Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:MFD)
Jump to: navigation, search

Administrator instructions

Centralized discussion
Proposals Discussions Recurring proposals
  • An RfC about whether or not the opt-in requirement should be removed from the enwiki edit counter.
  • A proposal to reimplement the Main Page with an alternative framework.
  • An RfC regarding changing the username policy to allow role accounts.
  • A discussion on ways to improve the "Today's featured article requests" system.

Note: inactive discussions, closed or not, should be archived.

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.

Information on the process[edit]

What may be nominated for deletion here:

  • Pages in these namespaces: Book:, Help:, Portal:, MediaWiki:, Wikipedia: (including WikiProjects), User:, TimedText:, Module:, and the various Talk: namespaces
  • Userboxes (regardless of 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
  • If you want to have your own personal userpage deleted, there is no need to list it here; simply tag it with {{db-userreq}}. If you wish your user talk page (or user talk page archives) to be deleted, this is the correct location to request that.
Deleting pages in other people's userspace
  • Consider explaining your concerns on the user's talk page with a personal note or by adding {{subst:Uw-userpage}} ~~~~  to their talk page. This step assumes good faith and civility; often the user is simply unaware of the guidelines, and the page can either be fixed or speedily deleted using {{db-userreq}}.
  • Take care not to bite newcomers - sometimes using the {{subst:welcome}} or {{subst:welcomeg}} template and a pointer to WP:UP would be best first.
  • Problematic userspace material is often addressed by the User pages guidelines including in some cases removal by any user or tagging to clarify the content or to prevent external search engine indexing. (Examples include copies of old, deleted, or disputed material, problematic drafts, promotional material, offensive material, inappropriate links, 'spoofing' of the MediaWiki interface, disruptive HTML, invitations or advocacy of disruption, certain kinds of images and image galleries, etc) If your concern relates to these areas consider these approaches as well, or instead of, deletion.
  • User pages about Wikipedia-related matters by established users usually do not qualify for deletion.
  • Articles that were recently deleted at AfD and then moved to userspace are generally not deleted unless they have lingered in userspace for an extended period of time without improvement to address the concerns that resulted in their deletion at AfD, or their content otherwise violates a global content policy such as our policies on Biographies of living persons that applies to any namespace.
Policies, guidelines and process pages
  • Established pages and their sub-pages should not be nominated, as such nominations will probably be considered disruptive, and the ensuing discussions closed early. This is not a forum for modifying or revoking policy. Instead consider tagging the policy as {{historical}} or redirecting it somewhere.
  • Proposals still under discussion generally should not be nominated. If you oppose a proposal, discuss it on the policy page's discussion page. Consider being bold and improving the proposal. Modify the proposal so that it gains consensus. Also note that even if a policy fails to gain consensus, it is often useful to retain it as a historical record, for the benefit of future editors.
WikiProjects and their subpages
  • It is generally preferable that inactive WikiProjects not be deleted, but instead be marked as {{inactive}}, redirected to a relevant WikiProject, or changed to a task force of a parent WikiProject, unless the WikiProject was incompletely created or is entirely undesirable.
  • WikiProjects that were never very active and which do not have substantial historical discussions (meaning multiple discussions over an extended period of time) on the project talk page should not be tagged as {{historical}}; reserve this tag for historically active projects that have, over time, been replaced by other processes or that contain substantial discussion (as defined above) of the organization of a significant area of Wikipedia. Before deletion of an inactive project with a founder or other formerly active members who are active elsewhere on Wikipedia, consider userfication.
  • Notify the main WikiProject talk page when nominating any WikiProject subpage, in addition to standard notification of the page creator.
Alternatives to deletion
  • Normal editing that doesn't require the use of any administrator tools, such as merging the page into another page or renaming it, can often resolve problems.
  • Pages in the wrong namespace (e.g. an article in Wikipedia namespace), can simply be moved and then tag the redirect for speedy deletion using {{db-g6|rationale= it's a redirect left after a cross-namespace move}}. Notify the author of the original article of the cross-namespace move.

Please familiarize yourself with the following policies[edit]

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:

Administrator instructions[edit]

Administrator instructions for closing discussions can be found here.


Current discussions[edit]

Pages currently being considered 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.

Purge server cache

April 16, 2014[edit]


User:DJMX133 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia is not a web host for fantasy onloine reality game shows. A request for speedy deletion under WP:U5 was declined under the assumption the material is a draft for a real article. It isn't. The article claims to be for Big Brother US Season 3 (2014). Big Brother 3 (U.S.) aired in 2002, not 2014, and with a completely different cast. This is typical of these fantasy reality game show user pages. Whpq (talk) 11:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Edwardcates (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Promotional WP:FAKEARTICLE, Wikipedia is not linkedin. Unsourced WP:BLP. User has made no edits outside this topic. Blanking reverted. MER-C 11:18, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete - It seems to be a copy of [1], but I can't be sure that it wasn't copied from Wikipeia as the version here predates the earliest recorded in the Wayback machine. In any case, this user page is entirely promotional in nature. -- Whpq (talk) 11:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Omar Abubakar[edit]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Omar Abubakar (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)

This person does not appear to meet Wikipedia's standards of notability. There is not a published source on the internet about this person. The person was born in 1992, so if there is not a source on the internet, I don't think there would be any in books either.Hoops gza (talk) 02:10, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete Hopeless draft about non-notable person. In future, it is best to however avoid nominations like this as stale AfC drafts will expire within six months in any case and there should be no rush to delete harmless ones before that (harmless = not copyvio or libel, although this one might have BLP issues). jni (delete)...just not interested

April 15, 2014[edit]

User:VJ Emsi/realwiki[edit]

