Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

Skip to: Table of contents / current discussions / old business (bottom). Purge this page

WP:MFD

Please do not nominate your
administrator will then delete the page. See Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion
for more information.

Miscellany for deletion (MfD) is a place where

policy, and with careful judgment of the rough consensus

if required.

Filtered versions of the page are available at

Information on the process

What may be nominated for deletion here:

Pages not covered by other
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

undeletion policy

.

Before nominating a page for deletion

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 `{{db-userreq }}.` 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 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 {{ 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

Wikipedia:Deletion policy – our deletion policy that describes how we delete things by consensus
Wikipedia:Deletion process – our guidelines on how to list anything for deletion
Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – a how-to guide whose protocols on discussion format and shorthands also apply here
Wikipedia:Project namespace – our guidelines on "Wikipedia" namespace pages
Wikipedia:User page
– our guidelines on user pages and user subpages
Wikipedia:Userboxes – our guideline on userboxes

How to list pages for deletion

Shortcut

WP:MFDHOWTO

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
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
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

XFD backlog
V	Apr	May	Jun	Total
CfD	8	17	13	38
TfD	0	14	1	15
MfD	0	2	0	2
FfD	0	2	2	4
RfD	1	20	9	30
AfD	0	0	17	17

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

Archived discussions

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

Current discussions

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.

June 10, 2024

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Preethi (disambiguation)

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: Wrong venue. Disambiguation pages should be handled at

(non-admin closure) Curbon7 (talk) 12:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Preethi (disambiguation)

Per

MOS:DABNAME. Polyamorph (talk) 12:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep - The is at least one film and one person with "Preethi" in their name. --Jax 0677 (talk) 12:30, 10 June 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.

June 9, 2024

Draft:Colourblocks

Fails

WP:GNG, has been draftified for like a couple years and there is no sign in improving the article to be put back in mainspace. 48JCL TALK 00:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep. None of that is a reason for deletion. Standard AfC processes suffice. SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:09, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per SmokeyJoe. There's a lot of edits made to it over the years but that's pretty common in this subject area. Don't see any reason to delete the draft. Skynxnex (talk) 03:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The draft is being worked on continually. The only time limit for drafts is that drafts that are abandoned for six months are deleted. If the community had intended there to be other time limits for drafts, they would have specified. This draft is being edited, sometimes by unregistered editors, and sometimes by registered editors. There is no deadline for the improvement of drafts, as long as they are being edited. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 8, 2024

Wikipedia:Don't dive thinking that the referee won't notice

I'm not sure this is something we need; I'm not even sure this is something I understand, and I don't see how this is really relevant to Wikipedia editing. The basic setup is already difficult: what does diving have to do with whether you tackled someone earlier on or not? Drmies (talk) 20:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy - This essay appears to use faking a foul in association football as some sort of metaphor for civil behaviour, but the essay is incomprehensible. The author an have it as a user subpage. -- Whpq (talk) 12:32, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy pending an explanation from the originator. As
yellow card, when the offenses were not their fault. So the topic is a player who is repeatedly playing unfairly. It isn't clear what this has to do with Wikipedia, or with disruptive editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

June 7, 2024

Draft:Fatih Emrah Uçan

Content appears to be a hoax as official sources link the Kordhell alias to Mick Kenney instead. Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 16:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it is poorly written. Catfurball (talk) 18:11, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an unreferenced
biography of a living person. (The official web site is not a source but a sales web site.) Robert McClenon (talk) 15:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Draft:Toy Story & UglyDolls

This film does not exist. Not sure why this page was created in draft space. Page is a direct copy from UglyDolls with just the name changed Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Do not fork content, unless for a good reason. SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:34, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Bduke (talk) 06:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and possibly
WP:G3 eligible? Skynxnex (talk) 13:02, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete. I see no harm in deleting the draft before the
WP:SPA last active over a month ago who will likely not return within six months, especially since almost all their edits elsewhere have been reverted. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:45, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete - There have been some changes from
redundant fork, with no apparent purpose that benefits the future of the encyclopedia. This may have been some sort of game or exercise by the originator, that is not a proper use of draft space (or user space). Robert McClenon (talk) 15:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

