Jump to content

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:MFDHOWTO)
"WP:MFD" redirects here. For media for deletion, see Wikipedia:Files for discussion. For modules for deletion, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.


Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

Miscellany for deletion (MfD) is a place where Wikipedians decide what should be done with problematic pages in the namespaces which aren't covered by other specialized deletion discussion areas. Items sent here are usually discussed for seven days; then they are either deleted by an administrator or kept, based on community consensus as evident from the discussion, consistent with policy, and with careful judgment of the rough consensus if required.

Filtered versions of the page are available at

Information on the process

[edit]

What may be nominated for deletion here:

  • Pages not covered by other XFD venues, including pages in these namespaces: Draft:, Help:, Portal:, MediaWiki:, Wikipedia: (including WikiProjects), User:, TimedText: and the various Talk: namespaces
  • Userboxes (regardless of namespace)
  • Pages in the File namespace that have a local description page but no local file (if there is a local file, Wikipedia:Files for discussion is the right venue)
  • 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 userpage or a draft you created deleted, there is no need to list it here; simply tag it with {{db-userreq}} or {{db-u1}}. If you wish to clear your user talk page or sandbox, just blank it.
Duplications in draftspace?
  • Duplications in draftspace are usually satisfactorily fixed by redirection. If the material is in mainspace, redirect the draft to the article, or a section of the article. If multiple draft pages on the same topic have been created, tag them for merging. See WP:SRE.
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 {{WikiProject status|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.
Alternatives to MfD
  • Speedy deletion If the page clearly satisfies a "general" or "user" speedy deletion criterion, tag it with the appropriate template. Be sure to read the entire criterion, as some do not apply in the user space.

Please familiarize yourself with the following policies

[edit]

How to list pages for deletion

[edit]
Shortcut

Please check the aforementioned list of deletion discussion areas to check that you are in the right area. Then follow these instructions:

Instructions on listing pages for deletion:

To list a page for deletion, follow this three-step process: (replace PageName with the name of the page, including its namespace, to be deleted)

Note: Users must be logged in to complete step II. An unregistered user who wishes to nominate a page for deletion should complete step I and post their reasoning on Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion with a notification to a registered user to complete the process.

I.
Edit PageName:

Enter the following text at the top of the page you are listing for deletion:

{{mfd|1={{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}}}
for a second or subsequent nomination use {{mfdx|2nd}}

or

{{mfd|GroupName}}
if nominating several similar related pages in an umbrella nomination. Choose a suitable name as GroupName and use it on each page.
If the nomination is for a userbox or similarly transcluded page, use {{subst:mfd-inline}} so as to not mess up the formatting for the userbox.
Use {{subst:mfd-inline|GroupName}} for a group nomination of several related userboxes or similarly transcluded pages.
  • Please include in the edit summary the phrase
    Added MfD nomination at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]
    replace PageName with the name of the page that is up for deletion.
  • Please don't mark your edit summary as a minor edit.
  • Check the "Watch this page" box if you would like to follow the page in your watchlist. This may help you to notice if your MfD tag is removed by someone.
  • Save the page
II.
Create its MfD subpage.

The resulting MfD box at the top of the page should contain the link "this page's entry"

  • Click that link to open the page's deletion discussion page.
  • Insert this text:
{{subst:mfd2| pg={{subst:#titleparts:{{subst:PAGENAME}}||2}}| text=Reason why the page should be deleted}} ~~~~
replacing Reason... with your reasons why the page should be deleted and sign the page. Do not substitute the pagename, as this will occur automatically.
  • Consider checking "Watch this page" to follow the progress of the debate.
  • Please use an edit summary such as
    Creating deletion discussion page for [[PageName]]
    replacing PageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion.
  • If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
  • Save the page.
III.
Add a line to MfD.