User:VJ Emsi/realwiki (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Violates WP:FAKEARTICLE and WP:BLP. While much of the content was copied from my page at [ ] such usage is allowed (see the licensing information I put on that page). It is, however, rude to pretend that someone else wrote it, and a definite BLP violation if that person is a third-party who may very well object to it being attributed to him. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:53, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete Page seems to be not made for contributing to our encyclopedia project. Potential BLP issue. jni (delete)...just not interested 07:58, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Ignore - a waste of time to discuss that. Clearly marked as user page. Let him have the fun of experimenting with layouts, or whatever. OAlexander (talk) 08:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Given the fact that you are OK with what this page says about Thomas Hunter, Lloyd Greenland and Jerry Blythe, would you like to give us your full legal name so that someone can write similar things about you? --Guy Macon (talk) 18:12, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Llibllib (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This appears to be webhosting. I've asked for input here but got no response. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:36, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

The user's talk page was starting to be used for another table. I removed it and pasted it to the bottom of User:Llibllib in good faith. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough. I MfDd this one because I'd asked the user if this was for an article, and the reply was simply "yes". I have no idea what this Big Brother thing is all about, so didn't know if it could be something useful for the article. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:57, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete - It claims to be Big Brother 3 (U.S.) in 2014. That season aired in 2002 with a different cast. Also, there are two completely different elimination tables for the same purported season. The reason of course is that these are make-believe seasons as Wikipedia is being used to host fantasy online reality game shows. -- Whpq (talk) 11:50, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Afterice (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Page created by a self-identified sock of a banned editor. See [Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wiki brah]. SummerPhD (talk) 23:47, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Mark999/List of bus routes in the West Midlands county[edit]

User:Mark999/List of bus routes in the West Midlands county (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Deleted material stored in userspace. All of these lists have been deleted by overwhelming consensus at tons of AFDs -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 12:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages:

-Davey2010 12:10, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete all these stale drafts and deleted articles per WP:NOTWEBHOST.--Charles (talk) 13:10, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete all it's too bad, because I was looking for this just last week. No, wait... I wasn't. At best this is of local interest and is not for Wikipedia.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Wow, totally forgot I was working on one of these. While I'll happily agree these should be deleted you really might have left me a message telling me this was open? — foxj 16:53, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • The reason no one here was notified is because no one's been active so I found it pointless, As I said on my TP I for some reason didnt't check your contribs which I've apologized for :) -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 17:00, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Nudity/Web resources[edit]

Portal:Nudity/Web resources (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Fails WP:ELNO, WP:LINKFARM John of Reading (talk) 09:48, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete That's a private directory of fun links, not a useful encyclopedic resource. It would be dubious (per WP:EL) as a section on a talk page, but fails WP:NOTWEBHOST as a page. Johnuniq (talk) 11:32, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • wait since when is a portal not allowed to have weblinks? Just because they're about nudity is irrelevant.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 13:29, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • keep I find many other examples here [2] of "Web resources" pages on portals (137 to be exact). This list could be potentially trimmed but that's an editing issue, I see no policy-based reason to delete, anymore so than we would delete "External links" sections of pages. Such sections, and in the case of portals, such pages, have every right to exist, they just need to be managed per policy.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 14:07, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

User talk:BenjaminTsai[edit]

User talk:BenjaminTsai (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)

Talk page history contains undesired redirect BenjaminTsai (talk) 09:44, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


User:WieeySozai (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

WP:NOTPROMO could fall under WP:CSD#G11 ///EuroCarGT 03:46, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Wikipedia not Facebook. -- Whpq (talk) 12:05, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

April 14, 2014[edit]

User:Candleabracadabra/Acoustic harassment[edit]

User:Candleabracadabra/Acoustic harassment (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Already deleted at voice to skull and voice-to-skull. This is a fictional construct promoted by people who are, according to the evidence, mainly mentally ill, and it's covered in electronic harassment. This is an offsite POV-push, with very obvious co-ordination between accounts. Guy (Help!) 08:31, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

  • JzG, if you don't mind, add some detail to the case, proving SYNTH or whatever. Your opponent put some work into this article and while, after two quick glances at the article, I'm likely to agree with you, they deserve a detailed explanation, if only to help settle future...what shall we call it...disagreement. Drmies (talk) 14:22, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
The article has already been deleted several times, there is no such thing as "voice to skull", and it's already covered in the context of electronic harassment. The detailed explanation has already been provided at WP:ANI and elsewhere, as well as in the previous deletion discussions. This is a pretty blatant attempt to end-run round deletion process, and it's the nth attempt to do that for this content. Guy (Help!) 14:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • The stuff in the cited Wired articles looks interesting at first glance, though synthesis may have taken place getting from that to the userpage under consideration. The Wired articles aren't mentioned in the electronic harassment article. (talk) 16:27, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Acoustic harassment is certainly not a fictional construct. That's just wrong. As are Guy's delusional claims of my being part of some off wiki collaboration effort. After working on the article and reviewing sources, I've found several existing article already on Wikipedia that address aspects of these perfectly legitimate subjects. And since I've provided Google Books results for acoustic harassment from a plethora of perfectly legitimate sources, claiming that this is something made up is denialism.

As far as the article in my userspace goes, the weaponry aspects should be merged to Sonic weapon. The acoustic harassment article should focus on the technology and the devices as substantially covered, mostly in relation to marine life. There is also some usage of this against birds (at airports and I live near blueberry fields and they shoot off guns to scare those away). There are also some human aspects that seem appropriate to mention or at least note as see also such as The Mosquito and LRAD. The connection to using these technologies with humans is not something made up, it's in several sources, but I do think it would be appropriate to split out the weapon aspect to the sonic weapon article and keep the acoustic harassment article focused to where the sources cover it in depth.

