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.
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[edit]
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[edit]
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[edit]
- 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[edit]
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[edit]
V | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 22 | 167 | 0 | 189 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
RfD | 0 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 18 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
Administrator instructions for closing and relisting discussions can be found here.
Archived discussions[edit]
A list of archived discussions can be located at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates.
Current discussions[edit]
- 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 6, 2022[edit]
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The helper5667/sandbox[edit]
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The helper5667/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The helper5667/sandbox (2nd nomination) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Two "MfDs" which don't appear to have been intended as serious MfDs: they were each opened, then closed (as "keep", not "withdrawn") around a minute later, and may have been some sort of test of closing deletion discussions rather than a serious attempt to get the page deleted. The {{mfd}} tags were never placed (steps 2 and 3 of filing an MfD were followed, but not step 1). The deletion rationales were also obviously non-serious, and the user filed the MfD against their own sandbox (which they could have speedily deleted if they wanted to, giving further evidence that the MfD wasn't serious).
Deleting these is probably for the best, because if there's ever a third attempt to delete the page, the prior "MfDs" will be very confusing, and in general it causes confusion for people who track the MfD log to see what's been going on at MfD recently (I was very surprised to see the same sandbox nominated for MfD twice on the same day, and had assumed a bot malfunction until I realised what had happened). --ais523 23:57, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete all these test MfDs. In fact, somebody should G2 them. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:02, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Faroe Islands/Article alerts[edit]
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Faroe Islands/Article alerts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
I don't know if CSD G8 is applicable here. Q₂₈ (talk) 23:40, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
- Deleting this without updating WP:AALERTS/SUBLIST will just lead to it being recreated. So update that first if the Alerts are no longer needed.
- Also since Wikipedia:WikiProject Faroe Islands was deleted, it's likely all subpages should be deleted, not just this one. However, I note that {{WikiProject Faroe Islands}} is still around, and so all things that are based on it will still work. Including these Alerts. So I'm not sure deletion is needed. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:44, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep for now as per Headbomb as Wrong Venue. This report is being produced based on the task list used by a bot. Do not bring requests involving pages produced by bots to MFD without first discussing with the bot maintainer. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
- Question - Do we need a list of issues not to bring to MFD, such as stupid drafts*, and pages produced by bots? (*With certain exceptions such as BLP violations and fantasy web sites) Robert McClenon (talk) 03:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Robert McClenon: You could be less WP:BITEy here, both with this comment and the one above. The only thing this requires, bot-wise, is a trivial update to a subscription page that anyone can do. The question of having the alerts or not would normally be discussion on the Project's talk page, but that project has been deleted. MFD is a perfectly fine venue to have a discussion on whether or not these alerts are still needed, but this should likely be done in the context of the other subpages of WikiProject Faroe Islands. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:45, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
July 4, 2022[edit]
Draft:Professional Video Monitors[edit]
Rejected draft. Tagged for speedy deletion under G11, which I don't feel is appropriate (it is not "exclusively promotional" and in fact lists some drawbacks of the product), yet searching turns up mostly sales pages and product listings rather than reliable sources. Let's make a decision one way or the other--I can see both sides. ChromaNebula (talk) 16:51, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - It's a rejected draft. There is no need to bring rejected drafts to MFD, and rejected drafts should not be brought to MFD simply because they were rejected. The purpose of rejection is to stop useless resubmissions without making extra work for MFD. It isn't necessary to bring drafts to MFD simply because they needed rejecting. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:41, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - Rejected drafts shouldn't go to MFD. They should either be allowed to develop or speedy deleted via G13. --WaltCip-(talk) 12:22, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
- That's what I thought too. I only took it here because it was (inappropriately) marked for speedy deletion and I didn't want to start an edit war over the issue, especially being a relatively new user. ChromaNebula (talk) 17:14, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
July 3, 2022[edit]
Draft:Brown Jovi[edit]
This is a throw a way character to make a joke (Brown Jovi / Bon Jovi) that appears in about 10 seconds of a Ms. Marvel episode, and is in no way notable for an article, let alone a draft, about them. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:05, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Trailblazer101 (talk) 15:27, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Snow delete never going to become an article, totally stupid. Dronebogus (talk) 15:44, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Weak delete – Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity, but since it's been nominated from deletion we might as well get rid of it. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:10, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Sure, but this clearly isn't going to become a mainspace article. Why let it languish between being as it currently is for six months, or other editors coming across it and trying to submit it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- There are many, many drafts like this one, some even more nonsensical than this (example 1, example 2). That's where G13 comes in, so editors don't need to send them to MfD every time. There's no harm in keeping these drafts since they're never going to become articles anyway, and even if editors try to submit them to AfC they will 99% be rejected. Just let them be automatically G13'd after six months. InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:18, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- It’s here, we should just snow delete it, WP:NOTBURO Dronebogus (talk) 00:49, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- There are many, many drafts like this one, some even more nonsensical than this (example 1, example 2). That's where G13 comes in, so editors don't need to send them to MfD every time. There's no harm in keeping these drafts since they're never going to become articles anyway, and even if editors try to submit them to AfC they will 99% be rejected. Just let them be automatically G13'd after six months. InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:18, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Sure, but this clearly isn't going to become a mainspace article. Why let it languish between being as it currently is for six months, or other editors coming across it and trying to submit it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - Stupidity is not a reason to delete a draft. Stop ragpicking. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:50, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Throwaway or not, it has sources only a week old. This is the purpose of draftspace. Don’t bring worthless harmless things to MfD. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:24, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- 'Keep - Stay out of draft space, let G13 do its job.--WaltCip-(talk) 12:20, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
June 30, 2022[edit]
User:Mishadworken[edit]
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[edit]
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[edit]
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)
- Keep with the same reasoning as on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/File talk:688 Club logo.jpg – I think these two pages are in identical situations. For what it's worth, there have been two previous discussions about this sort of page at WT:CSD (the one linked in the nomination and this one); I'd judge the former discussion as "no consensus as to whether it's correct to delete these pages or not" and the latter discussion as confirming that. --ais523 21:57, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Draft:Lucknow Super Giants[edit]
- Draft:Lucknow Super Giants (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
- Draft:Lucknow IPL Team (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Duplicate of article already in mainspace Spike 'em (talk) 10:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy Redirect to Lucknow Super Giants. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:00, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:AlvinJamesSaldanha |
---|
The result of the discussion was: delete. Rough consensus exists that this is a WP:NOTWEBHOST violation. Wikipedia is not the place to post/host resumes. TheSandDoctor Talk 02:26, 7 July 2022 (UTC) User:AlvinJamesSaldanha[edit]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)
|
June 27, 2022[edit]
Draft:The Handmaid's Tale Novel - Parents' Guide[edit]
- Draft:The Handmaid's Tale Novel - Parents' Guide (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Violation of WP:NOTESSAY, WP:NOTWEBHOST, and WP:NOTGUIDE. LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop and My Little Pony Fan) 19:59, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - It's a draft. It needed declining or rejecting. The reasons given are reasons to decline or reject a submission,and it was declined. It may or may not be able to be made either into an article or part of an article by attributing the opinions to reliable sources. The nominator should stop ragpicking. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: Fails WP:NOR, but we don’t delete most drafts per WP:NDRAFT; bringing them to MfD defeats the purpose of draftspace. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:51, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - These wholesale draft MFDs are getting out of hand.--WaltCip-(talk) 12:12, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
- speedy delete this didn’t need to happen in the first place but since it’s extremely obvious this is not intended to be a useful contribution to the encyclopedia but rather a weird essay/soapbox that wouldn’t even be useful to its intended audience then why not just delete it while it’s here? Dronebogus (talk) 13:37, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- What Speedy delete criterion? To call “speedy delete” after “keep” !votes displays nonconcurrence with the spirit of WP:CSD. SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:37, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- Can probably be covered under the spirit of WP:A11, WP:U5 using WP:IAR and WP:NOTBURO. This is not an attempt at making an encyclopedia article, anyone can blatantly see that, and there is no way it’s going to be salvaged. Dronebogus (talk) 16:51, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- What Speedy delete criterion? To call “speedy delete” after “keep” !votes displays nonconcurrence with the spirit of WP:CSD. SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:37, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Old business[edit]
Everything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began 04:46, 30 June 2022 (UTC) ended today on 7 July 2022. 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. |
June 22, 2022[edit]
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Charlie Wilson1702 |
---|
The result of the discussion was: keep. TheSandDoctor Talk 02:24, 7 July 2022 (UTC) User:Charlie Wilson1702[edit]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)
|
June 28, 2022[edit]
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:WWWJ-FM |
---|
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. Found not to be a blatant hoax, just undemonstrated verifiability. There is an unreconciliable split between whether it should be deleted as hopeless or kept to die a natural death. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:47, 6 July 2022 (UTC) Draft:WWWJ-FM[edit]This is a speedy declined by the creator. The article purports to describe a 94.7 FM radio station in Atlanta, which does not exist. (Atlanta has WUBL on 94.9, so there couldn't be one.) There is also no radio station with the call sign WWWJ at this time. This is a blatant hoax, no matter what the creator claims, and it should be deleted as unsuitable to become an encyclopedic article. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:12, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
|