This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. This notice will automatically hide itself when the backlog is cleared. |
Skip to: Table of contents / current discussions / old business (bottom). |
Please do not nominate your user page (or subpages of it) for deletion here. Instead, add {{db-userreq}} at the top of any such page you no longer wish to keep; an administrator will then delete the page. See Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion for more information. |
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
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:, MOS: (in the unlikely event it ever contains a page that is not a redirect or one of the 6 disambiguation pages) and the various Talk: namespaces
- Userboxes, regardless of the namespace
- 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
Before nominating a page for deletion, please consider these guidelines:
Deleting pages in your own userspace |
|
Duplications in draftspace? |
|
Deleting pages in other people's userspace |
|
Policies, guidelines and process pages |
|
WikiProjects and their subpages |
|
Alternatives to deletion |
|
Alternatives to MfD |
|
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
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.
|
Administrator instructions
V | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 7 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 25 | 24 | 49 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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.
December 14, 2024
This page appears to be the exact opposite of WP:DENY as the target has edited it several times before, and AIV, SPI and Meta's SRG page appear to be the better routes available. The same case also applies to the LTA page about MidAtlanticBaby, which was deleted hours later (after its creation) by Daniel Quinlan to deny recognition. Codename Noreste 🤔 Talk 21:15, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Was a useful learning experience for a newbie to Hamish Ross - I would never have known as a mere editor that such calculated manipulation existed without it -AIV, SPI totally useless of informing me the next time he drifted by to gain credulity for a sock on pages I monitor, which means page has useful purpose. Hide recognition means bigger mess to clean up and I was able to let another editor quickly into the knowledge that they had been sucked into interacting with a sockpuppet while the admins had other things more important to do to help the community ChaseKiwi (talk) 22:13, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm on the fence. Hamish Ross is more difficult to recognize and a bit less active. On the other hand, there is some risk of the page treading into beans territory, and it's already skirting that line. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 22:37, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Sorry, but I have to vote to keep. Unlike MAB's socks and IPs, Hamish Ross edits multiple pages and whatnot, which makes him more difficult to spot. Also, a lot of the IPs that he uses to edit look extremely similar to others, which further conceals his identity. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 23:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Is anyone in charge of Long-Term Abuse, or is this a free-for-all? I am aware. that Deny and RBI are considered usually preferable to creating an LTA file. However, ignoring the creation of an unnecessary LTA file may also be a better approach than bringing it to MFD, which may be a Streisand effect or maybe a second Streisand effect? Should the creation and management of these files be put under control of the SPI clerks? These requests to delete LTA files, with the stated objective of denying recognition, seem to provide extra recognition. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
December 13, 2024
Inactive project (which only ever had 1 member) about an inactive band. I'm proposing straight deletion (with follow up deletion of templates and categories) as the main page is almost entirely the article about the band. Gonnym (talk) 15:19, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
WeakDelete - I don't like deleting a WikiProject that has ever functioned as a WikiProject. It appears that this project has never functioned as a project in twelve years. The activity of a WikiProject is mostly on its project talk page. The project talk page, which has never been archived because it never needed archiving, shows nothing that looks like real activity. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:38, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
This appears to be a hoax/althistory page in the form of an article; there is no "Armenian Empire", much less an "Armenian Empire Song Contest". — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- “This appears to be” is so softly tentatively worded that it belongs on the talk page, not an MfD nomination.