A big part of the problem is that voice to skull was redirected to electronic harassment, which is something quite different. Now that I've found more appropriate targets we can redirect Voice-to-Skull to the correct article, its is already discussed in Microwave auditory effect. Sonic weapon would be fine too. Problem solved. Of course I can't do this because an abusive admin has reflexively protected the article title (out of process) instead of engaging in rational discussion. Such is life.

There is no basis for restricting my abilities to edit legitimate article subject in my userspace and allegations of my being part of some conspiracy or off wiki-campaign are daft. Maybe Guy is hearing voices? Best to seek out professional help in those circumstances. But again, these are legitimate subjects, I don't really think they fall into the realm of pseudoscience, and we should have no difficulty dealing with the subject properly (again there are EXISTING articles that address many aspects of these subjects) we just need to rein in the craziness, delusional paranoia, and dishonest bullying so we can work through the subject matter rationally and reasonably. Thanks. Candleabracadabra (talk) 16:39, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

  • The Wired articles are of no use to an encyclopedic article. As the author states, they are merely a collection of amusing urban myths and certainly cannot be used as the basis for any article on something "real" such as sonic weapons. There is nothing new of value in the article, so it can be safely deleted. GDallimore (Talk) 22:06, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Well, we generally give a fair amount of leeway to material in userspace, I think. I myself have some proto-articles cluttering up my userspace... If it was obviously not anything to do with an encyclopedia -- a list of your school friends, pictures of your cat -- that'd be different, but it kind of looks and feels like it could an actual article someday, if some more refs can be scared up. That's a reasonable use of userspace I think.
If it's disruptive that's different. The nominator speaks of an "offsite POV-push, with very obvious co-ordination between accounts". If that's true then we have different problem. I'd want more details on that, though. I'm not up on the personalities and politics of this, so I'm not gonna vote, but my inclination is to see what develops. If the article creator scares up enough material and refs to make a decent article, then no problem. If the article creator messes around with it in his userspace forever, then no problem. If the article creator tries to repeatedly publish an unacceptable article, then problem. My inclination would be to chill and wait. Herostratus (talk) 23:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment It looks like we have further material on this phenomenon at Tinfoil hat#Electromagnetic_hearing. Maybe that would be a good place to put the info? (talk) 00:04, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I agree with Herostratus but I'm going to say keep the userspace draft. The material doesn't seem to be suitable as a stand-alone article at present (notability) but the verifiability aspects seem OK so the material could be merged elsewhere or could be developed into an article. There is no BLP or "attack page" problem. In small part, the draft is documenting what a few people believe (most people might think the belief is irrational) and that can be fine if it is kept in a neutral perspective. I do not think the draft is advancing a "fictional construct". If there are reliable sources saying the adherents are "mainly mentally ill" it is important that this aspect should be included. Likewise if there is evidence that the DoD document[3] is fictitious in its existence or content. Thincat (talk) 19:53, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Agree with Herostratus. Nothing wrong with using user space for building an article that is not yet ready for prime time.--GRuban (talk) 19:55, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ravi Sinha[edit]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ravi Sinha (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)

Repeatedly resubmitted, but there is no possibility of notability for this engineer. DGG ( talk ) 00:29, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

April 13, 2014[edit]


User:Kangaross1989 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User page is being used as a web host. Whpq (talk) 20:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete not sure what it is, but it isn't a user page.--Paul McDonald (talk) 21:38, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak keep it looks like a draft of a table to be included in an article or something; given the presence of userboxes and the fact that a lot of names in the table are linked to Wikipedia articles, I'm tempted to give the user the benefit of the doubt. -IagoQnsi (talk) 23:50, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Comment - I suggest you review this editors contributions. This sandbox is a compendium of Survivor trivia, none of which is being used for article development. This editor has been busy with compiling this trivia, but it certainly hasn't been for placement in articles when you look at the edits in article space. One lone edit in all of 2013, and seven edits in 2012. Also see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Fuschiabriefs. This same editor has been busy compiling fantasy reality gaming info on some other user's page. -- Whpq (talk) 00:04, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey guys, not really sure what is going on, but what exactly is wrong with my user page now? It's really just a database for my own usage about my favourite show, Survivor. I don't link it to anywhere else. Sorry, all a bit confusing :-/ Kangaross1989 (talk) 02:06, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

    • Wikipedia is not a free web hosting server. Consider using a pen and paper.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:01, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep & move to Sandbox, If nothing changes in a month I suggest renomming. -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 03:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak delete User himself admitted this is not used for our project but for something else: [4] He has some contributions to Survivor related articles back in 2011 and earlier so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in hope he contributes something back to the Wikipedia in future. jni (delete)...just not interested 06:32, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough. I mistakenly thought a userpage could be used for whatever, but I see that I was wrong. A shame, but they're the rules. Have the rules changed recently, or is there just a current crackdown on this, because I've had this page for quite a while now. Apologies, and thanks. Kangaross1989 (talk) 12:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


Book:Puebloan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

duplicate of Book:Puebloan People's, which i have now updated, so Puebloan is now less developed. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 17:49, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Lcmmanchester (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Also, User:Luca carey morgan hilton, User talk:Luca carey morgan hilton.