Follow   this edit link   and at the top of the list add a line:

{{subst:mfd3| pg=PageName}}
Put the page's name in place of "PageName".
  • Include the discussion page's name in your edit summary like
    Added [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]
    replacing PageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion.
  • Save the page.
  • If nominating a page that has been nominated before, use the page's name in place of "PageName" and add
{{priorxfd|PageName}}
in the nominated page deletion discussion area to link to the previous discussions and then save the page using an edit summary such as
Added [[Template:priorxfd]] to link to prior discussions.
  • If nominating a page from someone else's userspace, notify them on their main talk page.
    For other pages, while not required, it is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the miscellany that you are nominating. To find the main contributors, look in the page history or talk page of the page and/or use TDS' Article Contribution Counter or Wikipedia Page History Statistics. For your convenience, you may add

    {{subst:mfd notice|PageName}} ~~~~

    to their talk page in the "edit source" section, replacing PageName with the pagename. Please use an edit summary such as

    Notice of deletion discussion at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]

    replacing PageName with the name of the nomination page you are proposing for deletion.
  • If the user has not edited in a while, consider sending the user an email to notify them about the MfD if the MfD concerns their user pages.
  • If you are nominating a WikiProject, please post a notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council, in addition to the project's talk page and the talk pages of the founder and active members.

Administrator instructions

[edit]
XFD backlog
V Apr May Jun Jul Total
CfD 0 0 4 34 38
TfD 0 0 0 4 4
MfD 0 0 0 2 2
FfD 0 0 0 1 1
RfD 0 0 4 30 34
AfD 0 0 0 1 1

Administrator instructions for closing and relisting discussions can be found here.

Archived discussions

[edit]

A list of archived discussions can be located at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates.

Current discussions

[edit]
Pages currently being considered for deletion are indexed by the day on which they were first listed. Please place new listings at the top of the section for the current day. If no section for the current day is present, please start a new section.

July 21, 2024

[edit]

User:Drbogdan

[edit]
User:Drbogdan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This user was recently CBANned for abuse of editing privileges, in particular promotional editing. Three of the user subpages created by this user have been removed via MfD already, and the content one of those pages (Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Drbogdan/NytComments-Search) still exists on the userpage as the main content and this userpage has served as a locus of the WP:PROMO content, namely directing offsite users routinely to the userpage which contains a lot of promotional material (see the ANI). Note that a lot of the promotional material is collapsed but when expanded is about half the page.

Like many users involved in that ANI, I hope that the user can return productively, but in the meantime this page is still way too cut-and-dry WP:PROMO and recreates material already removed for violating policies. If left up still serves a promotional purpose. I don’t intend this to be WP:GRAVEDANCING, I just really don’t believe that leaving up the page that people are being directed to which represents some of the major WP:PROMO that resulted in a CBAN up is serving Wikipedia in any way, and if the user in question is to return they’d likely need to rewrite a majority of this in any case. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 15:25, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:BMarGlines/Template:Channel Four Television Corporation

[edit]
User:BMarGlines/Template:Channel Four Television Corporation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Speedy delete: It's a fake Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:59, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 20, 2024

[edit]

User:Valjean/Archive 32

[edit]
User:Valjean/Archive 32 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This is a violation of numerous site policies.

