Jump to content

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"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 May Jun Jul Aug Total
CfD 0 0 3 25 28
TfD 0 0 4 0 4
MfD 0 0 2 1 3
FfD 0 0 0 3 3
RfD 0 0 75 17 92
AfD 0 0 0 0 0

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.

August 10, 2024

[edit]

User:MilkDaddy321/sandbox

[edit]
User:MilkDaddy321/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Spam page Andy Dingley (talk) 14:49, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Njoidjer

[edit]
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Njoidjer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Created by a globally locked user, no one has taken the time to expand this into a comprehensive LTA report. Statements listed on page do not have anything backing them up, it sounds like the sock puppeteer just wanted an excuse to brag. Unless someone wants to make this useful and informative in nature, I do not see the point of it. Thebirdlover (talk) 13:43, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom / WP:DENY. Frost 13:52, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - This would be Delete if the nomination were by an SPI clerk. This would be Speedy Delete, G5, if there were evidence that the sockpuppeteer was blocked or globally locked before this page was created, and still can be Speedily Deleted as G5 if a block on another WMF system can be shown to have been before the creation. We should develop better guidelines for maintaining and deleting LTA files, such as restricting their deletion to clerks. As it is, there is no adequate reason to delete. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:05, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • While the account in question, User:The wiki donkey, has not been explicitly tagged as User:Njoidjer, it is telling that the only edit that this user made was creating the page and that they were globally locked within 10 minutes of editing for long-term abuse. I do not believe the decision to delete a LTA page should be taken lightly, but it is obvious that this page was created by a sockpuppet of User:Njoidjer and should be deleted on those grounds. If you think speedy deletion would be a better method of doing so based on the CSD procedures, I would be happy to nominate it that way instead. The main reason why I launched a formal MFD request instead of CSD is because there is not a lot of precedence for deleting these pages and as I said, I wanted to be better safe than sorry. I disagree that we need to 100% defer to SPI clerks on this process in every single instance, that is why we have a collaborative approach on Wikipedia and come to a consensus on these matters. Plus there are some vandals who just do not merit inclusion. While I do think this sockpuppeteer specifically might actually be a good candidate for a page eventually due to how long of a span they have been vandalizing for, it should be started from scratch if someone has the interest in writing it and this inaccurate version should not be a placeholder in the meanwhile. --Thebirdlover (talk) 19:18, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Sleight of Hand

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

Project created in 2015 and has ever had only 2 members interested in it. The banner itself has only 19 transclusions. This is extremely low even for a task force. Gonnym (talk) 12:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - The activity of a WikiProject takes places mostly on its talk page. The talk page had zero posts in 2024, and 5 pageviews in the year 2024. That is 1 pageview every 44 days. The project page had 28 pageviews in 2024. I haven't looked at activity in previous years, but I don't think that is necessary to show that this WikiProject either has died or was stillborn. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:23, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - In the year 2023, there were 2 pageviews of the project talk page in the year. 1 of them was the one post to the talk page, and was about quality assessments, and so appears to have been a message to all WikiProjects. Other than that, there was 1 other view of the project talk page in the year. Nobody is paying any attention to the project talk page, which means that nobody is taking part in the project. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. C F A 💬 01:44, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:2A00:1370:8133:3B03:A924:85EF:7F1E:445C/Userboxes/OMORI NPCs

[edit]
User:2A00:1370:8133:3B03:A924:85EF:7F1E:445C/Userboxes/OMORI NPCs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This userbox was created by a user in a userspace that wasn't theirs. Also, IP addresses are not typically supposed to have pages in their userspace. The edits creating this userbox were the only edits ever made by its creator. It does not seem to be in use on any page at the moment, and it is not linked to. There is no reason we should keep this. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:29, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Agree. Delete. Bduke (talk) 00:34, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I looked for a guideline stating that user pages should normally not be edited by other users, or that editing another user's user space is improper. I didn't find such a guideline. Maybe I overlooked it. If so, will someone please point it out to me? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:16, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Robert McClenon: See this link. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:50, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That needs strengthening. It says In general, one should avoid substantially editing another's user and user talk pages, except when it is likely edits are expected and/or will be helpful. That is mealy. Maybe there needs to be a specific statement that creating subpages of another user's user or user talk page is disruptive. But thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:38, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - In the absence of a guideline, the rule to Use Common Sense applies, and using the user space of another user, or of an IP address, seems just wrong, as is the existence of a user space for an IP address. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:16, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: No transclusions and creating this userbox was the creator's only edits before going inactive. If they were ever active or there were transclusions I'd just move it into their userspace. C F A 💬 01:43, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 6, 2024

[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia South West

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia South West (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

