Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion

Find this page confusing? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

For requests to hide the contents of edit summaries, see Wikipedia:Oversight.

"WP:SPEEDY" redirects here. For the guideline discussing when to end deletion debates early as "keep", see Wikipedia:Speedy keep. For the list of current candidates for speedy deletion, see Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. For the speedy renaming of categories, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy.

The criteria for speedy deletion specify the only cases in which administrators have broad consensus to bypass deletion discussion, at their discretion, and immediately delete Wikipedia pages or media. They cover only the cases specified in the rules below.

Deletion is reversible, but only by administrators, so other deletions occur only after discussion. Speedy deletion is intended to reduce the time spent on deletion discussions for pages or media with no practical chance of surviving discussion.

Administrators should take care not to speedy delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases. If a page has survived its most recent deletion discussion, it should not be speedy deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations and pages that meet specific uncontroversial criteria; these criteria are noted below. Contributors sometimes create pages over several edits, so administrators should avoid deleting a page that appears incomplete too soon after its creation.

Anyone can request speedy deletion by adding one of the speedy deletion templates. Before nominating a page for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved, reduced to a stub, merged or redirected elsewhere, reverted to a better previous revision, or handled in some other way. A page is only eligible for speedy deletion if all of its revisions are also eligible. Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criterion/criteria the page meets, and should notify the page creator and any major contributors.

The creator of a page may not remove a speedy deletion tag from it. Only an editor who is not the creator of a page may do so. A creator who disagrees with the speedy deletion should instead click on the Click here to contest this speedy deletion button which appears inside of the speedy deletion tag. This button links to the discussion page with a pre-formatted area for the creator to explain why the page should not be deleted. However, if the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page or category page, this can be taken as a deletion request, and the blank page tagged for deletion with {{db-blanked}} (see G7).

Besides speedy deletion, there are the following methods of deletion:

• Wikipedia:Deletion discussions (AfD, Mfd, RfD, TfD, CfD, FfD), the normal method of carrying out deletion.
• Wikipedia:Proposed deletions, for nominating pages for uncontroversial deletion.
• Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people, for articles on living persons without sources.

Introduction to criteria

Abbreviations (G12, A3...) are often used to refer to these criteria, and are given in each section, though plain-English explanations are often more appropriate.

Immediately following each criterion below is a list of templates used to mark pages or media files for speedy deletion under the criterion being used. In order to alert administrators to the nomination, place the relevant speedy deletion template at the top of the page or media file you are nominating (within <noinclude>…</noinclude> if nominating a Template: page). Please be sure to supply an edit summary that mentions that the page is being nominated for speedy deletion. All of the speedy deletion templates are named as "db-X" with "db" standing for "delete because". A list of the "db-X" templates can be found at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Deletion templates.

If a page falls under more than one of the criteria, instead of adding multiple tags it is possible to add a single {{db-multiple}} tag to cover them all. For example, if an article seems both to be promotional (G11) and also to fail to indicate significance of its subject (A7) then the tag {{Db-multiple|G11|A7}} can be used to indicate both of these concerns. Then the article can be speedily deleted if an administrator assesses it and decides that either or both of the criteria apply.

There is strong consensus that the creators and major contributors of pages and media files should be warned of a speedy deletion nomination (or of the deletion if not informed prior thereto). All speedy deletion templates (using criteria other than G6, G7, and G8) thus contain in their body a pre-formatted, suggested warning template to notify the relevant party or parties of the nomination for speedy deletion under the criterion used. You can copy and paste such warnings to the talk pages of the creators and major contributors, choose from others listed at Category:CSD warning templates, or place the unified warning template, {{subst:CSD-warn|csd|pagename}}, which allows you to tailor your warning under any particular criterion by replacing 'csd' with the associated criterion abbreviation (e.g. g4, a7).

Pages that have survived deletion discussions

Occasionally, a page or file that has survived a deletion discussion may be nominated for speedy deletion. The fact that it survived the discussion almost always means that at least a couple of editors thought it was worth keeping around.

Except in obviously non-controversial cases such as office actions and pages or files that are known to exist (including all required attribution history) on another WMF project, both those nominating pages for speedy deletion and administrators doing the deletions should check the article history and review any past deletion requests and deletion discussions before nominating such a page or file for speedy deletion or actually deleting it.