1) Editors should not use Wikipedia for content that they insist other editors are not allowed to read or discuss. 2) The title is deliberately misleading; the page is not a talk-page archive, but an extremely long and rambling article about the "Donald Trump pee tape" and other rumors involving Russia. 3) Some of the accusations and insinuations against Mr. Trump are BLP violations; the clear intention of the article is to engage in personal attacks against Mr. Trump. Walsh90210 (talk) 15:01, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editors are allowed to use their private userspace for article development. The URL is deliberately neutral to avoid it being noticed and publicized by bad actors. I am not interested in promoting this content. Your opinions of the insinuations and accusations made by RS, Congressional investigations, and the intelligence community should not be used as the reason for deleting content that is being developed for an article. It is not ready for publication yet, so don't judge it as if it had already been publicized. That's an attitude that works against article development and our RS and Verifiability PAG. I am working on, revising, rearranging, and continually paring down, this article-to-be. This may not be its final format.
Keep your political views out of this. This is harassment. You should read it and the sources before acting, and then wait until publication. You will learn a lot.
Whether the rumor is true or not, RS and official investigations have written a lot about the rumor, and the topic is obviously quite notable, so an MfD or AfD would be improper. Harassment of editors while they are developing articles based on RS is a serious breach of conduct norms here and can have wide and damaging ramifications that prevent the development of potentially controversial articles. That is the effect here, and it's a really nasty move. The chilling effect is enormous. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The hypocrisy of a person who puts "This is my sandbox. No cats allowed. Just stay away. If you want to discuss this, DON'T use any talk pages. Email me." at the top of a page accusing others of a "chilling effect" and "harassment" for looking at it is immense. I will not reply to any of the other accusations against me. Walsh90210 (talk) 16:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did that because I don't want my work to be misused to push a POV or draw attention to it. That would be a forbidden misuse of userspace. You are the one drawing attention to it. Articles, not drafts, are what should get attention.
Stop and think about the chilling effect this has. No editor will ever be safe when creating legitimate content, no matter how notable and well-sourced. This kind of harassment should not be allowed, and we need a guideline to prevent it. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:33, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for the following reasons:
      • This is an entirely negative page about a living person who is the subject of a biography of a living person. It is not an attack page that is subject to speedy deletion because it is sourced, but it violates neutral point of view.
      • If the user wants to develop article material without interference by other editors, they can do so on their own computer.
      • If the user wants to display content to the general public but does not want them to edit it and does not want them to discuss it on a talk page, then the user is seeking to use Wikipedia as a web host.
      • Since we already have an article on Donald J. Trump, the user appears to be developing a subordinate article. Discussion of whether to spin out or split an article should be on the talk page of the parent article, Talk:Donald J. Trump, not by creating a draft child article subject to article ownership.
      • The originator says that we need a guideline to prevent: This kind of harassment. I would be interested in seeing and reviewing the draft guideline.
      • This isn't exactly a sandbox and isn't exactly a draft, but it is problematic as either. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:49, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • DeleteNeutral. Apart from the problems of the content itself (BLP violations etc.), the user needs to be reminded of WP:OWN. Placing limits on how a user page (or any page) can be discussed is not any one user's prerogative. I also ask my fellow MfD participants to review User:Valjean/Archive 31 and User:Valjean/Archive 30 which have very similar histories to the nominated page except they are blanked. They may also be eligible for deletion. Nickps (talk) 22:27, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I take back the part about BLP violations per the latitude users should be afforded in their own userspace. However, I still stand by my comment that placing limits on a talk page like it was done here should not be tolerated. Nickps (talk) 14:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Nickps: thanks for your change of heart. I can understand your reaction to my rather terse and short note on the page. It was written at a time when I was under ferocious attack and harassment for working on some draft articles in my userspace, and I was very touchy. It forced me to delete years of work and research.
    I have now revised that note and explain my reasons more fully. Please read it. It's also the first time I have publicly mentioned my autism, AFAIK. I'm not always good at communication, am not always diplomatic, and often make mistakes. I'm sorry about that. I appreciate helpful advice. I am not an anti-social person, just a bit awkward at times. Life is one continuous series of hourly misunderstandings, and that makes it a pain in the ass, yet I keep trying. I just wish there were some protections afforded to editors when working in their private userspace. In a publishing house, what has happened here would not be allowed. See my note for more on that. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:11, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: please clarify a few things for me:

  1. You say it "isn't exactly a sandbox". Please point me to the PAG that requires a page that is clearly labeled as "removed from search engines' indexes" and a "This is my sandbox." (plus "This is not a Wikipedia article: It is an individual user's work-in-progress page, and may be incomplete and/or unreliable.") to have a URL or title that also says "sandbox". What have I done wrong?
  2. You say it "isn't exactly a draft". It is clearly labeled a "draft": "For guidance on developing this draft, see Wikipedia: So you made a userspace draft." Please point me to the PAG that requires it to be labeled a "draft" in some other manner. The URL and title can be WXYZ or !@#$%^, AFAIK. I don't know of any rule about this.
  3. Please point me to the PAG that forbids the creation of an article when it, right from the beginning, is obviously too large to be included in a main article. There are such things as articles that mention Trump where he is not the main topic of the article, even though it touches on him. The title describes the topic accurately and has high common name recognition value. What PAG have I violated?
  4. You write "If the user wants to display content to the general public" I do not want to do that, hence the odd URL. I deliberately try NOT to draw attention to it. It is not an essay, and I do not mention it anywhere else, link to it, or share it anywhere else. I am not interested in misusing my userspace. I am doing what editors are allowed to do here, which is to use their userspace to host drafts they are developing as articles or other products useful to the project. What have I done wrong? What PAG have I violated?
  5. BLP applies to "unsourced" negative content, not to properly sourced negative content that is part of documenting a topic like this one. You don't seem to have read the page or know what it's about. You probably think that what is written about it at Steele dossier covers the topic, but that barely scratches the surface, as this rumor started in 2013, and Trump has known about it since then, long before the dossier was imagined.