June 6, 2024

User:Freavene

~~I think this is quite possibly attack-esque, although I don't feel it's bad enough for csd. Gaismagorm (talk) 21:04, 6 June 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]

ok the attack text was removed, so honestly withdrawn Gaismagorm (talk) 23:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to admin or oversight if possible, remove page history due to kind of being a personal attack 48JCL TALK 02:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:9t5 User Page Contest

Because of

WP:NOTHERE, as it seems to provide monetary incentives for users to do something else using Wikipedia's platform other than improve the encyclopedia. Maybe a request at some central forum to create something like this and demonstrate community support for it might overcome some of these objections, but I don't know that this is supportable coming from an individual initiative. If this were commonly replicated by other users, or even if this one initiative attracted wide participation it seems like it could hurt the goal of the encyclopedia. Mathglot (talk) 15:55, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete. Wikipedia is not a platform for random user-page-design contests. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Wikipedia already has a history of holding contests. My point was to encourage friendly competition, and give back to Wikipedia in the process. Just because web design isn’t the purpose of Wikipedia doesn’t mean that Wikipedians are barred from enjoying competitions that celebrate their skills. And again, like I said, it’s been something that has been done plenty in the past. 9t5 (talk) 20:36, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you point to some examples of successful contests that weren't directly related to editing (and hopefully improving) article content? AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would also note that "done plenty in the past" (i.e.,
policy or guideline that supports your position and negates the ones listed above that argue in favor of deletion. Mathglot (talk) 00:07, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
@Mathglot So case law and precedent is good enough to run the United States legal system on but .. not Wikipedia. Okay. Noted. Seems a bit like you’re implying that at the end of the day it comes down to the preference of higher ranking editors and not principle at all.

@AndyTheGrump A fair request. I will post my response to that later tonight!

Best, 9t5 (talk) 00:35, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please
civil law legal system used in France and much of Europe and the rest of the world. Mathglot (talk) 01:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
@
WP:LOSE2WIN
.. by engaging the community in a way that would allow for perhaps some genuine relationships to grow/allow new editors to interact with their peers in a lighthearted way that isn’t so serious such as an AfD.. the issue is the inability to have any room for change on the platform by those up on the top. The rigid inability to grow with the times, has led to a rapid decline. Paired with the fact that deletionists overtook a platform that used to be MUCH more inclusive. Listen, you can wikilink almost anything anybody says to WP:.. whatever the hell you choose to shape your narrative.