Editors should consider alternatives such as reverting to an older version, editing out inappropriate content (e.g. copyright violations), or requesting other forms of deletion before requesting speedy deletion of these pages.

In addition to the above, administrators should consider revision deletion if appropriate.

When in doubt, open a new deletion discussion.

List of criteria

General

These apply to every type of page, and so apply to articles, redirects, user pages, talk pages, files, etc.:

G1. Patent nonsense

Main page: Wikipedia:Patent nonsense

Pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history. This excludes poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, implausible theories, vandalism and hoaxes, fictional material, coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material. This excludes the sandbox and pages in the user namespace. In short, if you can understand it, G1 does not apply.

• {{db-g1}}, {{db-nonsense}}

G2. Test pages

A page created to test editing or other Wikipedia functions. Subpages of the Wikipedia Sandbox created as tests are included, but not the Sandbox itself. This criterion does not apply to pages in the user namespace, nor does it apply to valid but unused or duplicate templates (although criterion T3 may apply).

• {{db-g2}}, {{db-test}}

G3. Pure vandalism and blatant hoaxes

Further information: Wikipedia:Vandalism

This includes blatant and obvious misinformation, blatant hoaxes (including images intended to misinform), and redirects created by cleanup from page-move vandalism.

• {{db-g3}}, {{db-vandalism}}, {{db-hoax}}

G4. Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion

A sufficiently identical and unimproved copy, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion. This excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies, and content moved to user space for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy). This criterion also excludes content undeleted via deletion review, or which was deleted via proposed deletion or speedy deletion (although in that case the previous speedy criterion, or other speedy criteria, may apply).

• {{db-g4}}, {{db-repost}}

G5. Creations by banned or blocked users

Further information: Wikipedia:Banning policy and Wikipedia:Blocking policy

Pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and which have no substantial edits by others. G5 should not be applied to transcluded templates.

• To qualify, the edit must have been made while the user was actually banned. A page created before the ban does not qualify.
• To qualify, the edit must be a violation of the user's block or ban. For example, pages created by a topic-banned user may be deleted if they come under that particular topic, but not if they are in some other topic.
• {{db-g5|name of banned user}}, {{db-banned|name of banned user}}

G6. Technical deletions

Uncontroversial maintenance, including:

• Deleting dated maintenance categories
• Deleting unnecessary disambiguation pages, such as those listing only one or zero links to existing Wikipedia articles. Note: per MOS:DABRL, redlinks are allowed in dab pages, if supported by a bluelink to an article that shows usage of the same redlink in reasonable context; the supporting bluelink counts as a valid link to an existing Wikipedia article.
• Performing uncontroversial page moves. An administrator who deletes a page that is blocking a move should ensure that the move is completed after deleting it.
• Deleting pages unambiguously created in error or in the incorrect namespace

If no special tag like {{db-move}} can be used, the general {{db-g6|rationale=reason}} tag should be used instead, with a reason specified in the rationale= parameter of the tag.

• {{db-g6|rationale=reason}}, {{db-copypaste|page to be moved}}, {{db-deprecated}}, {{db-disambig}}, {{db-move|page to be moved|reason}}, {{db-xfd|votepage=link to closed deletion discussion}}

G7. Author requests deletion

If requested in good faith and provided that the only substantial content to the page and to the associated talk page was added by its author. (For redirects created as a result of a pagemove, the mover must also have been the only substantive contributor to the pages prior to the move.) If the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page or category page, this can be taken as a deletion request.

• {{db-g7}}, {{db-author}}, {{db-blanked}}, {{db-self}}

G8. Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page

Examples include talk pages with no corresponding subject page; subpages with no parent page; image pages without a corresponding image; redirects to invalid targets, such as nonexistent targets, redirect loops, and bad titles; and categories populated by deleted or retargeted templates. This excludes any page that is useful to Wikipedia, and in particular deletion discussions that are not logged elsewhere, user pages, user talk pages, talk page archives, plausible redirects that can be changed to valid targets, and image pages or talk pages for images that exist on Wikimedia Commons, and pages that should be moved to a different location. Exceptions may be sign-posted with the template {{G8-exempt}}.

