Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion
This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. This notice will automatically hide itself when the backlog is cleared. |
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 | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 6 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 36 | 36 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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.
October 15, 2024
[edit]Article for topic already exists in mainspace, incorrect use of project namespace FifthFive (talk) 02:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - This is a copy of a mainspace article that has been nominated for deletion (as noted by nominator). It may have been copied to project space because the guidelines explicitly forbid copies of mainspace articles to user space, and do not explicitly forbid copies of mainspace articles to project space. However, it is a redundant content fork, and is a misuse of project space. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
October 14, 2024
[edit]- Draft:What to do when leaving an abusive relationship (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal. Folkezoft (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - See Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity. This is a draft that will probably never be accepted into article space. Any benefit from trashing these hopeless drafts would be exceeded by the burden on the community (and in particular on the regular MFD editors) of reviewing large numbers of drafts to delete them. The policy on what Wikipedia is not lists various types of articles that are not allowed in article space. In draft space, we rely on the AFC reviewers not to accept them. In reviewing new drafts to assign them to categories and WikiProjects, it isn't necessary to nominate them for deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:58, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak delete per WP:NOTGUIDE, only because of the sensitive nature of the topic. I generally would agree with Robert, however, we are not in the business of offering advice about leaving potentially abusive relationships (e.g. someone finding this and following it could potentially suffer real-life harm if the advice is poor; better we have a clear collective conscience in this case). — Godsy (TALKCONT) 01:01, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Page serving no obvious purpose. This page, whose entire text consists of "AAAAAA!" just as the title implies, was created in March with the {{humor}} template on it from the outset -- but precisely because anybody could just add that template to absolutely anything in projectspace (e.g. failed drafts, total nonsense, hoaxes, etc.) that they wanted to "immunize" against deletion, the use of that template has traditionally required a consensus to be established that the page warranted retention on the grounds of humor.
Then a few days later the creator tried to add it to a redlinked (i.e. non-existent) category for "Articles that their creator doesn't remember writing", before immediately reverting themselves within less than a minute -- and then the page saw no further activity for the next seven months until last Thursday, when a different editor with no prior connection to it tried, for no obvious reason, to unrevert it back into the redlinked category with the edit summary "hummus" (i.e. no genuine explanation of why they were doing it, or how they even found the page in the first place given that absolutely nothing in Wikipedia links to it.)
So, basically, this is just silliness that's only inviting unconstructive editing rather than serving any purpose. Bearcat (talk) 18:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
WeakDelete - The nutshell to the Project namespace guideline says:Project pages are for information or discussion about Wikipedia.
. This has nothing to do with Wikipedia. However, the nominator, User:Bearcat, forgot to notify the originator of this page that they were nominating it for deletion. Since User:The Master of Hedgehogs is a current editor, they should be notified, and have a right to explain or at least try to explain what their purpose is for creating this page. I will change this to a Delete if the originator is notified and does not give an explanation of this page, or gives an explanation that doesn't make sense. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)- Comment: As the creator, I never wanted to "immunize" this page from deletion. The Master of Hedgehogs (converse) (hedgehogs) 15:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete serves little purpose. what an odd article, I must say. Babysharkboss2!! (Yes, this is indeed...a JoJo reference.) 17:01, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Newly created and silly. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 01:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Appears to be an unattributed machine translation of Steve Hanke with broken formatting. Flounder fillet (talk) 09:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Copies of mainspace articles in user space in the original English are not permitted, because they are redundant content forks. Copies of mainspace articles in Spanish are at least as much of a problem as copies in English. This page is the only edit by its creating user, so it appears to be a non-constructive test. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:05, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
October 12, 2024
[edit]- TimedText:It's just a burning memory - sample.ogg.en.srt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