A WikiProject created 4 years ago for a region in Australia. 0 (zero) talk page discussion and only two editors in project (if you can call zero edits other than in the main project page, being part of a project). This is even less than what a task force would need to be useful. Gonnym (talk) 11:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. Which is why it isn't a project. You could just as much redirect Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia South West to a section of WikiProject Western Australia. Gonnym (talk) 11:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Peel

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

A WikiProject created 4 years ago for a region in Australia. 0 (zero) talk page discussion and only two editors in project (if you can call zero edits other than in the main project page, being part of a project). This is even less than what a task force would need to be useful. Gonnym (talk) 11:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Mid West

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Mid West (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

A WikiProject created 4 years ago for a region in Australia. 0 (zero) talk page discussions (other than one automated one unrelated) and only two editors in project (if you can call zero edits other than in the main project page, being part of a project). This is even less than what a task force would need to be useful. Gonnym (talk) 11:32, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Great Southern

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Great Southern (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

A WikiProject created 4 years ago for a region in Australia. 0 (zero) talk page discussion and only two editors in project (if you can call zero edits other than in the main project page, being part of a project). This is even less than what a task force would need to be useful. Gonnym (talk) 11:31, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Goldfields–Esperance

[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Goldfields–Esperance (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

A WikiProject created 4 years ago for a region in Australia. 0 (zero) talk page discussion and only two editors in project (if you can call zero edits other than in the main project page, being part of a project). This is even less than what a task force would need to be useful. Gonnym (talk) 11:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Gascoyne

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

A WikiProject created 4 years ago for a region in Australia. 0 (zero) talk page discussion and only two editors in project (if you can call zero edits other than in the main project page, being part of a project). This is even less than what a task force would need to be useful. Gonnym (talk) 11:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is especially less useful (compared to the others) with it only having a categorytree tag, two see also links and an image. Gonnym (talk) 11:44, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Pilbara

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

A WikiProject created 5 years ago for a region in Australia. 0 (zero) talk page discussion and no other editor in project (one other edit fixed typos in project page). This is even less than what a task force would need to be useful. Gonnym (talk) 11:27, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia Kimberley

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

A WikiProject created 5 years ago for a region in Australia. 0 (zero) talk page discussion and no other editor in project. This is even less than what a task force would need to be useful. Gonnym (talk) 11:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages/Register

[edit]
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages/Register (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Abandoned outline of a draft supplement to MOS that was created on 17 January 2010 and never progressed. The creator has not edited WP since May 2017. Nurg (talk) 05:25, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:The Importance of Creative Contests for Community Engagement on Wikipedia

[edit]
Wikipedia:The Importance of Creative Contests for Community Engagement on Wikipedia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

bizzarre llm essay. what are "creative contests"? the essay doesn't say. ltbdl (talk) 04:55, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Herd mentality

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

Newly created. POV from an editor with an axe to grind. Can be in userspace but should probably just be deleted. Star Mississippi 03:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as first choice, userfy as second choice. There's wide latitude for userspace essays but this is just a really hostile and anti-community rant, essentially complaining about everyone else being Wrong and clearly only disagreeing because they're sheep (rather than, perhaps, the author being the one who might possibly be wrong). Absolutely should not be a WP space essay where standards are stricter regardless. SnowFire (talk) 03:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete: per nom & SnowFire. some sentences seem like they're LLM-generated, but regardless it's just not the kind of essay we should have here. clearly expresses contempt for the community and its processes. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 04:12, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete. The author might be making one good point about how some people use raw AfD stats to judge contribution quality, rather than the actual presence of policy-based arguments in the !votes themselves, and that does indeed encourage herd mentality. But that point is drowned in so much LLM verbiage and "Galileo gambit" self-victimization as to make the whole essay unfit for project space.

    They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.

    — Carl Sagan
    Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:35, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is one user screed against the community, as a second choice usefying would be acceptable as such things are maybe acceptable in userspace. It's also just another failure to understand that if others don't agree with you argument, then that is a failure of your argument not of others. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 08:57, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Written (or more likely AI-generated) by one editor with an axe to grind. Zero value added to the project by preserving this. I see no point in userfying this as the editor who created it is now indefinitely blocked. --Kinu t/c 22:49, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy: as a disputed single-author essay. As a userspace essay it is perfectly valid. It is an experienced user opinion on a project issue. The recent block makes it more important to keep in userspace than delete. Deletion of opions that you don’t like is censorship. SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete - It is not important whether this was written by artificial intelligence. I agree with Chaotic Enby that there is some signal in the noise, but not much. This is mostly an expression of poorly directed anger, and the world already has too much poorly directed anger. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:43, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong userfy. If a user has an opinion, they should be allowed to express it. I don't see any issues with this essay being in the userspace. Also per SmokeyJoe. Svampesky (talk) 16:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy: More of a rant / vent with a few useful elements. Fine for a userspace essay but not something for mainspace. Ravensfire (talk) 13:56, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - An inappropriate rant that does not belong on the wiki. Since the editor is indefinitely blocked by community consensus, there is no reason to userfy the page, as they will not be able to edit it until they can successfully appeal (which seems incredibly unlikely given the circumstances). There's no need for this screed to live on in user space. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 18:16, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Again, I don't think it was AI-generated, but the creator was indeffed so little point in userfying it. C F A 💬 01:54, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 5, 2024