Please answer my questions. The content is based on myriad RS, many of the highest quality and reliability, as this has national security implications and is the subject of FBI and Congressional investigations, testimony, and several lawsuits by Trump, which he has lost.

You should read these DYK? items. Myriad RS are behind each one:

Did you know?

  • ... that Trump has known about the rumor since he left Moscow in 2013?
  • ... that the rumor did not start with the Steele dossier? The dossier only repeats the original rumor.
  • ... that Trump has repeatedly lied about this? He even dared do it to the Director of the FBI.
  • ... that Trump's lies were so blatant and egregious that they got the Director of the FBI to change from a pee tape skeptic to a maybe peeliever?
  • ... that many other notable people have strong suspicions that the rumor is true?
  • ... that Trump's own actions cause them to think this way?
  • ... that before anyone pinpointed the possible time of the alleged incident, Trump lied very specifically about exactly that time?
  • ... that his actions are considered evidence of his consciousness of guilt?
  • ... that Trump and others have acted as if the tapes were real and actually exist?
  • ... that Michael Cohen has testified about this to Congress in 2019 and revealed many of these facts?
  • ... that Cohen and a group of allies have worked for many years to track down the tapes and stop this rumor? He was willing to pay a lot of money for the tapes. He testified about this.
  • ... that myriad RS, Congressional investigations, and other very reliable sources have written about this and analyzed it?
  • ... that the fact that the actual tape has not been published means the rumor, true or not, remains unproven?
  • ... that the real issues here are kompromat and national security issues, not Trump's alleged sexual proclivities?

And one more:

  • ... that editors should be allowed, without harassment, to do what is allowed here, which is to use their userspace to create articles, including potentially controversial ones?