I was offering to donate $5 per contestant who participates simply to make it something that was something people could enjoy AND it would be doing some good for the Wikimedia Foundation. I must’ve been misguided though.. it’s not like they’re begging for donations or something crazy like that. Maybe I should redirect my energy towards finding things to delete simply because “well pointing to cases in the past where pages weren’t deleted under the same exact circumstance isn’t technically an argument against deletion because section 405 of the gotta kill all the fun section of the destroy Wikipedia from the inside out section states: if an editor smiles, it’s gotta be deleted” 9t5 (talk) 02:24, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@
WP:WAX. 48JCL TALK 02:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Weak Delete in the absence of a detailed explanation as to what this contest is about and what its purpose is. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:35, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Robert McClenon The format is for editors to sign up, and then on August 2nd a theme gets announced (examples: Gothic Architecture, Greek Mythology, Marine Life). Then August 2nd-August 9th, editors who signed up are able to edit their user pages to have it creatively incorporate the theme. They can revert their user pages right back to what they were prior — submissions are of the specific revision of their final user page design. Those who submit a revision before the week closes will be considered valid entries. Then August 12th-August 19th (allowing a weekend for me to go through and make sure no guidelines were violated etc.) voting would be open to extended confirmed users (to prevent meatpuppetry). August 20th I was going to announce three winners with the most votes.
I thought it would be fun to bring the community together. I am not very shocked, I guess that the attempt was met with a deletion nomination. 9t5 (talk) 14:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Wikipedia:Danny's contest was held as a means to increase the amount of featured articles on the website because the issue on Wikipedia back then in 2006 was getting quality of the writing to improve. Today, the issue on Wikipedia is retaining new editors. Danny’s contest sought to implement donation as a means of a larger contribution to a cause while encouraging positive change on Wikipedia.. I simply am confused why this contest is seen as aiming to do anything different. The changes are to user pages and would not affect the mainspace at all, but if the issue is that people want only writing contests to exist… I will happily change the contest to a creative writing one. However, this website consists of more than just article writers. There are template editors who have entirely different skill sets that I am sure would be really into a coding contest like this. I rest my case. 9t5 (talk) 14:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The contributions to the Wikimedia Foundation may have little or no value to the English Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is the labor of love of its volunteers. The WMF owns the servers, but that is about the extent of the support that the English Wikipedia receives. Some of our volunteers are deeply skeptical of the WMF. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:35, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Robert McClenon Interesting. I didn’t know this. 9t5 (talk) 14:19, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy Does not work as a projectspace page, but I don't see why it could not be a page in 9t5's userspace. The requirements there are much less strict. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Mathglot and AndyTheGrump.—Alalch E. 17:24, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: For my argument on the topic, see
  WP:CREATECOMMUNITY
  .
9t5 (talk) 20:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to User:9t5/Userpage Contest per arguments above. I see absolutely no reason to just straight up delete it. 48JCL TALK 02:36, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Njoku Okechukwu Obiajunwa Hippolyte

WP:SNOWBALL and Blatant WEBHOST violation. This is an attempt to share their CV and photos - will never make it to mainspace. Photos are up for deletion on Commons as NOTWEBHOST Gbawden (talk) 13:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete should have never been created. Catfurball (talk) 18:10, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 5, 2024

Draft:Come Home to Me (album)

Hoax draft. William Graham ^talk 14:30, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for at least two reasons. First, entirely the work of blocked editors, a globally blocked IPv6 range and a sockpuppet. Second, appears to be a
notable person who is the alleged recording artist makes no mention of an album, and is otherwise unverifiable. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:55, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete per nom and Robert McClenon. Skynxnex (talk) 15:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:WWE Raw is War

Created by blocked IP user. Incorrect information and hoax logo. Any true information already exists in WWE Raw. William Graham ^talk 14:28, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Incorrect information includes at least one false reference to a
living person, and that is more than enough reason to delete rather than redirect. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Draft:Ivan Ssewankambo

NOTWEBHOST - this is a blatant attempt to share their CV on WP Gbawden (talk) 07:37, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -
Wikipedia is not for resume posting is a policy. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:38, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete per above. This is better off at Linkedin. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's the criteria for deletion of unpublished pages because, despite my contribution to the page, I couldn't publish it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.227.130.131 (talk • contribs)
Delete article is poorly written. Catfurball (talk) 18:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Wikipedia doesn't host such draft. I sensed certain advert that could have been speedy G11. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Popeye And Pink Panther's Party/Popeye And Pals (MeTV)

No evidence of any

WP:NOTWEBHOST, since there's been no edits displaying any intent to add any sources to this draft for meeting main space requirements. All edits by the contributing author have thus far been to add each week's latest aired episode titles, a pattern going on 9+ months now. Zinnober9 (talk) 06:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep - It's a draft, and
good faith draft, although it will not be accepted in its current condition. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:31, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete there are no references and most likely there never will be since this draft was created in 2023. Catfurball (talk) 18:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Bugs Bunny And Friends (MeTV)

No evidence of any

WP:NOTWEBHOST, since there's been no edits displaying any intent to add any sources to this draft for meeting main space requirements. All edits by the contributing author have thus far been to add each week's latest aired episode titles, a pattern going on 9+ months now. Zinnober9 (talk) 06:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep - It's a draft, and
good faith draft, although it will not be accepted in its current condition. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:30, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete there are no references and most likely there never will be since it was created in 2023. Catfurball (talk) 18:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:The Tom and Jerry Show (MeTV)

