Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion no drafts
![]() | 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 for you. See Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § G7 for more information. |
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
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion no drafts
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion no portals
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion no user pages
Information on the process
editWhat 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:,[a] Event: and the various Talk: namespaces
- Userboxes, regardless of the namespace
- File description pages when the file itself is hosted on Commons
- 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.
Notes
Before nominating a page for deletion
editBefore 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
edit- 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
editPlease 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
editV | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 37 | 39 | 76 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 2 | 14 | 16 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 9 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Administrator instructions for closing and relisting discussions can be found here.
Archived discussions
editA 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 26, 2025
editSimilar case to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Praise(musician). User did not made substantial contributions. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:59, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
The user contributions list suggests Praise(musician) (talk · contribs) has no significant contributions on enwiki, and their userspace page appears to promote himself. WP:PROMOTION. The user himself is not notable (WP:BIO), so doesn't deserve a stand-alone article. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:57, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
August 24, 2025
editWP:RFORK of SY Quest incident Paradoctor (talk) 12:27, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete as a copy of an article and a redundant fork. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:57, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
Unsourced child actor biography written in Malay language that was deleted twice from Malay Wikipedia. Paradoctor (talk) 12:13, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete - Not being in English is not a reason to delete, but being an unreferenced biography of a living person is a reason to delete in any namespace. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:58, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
WP:RFORK of Naushah Ganj Bakhsh, content was repeatedly rejected. Paradoctor (talk) 11:44, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete - I don't see the evidence of repeated rejection of content, but this is a copy of an article and a redundant fork. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:00, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
August 22, 2025
editLTA page for an abuser that apparently stopped editing 15 years ago. WP:DENY applies. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 22:49, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete Utterly useless. There's no pointing in tagging a page with {{historical}} when it was only created yesterday. Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:57, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete as equivalent to G7. Blanking except for a {{historical}} tag immediately after creating a page should be viewed as blanking it, which is viewed as a deletion request. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:20, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
- This page is only a day old. Challenge HQIQ (talk · contribs) as to what they think they were doing, and warn them that this looks like disruption. What connection to HQIQ, User:ChildrenWillListen, and Patchouli (talk · contribs) have with each other? SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:02, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
- I have no connection with either of the users. I haven't even heard of Patchouli until yesterday, and I found the page while looking into this. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 13:08, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete: What's the point of making one for a vandalism case that was ended 15 years ago, the immediately blanking it? Created a few days ago, no point in keeping it around. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 21:53, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete, essentially a borderline WP:G7. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 10:57, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete as not useful per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:26, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
Unnecessary and uninformative LTA page that should be deleted per WP:DENY. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 22:34, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- Ask ChildrenWillListen (talk · contribs) and HQIQ (talk · contribs) what connection they have with Timelash (talk · contribs), and warn HQIQ that this page creation looks like WP:GRAVEDANCING and is disruption. SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:09, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
- @SmokeyJoe I have no connection with Patchouli or Timelash. HQIQ talk 04:18, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- User:HQIQ, why would you create an LTA page for an ancient dormant case? SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- No reason, HQIQ talk 06:01, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- User:HQIQ, why would you create an LTA page for an ancient dormant case? SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- @SmokeyJoe I have no connection with Patchouli or Timelash. HQIQ talk 04:18, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
- Weak Delete as follows:
- I almost always oppose deletion of LTA pages, because deletion of LTA pages, intended to deny recognition, is actually a Streisand effect.
- MFD is more visible than LTA pages.
- It is my opinion that the creation of LTA pages should be restricted to Checkusers and SPI clerks.
- However, this LTA page is new, and is not formatted as a proper LTA page.
- This LTA page is being created by an editor who has started creating LTA pages in mistaken good faith, and should be advised to leave them to Checkusers and SPI clerks.
- Limiting the creation of LTA pages to authorized users is a better check against feeding trolls than tagging them for deletion.
Robert McClenon (talk) 04:41, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
- I wouldn’t really mind if both pages (Timelash and Patchouli), to be honest. HQIQ talk 07:01, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
August 21, 2025
editPromo user sandbox, g11 declined as not promo. Lavalizard101 (talk) 09:18, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
- delete Merde . Borderline on my personal criteria for honoring G11's. Clearly promotional a little short of WP:G11. All promo sources.---- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:32, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per promotional/advertising. >^CreativeLibrary460 /access the library revision\ 09:40, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 05:22, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete as promotion by blocked promotional user. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:50, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
August 12, 2025
edit- User:JoseyWales019/sandbox/Lamont Morgan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
- (Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) Salvio giuliano 09:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
Procedural nomination per this conversation at ANI where evidence has been presented that this article was created (at least in part) using AI software. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete - As discussed at WP:ANI, this sandbox draft is the product of artificial intelligence and cannot be trusted, and nothing by this editor can be trusted. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:19, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- Keep: Plausibly notable. Real references. The use of AI in userspace is not inherently unacceptable. Fake facts, or fake opion would be unacceptable, but I don’t see that. SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:04, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 09:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
Old business
editEverything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began 15:29, 19 August 2025 (UTC) ended today on 26 August 2025. 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. |
August 6, 2025
edit- Template:User css-N (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)
- (Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) Techie3 (talk) 11:00, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- (Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) bibliomaniac15 23:55, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
The text in this userbox is almost identical to Template:User css-4, which indicates expert knowledge. The "-N" templates for programming languages have long been treated as a joke, since the "native speaker" wording is not really applicable to them. The associated categories have already been deleted multiple times — see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 January 12#c-Timrollpickering-2012-01-21T01:56:00.000Z-Category:User_pas-N. I believe the appropriate solution is to replace all uses with "User css-4" and either delete this template or reclassify it as a joke template, as an analogous ones (Template:User pas-N and similar in Category:Humorous user templates) still exist. Solidest (talk) 08:43, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Comment In case someone missed the title of this page, there was a previous nomination of this at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User css-N. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 02:54, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Replace all uses with Template:User css-4 and then Delete per nom; I find Black Falcon's "redirect" !vote in the 2010 discussion much more convincing than the "keep"s there. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:36, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 23:55, 6 August 2025 (UTC) - Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Try relisting again
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Techie3 (talk) 11:00, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete; do what Pppery said. Rationale per nom.—Alalch E. 14:54, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 07:48, 19 August 2025 (UTC)