? Autorko (talk) 11:41, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- This is a mess! User:Autorko - What do you think that the template on former Draft:Memgraph that says "do not blank, merge, or move it" means? "Do not move it" includes do not move a nominated draft into article space. User:Sammi Brie - It is not necessary to nominate drafts for deletion because they are duplicates of existing articles. They are redirected to the article. That is what Speedy Redirect is for. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:15, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- User:Autorko - Do you have a conflict of interest?
- User:Autorko - Why are you moving a page that has no visible text but only a copyvio notice into article space? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:15, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say that I have conflict of interest. I'm contributing to open source parts of that project, same as I do with some other opensource software, GPL, and similar projects for past 5 years. So if contribution to opensource project that I'm writing about on Wikipedia is a conflict, then I have "conflict of interest". Autorko (talk) 06:07, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Keep in draft space after the copyvio is dealt with so that the remainder of the draft can be viewed. What happened to the copy that was in article space? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:52, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- It looks like Draft:Memgraph was moved to Memgraph and then back to Draft space, all after this MFD was filed. Liz Read! Talk! 01:29, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment, some history:
- the mainspace Memgraph page was first created by WP:cut-and-paste by Autorko, where it was (correctly) blanked as copyvio by Robert McClenon
- Autorko then placed a prod on the draft
- Sammi Brie nominated that for deletion here
- I reversed the C&P move (redirected to the draft, deleted that as R2) and then blanked the draft because of the copyvios
- Autorko moved it to mainspace despite the notice at the head of the page reading "please do not blank, merge, or move it, or remove this notice"
- I undid that move.
It's liable to be deleted at any time for copyright reasons unless a viable rewrite is proposed. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:48, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
June 5, 2022
Draft:WP:UNCERTAIN
- Draft:WP:UNCERTAIN (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Draft of a new proposed guideline by a now-banned editor, barely written and nobody else has contributed despite being pinged to do so, a week ago. starship.paint (exalt) 16:15, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- I normally always !vote keep for drafts since G13 would take care of the ones that are inactive. But this is pretty clearly an attempt at dodging the outcome of a prior MFD. Delete per nom. WaltCip-(talk) 16:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- To be clear, WaltCip's description of
this is pretty clearly an attempt at dodging the outcome of a prior MFD
is referring to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:What MEDRS is not, which was initiated on 28 May; the now-banned user started this draft on 29 May. The original MFD was later closed as delete. starship.paint (exalt) 02:08, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- To be clear, WaltCip's description of
- Delete as a stub potentially created to further WP:TE of the now-banned creator. I would not be opposed to an editor in good standing seeking to build a good-faith draft in this location, but without additional near-term edits the stub should be removed. Bakkster Man (talk) 15:17, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I am in very good standing and would be happy to work on this draft. We don't retroactively delete everything a banned editor contributed, and I don't think the ban was justified. Francesco espo (talk) 21:08, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- The draft is one line long and has a shortcut as a title. Why not simply start your own version (with a proper title)? Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:22, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
June 4, 2022
User:Seanisverybest/sandbox/~
- User:Seanisverybest/sandbox/~ (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Patent nonsense, gibberish, violation of WP:UP#GOALS, WP:NOTAWEBHOST. Page is 2 million bytes in size, 51st largest page on the English Wikipedia [4]. User’s last edit was to this page in March 2020. MxYamato (talk) 06:22, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete User pages aren't a free pass to do anything. There is more leniency in userspace but creating a page with over 2000 (useless) citations seems like a waste of server space. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 20:37, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Deleted pages are still kept in server space. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 22:22, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - It's a sandbox full of sand. Stop ragpicking. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:16, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. This page consists of the same citation repeated over 15,000 times. The article creator hasn't edited on Wikipedia in over two years. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:09, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per JayPlaysStuff. starship.paint (exalt) 03:19, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep and blank as a sandbox. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 16:01, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, blank if needed It's a sandbox. Deleted articles are kept in server space, so this page's deletion will accomplish nothing. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 22:25, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete inappropriate tones are facing-to-facing {{db-attack}} if no conflicts. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:45, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and JayPlaysStuff. —Sundostund (talk) 18:13, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - it's a sandbox. Sandboxes often have a bunch of nonsense in them. If you're not into nonsense, there's no need to poke around in other people's sandboxes. Nobody will ever see this other than the author and people looking for stuff to delete. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:13, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Old business