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
[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:, MOS: (in the unlikely event it ever contains a page that is not a redirect or one of the 5 disambiguation pages) and the various Talk: namespaces
- Userboxes, regardless of the namespace
- 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 | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 33 | 0 | 33 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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.
November 8, 2024
[edit]- MediaWiki:Delete (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
- MediaWiki:Protect (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Message is identical to source, albeit with different casing (lowercase instead of uppercase). Please also see Special:AllMessages/delete and Special:AllMessages/protect. Awesome Aasim 00:02, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
November 7, 2024
[edit]Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Queen Elizabeth slipped majestically into the water |
---|
The result of the discussion was: keep. Per WP:SNOW FOARP (talk) 11:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
This essay is excessively obscene. It's largely based on sexual humor and contains multiple images that depict sexual intercourse for humorous, not informative, purposes. Moreover, sex jokes and the images of depicted or implied ("CENSORED") sexual intercourse are interspersed with non-sexual photos of real women, who most likely haven't been asked if they want to be shown in this context. I'm sorry to say this, but this page very much comes off as sexist. Were this in article space, it would have been in violation of WP:GRATUITOUS. Otherwise, if this page is not to be deleted, it would be good to at least remove the explicit images. NicolausPrime (talk) 20:37, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
|
- MediaWiki:Abusefilter-blocker (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
- MediaWiki:Abusefilter-blockreason (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Abuse filter blocking is disabled on English Wikipedia. Thus this message is pointless. There is only one log entry attributed to User:Edit filter: Special:Log/Edit filter. Awesome Aasim 19:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Inconsistent with MediaWiki:Skin-view-edit, MediaWiki:Monobook-view-edit, MediaWiki:Vector-view-edit, MediaWiki:Vector-2022-view-edit, etc. Should be deleted to allow the default "Edit" text to be visible. Since this page has a bit of a history I am hesitant to tag it for G6 and am instead sending it to MFD. Awesome Aasim 19:28, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
November 6, 2024
[edit]- Draft:A Car's life: Sparky's big Adventure (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Draft by a quickly blocked vandalism-only account. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:25, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- Question - Does the film exist? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NDRAFT. Deleting drafts is busywork. -1ctinus📝🗨 19:48, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per WP:G3. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:E4CF:BC31:3E2B:DEFF (talk) 22:26, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- If you have an account, it is a violation of WP:SOCK to edit projectspace logged out. If you don’t have an account, please WP:REGISTER. Some level of medium-term accountability is important for editors of projectspace. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:14, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - I have verified that the film does exist. The draft is the work of a vandal, but is not vandalism itself, only a stupid draft. Stupid drafts can be ignored for six months. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:34, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Not vandalism. Author is therefore not a vandalism account. The terse nomination is wrong. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:10, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
November 4, 2024
[edit]No transclusions. There is no reason to keep old versions of templates; they can be seen in the page history. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:55, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Agree with nom. If history merge is needed then it should be done, but we don't need to keep multiple sets of "old" templates. Gonnym (talk) 21:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Once-used Userboxes need to be kept to avoid breaking old versions of userpages. SmokeyJoe (talk) 19:57, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:17, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Virtually blank draft, consisting of a Wikipedia maintenance template but no actual content, with no obvious reason to exist. This appears to have been created in an attempt to institute a "PC" --> Pony Canyon redirect as a bypass of the fact that PC already exists in mainspace as a disambiguation page listing a lot of things (including, but not limited to, the obvious one that would have a much stronger claim to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for it than Pony Canyon ever would), and has been filed in Category:Pony Canyon a couple of times in defiance of WP:DRAFTNOCAT, even though filing it there wouldn't even serve any useful purpose anyway: even where shortcut redirects are in place, they don't need to be filed in their target's eponymous category as an alternative way of getting from the category to its own head article that's already in the same category.
So there's just no need for this, if its only purpose is to try to bypass Wikipedia's standard processes. Bearcat (talk) 15:20, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. This appears to be a mistake by a new account, perhaps even an alt account of someone already involved. Glad to see it brought here so the community can see it. BusterD (talk) 16:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - If it is a mistake by a new account, the user can tag it with G7 for deletion. Otherwise it is the sort of junk that can be left in draft space. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Likely WP:HOAX. Other than small changes being made to the introduction and infobox to present the subject as "A(u)gustus Huckleberry" (a name that doesn't verify on the Google as having any connection to Carnegie Mellon University at all under either spelling), this is otherwise a mixture of text copied and pasted from Farnam Jahanian without being significantly changed, and boilerplate placeholder text of the lorem ipsum variety. Also, the photo in the infobox is clearly not of a man in his 60s. Bearcat (talk) 02:25, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - This may have had the involvement of one of the minions of Genseric. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
November 2, 2024
[edit]Unused userbox that appears to violate WP:UBDIVISIVE. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - We have usually kept controversial political userboxes, as long as they did not advocate violence. This userbox does not advocate violence, but opposes an organization that is said to advocate violence. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:30, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:User Oppose Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Unused userbox that appears to violate WP:UBDIVISIVE. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Just as there are userboxes that support various political ideologies, having a userbox that expresses opposition to a specific ideology contributes to a balanced representation. It’s crucial that Wikipedia reflects a spectrum of viewpoints, especially on contentious topics. Secondly the existence of such userboxes is constructive, they allow individuals to express their views and engage with differing opinions, which aligns with Wikipedia’s goal of providing a platform for diverse perspectives. There are several instances where userboxes representing differing ideologies exist without being flagged for divisiveness. This suggests that our community values the representation of diverse viewpoints. If the support template exists for a organization like RSS which is often regarded as terrorist organization or far right extremist, and often blamed for assassination Mahatma Gandhi, there is a need of the template which is in opposition to the ideology of RSS and PFI. ZDX (User) | (Contact) 14:55, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - We have usually kept controversial political userboxes, as long as they did not advocate violence. This userbox does not advocate violence, but opposes an ideology that is said to advocate violence. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:30, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Unused userbox that appears to violate WP:UBDIVISIVE. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Just as there are userboxes that support various political ideologies, having a userbox that expresses opposition to a specific ideology contributes to a balanced representation. It allow individuals to express their views and engage with differing opinions. There are several instances where userboxes representing differing ideologies exist without being flagged for divisiveness. ZDX (User) | (Contact) 15:01, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - We have usually kept controversial political userboxes, as long as they did not advocate violence. This userbox does not advocate violence, but opposes an organization that is said to advocate violence. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:29, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Unused userbox that appears to violate WP:UBDIVISIVE. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - We have usually kept controversial political userboxes, as long as they did not advocate violence. This userbox does not advocate violence, but opposes an organization that is said to advocate violence. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:28, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
November 1, 2024
[edit]Wikipedia:WikiProject Terrorism/Guantanamo/What to do with Afghan training camps?/Merge less well referenced articles to Afghan training camp... or to a new article...