WP:FAKEARTICLE issues: promotional user page with no attempt to move into project space. User with no other project contributions. Magog the Ogre (t c) 15:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete - also has serious WP:BLP problems. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:30, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete all per above -- questionable and promotional unsourced WP:BLP WP:FAKEARTICLEs. Not suitable for mainspace. MER-C 12:13, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Efi papastylou[edit]

User:Efi papastylou (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Blatant misuse of Wikipedia as personal webspace. Was previously blanked, but has been restored by anonymous user (based in Greece according to IP, where original user is also from, hence it is possibly them). Ubcule (talk) 15:29, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. This would be otherwise CSD U5, but it has the magic words "CURRICULUM VITAE" that save your garbage page from faster deletion process. jni (delete)...just not interested 18:21, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Innatech (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This is a duplicate of Beat the System (band) and should either be deleted or moved. The account also appears to be a sock of user:Davestapp and both are WP:SPAs. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete Looks like the draft for the actual article, and so now has no use. For some reason, the user is still modifying it. I've posted a message to him about that. I've also posted to both about the alternate accounts. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:12, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Santino Noir[edit]

User:Santino Noir (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

WP:FAKEARTICLE Whpq (talk) 14:38, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Elkvillerepublic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

WP:FAKEARTICLE Whpq (talk) 14:27, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete. Unsourced WP:FAKEARTICLE about a non-notable micronation from a user with no other edits. MER-C 12:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

User:John J. Bulten/John F. Ashton[edit]

User:John J. Bulten/John F. Ashton (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

No activity on this user subpage. No longer needed and never going to turn into a Wikipedia article. jps (talk) 13:15, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Keep  There is no deadline at Wikipedia, and the argument that this topic won't return to article space appears to be "I don't want the topic to return to mainspace" circular reasoning.  There is a long history with this article, and I specifically argued that the userfication should come without a deadline.  Unscintillating (talk) 13:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete abandoned draft of a WP:BLP. User has not edited at all (let alone this draft) in over a year, this can be considered as equivalent to CSD G13. Guy (Help!) 13:29, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • G13 is for AfC, so that doesn't apply.  There is no deadline at Wikipedia.  There was an a case at MfD of a draft seven-years old being kept.  No deadline is also the current consensus at draftspace for non-AfC articles.  Unscintillating (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • What are your criteria by which you claim abandonment?  If you can make a case that the draft is abandoned, it can be moved to Abandoned Drafts or draftspace.  Unscintillating (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Move to article space. Satisfies notability criteria and has been significantly cleaned up. Cesiumfrog (talk) 07:58, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


User:DarkFireYoshi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia is not a web host for fantasy gaming material. Whpq (talk) 11:22, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete and salt per nom. The previous MFD got the deletion reason wrong -- the deleted content was also fantasy gaming material. MER-C 11:29, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Okay, I'll clear it out. Sorry DarkFireYoshi 18:31, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • You said that the last time around, yet you have continued to use this page to host fantasy gaming material. MER-C 10:53, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Okay, then delete it. I wasn't hosting anything I was just messing around using Wikipedia editing, etc. DarkFireYoshi 20:58, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Fuschiabriefs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Compilation of online fantasy gamin g material, or fan fiction. Oddly, this user page was created and maintained by Kangaross1989 (talk · contribs) Whpq (talk) 11:17, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom or perhaps speedy delete per new CSD U5 criteria (applicable if we count only edits of non-contributor Fuschiabriefs, and ignore the fact that this is operated by someone else). Technically not CSD U2 as someone has registered this account. Note that Kangaross1989 (talk · contribs) also created and maintained similar content on User:Kangaross1989, which should be deleted as well. It might not be U5 as user has some contributions. jni (delete)...just not interested 18:33, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi all, not really sure what the problem with this page is now, but it's just a database I use to refer to a Survivor online gaming community I am a part of. It's not used for anything else. This is all a bit confusing to me, so any light on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks :) Kangaross1989 (talk) 02:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for telling us that you are not using it for purposes of building an encyclopedia, but for some unrelated online activity. Maybe you could shed some light, why you are editing other user's user page for this? That is certainly confusing. jni (delete)...just not interested 06:18, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Ivan Law Sr[edit]

User:Ivan Law Sr (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia is not Facebook. Re-creation of previously-deleted self-promotional user page by user with no other contributions. I considered speedy-deletion under WP:CSD#U5 Blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a web host, but this might be considered to come under the exemption for "résumé-style pages". JohnCD (talk) 11:04, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete - Self-promotional user page. -- Whpq (talk) 12:07, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. MER-C 12:14, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

This is a simple user page and not an article however I do qualify to write articles on beat making. this my user page and it contains a bio of the user it contains an application of the user to the recording academy of art's and finally the page contains a not from the president of the united states of America to the user. this user page is within the user page guide lines Ivan is a user with musical ties and a record label. it is not promotional these are his accomplishment, none of this is for promotions its who Ivan is. he should be allowed to place his bio on his user page it's not an article it's a user page. he is a user that received a note from the president he should be allowed to place that on his user page. everyone has there bio on there user page. ivan bio and life is deeply rooted in music. thanks--Ivan Law Sr (talk) 15:13, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


User:BadGirlsClubTeens (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

WP:FAKEARTICLE Whpq (talk) 02:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete. Old promotion by an account blocked for promotion with no remaining edits. Is it too reasonable a draft for CSD#U5? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:17, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Gregaga/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia is not a web host for fantasy reality game shows. Whpq (talk) 01:41, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. This is not eligible for U5 because the user has non-trivial mainspace contributions. MER-C 03:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

April 12, 2014[edit]


User:KingReynolds (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

WP:NOTBLOG ///EuroCarGT 23:37, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Toxic Envy/sandbox[edit]

User:Toxic Envy/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia is not a web host for fantasy online reality game shows. Whpq (talk) 13:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Ashishbalmiki123 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia is not a resume service. MER-C 10:50, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Kacy Jacobsen[edit]