This is the subtitle track for the song "It's Just a Burning Memory", which samples the song "Heartaches". Though the latter song does have lyrics, the former does not, making this TimedText page rather confusing. The syllable-by-syllable additions are also rather poor for accessibility, but that can be handled through regular editing even if this is kept. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:44, 12 October 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 09:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC) ended today on 16 October 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 7, 2024
[edit]Another blatant hoax. Someone should talk to this editor. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 05:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- User:Mvcg66b3r - The follower of Genseric has been blocked. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- This is an old page. It was a redirect in 2006. It was converted to a dab page is May 2023. User:Dan arndt improperly draftified it today, Wikipedia:DRAFTNO. What should have he done? I think the problem is disruptive edits by Oseangov (talk · contribs), and the answer to this is not draftification and mfd of the draft. SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- @SmokeyJoe: you are absolutely correct in that I should have more diligent in checking the article's history. For some reason it came up as newly created on the NPP. I'm prepared to take your guidance on this one - the fact that it is now a MfD makes it harder to revert the draft status. Dan arndt (talk) 09:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- You caught a bad page, which is good. Disruptive edits of redirects is a problem and can be hard to sort out. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:48, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- @SmokeyJoe: you are absolutely correct in that I should have more diligent in checking the article's history. For some reason it came up as newly created on the NPP. I'm prepared to take your guidance on this one - the fact that it is now a MfD makes it harder to revert the draft status. Dan arndt (talk) 09:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Restore this version, a redirect, in mainspace. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Optionally delete subsequence versions. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Restore Redirect to KXLB in order to revert vandalism by blocked editor. Whether KYHT should be a redirect to KXLB or something else such as a dab can be decided by normal discussion, but the redirect was the last status before the page in question was created as vandalism, which should simply be reverted. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
September 23, 2024
[edit]- User:Michael Jester/St. Louis Cardinals all-time roster (I–J) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Delete; abandoned project already covered by St. Louis Cardinals all-time roster. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- This is not a reason to delete someone else’s usersubpage. Redirect. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - See the guideline on copies of articles in user space, which says:
Old copies of mainspace articles should be deleted.
. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:04, 24 September 2024 (UTC)- This page, via copy-paste, came from the user’s userspace, years later to be userfied back by someone else. It is not a copy of the article, but a userfied old article. The guideline you quote doesn’t apply to this. SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:41, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- User:Michael Jester/St. Louis Cardinals all-time roster (A) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Delete; abandoned project which is already covered by St. Louis Cardinals all-time roster. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- This is not a reason to delete someone else’s usersubpage. Redirect. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- @SmokeyJoe, thank you. I'm still figuring things out here. I'm not as familiar with articles discussion policies; I'm more involved in Templates and Categories. If you think that is the best course then I agree with you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- User:Omnis Scientia. Thank you. You’ve got a lot of edits in your two years here. Deletion is much more readily done with templates and categories, in my view because they are not real content but transitionary support of content.
- I advise you to get experience at WP:AfD, it’s a good place to learn stuff, from the other volunteers there. At AfD, things that don’t belong, in any form, in mainspace, get deleted.
- At MfD, addressing userspace content, there is no need for the content to ever belong in any form in mainspace. I see MfD as only usually deleting deleting things that should never have been created in the first place, like a copy of something else serving no purpose and potentially creating future confusion. In this case, the page has a long history of edits, and was in mainspace for a long time. The edits are content edits, and we usually don’t delete content edits without good reason. If we consider the old content to now be redundant to something better, redirecting is a nice neat way of packaging it, without restricting anyone’s access to their past edits. As redirecting is easily undone, it doesn’t require a formal discussion to consider doing it. If it’s old and redundant, just redirect. SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- @SmokeyJoe, thank you. I'm still figuring things out here. I'm not as familiar with articles discussion policies; I'm more involved in Templates and Categories. If you think that is the best course then I agree with you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - See the guideline on copies of articles in user space, which says:
Old copies of mainspace articles should be deleted.
. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:04, 24 September 2024 (UTC)- It’s not a copy of a mainspace article. SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:42, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
September 19, 2024
[edit]- Wikipedia talk:Tip of the day/Header (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
This is a horrible "template" that makes the simple process of adding or following discussions on a talk page, extremely hard. It's also a duplicate of the Wikipedia:Tip of the day for no reason at all. Compare the current version of Wikipedia talk:Tip of the day to this version. While projects can style their project pages how they want (within reason), the talk pages should be as simple as needed. Gonnym (talk) 13:51, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- Have you raised this on a talk page anywhere? SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:54, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
September 18, 2024
[edit]- Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
All prior XfDs for this page: |
Unclear what has changed since Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound. The few new editors that just signed up to Wikipedia is hardly a sign this project will survive. At best that needs to be a task force (if even that). Gonnym (talk) 18:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy keep due to no deletion rational proffered by the nomination. This should be a talk page discussion. The claim, This project has now attracted about 20 editors, and we've made a significant contribution to wikipedia. Please see the campaign here: https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/campaigns/southern_african_music__sound/programs, should be discussed on the talk page, not at MfD. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:42, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - The deletion rationale is the same as for the first deletion nomination in March 2024, which was closed as delete. The work of a WikiProject is normally done at its talk page. The talk page of this project had 159 pageviews in the year 2024, which is less than 1 daily pageview, and 113 of those pageviews were on 18 March 2024, in connection with the previous MFD. The project page itself shows 399 pageviews in the year 2024, or approximately 1 daily pageview. and 117 of those pageviews were on 18 March 2024. The activity for both the project page and the project talk page is in two clusters, the first between 13 March 2024 and 1 April 2024, and the second between 18 September 2024 and 20 September 2024. It appears that this project and its project talk page were entirely unused between 2 April 2024 and 17 September 2024. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:57, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
- Neither the deletion rationale or the circumstances are the same. The March 2024 MfD was not closed as delete. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:56, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
September 6, 2024
[edit]- Wikipedia:WikiProject Severe weather/Popular pages (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
Useless only has 1 page and apparently only has ever had 1 page as per page history Isla🏳️⚧ 23:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- It used to have most of the pages in the projectspace back in 2021. Hasn't been touched by anyone since 2021, and since then the bot malfunctioned and trimmed it down to exactly 1 page and I doubt there's any interest within the project to bring it back. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 01:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Mark historical' and revert to last functional version, no good reason to delete it entirely as it didn't cause harm. This is not a case of a malfunctioning bot; it's a case of garbage in, garbage out as, until my actions at Talk:Winter Storm Helena (which I undeleted, redirected, then re-deleted), it was indeed the only page listed under WikiProject Severe weather in the assessments special page search results. I've removed it from the bot's config page. I barely knew anything about how the popular pages lists were generated or page assessments special pages before this discussion so I've learnt several things about them by skim-reading the documentation and realising that the severe weather popular pages list began to malfunction around the time the templates were merged/deleted. Graham87 (talk) 04:58, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'd be OK with the soft redirection proposed below. Graham87 (talk) 02:51, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Historical. No evidence that there is consensus in the WikiProject to delete. Does the nominator represent the WikiProject? SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:52, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, or soft redirect to Massviews.
The bot malfunctioned…
The bot is doing exactly as it was programmed to :) The issue here is apparently WikiProject Severe Weather was merged to be a sub-project of WP:WEATHER, and no one updated the bot's config. Compare Special:PageAssessments for "Severe weather" versus "Weather/WikiProject Severe weather".So it is one simple change to the config and the bot will start updating the report again. However I agree that there's likely little interest in this report, judging by the pageview data and the fact that no one noticed the report broke in all this time since 2021. Also, as this WikiProject is quite small (~2,000 articles), the bot-generated report is redundant to live querying with a tool like toolforge:massviews. This example shows the exact same data that the bot would if the config is fixed. For such a small project, I advocate we don't need the bot-generated report. Just put a link to Massviews at WP:WikiProject Severe weather or even soft redirect the popular pages page to Massviews results for the previous month. — MusikAnimal talk 16:59, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to Massviews per above.—Alalch E. 01:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. This page seems about as useless aas pages get. Redirecting to Massviews might also be OK. Narfhead4444, Gamer Ordinare 01:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)