• {{db-g8}}, {{db-imagepage}}, {{db-redirnone}}, {{db-subpage}}, {{db-talk}}, {{db-templatecat}}

G9. Office actions

Main page: Wikipedia:Office actions

The Wikimedia Foundation office reserves the right to speedily delete a page temporarily in cases of exceptional circumstances. Deletions of this type may not be reversed without permission from the Foundation.

G10. Pages that disparage, threaten, intimidate or harass their subject or some other entity, and serve no other purpose

Main page: Wikipedia:Attack page

These "attack pages" may include libel, legal threats, material intended purely to harass or intimidate a person or biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced. These pages should be speedily deleted when there is no neutral version in the page history to revert to. Both the page title and page content may be taken into account in assessing an attack. Articles about living people deleted under this criterion should not be restored or recreated by any editor until the biographical article standards are met. Redirects from plausible search terms are not eligible under this criterion. For example, a term used on the target page to refer to its subject is often a plausible redirect - see WP:RNEUTRAL.

• {{db-g10}}, {{db-attack}}, {{db-attackorg}}, {{db-personal attack}}, {{db-negublp}}

G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion

Main page: Wikipedia:Spam

Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. If a subject is notable and the content can be replaced with text that complies with neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. Note: An article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. "Promotion" does not necessarily mean commercial promotion: anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organisation, a point of view, etc. See WP:NOTFORPROMOTION for the policy on this.

• {{db-g11}}, {{db-promo}}, {{db-spam}}, {{db-spamuser}}, {{db-spamuser-sandbox‎}}

G12. Unambiguous copyright infringement

Text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a compatible free license, where there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. For equivocal cases which do not meet speedy deletion criteria (such as where there is a dubious assertion of permission, where free-content edits overlie the infringement, or where there is only partial infringement or close paraphrasing), the article or the appropriate section should be blanked with the {{subst:copyvio | url=insert URL here}} template, and the page should be listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Please consult Wikipedia:Copyright violations for other instructions. Public-domain and other free content, such as a Wikipedia mirror, do not fall under this criterion, nor is mere lack of attribution of such works a reason for speedy deletion. For images and media, see the equivalent criterion in the "Files" section below, which has more specific instructions.

• {{db-g12|url=source URL}}, {{db-copyvio|url=source URL}}

Note: If other criteria apply in addition to G12, the template {{db-multiple}} should be used instead of the above to avoid pointless copyright permission requests subsequent to deletion.

• {{db-multiple|g12|url=source url|other criteria}}

G13. Abandoned Articles for creation submissions

Further information: Wikipedia:Articles for creation and Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/G13

Rejected or unsubmitted Articles for creation pages that have not been edited in over six months. This criterion applies to all drafts in WikiProject Articles for creation project and talk namespaces, as well as all userspace drafts that are using the project's {{AFC submission}} template.

• {{db-g13}}, {{db-afc}}

Articles

Note: not all numbers are used as some criteria have been repealed.

A1. No context

Articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Example: "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh." This applies only to very short articles. Context is different from content, treated in A3, below. Caution is needed when using this tag on newly created articles.

• {{db-a1}}, {{db-nocontext}}, {{db-short}}

A2. Foreign language articles that exist on another Wikimedia project

Articles having essentially the same content as an article on another Wikimedia project. If the article is not the same as an article on another project, use the template {{Not English}} instead, and list the page at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English for review and possible translation.

• {{db-a2}}, {{db-foreign}}

A3. No content

Any article (other than disambiguation pages, redirects, or soft redirects to Wikimedia sister projects) consisting only of external links, category tags and "see also" sections, a rephrasing of the title, attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, chat-like comments, template tags, and/or images. This also applies to articles consisting entirely of the framework of the Article wizard with no additional content beyond the above. However, a very short article may be a valid stub if it has context, in which case it is not eligible for deletion under this criterion. Similarly, this criterion does not cover a page having only an infobox, unless its contents also meet the above criteria. Caution is needed when using this tag on newly created articles.

• {{db-a3}}, {{db-nocontent}}, {{db-contact}}, {{db-empty}}

A5. Transwikied articles

Further information: m:Help:Transwiki

Any article that consists only of a dictionary definition that has already been transwikied (e.g., to Wiktionary), a primary source that has already been transwikied (e.g., to Wikisource), or an article on any subject that has been discussed at articles for deletion with an outcome to move it to another wiki, after it has been properly moved and the author information recorded.