User:Kacy Jacobsen (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia is not linkedin. MER-C 10:48, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete per WP:NOTAWEBHOST- This has nothing to do with Wikipedia, and is the user's only contribution. It's pretty promotional too; could it be speedy deleted as advertising? —Anne Delong (talk) 11:09, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bad Girls All-Star Battle (season 3)[edit]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bad Girls All-Star Battle (season 3) (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)

Wikipedia is not a web host for fantasy reality game shows. This purported article for creation is complete with results even though it has not yet aired. Note that Bad Girls All-Star Battle has had only two seasons, and its web site provides no indication that a third is coming in August 2014 as claimed in this article. This IP editor also editted Wikipedia_talk:Articles for creation/Bad Girls Club (season 13), another non-existent show in AFC space. Whpq (talk) 02:46, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. MER-C 10:53, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NOTAWEBHOST- This has nothing to do with Wikipedia. —Anne Delong (talk) 11:04, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete as utter crap and per above. -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 04:00, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bad Girls Club (season 13)[edit]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bad Girls Club (season 13) (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)

Wikipedia is not a web host for fantasy reality game shows. This purported article for creation is complete with results even though it has not yet aired. Note that Bad Girls Club (season 12) which is about a real show, has yet to air either. See also Wikipedia_talk:Articles for creation/Bad Girls All-Star Battle (season 3) which seems to be related. Whpq (talk) 02:44, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. MER-C 10:53, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

April 11, 2014[edit]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay Nigger Association of America/Notice[edit]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay Nigger Association of America/Notice (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Does this page serve any purpose? It raises an interesting question for MfD: if a page does nothing (neither good nor harm), what should we do with it? --BDD (talk) 23:41, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Speedy Keep  Coerces discussion using the threat of deletion.  XfDs are not RfCs biased with one delete !vote lacking a deletion argument.  Unscintillating (talk) 00:11, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Um... can you think of a better venue to discuss this page? --BDD (talk) 15:41, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Um...what does that have to do with you withdrawing the nomination, and speedily closing any future nominations like it that you see?  Unscintillating (talk) 18:20, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Meh Does this MfD serve any purpose? Other than adding a new entry to
box. I guess this /Notice thingy can be refactored whatever way editors want to, and then they can mark leftovers to G6 speedy deletion. jni (delete)...just not interested 15:52, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Sri Lanka Ellaya[edit]

User:Sri Lanka Ellaya (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Patently unacceptable AFC submission that has been repeatedly submitted after being warned multiple times that we need a reliable source to accept. Since the editor has not gotten the clue that we have policies to follow the only appropriate thing to do is delete this waste of volunteer time Hasteur (talk) 20:59, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Keep: This page actually intrigued me - the sheer amount of time spend creating it and the associated blogs would have been mind boggling if this was just an elaborate hoax. After some fairly extensive digging i actually managed to find some sources though that prove the subject seems to exist - the coverage itself is limited to a line or two in most parts though with a few exceptions:
The limit online coverage itself may actually be attributed to a few circumstances surrounding the sport as well. One thing to note is that the sport itself seems specific to Sri Lanka, which has a population of only 20 million people. Add to this that the popularity of the sport seems to center in the pre-internet years and that Sri lanka isn't the most technically advanced nation and it feels less unusual that barely any coverage ended up seeping towards the internet. Also interesting are several mentions in the thesis linked above. According to that document the game is mostly popular in rural area's and it literally states "According to Administration Reports (1900-1948), elle and volleyball were not popular in elite schools". If this still holds true that would be another limiting factor in regards to the spread of the sport on the internet.
Due to the above i believe the article should be kept. The subject exists and while it may be especially difficult to source it the thesis and the journal might just create enough material for a somewhat more extensive article. At the very least there should be enough material for a stub article that is actually able to pass AFC. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 23:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Quick addition to the above - the "Keep" added here is specific for the articles subject as it was previously deleted as a fake article. I am not claiming that the page as currently written should be kept as-is, merely that the subject should. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 23:26, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment  There are copyvio issues with [5]Unscintillating (talk) 00:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment  There is an unsourced stub at Elle (sport), and there is a one-word mention at Sport in Sri LankaUnscintillating (talk) 00:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment  Note that this deletion does not apply to the talk page.  Unscintillating (talk) 00:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep per Excirial, and the fact that I doubt this would be a hoax if there are that many sources about it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I've got no problems with keeping it if someone can provide the references to back it up. However, to be ignored 5 times requesting something to support its existence is a bit much! I was unable to find anything other than one blog that referenced the sport.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 20:54, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete - Ther eis no doubt the sport exists. WE have the stub, Elle (sport) which needs expansion. However, this particular editor, enthusiastic though he may be, does not have a good command of English. The material submitted by this editor, and the various other sockpuppet accounts have been shown to be, at least in part, copyright violations; he has not addressed this, or perhaps, simply doesn't understand. The material under consideration here is almost certainly been copy-pasted from somewhere else as the level of English far exceeds what this editor is capable of Note that this MFD is not about the notability of the sport of Elle, but whether this user page should be kept. Given the almost 100% certainty of copying, we should not be keeping this material. -- Whpq (talk) 12:14, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tumblr's Drag Race (Cycle 2)[edit]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tumblr's Drag Race (Cycle 2) (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/enfiergijhrgijroigji (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Big Brother Tumblr 2 (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/my game lol 1 (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Big Brother Tumblr All-Stars (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Big Brother Tumblr 3 (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)