No evidence of any

WP:NOTWEBHOST, since there's been no edits displaying any intent to add any sources to this draft for meeting main space requirements. All edits by the contributing author have thus far been to add each week's latest aired episode titles, a pattern going on 9+ months now. Zinnober9 (talk) 06:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep - It's a draft, and
good faith draft, although it will not be accepted in its current condition. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:29, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete there are no references and most likely there never will be since it was created in 2023. Catfurball (talk) 18:22, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Woody Woodpecker and Friends (MeTV)

No evidence of any

WP:NOTWEBHOST, since there's been no edits displaying any intent to add any sources to this draft for meeting main space requirements. All edits by the contributing author have thus far been to add each week's latest aired episode titles, a pattern going on 9+ months now. Zinnober9 (talk) 06:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep - It's a draft, and
good faith draft, although it will not be accepted in its current condition. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:26, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete there are no references and most likely there never will be since it was created in 2023. Catfurball (talk) 18:24, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 3, 2024

User:Rawen Ab/Userboxes/Google Maps Local Guide

This is not a userbox, and it is not serving any purpose in userspace. I will remove it from its listing at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Internet/Websites. Are there grounds for uncontroversial deletion? TNstingray (talk) 22:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unfortunately CSD G1 doesn't apply here. It could be tagged as U5, but there is clearly disagreement upon admins. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 23:53, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
U5 doesn’t apply. U5 doesn’t apply if the user has made constructive contributions to the project. I doubt very much that any admin disagrees. SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, agree with the above. Bduke (talk) 05:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. What's the purpose of deleting it? The editor has been active this year and could decide to format it as a userbox as it seems to meet Work in progress or material that you may come back to in future (usually on subpages) and/or Experimentation (usually on subpages) from
WP:UPYES, for example. Skynxnex (talk) 17:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep: I assume this is meant to be something along the lines of "This user is a Google Maps Local Guide" but was not completed for whatever reason. Concur with removing it off the listing as it is incomplete, but is otherwise a non-obtrusive work-in-progress. Curbon7 (talk) 06:42, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Anonymy365

I don't want any topics on my talk page. So, I'm requesting my talk page to be deleted. The reason is because I want to be completely unrecognized and that includes my name not being mentioined. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymy365 (talk • contribs) 15:08, June 3, 2024 (UTC)

Keep Sorry, we almost never delete user talk pages. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, and there must be a place where others can contact you. You can blank comments from it that you do not wish to be seen, though they will still be visible in the page history to the curious. You can also add notices to your talk page that discourage others from adding unnecessary comments. Or you can make a new account and no longer be associated with your current identity (see Wikipedia:Clean start). Or you can undergo courtesy vanishing, where your username will be changed to a generic one and your account will retire from editing. Good luck on whatever you choose. Air on White (talk) 19:49, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. Editor has a history of problematic edits including a brief block for disruptive editing, and the page history has a long list of admonishments and apparently unheeded advice, all of which was blanked by the user at some point or other. They've made further problematic edits today, so it appears that rather than wanting to disappear, they simply
don't want to be held accountable for their activity. This, of course, is not compatible with how Wikipedia works. --Finngall ^talk 22:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep - There are two possible explanations for this request, neither of them a valid reason. First, the user wants to vanish, but deleting the talk page is not how any of the approved forms of vanishing are done. Second, the user wants to be a user without a talk page. That seems the more likely explanation, but we do not know. Wikipedia does not and should not allow a user to have no talk page, because it is necessary for other users to be able to communicate with them. Either is a plausible explanation of what is being requested, but either request should be denied. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:58, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment User has now changed their username to Anonymy365248 and the their user talk page has moved accordingly. --Finngall ^talk 13:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy links: Anonymy365248 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) --Finngall ^talk 17:26, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy partial blank. I see no reason why some of the old warnings still need to be there. That being said, the June one should stay. Keep in mind that Wikipedia admin have access to deleted content. You can be blocked without further warning by not taking these messages seriously. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:52, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
10:17, 6 June 2024 A09 talk contribs moved page User talk:Anonymy365 to User talk:Anonymy365248 without leaving a redirect (Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Anonymy365" to "Anonymy365248")
- SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:40, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:A09, was that a sensible user rename? I don’t think it was. SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:45, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Especially considering that this is their second username change in less than six months. --Finngall ^talk 16:55, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:DAC Studios