- Do you think it is a hoax or alt history, or not? If the concern is mere “appearance”, fix it. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:26, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- You're right; I should be more assertive: this is a hoax/althistory page in the form of an article, and should be deleted as such. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:15, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- You're right; I should be more assertive: this is a hoax/althistory page in the form of an article, and should be deleted as such. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - This is a Hoax in the form of a fake article about an unreal reality television show. Fictitious contests such as this have been common at MFD in the past, and are deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:46, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- How do you keep finding these userpages for users who haven't edited since 2016? FLIPPINGOUT (talk) 23:26, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - I have written an essay, Wikipedia:Wikipedia is Not for Unreal Reality Shows, because this is a type of misuse that we see from time to time at MFD. Comments or expansion are welcome. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:34, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 11:13, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
December 12, 2024
Highly offensive userpage that is contrary to the purpose of the "User:" space. Content includes wikilinking "Hungarian" with Schizophrenia, vice-versa, wikilinking "Schizo Ramblings" as Hungarian language, United States for "Hamburger Hotdog" and "Freedom", "This user identifies as a Maoist.", "This user recognizes the US as a terrorist state" and "This user supports one democratic state in historic Palestine from the river to the sea." All of these are heavy misuses (and the non-userbox ones are highly offensive, at that) of a userpage. Surprised they haven't been blocked, either. EF5 18:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- If you think supporting Palestine is “Highly offensive” then why are you on Wikipedia, a supposedly “unbiased” website? DFLPApologist (talk) 18:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- I said the non-userbox examples are highly offensive. WP:UPBAD states
In addition, there is broad agreement that you may not include in your user space material that is likely to bring the project into disrepute, or which is likely to give widespread offense
, which is exactly what's happening here. I mean, c'mon. Wikilinking "Hamburger hotdog" to United States?? EF5 18:14, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- I said the non-userbox examples are highly offensive. WP:UPBAD states
- identifying as a maoist and supporting palestine are offensive.? 2407:7000:AB5A:9696:DB3:4EB2:9C09:609 (talk) 07:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Administrator note: I've blanked the page as inappropriate humor, but left the MFD open so that the community can further discuss the issue, if they so desire. Isabelle Belato 🏳🌈 12:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - I concur with Isabelle Belato that this was inappropriate and offensive. As long as we are here, this should be deleted rather than merely hidden. As per discussion at WP:ANI, deletion is a reasonable Alternative to Blocking. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:24, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Delete as overtly inappropriate and offensive. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 11:10, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - The blanking was an application of Ignore All Rules, since the banner on a page that has been nominated for MFD says:
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
. The blanking does not close this MFD, because the offensive content is still in the history. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:34, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
User page that simply contains the ISIS flag, and has only ever contained that flag. Per WP:UPNOT, there is broad agreement that you may not include in your user space material that is likely to bring the project into disrepute
, which support for the proscribed terror group would do. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 01:19, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- How did you find this random user page of a user who hasn't contributed in 8 years.
- Anyways, delete per nom. FLIPPINGOUT (talk) 02:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.—Alalch E. 16:13, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 11:19, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
December 11, 2024
Draft is a exact copy of a different, existing draft -Samoht27 (talk) 23:35, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, there are good reasons to have a copy of an existing draft. The user may just want to edit a version of the draft without interfering with the work of whoever made the original draft. FLIPPINGOUT (talk) 02:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - I just declined the sandbox as a duplicate of the draft. There are conflict of interest issues, but deletion of the sandbox is not necessary. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:15, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
This sandbox was created for self promotion. After author created this sandbox, another user (most likely a meat-puppet) copied this sandbox and created Md. Akram Hossain which is now deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Md. Akram Hossain. We should delete this self-promo sandbox also. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 14:08, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Sandboxes and drafts are not deleted for being duplicates of deleted articles, because they are not substantially the same as the deleted articles if they are in different namespaces. One reason for this is so that drafts can be developed that overcome the issues raised in the AFD. If the originator is a sockpuppet, they should be reported to sockpuppet reports. This sandbox should be rejected if submitted for review. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Acceptable for userspace. The mainspace page was deleted for notability reasons, which don’t apply in userspace. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Seems like a slightly modified copy of mainspace article Cyanopsia?? I swear there's a CSD for this but I can't find any so I submitted to MfD as a second option User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:02, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Looking at the user's contribs, the sandbox seems to be where they draft contributions to the cyanopsia article, which seem to be sizable and constructive. FLIPPINGOUT (talk) 22:34, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - As per Flippingout, modified copies of mainspace articles for the purpose of drafting edits to the article are a legitimate use of a sandbox. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
