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 | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 22 | 148 | 0 | 170 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
RfD | 0 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 18 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
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.
July 4, 2022
July 3, 2022
June 30, 2022
User:Mishadworken
- User:Mishadworken (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Apparently abandoned draft (for several years now!), or possibly an attempt to recreate a deleted article in userspace. Potential BLP issues. --ais523 05:12, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as an unsourced BLP. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:56, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: as an unsourced BLP. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:59, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
File talk:688 Club logo.jpg
- File talk:688 Club logo.jpg (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Talk page of locally deleted file that contains no discussions. Tagged with {{G8-exempt}} and not eligible for speedy deletion. See Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Archive 81#File talk pages which consist only of boilerplates, wikiproject tags, and/or text which has been copied to Commons. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:31, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete There is no reason to tag a page with G8-exempt if it doesn't contain anything. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:40, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- "It doesn't contain anything" is patently false. It contains a WikiProject banner. Were they consulted? We've long held that WikiProjects alone are to be the arbiter of what's appropriate to a WP. We're now saying that other project areas are entitled to exercise unilateral veto power on account of their local consensus? Sounds like a hijacking to me. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 21:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think the statement
We've long held that WikiProjects alone are to be the arbiter of what's appropriate to a WP.
is totally accurate. WikiProjects can, for sure, provide valuable guidance when it comes to sorting out issues, but a consensus achieved at a WikiProject is also a local consensus and it can't supersede a community consensus. Is there's any value to keeping this talk page other than it has a WikirRoject banner on it? The {{G8-exempt}} template was added by Miniapolis back in 2015 and maybe there was a reason for doing so back then that no longer applies. File talk pages (even ones tagged with G8-exempt) often end up deleted when the corresponding file is deleted if the reviewing admin feels there's no value to keeping the talk page. This file was originally uploaded as non-free content, but it was deleted per WP:F8 by Miniapolis after the file was moved to Commons in 2015. I've posted a {{Please see}} about this discussion on Miniapolis's user talk page; perhaps they will comment and help clarify things. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:59, 30 June 2022 (UTC)- Thanks for the ping, Marchjuly. I used to delete pages like this until I was told in no uncertain terms by Diannaa that, according to WP:G8 (which is policy), they should be kept. The project tag was placed in 2008 by Roswell native, who hasn't edited here since late last year. I don't see why pages like this need to be kept, and it may be time to open a discussion at WP:VPP. All the best, Miniapolis 23:40, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- The policy states "This criterion excludes any page that is useful to Wikipedia, and in particular: [among other things] Talk pages for files that exist on Wikimedia Commons" and that's what this talk page is. So policy states that it should be kept. — Diannaa (talk) 00:28, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think the statement
- "It doesn't contain anything" is patently false. It contains a WikiProject banner. Were they consulted? We've long held that WikiProjects alone are to be the arbiter of what's appropriate to a WP. We're now saying that other project areas are entitled to exercise unilateral veto power on account of their local consensus? Sounds like a hijacking to me. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 21:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Diannaa's and Miniapolis's comments above. While its encyclopedic value seem sketchy, WP:G8 does list this file talk page as a type of page that qualifies for {{G8-exempt}}; so, there's not a strong policy based reason for deleting the page even via MfD, unless someone wants to try and argue WP:IAR should be applied in this particular case. Although I don't agree that nominating the page for deletion here at MfD qualifies as a kind of "hijacking" in any way, the consensus to keep pages such as this is a community one that appears to be well established. Of course, there's always WP:CCC, but that should be something discussed at WT:CSD, WT:DELETE or even WP:VPP. For reference, a previous attempt to do such a thing at WT:CSD#Proposal: expand F2 to cover certain file talk pages did not establish a new consensus for any such change. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:44, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Looks like a bit touched F8 IIRC. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:30, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Keep as per User:Diannaa and User:Miniapolis. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I disagree with some of the keep arguments; "this page should be kept because it isn't a valid WP:CSD#G8" is an argument to not speedy, but it isn't an argument to not delete via MfD. On the other hand, this does appear to be the appropriate place for the WikiProject tag; I think it would be valid to place one of those on the talk page for a Commons file with no local description page, so the fact that there was a local description page (that got deleted) shouldn't be relevant. (This is a different situation from when, say, an article gets deleted; deleting a local description page for a file doesn't delete the file in much the same way as deleting a userpage doesn't block the user.) We wouldn't delete the information on the relationship between the WikiProject and file in Wikipedia:-space, so why do it in File talk:-space? --ais523 11:53, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
File talk:3amdigital.jpg
- File talk:3amdigital.jpg (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Talk page of locally deleted file. Tagged with {{G8-exempt}} but doesn't actually contain any discussion. See Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Archive 81#File talk pages which consist only of boilerplates, wikiproject tags, and/or text which has been copied to Commons. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:23, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as blatant misuse of G8-exempt. There is literally nothing to keep here. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:41, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Delete unless User:Miniapolis can explain within five days why this is useful.Robert McClenon (talk) 00:02, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Interesting that Robert McClenon !voted "weak keep" several minutes later in an identical discussion. As an admin, I'm tasked with upholding policy until it's changed; the place for that discussion is WP:VPP. (FWIW, I think the WP:F8 criteria should be changed.) Miniapolis 00:18, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - This is what comes of reading one MFD at a time and !voting on them in order. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
User:AlvinJamesSaldanha
- User:AlvinJamesSaldanha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
WP:NOTWEBHOST. User has contributions outside of userspace however they are almost all 5+ years old, the user page was created somewhat recently. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 01:04, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Autobiographical user pages aren't unusual. This user page should be fine as long as he doesn't attempt to turn it into an article. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 02:18, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Mellohi! WP:UPYES mentions limited autobiographical content. This page seems more like a resume and has no mention of anything related to Wikipedia, it may be more about self-promotion than Wikipedia. Being written in 3rd person, WP:FAKEARTICLE is likely also relevant. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 02:47, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Good morning.
- I will not be attempting to turn this into an article. There is PLENTY about me on the internet and this was not an attempt to be featured on wikipedia. I use wikipedia a great deal and correct a great many grammar and spelling mistakes, even if I am not logged in. It would be wonderful to have this not deleted, but I respect your decision.223.182.97.2 (talk) 03:46, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Alvin J Saldanha 223.182.97.2 (talk) 03:46, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. This really looks like resume and self-promotion to me. —Sundostund (talk) 13:17, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - This looks like web hosting of a resume. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:57, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Although there's a lot of latitude in userspace, I've come to think that it's incorrect to extend that to pages that look like articles (indeed, BLPs), especially when they contain a lot of content that's irrelevant to someone's work at Wikipedia. (Also, if it's to be kept, a user page that's this similar to an article should have {{userpage}} substed onto it to reduce confusion, especially due to the possibility that it gets picked up in mirrors – I've done that.) --ais523 12:04, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
June 28, 2022
June 27, 2022
June 22, 2022
User:Charlie Wilson1702
- User:Charlie Wilson1702 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Per this SPI, there should no longer be any sock tags implied to newer puppets whenever this LTA causes havoc. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 15:52, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- I disagree with the comments at the SPI, it is standard to tag the socks, to track disruption. GiantSnowman 16:36, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. I don't see any harm in keeping this for our records, I want to note that there is no WP:LTA file for this person yet. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:34, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Knowledgekid87 indeed there isn't. There are probably other LTAs which don't have a WP:LTA file either. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:26, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Old business