Many external links, unreliable sources. The image is fair-use but not tagged as so. This is my first MfD, so it's probably not accurate and the not correct thing to do.

talk) 15:54, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

The external link are part of the sources, alot of information regarding the topic is stated in their social media. Image also used under fair use with credit given as the license protecting it stated. AzzakyAris (talk) 16:09, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not unambiguous promotion (G11). It has problems, but we can fix them; if they can't within 6 months, it'll be deleted under G13 anyway. Air on White (talk) 19:53, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'Comment, - Maybe the nominator is unfamiliar with drafts and does not know that they are not deleted for sourcing or notability,, because they are meant to be improved. McClenon mobile (talk) 20:23, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Not G11, so this falls into the category of WP:Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity. Commons issues should be handled through the Commons processes. Curbon7 (talk) 06:49, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old business

Everything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began 01:05, 4 June 2024 (UTC) ended today on 11 June 2024. Editors may continue to add comments until the discussion is closed but they should keep in mind that the discussion below this marker may be closed at any time without further notice. Discussions that have already been closed will be removed from the page automatically by Legobot and need no further action.

May 29, 2024

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject SZA

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: no consensus. no prejudice against another discussion once the dust settles.

(non-admin closure) Queen of Hearts (🏳️‍⚧️ • 🏳️‍🌈) 19:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Wikipedia:WikiProject SZA

Limited scope, lacks potential for growth and interest, new WikiProjects are currently being discouraged because of creations like this. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete we do not need a WikiProject for singers. Catfurball (talk) 22:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge with another WikiProject - only around 120-ish articles are currently covered by the WikiProject, probably too-narrow in scope. Xeroctic (talk) 14:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - Taking an incipient WikiProject to
MFD after five days because it either is still launching or has failed to launch seems premature. Wait a little longer to see if there is signup. (My own guess is that there will not be signup, but that this nomination is premature.) Robert McClenon (talk) 06:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment - Do we need some procedure for the review of WikiProjects other than
MFD? Do we need a guideline on what are likely to be workable topic areas for WikiProjects? Robert McClenon (talk) 06:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Strong Keep The project has significantly improved the quality and coverage of articles to related to SZA and there's other popular singers who has wikiproject ( Dua Lipa, Michael Jackson, Olivia Rodrigo, etc).For instance, the project has contributed to the enhancement of key articles, such as her biography, discography and individual album pages. These improvements ensure that the information is reliable, well sourced and accessible to a audience. Sunrise In Brooklyn ✉ 18:52, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s not really the project improving the articles, it’s you, as the only active member. You don’t need a WikiProject for that. The idea is to get a group together first then create the project. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 05:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment would this be better off as a sub-project or task force within Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians? --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lenticel: speaking as literally the only other person in this WikiProject, I would go as far as to say most WikiProjects about musicians, often being disorganized anyway, should just be task forces under a more encompassing genre or music WP where more people might actually see and attend to the relevant articles . PSA 🏕️🪐 (please make some noise...) 03:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the insight. --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It's only a week old! Other singers have WikiProjects. Zanahary (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: We should let the project grow before deleting it... Give it maybe a week.. 𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘦𝘭'𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘮𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘺, 03:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as a subproject or task force under Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians. Deletion is a bit harsh IMO and I agree with PSA that it might be able to attract more editors there. --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Agree with above, and tidy discussion. Bduke (talk) 05:29, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @SunriseInBrooklyn I find it very concerning that you almost word for word copied Wikipedia:WikiProject Lorde’s project layout, and even forgot to change instances of the word. 48JCL^{[citation needed][dubious – discuss]} 20:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@48JCL, what a coincidence, I made that WikiProject also. Sunrise In Brooklyn ✉ 05:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Final stance: Week Keep. Let it grow for a bit 48JCL^{[citation needed][dubious – discuss]} 20:29, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep It's still a very new project, and with four very active members (more than a few active projects). Most artists truly in the mainstream have their own WikiProject as well, and as far as its scope goes, some projects have even less than 100 articles to cover, such as Olivia Rodrigo's. Isthmus55 (t • c) 02:04, 7 June 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.