December 10, 2024
- 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. (non-admin closure) JJPMaster (she/they) 06:18, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Not quite a G10 case IMO, but a major part of the essay is incivility/personal attacks. The authour cannot resolve this because she is blocked and the PAs are too important to the overall essay to just remove them. Withdrawn nomination. The keep !votes have clarified to me that there are good reasons to keep the page. QwertyForest (talk) 08:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I'm looking at the essay, and I agree it doesn't meet WP:G10. I'm also looking at the bullet points at WP:NPA#WHATIS, and trying to match them up to the essay content to see what qualifies, and it escapes me. What do you see? Mathglot (talk) 09:29, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- To clarify, this reads uncivil/PA to me:
lame nerds
random ignorant persons with overinflated egos who happen to have fancy-sounding, meaningless, irrelevant titles or super-scary powers and influence
the Hero of Wikipedia medal on display in both their userpage and bedroom
- QwertyForest (talk) 10:55, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. Afaict from what you've listed, no person or group is named, therefore there is no PA here, in my understanding of the policy. Seems like some prickly antiauthoritarianism, but I'd say that it falls under the considerable leeway given to users to determine what goes into their User space pages. 11:11, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- To clarify, this reads uncivil/PA to me:
- Comment: It's a statement of her approach to and philosophy about editing Wikipedia. And while I find that approach dismal and that philosophy abhorrent, I think the statement itself has merit as such.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:32, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- PS: I have her talk page watchlisted from prior discussion, and that is how I found my way here. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Switch to Keep per my fellow "ignorant person with [an] overinflated ego." -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- PS: I have her talk page watchlisted from prior discussion, and that is how I found my way here. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I think what the page says represents a totally unconstructive attitude, and the fact that its creator has such views is most unfortunate. However, not only does she hold such unconstructive views, but those views have coloured her very unconstructive editing history and her whole approach to dealing with other editors, and I find it very helpful to have it documented, as it helps to clarify the meaning of her position in conflicts she has been involved in. JBW (talk) 11:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: The Userpage is acceptable expression for a contributor. The user is currently blocked, but the block is very recent, and the block log reason is not correct, she will surely be unblocked soon. The user has a few years of editing, and rapid increase, and she will need some behavioural calming. This will not be helped by deleting her userpages. SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:55, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. You are allowed to be critical in userspace essays. No specific person was singled out, and the content is not vitriolic enough for it to count as a PA. Similar content has been posted at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-08-19/Op-ed § WP:THREATENING2MEN: The English Wikipedia's misogynist infopolitics and the hegemony of the asshole consensus. Mach61 20:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as per JBW. This essay is informative as to why she is blocked, and should be present for anyone reading an unblock request. Essays attacking the whole culture of Wikipedia are not considered attack pages, and have usually been left standing. In this case, leaving it standing provides context as to her block. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Not bad enough that deleting would be imperative.—Alalch E. 11:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- 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.
December 8, 2024
Claiming to be "the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler", describing oneself as "Aryan", and describing Marxism as "judeo-bolshevism" in a userpage template certainly falls under WP:POLEMIC. Di (they-them) (talk) 07:31, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Prussian-German ethnicity has been linked to Insanity - and certainly WP:POLEMIC The AP (talk) 07:35, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't like to participate in votes regarding me, especially considering it's going to be a conflict of interest. I also don't like using the "it's just a joke" argument... but none of this is polemic. It is not meant to be 'rhetoric intended to support a specific position by forthright claims'. It is meant to make fun of these things. It is 'in jest'. I thought the sheer absurdity of such a userpage in which all of this is contrasted with the fact that I am a communist and thus do not believe in the absurdity of things like "judeo-bolshevism" would indicate this.
- I am sorry if my userpage causes offense. It is to make fun of these people who call themselves "aryan hyperboreans" or whatever. TheodoresTomfooleries (talk) 07:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think that the humor isn't really obvious. Not to mention, pretending to be a caricature of a neo-Nazi to make fun of them is still polemic and not really related to building the encyclopedia. Di (they-them) (talk) 07:52, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- i agree !!! 83.254.204.236 (talk) 08:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I still hardly believe that this can still be considered polemic.