I do not use words lightly in my draft article, and, whenever necessary, I have used words like "alleged", which is what we do with unproven claims and allegations. The rumor has not been misrepresented as proven fact. It's an extremely notable and serious rumor that did not start with the Steele dossier, and Trump has repeatedly lied about it. That increases the notability, as RS have documented these lies. The topic easily passes the GNG notability guideline. If someone has a problem with some of the content, I have written, right at the top of the page, for them to "email me". -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 22:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This is no different than a draft version of an article, that is being worked on in user space. We delete pages in draft space if they are abandoned for more than a particular amount of time, but this is in user space, not draft space. As such, it doesn't matter much what the user decided to call the page (as in "archive") – but if this hasn't been done already, I would strongly urge putting the "NOINDEX" notation on the page. Maybe there are issues with WP:NPOV (there probably are), but those can be dealt with if it ever gets moved to mainspace. I get it, that some editors just don't like the negative tone, but the person that it's about is a public figure and there are sources that, even if not reliable, are at least verifiable, so the argument that it's a BLP violation is weak. If anyone wants to make Wikipedia great again, this is the wrong place to pursue it. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:12, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • NOINDEX has been there from the beginning, and it's VISIBLE! I do not want to promote or advertise this page. I just want to create an article, quietly, in my userspace. I have always created articles this way. Newbies are not allowed to do this, but experienced editors are.
    Anyone can email me if they have issues they want to discuss. It's that simple. The reason I don't want to use the talk page is that it draws more attention to the page. I don't want it to become the focus of controversy. That will no doubt happen after it goes public, as that happens to most articles about controversial topics. That's okay.
    It's interesting that the standard template for a draft assumes it is "incomplete and/or unreliable": "This is not a Wikipedia article: It is an individual user's work-in-progress page, and may be incomplete and/or unreliable. For guidance on developing this draft, see Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft." Read that template at the top of the draft page. I am not doing anything unusual here. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 23:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning keep. “BLP violations” are not substantiated. Although there’s a lot there, it’s within reasonable leeway for 33,000 mainspace contributions over 21 years. The content is reliably sourced. It does read a polemical, not suitable for Wikipedia mainspace. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Bingo! @SmokeyJoe: you're right: "It does read a polemical, not suitable for Wikipedia mainspace."...yet! It needs work, and that's what I'm doing. I am getting close to starting to seek input from others. Your advice will be appreciated. Feel free to email me. This is my standard method of writing articles, just like many other experienced editors do. There is nothing unusual happening here, except for this MfD. I don't recall this happening before in this type of situation, where all the rules for article creation are being followed. A draft article should not be judged harshly. It is not perfect, and, as the draft template actually says, a draft is assumed to be "incomplete and/or unreliable". If this were released now, criticism would be warranted, but it's still in my user draft space where it belongs. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 02:23, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment to User:Valjean - It wasn't necessary both to ping me here at this MFD and to post to my talk page. I had already seen your ping here before you posted to my talk page. It is true that I didn't answer, because sometimes I think and/or write before answering. I probably will answer, but will not necessarily answer within 24 hours. I am not required to answer, although I probably will. Bludgeoning an AFD, MFD, or DRV is usually not the most effective approach. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Nominating a draft for MFD or an article for AFD is not Harassment. Was there some other harassment also? If so, please report it at WP:ANI after reading the boomerang essay. Do we need a paragraph in the Harassment policy about What Is Not Harassment? There are too many claims of Harassment, some valid, some not valid. There are too many claims of Vandalism, and we have a section on What Is Not Vandalism. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Nomination another’s usersubpages can be harassment. As a rule, I always consider whether there is a harassment motivation. Does the nominator have a POV disagreement with the user that related to the user’s usersubpage? It happens. It could be the case here. The nominator, User:Walsh90210, makes broad allegations without easy presentation of the evidence, and I am still wondering how they came to visit this page, and what is their history in relation to both the topic and the user Valjean. I have suspicions about Walsh90210, they are a new account, they don’t act new, they seem combative, they don’t have a userpage but they bluelinked it with a week of their first edit, they claim to know the clear intention of another user. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:04, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    See my talk page:User talk:Doug Weller#MfD etc. where User:Star Mississippi raised the question. Walsh90210 replied saying "This is not my first account (note Special:Diff/1225534254). I abandoned my previous account (which was never sanctioned) because I did not want to associate with older comments I had made about Israel-Palestine after the events of late 2023. I don't intend to say any more other than in private communications with ARBCOM. Walsh90210 (talk) 7:32 pm, Yesterday (UTC+1)" I agree with the rest of the points made by SmokeyJoe, I think there's likely to be a history behind this nomination. Doug Weller talk 09:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    THanks @Doug Weller. I'm not going to weigh in on the content of this draft, but I do have concerns about the nomination and a procedural close could be in order. As I said on Doug's Talk, it should probably go to ArbComm if there's a privacy matter. Not policy and speaking as editor not admin, but I really think CT/fairly new Clean Start editors don't go well together. Star Mississippi 13:05, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I had a quick look and I think ArbCom should have a longer look. User:HJ Mitchell, User:ToBeFree, can you grab your special glasses? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drmies (talk • contribs) 14:28, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 19, 2024

[edit]

User:Robert Birkett

[edit]
User:Robert Birkett (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Per WP:FAKEARTICLE, fake article for Drummore Primary School JaggedHamster (talk) 21:05, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:2024 CrowdStrike outages
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: speedy keep. Nom withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:11, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:2024 CrowdStrike outages

[edit]
Draft:2024 CrowdStrike outages (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This should be moved to draftspace [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 08:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

July 18, 2024

[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject SZA

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject SZA (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​
All prior XfDs for this page:

This is a recently-created, highly niche WikiProject (focusing on a single musical artist) whose creator has since been indefinitely blocked and only has three other participants. It didn't follow the recommended process for creating a wikiproject by proposing it and gathering a group of interested editors before creation. Unfortunately we know from experience that such narrowly-focused wikiprojects are almost never successful and just end up cluttering projectspace and diluting attention from other, broader and more viable, collaborations in the subject area. Creating a SZA task force of WikiProject Music might be an alternative, but again this needs more than a few interested editors to be meaningful. – Joe (talk) 15:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Jerusalem