Wikipedia is not a web host for online fantasy reality game shows. These articles for creation are clearly not being seriously developed as encyclopedia articles. Instead, wikipedia is being used as a web host for these games. All of these pages have been created by Fireology (talk · contribs). Whpq (talk) 17:34, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete all per nom. MER-C 10:52, 12 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Mkallel/Easycwmp (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Submitter continues to submit without making changes to the article to provide references to support notability. The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 13:42, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Note the draft has been moved to article space by the creator, now this is a redirect. --kelapstick(bainuu) 20:54, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance[edit]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance (edit|subject|history|links|watch|logs)

This article contains no sources that are not already included in electronic harassment. The creator has repeatedly tried to instigate voice to skull as well, a POVfork of the former article. The sources do not constitute non-trivial coverage of the subject of this requested article (two namechecks, two do not even mention the subject), instead they are sympathetic portrayals of the phenomenon of "electronic harassment", cherry-picked from the many sources which identify the phenomenon as delusional. Basically, this is a group of no provable significance which exists to advocate freedom from something that has no provable existence outside the imagination of people who are, according to the evidence, usually diagnosed as mentally ill. Guy (Help!) 13:00, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete as promotional nonsense on a fringe topic. The FFCHS group is not notable—the sources do not show any notability. The group is promoting itself on Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 18:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nothing even approximating to the in-depth coverage needed to meet notability guidelines. Normally, I'd suggest allowing a little leeway in AfC for further sources to be found, but there seems no realistic prospect of this happening, and it seems quite obvious that the object of this article is to further promote a fringe theory that simply doesn't belong on Wikipedia. In the unlikely event that sufficient sourcing is ever found to justify an article on this group, the article would of course need a complete rewrite anyway, as it completely fails to adhere to WP:NPOV policy. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete Notability of group not met per WP:ORG. Seems like another attempt to get fringe "voice to skull" POV into Wikipedia. - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:08, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Vivekperi/Catchway Technologies[edit]

User:Vivekperi/Catchway Technologies (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Promotional WP:FAKEARTICLE from a user with no other live edits. MER-C 12:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


User:Haroonaliabbasi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia is not linkedin. MER-C 12:09, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

April 10, 2014[edit]

User:NCAA Season 91[edit]

User:NCAA Season 91 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Likely fails WP:ORIGINAL and/or Wikipedia:Notability per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Volleyball#Some drafts to sort out Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:15, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Keep this is clearly an active draft work by an editor who has clearly labeled it a draft and not an article. There may be an issue with the user name matching the future proposed article title, but that can be fixed administratively through renaming/etc. I see no policy violation. Not a deletion issue.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:35, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Actually, I added {{userspace draft}} but then found more that were possibly related. The users are very new, and haven't edited elsewhere. I'm not sure if the user was making something for the mainspace or simply using Wikipedia for webhosting, thus violating WP:FAKEARTICLE. I just wasn't sure what else to do. That is why I posted at project volleyball. When I got feedback, I thought MfD would be easiest way to handle these. Perhaps I should have posted at each of the talk pages asking whether or not they were preparing something for the mainspace. Sorry for any trouble I've caused with these. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:49, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
It never hurts to report even if you suspect. You could be right, I might be wrong (that happens a lot). If it's a fake article, it needs to go.--Paul McDonald (talk) 16:02, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
My apologies. I should have been more clear when nominating these. And yes, there are so many of these webhosting items. I often ask at their talk, and just get ignored or bushed off by the user. Here is the last one I encountered:
Again, sorry for rushing to MfD before exhausting other ways. I've just had such poor results in the past when trying to communicate with users about seeming FAKEARTICLE/NOTWEBHOSTING matters. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:50, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
On thing that prompted me with this NCAA Season 91 case is that two users edited it (NCAA Season 91 and UAAP 77) without ever communicating with each other at enwp. This is a clue that they are probably talking at some social media site, making it more likely that this may be a NOTWEBHOSTING case. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:00, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Season 90/NCAA Season 90[edit]

User:Season 90/NCAA Season 90 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Likely fails WP:ORIGINAL and/or Wikipedia:Notability per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Volleyball#Some drafts to sort out Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:14, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

User:NCAA 90[edit]

User:NCAA 90 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Likely fails WP:ORIGINAL and/or Wikipedia:Notability per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Volleyball#Some drafts to sort out Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:14, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

April 9, 2014[edit]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Club, Excel[edit]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Club, Excel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This page is half way between an article and a project page, It should be deleted and recreated as a true project page. CombatWombat42 (talk) 20:38, 13 March 2014 (UTC) [extra signature by relister to stop Legobot moving this down. JohnCD (talk) 11:33, 13 April 2014 (UTC)]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Relisting comment: Relisted to see whether anyone can make a suggestion about a better place for this. It's not a class project suitable for the Education Program structure, nor is it really a WikiProject. Any ideas?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JohnCD (talk) 20:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete if the purpose is so unclear that no one knows what to do with it, then it's clearly not needed. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 22:53, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

April 8, 2014[edit]


User:Danceboy13 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia is not a web host. Not U5 eligible as the editor has substantial mainspace contributions. Whpq (talk) 17:44, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Just blank. There is no actually webhosting for external purposes going on here. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:37, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Old business[edit]

March 31, 2014[edit]

User:Cskumaar/Maruthuvar community[edit]

User:Cskumaar/Maruthuvar community (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I'm guessing someone thinks this is a real article. We also have User:Vishwagna, User:Brahmin nayee and User:Niyoginayeebramhana. all quasi articles and all edited by User182.74.141.234 (talk · contribs) Dougweller (talk) 14:09, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Complex recommendation:
  • Move the latter 3 to user-sub-pages and leave a note on the respective users' user pages pointing to the new location. This should have been boldly-done before this went to MfD.
  • Courtesy-blank all 4 pages replacing the content with a note saying the previous content can be found in the edit history. This is only necessary because these editors seem to have stopped editing and are therefore not likely to be using this content.
  • Semi-protect or even fully-protect all affected pages to prevent non-logged-in editors from changing them. This is only necessary because these editors seem to have stopped editing and are not likely to notice and undo unwanted changes by third-party editors.
  • Leave a note on all 4 editor's talk pages explaining what was done and why it was done, providing links to this discussion, WP:User pages, WP:Userspace draft, and if articles about the topics in question exist, links to those articles. Let editors know that the page protections will be lifted upon request.
  • In cases where the topic does not have an article but where the topic is notable enough to qualify for one, leave a note explaining that if the pages are actually draft articles and not "user content," the editor is encouraged to restore them provided that they will be actively worked on with the intent of moving them to the main encyclopedia.
  • In cases where the topics are notable, an article is strongly desired, and either the current version or any past version would make an acceptable article as-is or with minor effort (or if a volunteer is ready to do the required work immediately), simply move the page into the main encyclopedia or to Draft: space for further work. I am not familiar enough with these topics to know if this suggestion is relevant or not.

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment Well, the account Cskumaar (talk · contribs) created his/her page almost 3 years ago with 2 edits and hasn't edited since. Vishwagna (talk · contribs) created that page almost a year ago with 4 edits, no edits since. Niyoginayeebramhana (talk · contribs)'s page was created in December with the only edit that account made. Except for Listofnayee (talk · contribs) who has made only one edit only and that to this page, all the edits have been by IPs. And finally Brahmin nayee (talk · contribs) created his/her page with 5 edits 2 weeks ago but only (talk · contribs) has edit it since. It's my conclusion that these accounts do not represent different individuals but are likely the same person, perhaps simply confused about what they are doing. Off to bed shorly, will see if others comment and think about what to do next. Dougweller (talk) 20:39, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    While I concede that this is likely the case, since there is no obvious abuse of multiple accounts or disruption (beyond the mere existence of these pages, if you consider that disruption), it's probably better to assume that they may be different individuals and decide accordingly. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:31, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

March 28, 2014[edit]


User:Malcolm/Userboxes/Mid (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User:StitchPedia/Jr. High. Student (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User Secondary School (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User Secondary School Homework do (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User:Meganmccarty/UBX/Homeschool (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User home (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User thinking home (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Although this has been discussed before and kept (in 2007: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Malcolm/Userboxes/Mid), I think it's worth revisiting. These userboxes draw attention to our younger users, and I feel that making these userboxes available encourages younger users, often interested in decorating their userpages with as many userboxes as they can find, to reveal their approximate ages. This deletion would also be in keeping with other deletions, such as "Wikipedians born in" categories for 1992 and on, Category:14 year old Wikipedians, etc. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:41, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete I have to agree with GorillaWarfare's rationale. I think that these userboxes encourage younger users to volunteer too much personal information. In addition, I fear that these user boxes could be used to help facilitate inappropriate adult-child relationships. It would better serve the community if these sorts of identifiers were deleted. Mike VTalk 02:30, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
they could also be used as signals that we should double check to make sure there is no personally identifying information, which would be to the users benefit. I suggest we remove the Jr. high school and Mid ones, DGG ( talk ) 03:44, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

March 23, 2014[edit]

User:BeauDamion/Beau Damion[edit]

User:BeauDamion/Beau Damion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Autobiographical, unsourced WP:FAKEARTICLE; Wikipedia is not MER-C 12:20, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

  • This is a private page that has not been published yet. It is created by the artists management team with help from the artist on occasion. When completed the page will have source material listed. This hasn't been published because it is incomplete and does not yet meet the requirements to submit to Wikipedia. This should not be deleted since it does not meet the criteria of Wikipedia's deletion policy."Administrators have the ability to delete articles and other Wikipedia pages from general view" "Deletion of a Wikipedia article removes the current version and all previous versions from public view" This is not published, in general or public view. This was brought to our attention by the artist (received email and forwarded it on to us) This artist is under new management and we will be taking over the task to complete this page. Beaudamion (talk) 00:52, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete - Although drafts are a valid use of user space, this one has gone stale. -- Whpq (talk) 03:43, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
  • "We" as in his new management. This is not self-promotion by definition (promoting oneself in a forceful way). This is being put together by other individuals. Not the artist himself. Also the completed page (updating and redoing much of the content listed) will be informative and biographical. There are multiple other "biographies" on Wikipedia of other musicians and artists in the industry that would then need to be taken down if you're basing it on the opinion you stated.

I agree the draft is stale, We didn't know there was a page in progress until the artist informed me of an email he received a couple days ago. Since he is under new management now "we" (the new management team) will be taking over this and completing the biography. Beaudamion (talk) 03:09, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

    • "We" is not an allowed use of an account. See WP:ROLE. Accounts on wikipedia are for individual use and are not shared. I suggest you look at drafting any article in Wikipedia:Drafts space if multiple people are going to be working on it. -- Whpq (talk) 03:25, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
  • WP:ROLE "Such accounts are permitted only if the account information is forever limited to one individual." This account is forever limited to one individual. See username.

Isn't the page in question a "draft" in the userspace? It says right in drafts that they can be created and not published within a userspace.