- Good day. TheodoresTomfooleries (talk) 08:12, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- (Personal attack removed) Leave the last funny wikipedia user page alone. Xenosystem (talk) 10:45, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think that the humor isn't really obvious. Not to mention, pretending to be a caricature of a neo-Nazi to make fun of them is still polemic and not really related to building the encyclopedia. Di (they-them) (talk) 07:52, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, yeah, we definitely don't need things like this here. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:D8C7:13A5:F937:D20E (talk) 12:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Snow delete. This should've been a speedy delete, and we are feeding someone who is very obviously a troll through this nom. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST) 12:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Again, how am I a troll? I have shown quite evidently through my contributions- of which I have made several of, that I am not here to 'disrupt Wikipedia' whatsoever.
- I have never vandalized a page. I have never intentionally broken any rules. I have never harassed anybody. My userpage has nothing to do with my edits on Wikipedia. TheodoresTomfooleries (talk) 15:56, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- TheodoresTomfooleries, see this comment. Read the room; nobody here finds your "jokes" funny. — 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST) 21:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Once again, my userpage has nothing to do with my contributions to Wikipedia. I would suggest not insinuating that someone is a troll when the definition of 'a troll' does not apply to me. TheodoresTomfooleries (talk) 00:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @TheodoresTomfooleries: Do "deliberately offensive or provocative messages" not describe the content you've added to your user page? Unless you were somehow expecting people not be taken off-guard by declaring that you are "actually the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler" as a joke or whole-heartedly believed it, it's safe for people to say your purpose was to troll. I see that you are a legitimate contributor here and I recommend just leaving your user page to host your userboxes and basic info about yourself and what you do on Wikipedia and lay off the edgy humor that is not appropriate for an online encyclopedia. You user page absolutely should be about what you do on Wikipedia, that's what they're for. Waddles 🗩 🖉 00:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Once again, my userpage has nothing to do with my contributions to Wikipedia. I would suggest not insinuating that someone is a troll when the definition of 'a troll' does not apply to me. TheodoresTomfooleries (talk) 00:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
My userpage has nothing to do with my edits on Wikipedia.
That's not actually true. While you can let your hair down a bit on your userpage, you can't actually do whatever you want over there. The same policies apply throughout Wikipedia. I appreciate the clarification that you aren't a troll and want to contribute productively elsewhere. Kind regards, Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk to me!/my edits) 10:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- TheodoresTomfooleries, see this comment. Read the room; nobody here finds your "jokes" funny. — 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST) 21:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Again, how am I a troll? I have shown quite evidently through my contributions- of which I have made several of, that I am not here to 'disrupt Wikipedia' whatsoever.
- Delete: Per nom. Please also delete User:DFLPApologist for similar styled trolling. - Ratnahastin (talk) 15:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep We're witnessing the death of comedy 16:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Bigshlomo (talk)
- Delete, we're witnessing the death of comedy. Bishonen | tålk 16:34, 8 December 2024 (UTC).
- Delete: not actually funny. Toughpigs (talk) 16:45, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete: Inappropriate user page. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 17:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - There is such a thing as humor, and there is such a thing as inappropriate humor. If this editor is not a troll, then they should avoid acting like a troll. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:13, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Keep but tag with {{humour}} I certainly didn't find it very funny, but at least I could tell it was intended to be such. If the user is willing to add the appropriate tags to clarify, then I'm fine with it. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 18:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC)You know what, just delete it. There are attempts at bad humour, but this one goes too far. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 21:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)- Yea, like I too laughed at this when I saw it on a screenshot on Twitter, but then I realised wait, this is Wikipedia, let's keep it that way. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk to me!/my edits) 10:26, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Utterly inappropriate trolling. Userpages are for letting other editors know who you are as an editor, not for trying to offend people. Cullen328 (talk) 18:29, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can we get a WP:SNOW close? – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 01:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not after less than one day, although I would be very surprised if this went any other way than delete. charlotte 👸🎄 06:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can we get a WP:SNOW close? – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 01:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Even if it's supposed to be funny, it's not obvious at first because it isn't funny at all. There are definitely people out there who believe in the Aryan race theory or even believe to be the reincarnation of historical figures like Hitler. Before looking into who this user was, I thought it was a newly-registered Nazi troll here to stir trouble, not someone who's been around for almost 4 years. Waddles 🗩 🖉 23:04, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment TheodoresTomfooleries, why don't you just blank your User page? Liz Read! Talk! 05:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
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.
- Doing so would be a violation. TheodoresTomfooleries (talk) 06:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - See discussion at WP:ANI. Deletion is an Alternative to Blocking. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete for more than obvious reasons. Also, a WP:SNOW close seems appropriate here. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 11:15, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Old business
Everything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began 07:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC) ended today on 15 December 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. |
December 6, 2024
- 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. El Beeblerino if you're not into the whole brevity thing 07:33, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scientology (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
While a few years old, this April Fools' AFD is primarily about a BLP's religion, although I am unsure whether this page may be considered an attack page or not. Xeroctic (talk) 19:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:19, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, deleting an old joke AfD is just pointless (and perhaps a bit humorless). Also, I think that all AfD's are worth keeping as historic reference, even humorous ones. FLIPPINGOUT (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment (since this has not received any replies in a few days) Even though old joke nominations are not usually deleted, even if it is low participation; this may be an exception due this joke AfD partially being about an aspect of a BLP's personal life (an article linked to in the page discusses the subject's Scientology membership in a few paragraphs).
- Additionally, the part of WP:FOOLS recommending against basing joke nominations about BLPs was only added in 2023, so this nomination probably is retroactively applying it. Xeroctic (talk) 10:09, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. It doesn't matter that it's an "old joke" (i.e. doesn't matter how old the page is) when it inappropriately has to do with a living person.—Alalch E. 10:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- 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.
December 5, 2024
The page now located at User:Est. 2021/sandbox/CURRENT was formerly a talk page for my previous account Vicipaedianus x, so –when I created this account back in 2021– I moved it into my user space an turned it into an archive. Later, on 19 June 2023, I copy-pasted all of its content to my archive located at User talk:Est. 2021/Archive/0, so I requested to merge the page history as well (specifically edits between February 2014 and February 2021, when it was a talk page) and the deletion of the former, but my request got declined, so I got stuck with a blanked subpage, and I started using it as a sandbox. I now remembered that –on 14 December 2023– I got told it was "not eligible for WP:U1 because at one time it was a user talk page, it may still be deleted by being listed at WP:MFD", so please, merge its history as a talk page into User talk:Est. 2021/Archive/0, if needed, and delete this useless duplicate turned sandbox. Thanks. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 16:03, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete - If this is not eligible for U1 because of its history, it is enough like a U1 that it should be deleted at the originator's request. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:45, 6 December 2024 (UTC)- Sigh.
- Per WP:DELTALK, the edits between September 2013 and November 2020 must not be deleted no matter how many layers of obfuscation you try to use to hide that fact.
- The request to history merge the talk page edits so the later edits can be deleted is valid and in my opinion should have been granted, but four other admins (including my past self) have improperly stonewalled it. Now that we're at a discussion venue rather than an individual-admin-request venue I guess we can override them and grant that request, so I support doing so.
- Est. 2021's insistence in getting things done this way has grown beyond reason. They've made nine distinct requests for admin actions relating to this one sandbox, all of which were declined. My gut wants to say "Keep" out of spite. But I'm better than that.