May 6, 2024

Draft:Amina Hassan Sheikh

The BLP is already in the main NS at Amina Hassan. This draft lacks citations and contains WP:OR. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 21:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History merge. User:Saqib mistates the history. The draft was already there first. Awesimf (talk · contribs) gets the new article credit, and should not have their contribution history deleted. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not about which page was created first, it's about which one aligns with WP:V. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 07:09, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. Failing WP:V is not a deletion reason, especially not now that you have found sources. You should have improved the draft, not create a content fork. Which page was created first is important. SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:15, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I only found out about this draft yesterday. If I'd known earlier, I would've definitely worked on improving it. Further, there's WP:OR and WP:PROMO content in there which it's a clear violation of WP:BLP. Anyway, I don't have strong feelings about it. The closing admin can do whatever they want with it. I'm not concerned about getting credit for merely creating a BLP. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 09:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t see a justification to revdelete anything if it was already in the history. So I support a history merge to fix the accidental fork, even if it is a small thing. Redirecting the draft to the article is a middle solution. SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History merge the first 5 revisions, from 17 March 2024. Delete the later revisions. There is then no overlapping history problem. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:18, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This nomination is
Speedy Redirection. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:46, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Redirect draft to article. Thanks to Awesimf for writing the draft, and to Saqib for writing a referenced stub. Perhaps they and/or others could see which of the currently unreferenced additional bits in the draft could be referenced and added to the article? Beyond that, I see no particular reason to delete this draft and its history, nor do I see any particular reason to not assume good faith regarding anyone's motivations here.
Martinp (talk) 18:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Bad faith is not required to correct something to how it should have been. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Matrinp. There are
WP:Parallel histories here so this can't be histmerged. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Only the first fiver revisions are important to history merge, and these create no parallel history. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Martinp and Pppery /... and Extraordinary Writ; switching back to my original recommendation: after a more careful look it is now clear to me that the histories are unrelated and I agree the question of who gets the credit is not important/ (parallel histories). ~~Selectively histmerge as SmokeyJoe says. Delete the later revisions.~~—Alalch E. 23:06, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Selectively History Merge: As per others in this discussion. There's no overlap with the first 5 revisions. TarnishedPath^talk 02:51, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TarnishedPath since you commented mostly "as per others" which references also my comment at the time when I also recommended histmerging I am just notifying you that I changed my !vote back to redirect, because while histmerging would have been fine in the scenario of someone creating a draft then someone else copying that to mainspace and continuing to work on it, instead of moving, which would be a "copy-and-paste mainspacing", in which scenario providing continuity to establish the real history of contributions would be beneficial, that scenario is not the current scenario, due to the article having been created independently from the draft. I would have !voted like this originally (and in fact I did), but I erroneously changed my !vote because I did not properly interpret the pages' histories. —Alalch E. 23:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see no problem with a redirect as the page history will be preserved. TarnishedPath^talk 00:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. History merges at best make the history harder to decipher and at worst give a misleading impression of what happened. In this case there's no legal attribution issue, and giving someone "credit" is not a good enough reason to resort to a histmerge, in my opinion. (Requests like this are regularly declined at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge.) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 08:41, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closed discussions

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates