Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 06:23, 27 August 2013

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Articles for deletion page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Shortcut

WT:AFD

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Q1: I don't like this page's name. I want to rename it to Articles for discussion or something else.

A1: Please see Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Rename AFD. Note that all of the "for discussion" pages handle not only deletion, but also proposed mergers, proposed moves, and other similar processes. AFD is "for deletion" because the volume of discussion has made it necessary to sub-divide the work by the type of change.

Q2: You mean I'm not supposed to use AFD to propose a merger or a page move?

A2: Correct. Please use Wikipedia:Proposed mergers or Wikipedia:Requested moves for those kinds of proposals.

Q3: How many articles get nominated at AfD?

A3: Per the Oracle of Deletion, there were about 470,000 AfDs between 2005 (when the process was first created) and 2022. This comes out to about 26,000 per year (2,176 per month / 72 per day). In 2022, there were 20,008 AfDs (1,667 per month / 55 per day).

Q4: How many articles get deleted?

A4: Between 2005 and 2020, around 60% of AfDs were closed as "delete" or "speedy delete". This is about 270,000. More detailed statistics (including year-by-year graphs) can be found at Wikipedia:Oracle/All and Wikipedia:Wikipedia records#Deletion.

Q5: Is the timeline strict, with exactly 168 hours and zero minutes allowed? Should I remove late comments?

A5: No. We're trying to get the right outcome, not follow some ceremonial process. If the discussion hasn't been closed, it's okay for people to continue discussing it.

Q6: How many people participate in AFD?

A6: As of October 2023, of the 13.9 million registered editors who have ever made 1+ edit anywhere, about 162,000 of them (1 in 85 editors) have also made 1+ edit to an AFD page. Most of the participants are experienced editors, but newcomers and unregistered editors also participate. Most individual AFD pages get comments from just a few editors, but the numbers add up over time.

This project page has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Noam Cohen (8 October 2006). "Wikipedia Wars: Giving the Heave-Ho in an Online Who's Who". New York Times.
David Segal (3 December 2006). "Look Me Up Under 'Missing Link': On Wikipedia, Oblivion Looms for the Non-Notable". Washington Post.
Daniel Terdiman (11 January 2007). "To delete Wikipedia entry or not to delete?". CNET News.
Matthew Moore (1 October 2009). "Wikipedia: 20 articles earmarked for deletion". Daily Telegraph.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78

For discussions that have not been well-archived (before 2004), the page history of the Articles for deletion page has to be used as a contingency archive. One can look in the Deletion log to obtain date and time of a deletion, then look in the page history of VfD near that time to see which edit regards the unlisting of the page, then view the previous version.

Wikipedia utilities/Page titles to be deleted – edit history before 13:45, 19 May 2002 (UTC) – also see its talk page), histories go back to November 2001
Votes for Deletion – edit history (22:22, 15 May 2002 (UTC) to 06:24, 28 May 2004 (UTC))
Votes for Deletion – edit history (04:53, 28 May 2004 (UTC) to 22:58, 20 September 2004 UTC))
Votes/Articles for Deletion – edit history (00:03, 21 September 2004 (UTC) to Current)
Old VfD archive index (now AfD archives 1–31)
Wikipedia talk:Archived deletion discussions (Archive)

This page has archives. Sections older than 25 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

About deleted articles

There are three processes under which mainspace articles are deleted: 1) speedy deletion; 2) proposed deletion (prod) and 3) Articles for deletion (AfD). For more information, see WP:Why was my page deleted? To find out why the particular article you posted was deleted, go to the deletion log and type into the search field marked "title," the exact name of the article, mindful of the original capitalization, spelling and spacing. The deletion log entry will show when the article was deleted, by which administrator, and typically contain a deletion summary listing the reason for deletion. If you wish to contest this deletion, please contact the administrator first on their talk page and, depending on the circumstances, politely explain why you think the article should be restored, or why a copy should be provided to you so you can address the reason for deletion before reposting the article. If this is not fruitful, you have the option of listing the article at WP:Deletion review, but it will probably only be restored if the deletion was clearly improper.