- Overall, weakly support history merge and delete, but if that's not done, strongly oppose deleting without history merging - that would set a hideous precedent that people can get their way by complaining enough. Although I guess WP:Database reports/Possibly out-of-process deletions#User talk pages exists, so the blatant double standard being demonstrated here will continue to exist either way. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:19, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Having reviewed the history in detail once, there is a strange odor to the history, and we don't want to just incinerate it to get rid of any possible dead animals. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:42, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Split history to put the talk page revisions back in User talk:Vicipaedianus x. Moving the talk page of your past account to a subpage of your current account is totally inappropriate. Let's say I want to read the talk page of User:Vicipaedianus x, an editor for multiple years with 278 edits. How do I do that? Obfuscating the previous account's talk page is falsifying history.—Alalch E. 10:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Alalch E.: Interesting misunderstanding, but I actually I moved the talk to my archive to be transparent about the ownership of both accounts, not to
obfuscate
anything. Moreover, if I didn't, people could have written onto the old talk page –without me ever noticing– and hence never got an answer. You can still read any thread posted there tho. How do you do that? User talk:Vicipaedianus x should redirect to User talk:Est. 2021/Archive/0, after the page history is merged –as I personally requested multiple times. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 13:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)- User talk:Vicipaedianus x should be archived at that root name, and you can leave a message on your old account's talk page saying that it's your old account and that messages should be left on your current account's talk page. —Alalch E. 15:24, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see why the current setup is wrong? Why is is any different from User talk:Malleus Fatuorum having been page moved to User talk:Eric Corbett, or many other instances of users being renamed? If that's what we have to do to get a consensus I can accept it, but it seems like hostile hair-splitting to me. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:44, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- User talk:Vicipaedianus x should be archived at that root name, and you can leave a message on your old account's talk page saying that it's your old account and that messages should be left on your current account's talk page. —Alalch E. 15:24, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Alalch E.: Interesting misunderstanding, but I actually I moved the talk to my archive to be transparent about the ownership of both accounts, not to
December 4, 2024
- 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. El Beeblerino if you're not into the whole brevity thing 07:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Unformatted, probably LLM RfA from an ineligible candidate. To veek2, you might find WP:RFAADVICE helpful; most candidates have made thousands of edits over months of consistent, active editing. WP:NOTNOW has some good advice :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Question - Why should we delete this? Why not leave it standing as an indication that the editor had the silly idea of applying for admin status? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:37, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- As a kindness to veek2. LLM slop does not need to be kept in the history of a {{courtesy blanked}} page; nothing worthwhile would be in the history. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:59, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
KeepWe don't commonly delete old RfAs unless they are malformed indeed. I can't remember us deleting at XfD unless there was something truly worth hiding from view (or it was merely a test page). Here we have a good faith self-nom statement by veek2. I'm all for kindness to newbies, but if a new contributor says he's Napoleon (for example), I'm inclined to allow the community to see that and make their own judgement (as opposed to Wikipedia preemptively appearing obtuse). I'm really not understanding the threat. While I almost always prefer blanking to deletion, in this case, I'd prefer this to be viewed. Attribution is a thing. So are consequences. BusterD (talk) 20:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC) Striking through. BusterD (talk) 20:51, 14 December 2024 (UTC)- Delete Irrelevant noise. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Not needed for historical reasons. We don't learn much about a user from their decision to create such a page, as it borders on an editing test.—Alalch E. 10:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 14:10, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- 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.
November 30, 2024
- 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: mark as historical. El Beeblerino if you're not into the whole brevity thing 07:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
This projectspace template is now not only useless and misleading. It consists entirely of a button that was intended to send a user to the Snuggle API. But Snuggle has been defunct since at least late April 2021. Clicking this button leads users to Wmflabs' 404 error page. Delete as dependent on a defunct tool. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 23:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Delete an abandoned tool. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:04, 1 December 2024 (UTC)- Question: Would "mark as historical" be a better outcome here than outright deletion? Thanks, Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah that. or redirecting to Wikipedia:Snuggle. Graham87 (talk) 04:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Mark Historical as a disused tool. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:46, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- 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.
- MediaWiki:Youhavenewmessagesfromusers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
- (Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) El Beeblerino if you're not into the whole brevity thing 07:39, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Superseded by MediaWiki:new-messages-from-many-users. See also [1] Awesome Aasim 03:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and rename to MediaWiki:new-messages-from-many-users, as should have been done in December 2023 (contrary to the commit message there, that message does still show up for logged-out editors). * Pppery * it has begun... 04:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, El Beeblerino if you're not into the whole brevity thing 07:39, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- MediaWiki:Youhavenewmessages (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
- (Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) El Beeblerino if you're not into the whole brevity thing 07:40, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Superseded by MediaWiki:New-messages. Awesome Aasim 03:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- See also [2]. Awesome Aasim 03:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and rename to MediaWiki:New-messages, as should have been done in December 2023 (contrary to the commit message there, that message does still show up for logged-out editors). * Pppery * it has begun... 04:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, El Beeblerino if you're not into the whole brevity thing 07:40, 15 December 2024 (UTC)