• {{db-a5}}, {{db-transwiki}}

A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events)

Further information: Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance

An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works. This criterion does not apply to species of animals, only to individual animal(s). The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.

• {{db-a7}}, {{db-person}} – for people, {{db-band}} – for bands, {{db-club}} – for clubs, societies and groups, {{db-inc}} – for companies, corporations and organizations, {{db-web}} – for websites, {{db-animal}} – for individual animals, {{db-event}} - for events
• It is irrelevant whether the claim of notability within the article is not sufficient for the notability guidelines. If the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied. Often what seems non-notable to a new page patroller is shown to be notable in a deletion discussion.

A9. No indication of importance (musical recordings)

Further information: Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance

An article about a musical recording that has no corresponding article about its recording artist and does not indicate why its subject is important or significant (both conditions must be met). This is distinct from questions of verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion does not apply to other forms of creative media, products, or any other types of articles.

• {{db-a9}}, {{db-album}}, {{db-song}}

A10. Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic

A recently created article with no relevant page history that duplicates an existing English Wikipedia topic, and that does not expand upon, detail or improve information within any existing article(s) on the subject, and where the title is not a plausible redirect. This does not include split pages or any article that expands or reorganizes an existing one or that contains referenced, mergeable material. It also does not include disambiguation pages. (When the new title is a reasonable term for the subject, converting the new article to a redirect may be preferable to deletion.)

• {{db-a10|article=existing article title}}, {{db-same|article=existing article title}}
• This deletion rationale should only be used rarely. In the vast majority of duplicate articles, the title used is a plausible misspelling or alternate name for the main article, and a redirect should be created instead. This criterion should only be used if its title could be speedy deleted as a redirect.

A11. Obviously invented

Further information: Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance

An article which plainly indicates that the subject was invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and does not credibly indicate why its subject is important or significant. The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify under Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Note: This is not intended for hoaxes (see CSD G3).

• {{db-a11}}, {{db-invented}}, {{db-madeup}}

For any articles that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Articles for deletion or Wikipedia:Proposed deletion.

Redirects

Note: not all numbers are included as some criteria have been repealed.

R2. Cross-namespace redirects

Redirects, apart from shortcuts, from the main namespace to any other namespace except the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces.

If the redirect was the result of a page move, consider waiting a day or two before deleting the redirect. See also Wikipedia:Cross-namespace redirects.

• {{db-r2}}, {{db-rediruser}}

R3. Implausible typos

Recently created redirects from implausible typos or misnomers. However, redirects from common misspellings or misnomers are generally useful, as are sometimes redirects in other languages. This criterion does not apply to redirects created as a result of a page move. It also does not apply to articles and stubs that have been converted into redirects, including redirects created by merges, or to redirects ending with "(disambiguation)" that point to a disambiguation page.

• {{db-r3}}, {{db-redirtypo}}, {{db-redirmisnomer}}

For any redirects, including soft redirects, that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. Redirect pages that have useful page history should never be speedy deleted. In some cases it may be possible to make a useful redirect by changing the target instead of deleting it. Redirects that do not work due to software limitations, such as redirects to special pages or to pages on other wikis, may be converted to soft redirects if they have a non-trivial history or other valid uses.

For reversal of redirects, use {{db-move}}, a special case of {{db-g6}}.

Files

These apply to files, images, and other media.

F1. Redundant

Unused duplicates or lower-quality/resolution copies of another Wikipedia file having the same file format. This excludes images in the Wikimedia Commons; cf. criterion F8 below.

• {{db-f1|replacement file name.ext}}, {{db-redundantfile|replacement file name.ext}}, {{duplicate|replacement file name.ext}}, {{isd|replacement file name.ext}}

F2. Corrupt or empty image

Files that are corrupt, empty, or that contain superfluous and blatant non-metadata information. This also includes image description pages for Commons images, except pages containing information not relevant to any other project (like {{FeaturedPicture}}).

• {{db-f2}}, {{db-nofile}}, {{db-fpcfail}}

F3. Improper license

Media licensed as "for non-commercial use only" (including non-commercial Creative Commons licenses), "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only" or "used with permission" may be deleted, unless they comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. Files licensed under versions of the GFDL prior to 1.3, without allowing for later versions, may be deleted.

• {{db-f3}}, {{db-noncom}}

F4. Lack of licensing information

Media files that lack the necessary licensing information to verify copyright status may be deleted after being identified as such for seven days if the information is not added. Administrators should check the upload summary, file information page, and the image itself for a source before deleting under this criterion.

• {{subst:nsd}} (no source), {{subst:nld}} (no license), {{subst:nsdnld}} (neither source nor license)

F5. Orphaned non-free use images

Images and other media that are not under a free license or in the public domain, that are not used in any article, may be deleted after being identified as such for more than seven days, or immediately if the image's only use was on a deleted article and it is very unlikely to have any use on any other valid article. Reasonable exceptions may be made for images uploaded for an upcoming article.

• {{subst:orfud}}

F6. Missing non-free use rationale

Non-free files claiming fair use but without a use rationale may be deleted after being identified as such for seven days. The boilerplate copyright tags setting out fair use criteria do not constitute a rationale. This criterion does not apply to situations where a use rationale is provided but is disputed.

• {{subst:nrd}}

F7. Invalid fair-use claim

• Non-free images or media with a clearly invalid fair-use tag (such as a {{Non-free logo}} tag on a photograph of a mascot) may be deleted immediately.
• Non-free images or media from a commercial source (e.g., Associated Press, Getty), where the file itself is not the subject of sourced commentary, are considered an invalid claim of fair use and fail the strict requirements of WP:NFCC; and may be deleted immediately.
• Non-free images or media that have been identified as being replaceable by a free image and tagged with {{subst:rfu}} may be deleted after two days, if no justification is given for the claim of irreplaceability. If the replaceability is disputed, the nominator should not be the one deleting the image.
• Invalid fair-use claims tagged with {{subst:dfu}} may be deleted seven days after they are tagged, if a full and valid fair-use use rationale is not added.
• {{db-f7}}, {{db-badfairuse}} (immediate F7 deletions); {{subst:rfu}} (replaceable with free image); {{subst:dfu}} (disputed fair use rationale)

F8. Images available as identical copies on the Wikimedia Commons

Provided the following conditions are met:

• The Commons version is in the same file format and is of the same or higher quality/resolution.
• The image's license and source status is beyond reasonable doubt, and the license is undoubtedly accepted at Commons. To avoid deletion at Commons, please ensure the Commons page description has all of the following:
  • Name and date of death of the creator of the artistic work represented by the file, or else clear evidence that a free license was given. If anonymous, ensure the page description provides evidence that establishes the anonymous status.
  • Country where the artistic work represented by the file was situated, or where it was first published.
  • Date when the artistic work represented by the file was created or first published, depending on the copyright law of the origin country.
  • All image revisions that meet the first condition have been transferred to Commons as revisions of the Commons copy and properly marked as such.
• The image is not marked as {{do not move to Commons}} or as {{keep local}}.
• All information on the image description page is present on the Commons image description page, including the complete upload history with links to the uploader's local user pages (the upload history is not necessary if the file's license does not require it, although it is still recommended).
  • If there is any information not relevant to any other project on the image description page (like {{FeaturedPicture}}), the image description page must be undeleted after the file deletion.
• If the image is available on Commons under a different name than locally, all local references to the image must be updated to point to the title used at Commons.
• The image is not protected. DO NOT DELETE PROTECTED IMAGES, even if there is an identical copy on Commons. They are usually locally uploaded and protected here since they are used in the interface or in some widely used high-risk template. Deleting the local copy of an image used in the interface does break things. More about high-risk images.
• {{c-uploaded}} images may be speedily deleted as soon as they are off the Main Page.

{{Db-f8}}, {{Now Commons}}, {{Now Commons|File:name of file on Commons.ext}}

F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement

Obviously non-free images (or other media files) that are not claimed by the uploader to be fair use. A URL or other indication of where the image originated should be mentioned. This does not include images with a credible claim that the owner has released them under a Wikipedia-compatible free license. Most images from stock photo libraries such as Getty Images or Corbis will not be released under such a license. Blatant infringements should be tagged with the {{db-filecopyvio}} template. Non-blatant copyright infringements should be discussed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files.

• {{db-f9|url=URL of source}}, {{db-filecopyvio|url=URL of source}}

F10. Useless non-media files

Files uploaded that are neither image, sound, nor video files, are not used in any article, and have no foreseeable encyclopedic use. Note that the following files are rarely sound, image, or video: .doc, .pdf, .ps, .html, .rtf, .txt, .xls, and .zip files. Examples of image, sound, and video files are: .jpg, .gif, .png, .svg, .mpg, and .wav. This is not a comprehensive list of files that can be deleted, nor is an extension alone enough reason to delete; this criterion is based on file content.

• {{db-f10}}, {{db-badfiletype}}

F11. No evidence of permission

If an uploader has specified a license and has named a third party as the source/copyright holder without providing evidence that this third party has in fact agreed, the item may be deleted seven days after notification of the uploader. Acceptable evidence of licensing normally consists of either a link to the source website where the license is stated, or a statement by the copyright holder e-mailed or forwarded to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Such a confirmation is also required if the source is an organization that the uploader claims to represent, or a web publication that the uploader claims to be their own. Instances of obvious copyright violations where the uploader would have no reasonable expectation of obtaining permission (e.g. major studio movie posters, TV screenshots, album covers, logos which are not simple enough to be public domain, etc.) should be speedily deleted per reason F9 (unambiguous copyright infringement), unless fair-use can be claimed. Files tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days may also be speedily deleted under this criterion.

• {{subst:npd}}

For any images and other media that are not speedy deletion candidates, use the Wikipedia:Files for deletion process.

Categories

C1. Unpopulated categories

that have been unpopulated for at least four days. This does not apply to disambiguation categories, category redirects, featured topics categories, categories under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion (or other such discussions), or project categories that by their nature may become empty on occasion (e.g. Category:Wikipedians looking for help). Place {{empty category}} at the top of the page to prevent such categories from being deleted.

Tag category with {{db-c1}}.

C2. Renaming or merging

A. Typographic and spelling fixes.

• Correction of spelling errors and capitalization fixes. Differences between British and American spelling (e.g. Harbours → Harbors) are not considered errors; however if the convention of the relevant category tree is to use one form over the other then a rename may be appropriate under C2C below. If both spellings exist as otherwise-identical category names, they should be merged.
• Appropriate conversion of hyphens into en dashes or vice versa. (e.g. Category:Canada-Russia relations → Category:Canada–Russia relations).

B. A rename enforcing established Wikipedia naming conventions and practices.

• Expanding abbreviated country names (e.g. U.S. → United States).
• Disambiguation fixes from an unqualified name (e.g. Category:Washington → Category:Washington (state) or Category:Washington, D.C.)

C. A rename bringing a category into line with established naming conventions for that category tree, or into line with the various "x by y", "x of y", or "x in y" categorization conventions specified at Wikipedia:Category names.

• This should only be used where there is no room for doubt that the category in question is being used for the standard purpose instead of being a potential subcategory.
• This criterion should only be applied when there is no ambiguity or doubt over the existence of a category naming convention. Such a convention must be well defined and must be overwhelmingly used within the tree. If this is not the case then the category in question must be brought forward to a full Cfd nomination.
• This criterion will not apply in cases where the category tree observes distinctions in local usage (e.g. Category:Transportation in the United States and Category:Transport in the United Kingdom).

D. A rename to facilitate concordance between a particular category's name and a related article's name.

• Renaming a topic category to match its eponymous article (e.g. Category:The Beatles and The Beatles).
• This applies only if the related article's current name (and by extension, the proposed name for the category) is unambiguous, and uncontroversial—either due to longstanding stability at that particular name or immediately following a page move discussion which had explicit consensus to rename. If the page names are controversial or ambiguous in any way, then this criterion does not apply.
• This criterion also does not apply if there is any ongoing discussion about the name of the page or category, or if there has been a recent discussion concerning any of the pages which resulted in a no consensus result.

E. Author requests renaming.

• This criterion only applies if the author of a category requests or agrees to renaming within 28 days of creating the category.
• The criterion does not apply if other editors have populated or changed the category since it was created. "Other editors" includes bots, but excludes an editor working with the author on the renaming.

For C2A to C2E, tag category with {{subst:Cfr-speedy|newname}} and list on WP:CFDS. Administrators may implement C2E cases without delay.