[edit]- Wikipedia:WikiProject Terrorism/Guantanamo/What to do with Afghan training camps?/Merge less well referenced articles to Afghan training camp... or to a new article... (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
I originally just redirected this but it was contested. Contextless Guantanamo related page, part of a project to make a lot of pages on a lot of Guantanamo prisoner BLPs (many of which are being slowly deleted as given our current rules they are non-notable) by an indef banned user that never went anywhere masquerading as a WikiProject page. Also, WP Terrorism is no longer a wikiproject so these are attached to a project that no longer exists. Marking it as historical is negative for that reason. I see no harm in letting it exist as a redirect so the page history is accessible but I do see issues with letting it remain attached to nothing.
Also nominating:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Terrorism/Guantanamo/What to do with Afghan training camps?
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Terrorism/Guantanamo
PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:59, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- Question - I would like to know whether I understand. It appears that there was a WikiProject until 19 October 2024, and then it was moved to become a task force of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography. Wikipedia:WikiProject Terrorism/Guantanamo was a subpage of the project, and it had its own subpages. So the issue is what to do with the subpages of something that no longer exists. Is that correct? My own thinking is that marking them historical is exactly what should be done, to record the historical link to the renamed project. Is my reading of the history correct? If so, why shouldn't we record the strange history? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:23, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Robert McClenon What's the point of keeping project pages that have no project? I find they tend, even if marked defunct or historical, to attract random edits, vandalism, and people for asking for help on the wrong pages to get no response. Redirecting it stops that. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:29, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
September 22, 2024
[edit]Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Aramea |
---|
The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 23:46, 29 September 2024 (UTC) WikiProject Aramea was created in 2015, and through viewing the edit history, has rarely seen any edits or discussion on creation or editing of articles since that time. Additionally, many of its formerly active members were sockpuppet accounts of users that have since been blocked indefinitely. The WikiProject itself is almost an exact carbon copy of WikiProject Assyria, with the same sections, graphics, and layout. I am proposing that the WikiProject be deleted as it essentially acts as a content fork, which is one of Wikipedia's criteria for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Surayeproject3 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
|
Old business
[edit]Everything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began 11:44, 1 November 2024 (UTC) ended today on 8 November 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. |
October 31, 2024
[edit]Unnecessary when Category:Top-importance Percussion articles exists. Has not been edited since the first day of its creation nearly twenty years ago. Why? I Ask (talk) 05:16, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Mark Historical - No need to delete. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Is it even historical? It has been edited by only one editor on one day over a decade ago. It does not represent the larger WikiProject at all. Why? I Ask (talk) 17:48, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Mark as historical or redirect to main WikiProject page: was once useful and there's no reason its content should be inaccessible to non-admins, which is all that deletion achieves. Per the links to the page, it was mentioned at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Percussion/Archive 1 and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Percussion/To do/Archive 1. Also, it was created in February 2008, which is more like 16-and-a-half years ago than 20 (fairly important because Wikipedia changed a lot between November 2004 and February 2008). Graham87 (talk) 09:35, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- I would prefer a move to the original author's user page per WP:PRJDEL. Why? I Ask (talk) 09:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Percussion/Collaboration of the Month (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Not been used since its creation in 2008. Wikipedia:WikiProject Percussion/In progress seems to be an attempt at re-creating it, thus this is unnecessary. Why? I Ask (talk) 04:44, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Mark Historical - No need to delete. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- It has never been used. The only edits are its creation and tagging of inactive. It is not historical. Why? I Ask (talk) 18:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Mark as historical or redirect to main WikiProject page: was once useful and there's no reason its content should be inaccessible to non-admins, which is all that deletion achieves. As it says on the page, the only collabroation of the month was [[List of percussion instruments, so it was used for something. Graham87 (talk) 09:41, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
October 25, 2024
[edit]Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Marine 69-71/Autographs |
---|
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:48, 8 November 2024 (UTC) WP:NOTWEBHOST violation GrayStorm(Complaints Dept.|My Contribs.) 04:10, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
|