[edit]

Draft:Object Overload

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

Non-notable web series. See also WP:BFDI. TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 18:08, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Object invasion and My talking Tom friends

[edit]
Draft:Object invasion and My talking Tom friends (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Non-notable subject. TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 18:07, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:List of Mystery Doug/Mystery Science Episodes

[edit]
Draft:List of Mystery Doug/Mystery Science Episodes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This draft is being used to host an indiscriminate collection of information that contains nothing more than the names and dates of episodes (of a specific format) by the YouTube channel, Mystery Science. The IPs adding content to the draft don't seem interested in the slightest in shaping up the draft to meet the requirements for getting it approved to mainspace, and the editing pattern in the draft history indicates they're keeping it as a personal list. This should be deleted per WP:INDISCRIMINATE and WP:HOST. Frost 15:42, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Corret TV

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

WP:HOAX article subject to all of the same problems as Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Neuto Network. I had in fact tagged it for inclusion in that discussion, but forgot to actually list it in that discussion and nobody caught it in time before that discussion closed -- so it can't just be deleted on the basis of that discussion, and has to go through a new one. But it's basically the same problem: a completely unverifiable television service in "Kenia" whose "website" doesn't exist, and whose "references" are completely unrelated coverage of other things (academic journal articles, etc.) that fails to verify the existence of any "Corret TV". Bearcat (talk) 15:10, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old business

[edit]


August 1, 2024

[edit]

Template:User CabalRes

[edit]
Template:User CabalRes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​
(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) ToadetteEdit (talk) 17:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, pointless template. (Found this existed through a Commons abuse filter.) The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:05, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Unused

Do you have any idea how many userboxes aren't used by anyone? (Hint: there are many.) How tf you expect anyone to know about this userbox when I just created it today? Are u for real? Emdosis (talk) 03:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for failing accessibility, MOS:CONTRAST. SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:56, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    *Fixed. Emdosis (talk) 12:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Unused because it was only created 2 days ago!!!, Harmless ubx, no valid reason for deletion. –Davey2010Talk 17:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    my hero :3 Emdosis (talk) 00:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy - Seems silly, but potentially harmless on the surface. One can display whatever color they like on their user page—only a minor accessibility case can be made here because this is in the template namespace and therefore intended for use by a plurality (though that is not a reason for deletion, especially as such a problem is easily remedied through quick editing if desired); it must also be remembered that anyone can substitute a userbox to their userpage and change it to absolutely any shade they like. Regardless, accessibility has already been addressed. However, I could see this being relatively unlikely to be transcluded by anyone except the creator. Therefore: userfication should assuage most (if not all) of the concerns presented, regardless of reasonability. That is, unless I am missing something in regard to what this is referencing and this is indeed something that needs to be squashed (no one has expounded that argument yet; please ping if it happens). — Godsy (TALKCONT) 05:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit (talk) 17:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 27, 2024

[edit]

User:TalkSubject

[edit]
User:TalkSubject (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​
(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) — Godsy (TALKCONT) 05:42, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a misuse of the "User:" space. I was original considering nominating this page for WP:U5, but I'm not sure. However, I'm really thinking the U5 is appropriate as the user has a username I would consider reporting to WP:UAA since the username structure makes it seem as though it's something official with Wikipedia, and the purpose of the page seems to be advertising WP:SEO. Steel1943 (talk) 17:04, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, see related WP:RFD nomination: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 27#User:TalkSubject/Joe Biden. Steel1943 (talk) 17:07, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the original revision of the page, they appear to declare themselves as an alternate account of User:Vanished user 1428570, which is now retired and vanished. Both accounts have stopped editing for more than three years, so there isn't any immediate disruption at least. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the "Vanished user 1428570" had a questionable user name before they retired as well. Steel1943 (talk) 21:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Godsy (TALKCONT) 05:42, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 22, 2024

[edit]