List discussions

WP:Articles for deletion
WP:Categories for discussion
WP:Copyright problems
WP:Deletion review
WP:Miscellany for deletion
WP:Redirects for discussion
WP:Stub types for deletion
WP:Templates for discussion
WP:WikiProject Deletion sorting
WT:Articles for deletion
WT:Categories for discussion
WT:Copyright problems
WT:Deletion review
WT:Miscellany for deletion
WT:Redirects for discussion
WT:Stub types for deletion
WT:Templates for discussion
WT:WikiProject Deletion sorting

Zenryoku Gu Shōjo!! Action!!

Need AFD steps II and III completed for this. Rationale: WP:CRYSTAL for an unknown series - it isn't even clear if it is a TV series, video game, or what it even is, or if this is even the title. 192.251.134.5 (talk) 14:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:23, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Special When Lit (album)

I have completed step I, and noted the justification for deletion on Talk:Special When Lit (album). Now I'm requesting that some registered, logged-in user complete steps II and III. Thanks. 114.164.216.48 (talk) 21:30, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Monty ₈₄₅ 21:53, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete nomination of Next Sarawak state election

Late here, had a "moment", forgot anon editors couldn't complete AFDs; my apologies. I've placed my rationale on the article's talk page, would some kind stranger complete the process, please? 84.203.39.131 (talk) 04:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done --NeilN ^{talk to me} 06:04, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural issues for AfD Moad Gouzrou

I need an administrator or somebody who can access deleted article histories to inspect the AfD of Moad Gouzrou for a G4 issue. When I looked up the deletion log [1] for Mouad Gouzrou (notice the "u" in Moad), I discovered that it had been deleted three times before and is now listed again after further creation. Am I reading the history correctly? I can't find a undeletion. If I am correct, is this not grounds for a G4 Speedy Delete? Crtew (talk) 04:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A previous version of the article was deleted at AfD, yes, but I'm afraid it doesn't qualify for G4. G4 also requires that the new version be substantially identical to the deleted one, which isn't the case here - the new article is considerably longer and cites a number of sources that weren't present in the original. Hut 8.5 10:08, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please complete nomination of Australian Gridiron League for deletion

I have stated the reasons on the talk page. Thanks. 58.164.105.136 (talk) 00:49, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Australian Gridiron League. Hut 8.5 10:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Toooto:cheap_jerseys_2013-14_for_football_game

Hello there,

I'm not familiar with the procedures at en:wp, so I thought I'd just leave a note here. I have no idea what this was supposed to be but it's certainly not an article. Please have a look at it and do whatever seems appropriate. Thanks, --El Grafo (talk) 09:52, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spam for a company selling football shirts, I've speedied it. Hut 8.5 10:00, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Meanwhile I've nominated the image file for deletion at Commons (this is how I came across the "article" in the first place). Cheers, --El Grafo (talk) 10:18, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strings (Arthur Loves Plastic album)

I have completed step I, and noted the justification for deletion on Talk:Strings (Arthur Loves Plastic album). Now I'm requesting that some registered, logged-in user complete steps II and III. Thank you. 114.150.82.38 (talk) 09:23, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strings (Arthur Loves Plastic album). UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 12:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article must not be blanked

(Re-asking for wider discussion) Why exactly is this advice in the template? Articles must never be blanked, as that is a form of WP:Vandalism. Is this an actual concern, or just historical cruft? -- Kendrick7^talk 03:15, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking an article as to leave a redirect is perfectly acceptable practice - though blanking can also be vandalism too. But, in the course of an AFD, one should not blank an article that is the subject of AFD even if the consensus is obviously towards "merge" or similar that would necessitate the blanking; only after closure should that happen. --MASEM (t) 03:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't merge discussions properly to take place outside of WP:AFD? -- Kendrick7^talk 03:38, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A merge result is a valid outcome of an AFD, but the AFD should not be initiated if the desired outcome is a merge. (Often the case is that people agree with "deletion" of the stand-alone article per the nom, but identify a redirect/merge target the nom did not see. This is reasonable to allow). --MASEM (t) 05:14, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The idea is to prevent an editor who wants the article deleted to go and blank the article, then complain that it's been blanked. We also sometimes see people come in and blank sections, then complain that the article has no real content. But there's a caveat there too - if the author blanks it, and no one else really edited it beyond tags and maintenance edits, then that can count as a speedy deletion request (WP:CSD#G7). UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 12:16, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I've had experiences in AFDs where a couple of editors who want to delete an article actively try to re-edit it to make their quest a fait accompli, and thanks to the Pong game that is WP:3RR all you can do is sit back and watch it happen. Would it not be better to generalize the sentiment and to remind editors to abide by the WP:PRESERVE policy? -- Kendrick7^talk 03:09, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I think a call to not remove references during the AfD would achieve that, and is in the same spirit of the no blanking, as it allows editors to assess the existing support for the article content. Diego Moya (talk) 07:59, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, normal editing should be possible even during an AFD - and if the refs are indeed rubbish, I should be able to remove them. Now, I should also explain at the AFD what I did and why, so that it's clear. On the other hand, it's pretty transparent when a nominator goes in and guts the article after nominating, and they'll usually get called out on it in the debate. I think that sort of thing would fall under Disruptive Editing, without a separate policy - but mentioning it here might make sense too. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 12:22, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zero1 Australian National Championship AfD

Zero1 Australian National Championship. I need this completed. This article should go and I have said why on the talk page. 101.173.170.151 (talk) 00:07, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zero1 Australian National Championship. Hut 8.5 11:03, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting

I nominated an AfD and it got no response from anyone so it's been relisted twice without any feedback. Will it be relisted a third time? At what point does a decision get made if there is just complete indifference except for my nomination? NewJerseyLiz ^{Let's Talk} 15:50, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The AfD is here. I've !voted. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:05, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Kadmon (character)

The page is related to a minor Italian television character (from the program "Mistero" / Italia1 http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistero_(programma_televisivo) ). I think that the wiki page was created only for self-promotional purpose to create a "background" to the character by producers of the show. The page have no international encyclopedic relevance so I think it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.229.51.18 (talk • contribs) 10:34, 21 August 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

Done. The debate is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Kadmon (character). UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 12:12, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please complete nomination of AWF Australasian Championship for deletion

I have placed the reasons on the talk page. Thanks. 58.164.105.136 (talk) 03:00, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AWF Australasian Championship. One suggestion: you state that the promotion was previously found wanting at AfD on notability grounds but did not provide a link to that prior discussion. It is a big gap you should fill.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:34, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I couldn't find it straight away which is why I didn't add it to begin with. 58.164.105.136 (talk) 08:40, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of largest automotive companies by revenue

List of largest automotive companies by revenue looks like WP:OR, but then each item is referenced. How are lists handled? If forbes or someone published the list it would be a no-brainer to keep (or at least merge). --76.110.201.132 (talk) 01:24, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Omar J. Jones and M. Courtney Watson Relisted

Based on advice I receive on the Notability/Noticeboard I nominated some WP:BLPs of Howard County politicians to Afd. Most got clear consensus, but these two got caught up in an irrelevant banter about the merits of copy/pasting. They have both been stagnant since the relisting a couple of days ago. I would appreciate an objective look-see if someone has the time. Thanks! MilaPedia (talk) 06:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 109: / Line 109: @@
 [[List of largest automotive companies by revenue]] looks like WP:OR, but then each item is referenced. How are lists handled? If forbes or someone published the list it would be a no-brainer to keep (or at least merge). --[[Special:Contributions/76.110.201.132|76.110.201.132]] ([[User talk:76.110.201.132|talk]]) 01:24, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
+== [[Omar J. Jones]] and [[M. Courtney Watson]] Relisted ==
+Based on advice I receive on the Notability/Noticeboard I nominated some WP:BLPs of Howard County politicians to Afd. Most got clear consensus, but these two got caught up in an irrelevant banter about the merits of copy/pasting. They have both been stagnant since the relisting a couple of days ago. I would appreciate an objective look-see if someone has the time. Thanks! [[User:MilaPedia|MilaPedia]] ([[User talk:MilaPedia|talk]]) 06:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)