Is this going a little off-topic? Wasn't the original reason for this being flagged for deletion being: Autobiographical (which it is not), unsourced (which it won't be when the article is completed in the next week or so), and being self-promotional (it is biographical and for information purposes, not self-promotion). Beaudamion (talk) 20:54, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Note to Admin: Despite the claim "the article is completed in the next week or so", diddly squat has been done. -- Whpq (talk) 01:19, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete Non-notable musician. jni (delete)...just not interested 16:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

March 21, 2014[edit]

March 19, 2014[edit]


User:Hallwayabeyance/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Per WP:FAKEARTICLE. Jespinos (talk) 16:46, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

So, I already know why my account COULD get deleted. I used those album covers to the Goreshit and Reizoko Cj albums in my Sandbox. I just wanted to see how it would look, I wasn't going to post it. Seriously. I don't KNOW what kind of copyright license they have. All I know is I got permission from both artists even beforehand and that wasn't an option on the "add pictures" menu. All I know. Spare me, please. Hallwayabeyance (talk) 20:35, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

April 7, 2014[edit]

User:Randihoffman/Thaddeus Rutkowski[edit]

User:Randihoffman/Thaddeus Rutkowski (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Thaddeus Rutkowski at some point. The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 16:31, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I see from Worldcat that his novels are in between 50 and 100 libraries. This would not be notability for a mainstream author, but it might be for someone in a niche like his. Move back to AfC, which will give 6 months to work on it before ww need look at it again. If Lurie's comment is actually a published review and not a blurb, it would go some distance towards notability. DGG ( talk ) 03:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Move to mainspace, cut section 3 and past on the talk page for possible follow-up. Decline for inadequate reference formating?! It is disconcerting that passing AfC is harder than passing AfD, no wonder AfC didn't work. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:23, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Please give me time to work on this page further and do not delete it - Randi Hoffman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randihoffman (talkcontribs)
  • Keep and help the newbie. This seems salvageable and user who made this deletion nomination has yet to make a case why this should be deleted. jni (delete)...just not interested 15:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • History merge with Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Thaddeus Rutkowski. This is a copy-paste fragment. It's not needed as a separate page, although the decline templates should likely be moved to the new page. Aggie80 wasn't suggesting that the user's work be deleted, only that this extra copy isn't needed. About the decline reason: Wikipedia has a policy of inline citations in BLPs, so at Afc we lead the new users to include them before passing out the drafts. There's been considerable discussion about this on the project talk page. —Anne Delong (talk) 11:58, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
The deletion was because there was already a page created in AfC. I thought I used the merge page as already in existence. The two pages should clearly be merged into the one in AfC. The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 13:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

April 6, 2014[edit]


Promotional BLP which is a stale draft. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:49, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Ghost (TV Series)[edit]

User:Ghost (TV Series) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Originally used to create a draft, now blanked. Also the username represents a tv series. No other edits. ShriramTalk 14:17, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Bar none. Since this user page is blanked, meaning there will be no deletion or others. However I do believe that there is a article relating to the username which the real name of the show is Phantom. So I think, withdraw this discussion, unless if the user continues to edit the user page, then delete per nom. Jhenny38 (Starters talk, My contributions) 07:11, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Fixtures Group[edit]

Wikipedia:Fixtures Group (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Looks like a misplaced article. It doesn't contain any reliable secondary sources, and it would qualify for WP:G13 if it had been submitted through articles for creation. I couldn't find any sources online, but my search was not helped by the very generic name of the company. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 06:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

  • It is an interesting history of the small company, worthy of being written down, but see Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. It would go well on the company website. As a Wikipedia article, it reads as promotion (not independent third party coverage) and it fails WP:CORP. I see also that the user has engaged in some link spamming, although not agregiously. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:40, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

April 5, 2014[edit]

User:Uzma Gamal/Test page[edit]

User:Uzma Gamal/Test page (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This unsourced list is likely to never be an article or list, due to the key phrase "blames israel", making it permanently POV (unless you added "praised israel", or "blamed by israel", etc). the page does show up as the #2 search result on google for " "blames israel" wikipedia ", so it could be erroneously interpreted as an article. If user finds this list useful (which it probably is), i think it needs to be somewhere other than WP. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 20:35, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

User:TheMan(need i say more)/The Kwartet[edit]

User:TheMan(need i say more)/The Kwartet (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

original sandbox for article now at The Kwartet Mercurywoodrose (talk) 20:25, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Current events/Brazil/Calendar[edit]

Portal:Current events/Brazil/Calendar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Horribly out of date/unmaintained. Only used on Portal:Current_events/Brazil/Special which is equally out of date and an orphan portal, with Portal:Current events/Brazil having been closed down in 2010. John Vandenberg (chat) 02:29, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2, 2014[edit]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (3rd nomination)[edit]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (3rd nomination) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

April Fool's Day is no reason to be disruptive. While a tag was added that the material is kept because it is considered humorous, I do not find the humor and only see a bad faith nomination. There is no value to Wikipedia to keeping Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (3rd nomination) or Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (2nd nomination). Paul McDonald (talk) 11:32, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete - Usually I'd say these should be kept but both of these are A. unfunny and B. pointless! (To copy one long rationale to the other is nonsensical to say the least!) .... Nothing of value will be lost!. -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 11:50, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete under criteria G3 - it's obvious vandalism. Eyesnore (pc) 12:54, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment How come the AFD for the 2012 AFD discussion redirects here? Maybe we could keep the 2012 AFD but not the 2014 one? There are more comments on the 2012 one, so it has more humorous value. Besides, I suppose they are pretty similar. Also, I'm pretty sure Wikipedia policy prohibits having two AFDs in one like this. Smartyllama (talk) 00:06, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Response that was my (poor) attempt to bundle two nominations. It's fairly standard at AFD. If they should be broken apart here, that's a mere technical move.--Paul McDonald (talk) 00:35, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Well, some of the arguments above seem to only apply to the 2014 nomination (such as Davey's comments about copying the 2012 nomination) while other comments (such as yours) would apply to both, so maybe it's best to split them up. Smartyllama (talk) 09:09, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Closed discussions[edit]

For archived Miscellany for deletion debates see the MfD Archives.