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Jerusalem (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This is a recently-created, highly niche WikiProject (focusing on a single city) with only one participant. It didn't follow the recommended process for creating a wikiproject by proposing it and gathering a group of interested editors before creation. Unfortunately we know from experience that such narrowly-focused wikiprojects are almost never successful and just end up cluttering projectspace and diluting attention from other, broader and more viable, collaborations in the subject area. Creating a Jerusalem task force of WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration might be an alternative, but again this needs more than one interested editor to be meaningful. – Joe (talk) 15:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Major League Cricket

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Major League Cricket (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This is a recently-created, highly niche WikiProject with only two participants. It didn't follow the recommended process for creating a wikiproject by proposing it and gathering a group of interested editors before creation. Unfortunately we know from experience that such narrowly-focused wikiprojects are almost never successful and just end up cluttering projectspace and diluting attention from other, broader and more viable, collaborations in the subject area. Creating a task force of WikiProject Cricket might be an alternative, but again this needs more than a few interested editors to be meaningful. – Joe (talk) 15:01, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Dardistan

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Dardistan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This is a recently-created, highly niche WikiProject with only one participant. It didn't follow the recommended process for creating a wikiproject by proposing it and gathering a group of interested editors before creation. Unfortunately we know from experience that such narrowly-focused wikiprojects are almost never successful and just end up cluttering projectspace and diluting attention from other, broader and more viable, collaborations in the subject area. Creating a Dardistan task force of WikiProject South Asia might be an alternative, but again this needs more than one interested editor to be meaningful. – Joe (talk) 15:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I understand where you are coming from. I will convert this to a task force and try to recruit other members. Paristani (talk) 15:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Wolf

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Wolf (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Appears to be an abandoned draft article (on a topic we already cover) rather than a WikiProject. – Joe (talk) 14:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Ledisi

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Ledisi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This is a recently-created, highly niche WikiProject (focusing on a single artist) with only one participant. It didn't follow the recommended process for creating a wikiproject by proposing it and gathering a group of interested editors before creation. Unfortunately we know from experience that such narrowly-focused wikiprojects are almost never successful and just end up cluttering projectspace and diluting attention from other, broader and more viable, collaborations in the subject area. Creating a Ledisi task force of WikiProject Music might be an alternative, but again this needs more than one interested editor to be meaningful. – Joe (talk) 14:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know there was a process but that's fine if you want to delete it. I just noticed that there was a Wikiproject for other singers and I thought this would be a helpful tool for anyone who wants to help contribute. Sackkid (talk) 21:43, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 17, 2024

[edit]

Talk:2024 Atlantic hurricane season/ACE calcs

[edit]
Talk:2024 Atlantic hurricane season/ACE calcs (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This is in clear violation of Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tropical_cyclones/Archive_43#RFC:_ACE_Calcs; this is nothing but an WP:INDISCRIMINATE collection of info if it's not going to be used in the article. Also WP:NOTDATABASE, WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Jasper Deng (talk) 22:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contention 1: Talk:2023 Atlantic hurricane season/ACE calcs still exists. Talk:2022 Atlantic hurricane season/ACE calcs still exists.
Contention 2: The discussion was closed by LightandDark2000 back in 2020, which reads:
Although there is some dispute as to how this should be done, it appears that the consensus is to use the figures from a trusted source. However, our ACE calculations can also be used as placeholders in lieu of more reliable figures.
As far as I can tell, we.. never figured out how exactly we're supposed to go about this. (Not that I knew that this was a discussion that was had until today, but that's my own fault.) We as a WikiProject (myself included from time to time) continue to update the operational portion of 2024/ACE. I do not know entirely why. I do not know entirely how. At this point, not entirely sure what deleting 2024 would be worth unless we nuked... everything. ~ AC5230 talk 06:18, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 16, 2024

[edit]

User:TheRealJackMarshall

[edit]
User:TheRealJackMarshall (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

WP:NOTWEBHOST violation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:TheRealJackMarshall/sandbox

[edit]
User:TheRealJackMarshall/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

WP:NOTWEBHOST violation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The user has blanked the page. Good. A statement from the user would be nice. Maybe they never knew? SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Page has been blanked. I tried to use Wikia/Fandom originally for this content but a lot of the code/templates that Wikipedia uses was not working properly so I was temporarily using Wikipedia. Because of the MfD I'm going to expedite that move to Wikia/Fandom and try to figure out the formatting changes. Thank you for letting me know that I was out of code for what's acceptable use on Wikipedia. TheRealJackMarshall (talk) 18:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 15, 2024

[edit]

Draft:2029 in American television

[edit]
Draft:2029 in American television (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Yes, this is a draft, and while things don't have to be perfect, a 5 year crystal ball is pushing it. Q T C 23:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Also:

Draft:2026 in American television (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Draft:2027 in American television (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Draft:2028 in American television (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Do not pump junk drafts through MfD.
These pages do not actually fail WP:CRYSTAL, they don’t document future events, they are empty tables, templates. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - No valid reason has been presented for deletion, Also why are we sending drafts here ?, they're not in articlespace so why care?, Guess some have too much time on their hands. –Davey2010Talk 20:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Billy Murray (singer)

[edit]
Portal:Billy Murray (singer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

No useful content Frietjes (talk) 14:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete this portal, without prejudice, but with a large fish to the nominator:
      • The nominator's statement that there is No useful content is true but misleading, either deliberately misleading or bizarre. The nominator blanked the portal, removing a link to the lead article, Billy Murray (singer), immediately before nominating the portal for deletion. They were therefore technically in compliance with the {{MFD}} tag, which says do not blank, merge, or move it, or remove this notice. So the nominator first blanked the portal, which removed useful content, and then nominated the portal for deletion.
      • My first thought, on seeing that the portal had originally had a lead article and nothing else, had been to !vote Neutral and give the originator six days to complete an unfinished portal. I was assuming that the originator was a good-faith editor, and might be planning to create a portal. I now see that the originator is not a good-faith editor, but has been blocked for vandalism, and so will not be finishing the portal, but probably either was never planning to finish it, or was planning to display hoax content.
      • I am very skeptical of portals, but as long as Wikipedia supports them, we should consider them on a case-by-case basis at MFD.
      • If another good-faith editor wants to create a portal, they should be allowed to do so, subject to another MFD, but not to speey deletion.

Robert McClenon (talk) 23:44, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete to me we do not need portals for individual singers. Catfurball (talk) 15:14, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Ambasing

[edit]
Draft:Ambasing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

While Ambasing is a real place, this page is mostly vandalism. The demographics section appears to be real, but is taken entirely from another page (I can't post a link to it because of the spam blacklist), word-for-word. Tymewalk (talk) 05:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 14, 2024

[edit]

Draft:Nations Unbound Great Cyber War

[edit]
Draft:Nations Unbound Great Cyber War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Blatant WP:NOTWEBHOST violation. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:09, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I nominated for G3, but this is just Discord drama and has no place on Wikipedia. Qcne (talk) 19:38, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moldovan userbox templates

[edit]
Template:User mo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User mo-0 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User mo-1 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User mo-2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User mo-3 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User mo-4 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Delete userboxes. ISO 639 code for Moldovan, mo, has been deprecated. (https://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_changes.php) --Lucjim (talk) 21:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. So, some language codes for the Moldovan language have been deprecated. Redirect past usage to what should be used going forwards, don’t just delete the old, but valid, usage. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It does not matter that the ISO 639 code for Moldovan was deprecated. The code can be deprecated and the userboxes can stay as they are.—Alalch E. 10:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. If people want to identify as speakers of the Moldovan language, I don't see any policy basis for keeping them from doing so. Redirecting to the Romanian userboxes would give many current transcluders two identical userboxes. I wouldn't complain if someone wanted to move these to new titles that don't use the ISO codes, although the link above does note: "The identifiers mo and mol will not be assigned to different items, and recordings using these identifiers will not be invalid." Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 12, 2024

[edit]

Talk:Khaled Mashal/Third intifada

[edit]
Talk:Khaled Mashal/Third intifada (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

The content of this page was merged here in 2007 after an AfD was closed with disposition to merge the content into Khaled Mashal (mentioned on the talk page here). Unless it was later removed (I haven't checked super thoroughly), that doesn't seem to have ever actually happened. But especially looking at this 17 years later, I'm not sure there's anything worth merging in here. The arguments for this were basically already made in the AfD. And if no one's actually ever going to merge this content, this page has no reason to exist. Kinsio (talk ★ contribs ★ rights) 19:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 9, 2024