For any categories that are not speedy candidates, use Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.

User pages

U1. User request

Personal user pages and subpages (but not user talk pages) upon request by their user. In some rare cases there may be administrative need to retain the page. In exceptional cases user talk pages may be deleted via Miscellany for Deletion (see right to vanish); they are not eligible for speedy deletion under this criterion. Note: The template does not display on certain pages (such as .css and .js pages), but its categorization will work.

• {{db-u1}}, {{db-userreq}}

U2. Nonexistent user

"WP:U2" redirects here. For WikiProject U2, see Wikipedia:WikiProject U2.

User pages of users that do not exist (check Special:Listusers), except userpages for anonymous users who have edited, redirects from misspellings of an established user's userpage, and for the previous name of a recently renamed user (which should normally be left as a redirect to the new name for a reasonable time).

• {{db-u2}}, {{db-nouser}}

U3. Non-free galleries

Galleries in the userspace that consist mostly or entirely of "fair use" or non-free images. Wikipedia's non-free content policy prohibits the use of non-free content in userspace, even content that the user has uploaded; use of content in the public domain or under a free license is acceptable.

• {{db-u3}}, {{db-gallery}}

For any user pages that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.

Templates

Note: not all numbers are included as some criteria have been repealed.
Note: when nominating, place any of the speedy deletion tags noted below inside <noinclude>...</noinclude> tags.

T2. Misrepresentation of policy

Templates that are unambiguous misrepresentations of established policy, e.g. disclaimer templates intended to be used in articles and speedy deletion templates for issues other than speedy deletion criteria.

• {{db-t2}}, {{db-policy}}

T3. Duplication and hardcoded instances

Templates that are not employed in any useful fashion, i.e., orphaned, deprecated, substantial duplications of another template, or hardcoded instances of another template where the same functionality could be provided by that other template, may be deleted after being tagged for seven days.

• {{db-t3|~~~~~ | OtherTemplate}}, {{db-duplicatetemplate|~~~~~ | OtherTemplate}}
• {{db-t3 | ~~~~~ | rationale=}}

For any templates that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.

Portals

P1. Any portal that would be subject to speedy deletion as an article.

• {{db-p1}}

P2. Underpopulated portal

Any portal based on a topic for which there is only a stub header article or fewer than three non-stub articles detailing subject matter that would be appropriate to present under the title of that portal.

• {{db-p2}}, {{db-emptyportal}}

For any portals that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.

Non-criteria

Commonly denied CSD reasons

The following proposals for new speedy deletion criteria are frequently raised, but have repeatedly failed to gain consensus:

• How-to articles
• Essay articles
• Expansion of A7, A9 and A11 to include books, software, schools and/or other subjects
• Neologisms
• Unsourced articles

A7, A9 and A11 scope

A7, A9 and A11 do not apply to any other subject that does not indicate importance. Expanding the scope of A7, A9 and A11 to different subjects (such as products, software, books, schools, etc.) have been proposed several times in the past and failed to gain consensus. Amongst the reasons for those rejections were that such subjects are not created often enough to require speedy deletion (such articles can be handled by proposed deletion or by listing the article at articles for deletion), that such subjects cannot be objectively covered in A7, A9 and A11's wording and that admins are not able to assess claims of importance for certain subjects. Before proposing a change to A7, A9 and A11 to expand their scope, please check whether your proposal has not already been discussed on the talk page (archives).

The following are not by themselves sufficient to justify speedy deletion.

1. Reasons based on Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia is not: "a dictionary", "an indiscriminate collection of information", "a crystal ball", "a how-to list", etc.
2. Hoaxes. If even remotely plausible, a suspected hoax article should be subjected to further scrutiny in a wider forum. Truth is often stranger than fiction. Note that "blatant and obvious hoaxes and misinformation" are subject to speedy deletion as vandalism.
3. Original research. It is not always easy to tell whether an article consists of material that violates the policy against novel theories or interpretations or is simply unsourced.
4. Neologisms that do not meet A11. New specialized terms should have a wider hearing.
5. Notability. Articles that seem to have obviously non-notable subjects are eligible for speedy deletion only if the article does not give a credible indication of why the subject might be important or significant.
6. Failure to assert importance but not an A7, A9 or A11 category. There is no consensus to speedily delete articles of types not specifically listed in A7, A9 or A11 under those criteria.
7. Author deletion requests made in bad faith. Author deletion requests made in bad faith, out of frustration, or in an attempt to revoke their freely-licensed contributions are not granted. However, anyone may request deletion of pages in their userspace.
8. Author deletion requests after others have contributed substantially. If other editors have substantially edited an article (i.e. more than just minor corrections or maintenance tagging), the original author may not request deletion under G7 because the work of others is involved.
9. Very short articles. Short articles with sufficient content and context to qualify as stubs may not be speedily deleted under criteria A1 and A3; other criteria may still apply.
10. Copies that are not copyright violations. If content appears both here and somewhere else (possibly in modified form), consider the possibility that Wikipedia's is the original version and the other site copied from us. Alternatively, the same author may have written both versions, or the original may be free content.
11. PNGs/GIFs replaced by JPEGs. JPEG encoding discards information that may be important later. Do not delete the original PNG/GIF files.
12. Questionable material that is not vandalism. Earnest efforts are never vandalism, so to assume good faith, do not delete as vandalism unless reasonably certain.
13. User and user talk pages of IP addresses. Although users are encouraged to create Wikipedia accounts, unregistered users are still allowed to edit Wikipedia, and are identified by their IP addresses. If an unregistered user has a static IP address, it may have a user page and/or user talk page associated with it, and even for non-static IP addresses, the history can contain important discussions or information which may be of interest.
14. Reasons based on essays. Wikipedia:Listcruft, Wikipedia:Obscure topics, Wikipedia:Deny recognition etc. are not valid reasons for speedy deletion.
15. A file that isn't a sound, video, or image file. To be deleted under F10, a file must have no encyclopedic value and not be used in any articles. Files that are in use or might have encyclopedic value, even if not sound, video, or image, should not be deleted without wider discussion.
16. An article written in a foreign language or script. An article should not be speedily deleted just because it is not written in English. Instead it should be tagged with {{Not English}} and listed at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English. It may be reconsidered after translation whether the article merits deletion, retention or improvement by means of a suitable tag.

Procedure for administrators

See also: Wikipedia:Deletion process

Make sure to specify the reason for deletion in the deletion summary. Also, in general the article's creator and major contributors should have been notified.

Before deleting a page, check the page history to assess whether it would instead be possible to revert and salvage a previous version, or there was actually a cut-and-paste move involved. Also:

• The initial edit summary may have information about the source of or reason for the page.
• The talk page may refer to previous deletion discussions or have ongoing discussion relevant to including the page.
• The page log may have information about previous deletions that could warrant SALTing the page or keeping it on good reason.
• What links here may show that the page is an oft-referred part of the encyclopedia, or may show other similar pages that warrant deletion. For pages that should not be re-created, incoming links in other pages (except in discussions, archives and tracking pages) should be removed.

Appendices

Deprecated criteria

Deprecated criteria include:

• A4. Attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title

  Merged with and later superseded by "No content" (A3) in November 2005 as part of a bold rewrite that was made to simplify the CSD criterion (Archived Discussion 1, Discussion 2, Discussion 3).

• A6. Attack articles

  Superseded by "Attack pages" (G10) in March 2006 (Discussion).

• A8. Blatant copyright infringement articles

  Superseded by "Unambiguous copyright infringement" (G12) in October 2006 (Unopposed proposal).

• R1. Redirects to non-existent pages

  Merged into "Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page" (G8) in September 2008 (Discussion)

• C3. Categories solely populated from a template

  Merged into "Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page" (G8) in October 2008 (Discussion)

• T1. Divisive and inflammatory templates

  Was repealed in February 2009 (Discussion). Instead, "attack pages" (G10) may be applicable in some cases. Otherwise, use Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.

See also

• AfD Common outcomes
• Archived delete debates
• Alternative outlets
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion
• Category:CSD warning templates
• Category:Speedy deletion
• Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Deletion templates
• Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Explanations
• Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Overturned speedy deletions
• Wikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators
• Wikipedia:Deletion of newly created pages and {{newpage}}
• Wikipedia:No blank pages
• Wikipedia:Proposed deletion
• Undeletion policy
• Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace (Grid of warning messages)
• Wikipedia:What to do if your article gets CSD tagged