Stale unfiled RfAs

[edit]
Group of stale unfiled RfAs – (View MfD)​
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/DebashisM (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Baseball Watcher (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/D4135t~enwiki (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/GoBlackhawksGo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Harimua Thailand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Parys (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Atomicthumbs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/OliveTree39 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Bobsmith319 2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Naconkantari 2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Countryboy603 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Shonyx (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/JASDVI (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mr.Mani Raj Paul (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/LewisT34 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jmanlucas (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/AndrewSE19 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Chikukiri (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) ToadetteEdit! 11:29, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All prior XfDs for this page:

Each of these has either been languishing since before 2021 or is the creation of a sockblocked user, or both. I don't think these retain any historical or practical value, so I'm putting these up for deletion here. If someone wants to root through the 2022s or even the horribly malformed ones from 2024 that are pretty clearly abandoned, up to them :) I thought these would be a good start. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:17, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all, obviously per nom. It's a shame they're not CSDable; if they were drafts they'd be dead already. ——Serial Number 54129 20:09, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all and, if necessary, speedy-close them as unfiled/malformed. There's plenty of random crap in RfA space; as late as last October, about 58 of the entries in Wikipedia:2005 requests for adminship had no tallies in the table. As I was going through them, it occurred to me that a lot of them were kind of stupid; nonetheless they're part of the historical record. Fot example, one of the people in that list you post is now a famous tweetfluencer under the same name, and one of them was as I recall a rather well-known figure of the old days. If the presence of old unfiled RfAs is messing up some statistics, I think that is a good argument to actually close them, but I think deleting them runs the risk of putting ragged holes in the history of project governance for no clear benefit. jp×g🗯️ 06:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JPxG: historical pages are meant to serve as records of past Wikipedia processes to give context to historical discussions and to inform future discussions on similar topics. These don't do that. They were never filed, attracted no discussion, and are not retained in any table or log as a useful reference. How exactly are they part of the history of the project governance? They're no more a part of it than article drafts are, and we delete those after six months. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:40, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, okay: in January 2006 Nakon was nominated for adminship by Sceptre, received one support and two opposes, and withdrew later the same day. In February 2006 Tv316 attempted to renominate him for adminship, with a paragraph-long nomination statement, and the same day Nakon declined it. In March 2006, Nakon's third nomination (from Master Jay) passed 98/13/10. The red text here is the part of the historical record that would be destroyed by deleting the page. I'm not saying this is the Dead Sea Scrolls or whatever, just that feels like it's obviously part of the history of Wikipedia and contextualizes the user and the RfA process itself, the exact same way as the first unsuccessful request does. jp×g🗯️ 07:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair, I'll withdraw that one. Do any others fit that pattern? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:51, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Jmanlucas is still active and may be planning to file still (last edit a week or two ago)
LewisT34, JASDVI and AndrewSE19 are NOTNOW SNOWs, Shonyx and OliveTree39 are socks.
Mr.Mani Raj Paul is a very premature RfA (was made five months after the account -- by now, six years later, they are 14,000 edits deeper and may have a chance of passing -- who knows), similar situ with Countryboy603.
If I'm going to be totally honest it feels like the socks are -- I mean, Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Eostrix was a sock RfA, it would obviously be silly to delete that. I think sock RfAs are probably useful for establishing a modus operandi for socks, or at least as useful as the other stuff we keep around. We don't delete the talk pages of vandals/socks, for example, even though those are 99% useless crap. jp×g🗯️ 08:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Parys and olivetree39 would be G5 eligible (Shonyx is the sockmaster, so not G5able; Eostrix wouldn't be G5able either). Any objection to me speedying those two?
LewisT34, JASDVI, and AndrewSE19 would be NOTNOW/SNOW if they were ever filed, which they weren't.
Mr.Mani Raj Paul, Countryboy603, and Jmanlucas would be welcome to request REFUNDs if they really wanted to work off of these versions, but they've given no indication that they still intend to run and would probably prefer to start fresh. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 08:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SmokeyJoe's idea to userfy them seems pretty smart, so I would be fine with keeping the ones that are significant-in-some-vague-sense, and then userfying the ones that would otherwise be deleted. jp×g🗯️ 22:34, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 11:29, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Do not keep at current titles, but do not delete. The option was presented above to "userfy", so that may be an option. Either way, these RFAs never went live, so keeping them at their current titles is misleading since the structures of these titles assume they are the 1st time these editors were subject to a live RFA, which never happened. Maybe the creation of a page such as Wikipedia:Requests or adminship (drafts) may need to be created to allow these never-live RFA pages to become subpages of it, in addition to potentially being a landing page for potential RFA candidates to post their draft RFA statements prior to moving them as a subpage of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship when they go live. Steel1943 (talk) 19:38, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Turns out one of these pages, Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Harimua Thailand, was previously nominated for deletion previously in 2021: See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Harimua Thailand. The discussion resulted in "keep". Steel1943 (talk) 19:54, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closed discussions

[edit]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion&oldid=1239697890"