[edit]
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Msalauddind89/sandbox
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Msalauddind89/sandbox

[edit]
User:Msalauddind89/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Unattributed copy of Ahmed Sofa. Created over three years ago with no attempt to work on the content. ✗plicit 11:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Drbogdan/BogdanDennis-PhD-Dissertation-1973
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 02:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Drbogdan/BogdanDennis-PhD-Dissertation-1973

[edit]
User:Drbogdan/BogdanDennis-PhD-Dissertation-1973 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Appears to be a semi-complete and search-engine indexed version of a page that was recently deleted through MfD, which can be found at Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Drbogdan/BogdanDennis-PhD-Dissertation-1973-TEXT, from a user who has been CBANed for promotional content. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 22:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - The same reasoning that called for deletion of the complete dissertation also calls for deletion of this partial version of the dissertation. Also, now that the originator has been indefinitely blocked, any general leeway arguments no longer apply (regardless of whether one originally agreed with them). Robert McClenon (talk) 19:40, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Old business

[edit]


July 8, 2024

[edit]
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:UBX/Juve Merda
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 02:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:UBX/Juve Merda

[edit]
User:UBX/Juve Merda (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This was nominated at the wrong venue (TFD). This is a procedural nomination on my part and I express no opinion on the merits. The original nominating statement is:

Offensive against Juventus Football Club, "merda" in Italian is a vulgar word equivalent to "shit"Qwerty 9706 (talk) 11:35, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that, somewhat confusingly, Qwerty 9706 is the TfD nom. Nickps (talk) 18:38, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. I accidentally removed my own signature when I deleted excess copied material when I made the MFD nomoination -- Whpq (talk) 18:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I thought about telling you but it felt like splitting hairs, so I just added a note here. Nickps (talk) 18:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would renaming the template be a viable option? Something like "No Juve"? The Banner talk 21:48, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. We might want to ask @SignedInteger for an opinion on the name, since they are apparently the only person that uses this. Nickps (talk) 22:01, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware of its name but admittedly I was searching for something more humorous because, as my page says: "Some of the contents of this user page are not meant to be taken seriously, but I'm sure you already knew that." I do think renaming it would work because I am only using it as a humorous userbox and not out of actual ill intent against Juventus or Juventus fans. SignedInteger (talk) 22:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also I noticed my page has this notice on it now: "This user page is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.
Please discuss the matter at this page's entry on the Miscellany for deletion page.
You are welcome to edit this page, but please do not blank, merge, or move it, or remove this notice, while the discussion is in progress. For more information, see the
Guide to deletion
."
I have no clue why this appeared and checking the edit history of my page shows nobody added it so I think it may be a bug. SignedInteger (talk) 22:08, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that appeared because of a mistake with tagging the userbox. It should be fixed now. Nickps (talk) 22:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

July 7, 2024

[edit]
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonial Empires/Userbox/CEBASICBOX
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: keep. bibliomaniac15 20:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonial Empires/Userbox/CEBASICBOX

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonial Empires/Userbox/CEBASICBOX (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonialism was redirected and is no longer a project or task force. Gonnym (talk) 09:59, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:15, 26 June 2024‎ Joe Roe talk contribs‎  60 bytes −3,268‎   ←Redirected page to Wikipedia:WikiProject History
User:Joe Roe, why did you do that?
I think the default action should be to redirect all subpages of Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonialism to Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonialism. That is, archive all subpages as redirects to the redirect. Is there a reason not to? SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was a consensus to do so at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History#Merge inactive history WikiProjects. Sorry, I forgot to add an edit summary. I've no objection to redirecting all the subpages. I retained some because the might be of historical interest and others because they have no incoming links anyway so it didn't seem worth the hassle. – Joe (talk) 11:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. By default, I think it’s better to preserve history of anything ever used, unless it should never have been created. However, if someone, especially someone from the WikiProject, has a rationale for deleting over archiving (history behind redirects), then I have no objection to deletion. I think wikiarchiology is a good thing to be allowed to happen, and that deletion requests should give at least lip service to why archiving is not a good idea. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:24, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per User:Joe Roe. Archive. SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Closed discussions

[edit]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion&oldid=1235852684#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion"