Cannabis Ruderalis

thcscience_admin
"WP:MFD" redirects here. For media for deletion, see Wikipedia:Files for deletion.

Administrator instructions

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.

A filtered version of the page that excludes nominations of pages in the draft namespace is available at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion no drafts.

Information on the process[edit]

What may be nominated for deletion here:

  • Pages not covered by other XFD venues, including pages in these namespaces: Draft:, Help:, Portal:, MediaWiki:, Wikipedia: (including WikiProjects), User:, TimedText:, Gadget:, Gadget definition:, and the various Talk: namespaces
  • Userboxes (regardless of namespace)
  • Files in the File namespace that have a local description page but no local file (if there is a local file, Wikipedia:Files for discussion is the right venue)
  • Any other page, that is not in article space, where there is dispute as to the correct XfD venue.

Requests to undelete pages deleted after discussion here, and debate whether discussions here have been properly closed, both take place at Wikipedia:Deletion review, in accordance with Wikipedia's undeletion policy.

Before nominating a page for deletion[edit]

Before nominating a page for deletion, please consider these guidelines:

Deleting pages in your own userspace
  • If you want to have your own userpage or a draft you created deleted, there is no need to list it here; simply tag it with {{db-userreq}} or {{db-u1}}. If you wish to clear your user talk page or sandbox, just blank it.
Deleting pages in other people's userspace
  • Consider explaining your concerns on the user's talk page with a personal note or by adding {{subst:Uw-userpage}} ~~~~  to their talk page. This step assumes good faith and civility; often the user is simply unaware of the guidelines, and the page can either be fixed or speedily deleted using {{db-userreq}}.
  • Take care not to bite newcomers – sometimes using the {{subst:welcome}} or {{subst:welcomeg}} template and a pointer to WP:UP would be best first.
  • Problematic userspace material is often addressed by the User pages guidelines including in some cases removal by any user or tagging to clarify the content or to prevent external search engine indexing. (Examples include copies of old, deleted, or disputed material, problematic drafts, promotional material, offensive material, inappropriate links, 'spoofing' of the MediaWiki interface, disruptive HTML, invitations or advocacy of disruption, certain kinds of images and image galleries, etc) If your concern relates to these areas consider these approaches as well, or instead of, deletion.
  • User pages about Wikipedia-related matters by established users usually do not qualify for deletion.
  • Articles that were recently deleted at AfD and then moved to userspace are generally not deleted unless they have lingered in userspace for an extended period of time without improvement to address the concerns that resulted in their deletion at AfD, or their content otherwise violates a global content policy such as our policies on Biographies of living persons that applies to any namespace.
Policies, guidelines and process pages
  • Established pages and their sub-pages should not be nominated, as such nominations will probably be considered disruptive, and the ensuing discussions closed early. This is not a forum for modifying or revoking policy. Instead consider tagging the policy as {{historical}} or redirecting it somewhere.
  • Proposals still under discussion generally should not be nominated. If you oppose a proposal, discuss it on the policy page's discussion page. Consider being bold and improving the proposal. Modify the proposal so that it gains consensus. Also note that even if a policy fails to gain consensus, it is often useful to retain it as a historical record, for the benefit of future editors.
WikiProjects and their subpages
  • It is generally preferable that inactive WikiProjects not be deleted, but instead be marked as {{WikiProject status|inactive}}, redirected to a relevant WikiProject, or changed to a task force of a parent WikiProject, unless the WikiProject was incompletely created or is entirely undesirable.
  • WikiProjects that were never very active and which do not have substantial historical discussions (meaning multiple discussions over an extended period of time) on the project talk page should not be tagged as {{historical}}; reserve this tag for historically active projects that have, over time, been replaced by other processes or that contain substantial discussion (as defined above) of the organization of a significant area of Wikipedia. Before deletion of an inactive project with a founder or other formerly active members who are active elsewhere on Wikipedia, consider userfication.
  • Notify the main WikiProject talk page when nominating any WikiProject subpage, in addition to standard notification of the page creator.
Alternatives to deletion
  • Normal editing that doesn't require the use of any administrator tools, such as merging the page into another page or renaming it, can often resolve problems.
  • Pages in the wrong namespace (e.g. an article in Wikipedia namespace), can simply be moved and then tag the redirect for speedy deletion using {{db-g6|rationale= it's a redirect left after a cross-namespace move}}. Notify the author of the original article of the cross-namespace move.
Alternatives to MfD
  • Speedy deletion If the page clearly satisfies a "general" or "user" speedy deletion criterion, tag it with the appropriate template. Be sure to read the entire criterion, as some do not apply in the user space.

Please familiarize yourself with the following policies[edit]

How to list pages for deletion[edit]

Shortcut

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

Instructions on listing pages for deletion:

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

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

I.
Edit PageName:

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

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

or

{{mfd|GroupName}}
if nominating several similar related pages in an umbrella nomination. Choose a suitable name as GroupName and use it on each page.
If the nomination is for a userbox or similarly transcluded page, use {{subst:mfd-inline}} so as to not mess up the formatting for the userbox.
Use {{subst:mfd-inline|GroupName}} for a group nomination of several related userboxes or similarly transclued 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.
  • Save the page.
III.
Add a line to MfD.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Administrator instructions[edit]

XFD backlog
V Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
CfD 0 7 28 114 149
TfD 0 0 0 6 6
MfD 0 0 0 11 11
FfD 0 0 0 39 39
AfD 0 0 0 0 0

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

Archived discussions[edit]

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

Current discussions[edit]

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

December 26, 2021[edit]

December 23, 2021[edit]

Draft:Starscixn[edit]

Draft:Starscixn (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​
Draft:Stars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Starscixn

This draft has been declined twice and rejected once and resubmitted after rejection. This would be a marginal case as to deleting the draft, but an identical draft has also been submitted as Draft:Stars, which is an attempt to game the naming of drafts, and which has also been declined twice. All of the submissions have been from shifting IP addresses, so that discussion with the submitter is not possible. However, semi-protection of both spellings of the draft is possible and is requested. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:16, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete both as unsuitably sourced, and as promotion, and for tendentious resubmission. Do not protect, protection in draftspace is contrary to the purpose of draftspace. Also, it would teach them about avoiding protected titles, and other WP:BEANS things. Advise Robert McClenon to read Wikipedia:Protection policy and to stop using MfD in place of WP:RfPP, for requests that would be speedy rejected at RfPP. —-SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:07, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete both as self-promotion and tendentious resubmission with no attempt to find any secondary sources. Not sure about salt as it hasn't been tendentiously recreated and resubmitted yet besides the 2nd draft which the editor should now understand that duplicate submissions will not help the case. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:51, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete Self-promotional drafts, but do not salt. Waddles 🎄 ❄️️ 02:07, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

December 22, 2021[edit]

Draft:Rarri Dream[edit]

Draft:Rarri Dream (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Tendentiously resubmitted despite multiple rejections. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:25, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete - This draft has been declined 5 times and rejected 5 times by 9 different reviewers. This may be a record for the most tendentiously resubmitted draft, but I don't know if anyone is keeping score. It isn't clear that deletion of the draft is the most appropriate way to deal with the resubmission, because a partial block may be in order, but it is an appropriate way to deal with the resubmission, and this is a content forum. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:46, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, and because sources look non-independent. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:DMFD as tendentiously resubmitted. Turned away 10 times with 5 declines and rejections each, and will obviously not become an article. I'm fairly certain this is not a record. IIRC there was one this past spring that had about seven of each. Regards, 85.172.31.16 (talk) 22:23, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Template:User Orthodox civilization[edit]

Template:User Orthodox civilization (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Not used, ambiguous, created by a blocked user. Heanor (talk) 13:25, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

  • Heanor, would you please make effort to avoid implying a misleading timeline. The template was not created by a blocked user. The template was created by a user who would later be blocked. And the reasons for the block appear unrelated to this userbox.
Your nomination appears related to your RfD at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_December_22#Orthodox_civilization. You are seeking to clean by deletions uses of “Orthodox civilization”. This term does not seem “ambiguous”. Eg https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-32567-5_2. Instead, it seems the internal POV of the early Eastern Orthodox Church. Historic POV is not a reason for deletion, but for coverage.
Many Userboxes are not used. Not used is not a strong reason for deletion. Could it be conceivably well used? If “yes”, I suggest moving to a subpage of User:UBX, per wikipedia:Userboxes. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:02, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Agree with you, SmokeyJoe, can you then close this nomination and move to a subpage of User:UBX? --Heanor (talk) 18:28, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Boron Fiber[edit]

Draft:Boron Fiber (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

There is already an article on this subject so there is no need for this one. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 03:37, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

  • Comment: I would recommend merging with the article on the subject because the draft contains cited information that the article lacks. (I was asking about if I could go ahead like with two articles at the Teahouse, but now I can't because it was MFD'ed by the person who answered my question, saying yes?!) --67.183.136.85 (talk) 03:56, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Speedy redirect : WP:SRE. To Boron fiber. Merge from the history. SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:14, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
    The draft dates from 2012, when it was in userspace and undiscovered until 2019-2020. The article dates from 2014 and appears to be a completely independent creation. SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:18, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Speedy redirect per SmokeyJoe, suitable content can be merged from the history. Regards, 85.172.31.16 (talk) 22:28, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

December 20, 2021[edit]

Portal:Current events/November 1994[edit]

Portal:Current events/November 1994 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Misuse of portal namespace as an article surrogate. Unnecessary fork of main year page so not worth moving to mainspace. Dronebogus (talk) 22:33, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Portal:Current events/April 1995[edit]

Portal:Current events/April 1995 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Misuse of portal namespace as an article surrogate. Unnecessary fork of main year page so not worth moving to mainspace. Dronebogus (talk) 22:28, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Portal:Current events/January 1994[edit]

Portal:Current events/January 1994 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Misuse of portal namespace as an article surrogate. Unnecessary fork of main year so not worth moving to mainspace. Dronebogus (talk) 22:27, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

User:SpinyRabbit052[edit]

User:SpinyRabbit052 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Wikipedia is not a web host for fantasy Cricket 19 tournaments. Whpq (talk) 16:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

@Whpq: But I didn't Find Fixture and Result to make it in Fandom — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpinyRabbit052 (talk • contribs)
@SpinyRabbit052: Wikipedia is not a web host even if you can't figure out how to host your game on another site. -- Whpq (talk) 17:34, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
@Whpq: I am not hosting, I just making, not showing this to everyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpinyRabbit052 (talk • contribs)
@SpinyRabbit052: If you are storing it on Wikipedia, then Wikipedia is hosting it regardless of the number of people who look at it. -- Whpq (talk) 21:10, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
I think the number of people who look at it is a useful indicator of actual NOTWEBHOST abuse of Wikipedia. I look at this. It is confused by the page being the user’s main Userpage. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:58, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
I disagree. It's hosting content unrelated to the work of developing an encyclopedia regardless of whether it is to entertain oneself, or entertain a group of friends. -- Whpq (talk) 22:17, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete - It doesn't really matter what is being fantasy-web-hosted, because Wikipedia is not for web hosting. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:04, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Move to a user subpage and blank: It looks like NOTWEBHOSTing for a fantasy game, and Wikipedia has little tolerance for this. Leeway applies, the user has a good number of mainspace contributions, and arguably the content is sandboxing related to their contribution interests, but it is not appropriate for their main Userpage. Advise them to keep this stuff blanked between uses, to reduce the appearance that it’s purpose is we hosting for some external purpose. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:55, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Old business[edit]

December 14, 2021[edit]

Draft:Alewya Demmisse[edit]

Draft:Alewya Demmisse (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Someone else has created the article at Alewya. NemesisAT (talk) 12:44, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

  • Speedy Redirect As a draft duplicating an existing article. 192.76.8.80 (talk) 14:19, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
    Your phrasing is misleading. When the draft was being worked on, the article did not exist. “Duplicating” implies an order of creation. The draft was pre-empting a later-to-be-created very similar article. — SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:50, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Speedy Redirect per 192. NemesisAT often in these cases it's better to just redirect the draft yourself when you see this sort of thing. It's only in the unusual case where a redirect is challenged that an mfd is necessary, in which case we can admittedly dispense with it quickly per WP:SRE. Regards, 78.140.196.174 (talk) 18:09, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Speedy redirect per 192. Leomk0403 (Don't shout here, Shout here!) 04:48, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
  • History merge: The similarities between the draft and the first version of Alewya are too great to assume that Alewya was created independently, and it’s creation looks like an attribution failure. History merging fixes this problem. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:47, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
    I'd like to ping @Mooonswimmer: here due to their work on the mainspace article. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 04:28, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
  • @Chess: Attribution failure on my part, as SmokeyJoe suggested. My apologies, didn't quite know how to proceed. I definitely did use a few finetuned phrases from the draft. Not a copy paste job though. History merge sounds fair. Mooonswimmer 09:44, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

December 13, 2021[edit]

User:TBM10/Uncircumcised[edit]

User:TBM10/Uncircumcised (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​
User:Lgk1776/Userboxes/Circumcised (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This userbox may potentially be NSFW and incompatible with Wikipedia's goals. While I kind of get the socio-political issues that this userbox is attempting to cover, it is basically saying "I am not victim" which is prob just as bad as "I have [insert race here] privilege"; in other words, it could potentially be promoting incivility. Also per our offensive content guideline, we do not include offensive images or text unless if it can be treated in an encyclopedic manner; userboxes and "about me" user pages do not treat this in an encyclopedic manner. Aasim (talk) 11:21, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

  • Keep: In favour of an RfC on Userboxes and whether random things unrelated to Wikipedia are allowed. Genital issues short of sexuality are not too offensive for work. SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:12, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment - User:Lgk1776/Userboxes/Circumcised exists as well. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 10:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
Good eye User:Godsy - I added that to the nomination. Aasim (talk) 00:30, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Comment. "Artistic" representations of nudity get a free pass in terms of social norms. That's why many of our articles use old artistic representations of nudity to illustrate related concepts, since they illustrate the same concepts but in a less licentious manner. I'm somewhat surprised to see someone calling Michelangelo's David "offensive" in light of that (unless you referring to some other image). Reminds me of Itchy & Scratchy & Marge. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 03:58, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

December 10, 2021[edit]

Draft:JK Llamera[edit]

Draft:JK Llamera (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Vanity BLP. No sources whatsoever. Appears to be autobiographical. SVTCobra 18:01, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

  • Comment I go through all of the expiring drafts each day and come across anywhere from 15-30 autobiographies like this, daily, from wannabe rappers, computer engineers, "entrepreneurs", student leaders, the whole gamut of interests. I don't think they all need to go through a deletion discussion. They are more common than you can imagine. This draft will never pass AFC approval and if it gets moved to main space, it'll be tagged for speedy deletion. My inclination is just let them be because the pages are typically abandoned when the page creator gets frustrated with our draft approval process. But that's just my POV, not Wikipedia policy. Liz Read! Talk! 01:32, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
OK, thanks, Liz. Duly noted. I shall not nominate another if I come across one. I only saw this one because it was posted to WP:COIN. Cheers, --SVTCobra 08:16, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep as per Liz. This is a draft that isn't bad enough for G11 or G3, and needed declining or rejecting, and was declined, and can be left to expire. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:33, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

 Question: Should I withdraw this or let it proceed since it's already underway? --SVTCobra 20:11, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete: “Delete as an unsourced WP:BLP”. This is a perfectly sound reason to delete a myriad of types of material that is useless for content building, and possibly harmful to a living person. Note that WP:BLP applies to all namespaces, which include DraftSpace. SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:39, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment The contents of the said article may be transferred to the user page of the subject of this case, if allowed. NewManila2000 (talk) 14:14, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep needed to be declined, was declined and is now best ignored and left for g13. I don't think this is a good candidate for userfication since it's borderline u5 eligible (frankly it's not far off of g11), although I also acknowledge there are tens if not hundreds of thousands of existing self-promo userpages that are equally bad if not worse that we are safely ignoring due to being noindexed. Anyway if they tendentiously resubmit or tendentiously maintain in draftspace to evade g13 then bring this back here WP:DMFD, otherwise g13 will take care of this without needing to take up further community time in discussion. Regards, 213.193.27.121 (talk) 19:35, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete It is a unsourced WP:BLP. scope_creepTalk 09:50, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per SmokeyJoe, for BLP reasons. Drmies (talk) 15:58, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment original author posted it in mainspace, and it was moved to draft. A different editor submitted it for AFC reviewing at which it ws declined. Original author seems to have multiple issues and warnings about their posts. I would leave it in draft for G13 but slap an autobio tag on it, and also remove sensitive BLP information. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:05, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep – the purpose of WP:BLP is to protect the interests of the page's subject, and that purpose is not furthered by deleting worthless drafts written by the page's subject. The interests of the project are furthered by discouraging the unnecessary use of MfD, so I'll !vote to leave this draft for the ever-rolling stream of G13 – the same fate, as has been noted, that many, many similar drafts will inevitably face as well. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:47, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Template:User ga-0.9[edit]

Template:User ga-0.9 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

For babel, 0.9 should not exist and should therefore be deleted. Q28 (talk) 10:38, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Keep - I created this as a humorous userbox. If you look at the history, the original text was, "Tá mo chuid Gaeilge go hainnis." Other learners and speakers altered it over time. I think there's a place for custom levels and humour here. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 17:36, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Do not create joke/humorous/satirical Userboxes in template space. Template aficionados don’t like them. They are not real templates, just Userpage cliche things. WP:MOVE it to your userspace. Or to a subpage of WP:UBX. SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:41, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
It has long been a contentious matter; templatespace userboxes are permitted à la WP:UBXNS. However, in most cases involving humor, I tend to agree that a place besides the template namespace is better.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 04:54, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
Modified. joke/humorous/satirical Userboxes. Editors who maintain templates and template space are not known for their generous facetious humours. Personal jokes belong in userspace, or maybe under Wikipedia:Department of Fun it’s a group thing. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:09, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Template:Userbox Wikimania 2023[edit]

Template:Userbox Wikimania 2023 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Given the events of the past two years, it was overly optimistic to assume that Wikimanias would continue into perpetuity without a hitch. Q28 (talk) 10:28, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

It seems illogical to delete a userbox predicated on a user's prediction that a future event will occur because of another user's prediction that the event will not occur.
That being said I agree with Jonesey95 and would support a move to Template:User Wikimania 2023. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 04:04, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Template:Userbox Wikimania 2022[edit]

Template:Userbox Wikimania 2022 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Given the events of the past two years, it was overly optimistic to assume that Wikimanias would continue into perpetuity without a hitch. Q28 (talk) 10:26, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Move to Template:User Wikimania 2022 per Jonesey95. The WMF has already said they're hosting Wikimania 2022. While it may be virtual or hybrid either way it's an event people can plan to attend. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 04:07, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Template:Userbox Wikimania 2024[edit]

Template:Userbox Wikimania 2024 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Given the events of the past two years, it was overly optimistic to assume that Wikimanias would continue into perpetuity without a hitch. Q28 (talk) 10:22, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

It seems illogical to delete a userbox predicated on a user's prediction that a future event will occur because of another user's prediction that the event will not occur.
That being said I agree with Jonesey95 and would support a move to Template:User Wikimania 2024. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 04:08, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

December 9, 2021[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennsylvania/Alerts/content[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennsylvania/Alerts/content (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​
(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) Aasim (talk) 20:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

This page has never been used since it was created. Q28 hope you pay attention to TFD 04:30, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Keep Agree. Not extensive. Project may start again Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 13:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment the template that uses this subpage has also been nominated for deletion, {{WikiProject Pennsylvania alerts}} is nominated at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_November_29 -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 17:22, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete The essay Wikipedia:Ragpicking only applies to page[s] in draft space or user space, and provides arguments against cleaning out those specific namespaces (both of which I happen to agree with). It does not provide a valid argument against cleaning out unused cruft in project namespace, which this appears to be. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:33, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
    I agree with that, but do not agree with WikiProjects being given no special respect. Is this "cleaning out", or is it random deletions. Why this page, and not other cruft? Once random outsiders have finished deleting their selection of the meaning of cruft, will the WikiProject members continue to regard the WikiProject as theirs to manage? I think it is more likely that outsider micromanagement deletion of their subpages will do more damage in destabilising the WikiProject membership that it will help the WikiProject. SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:32, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aasim (talk) 20:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Not everything created in a project space and even in a WikiProject subpage is automatically worth keeping, nor does it need to be discussed with the project. It either is used or useful or is not. In this case, it shows that it isn't used. Gonnym (talk) 07:03, 10 December 2021 (UTC)|
Keep Project is active. They can delete the page if they wish Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 13:20, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
@Wakelamp: Please don't leave multiple bolded !votes in the same discussion, it's fine to leave additional comments or reply to other editors but you should only leave one bolded !vote. 192.76.8.80 (talk) 11:33, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank-you for explaining. I will correct in future, Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 13:51, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Keep or Redirect to the primary project alerts page, but in the absence of a clear cut WP:DELREASON no need to waste community time in an WP:MFD, blanking or redirecting almost always suffices in cases where no CSD applies. Regards, 213.193.27.121 (talk) 19:18, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennsylvania/Alerts[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennsylvania/Alerts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​
(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) Aasim (talk) 20:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Since its creation, the system has not been used. Q28 hope you pay attention to TFD 04:28, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

  • Keep, unless the request comes from the WikiProject. SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:59, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep - User:Q28 is ragpicking and is wasting the time of other volunteers at MFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:11, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete The essay Wikipedia:Ragpicking only applies to page[s] in draft space or user space, and provides arguments against cleaning out those specific namespaces (both of which I happen to agree with). It does not provide a valid argument against cleaning out unused cruft in project namespace, which this appears to be. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:21, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
    Also fine with redirecting to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennsylvania/Article alerts * Pppery * it has begun... 01:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep per Robert McClenon. 172.112.210.32 (talk) 16:01, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
  • This unused page seems to be redundant to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennsylvania/Article alerts, which is updated regularly by a bot. Since we're already here, perhaps a redirect would be in order? That being said, I share Robert's ragpicking concerns, and I really hope we don't see any more MfD nominations along these lines. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:43, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
    Sounds like a good idea. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:31, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aasim (talk) 20:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Not everything created in a project space and even in a WikiProject subpage is automatically worth keeping, nor does it need to be discussed with the project. It either is used or useful or is not. In this case, it shows that it isn't used. Gonnym (talk) 07:04, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Keep' @gonnym - Incorrect. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion "Notify the main WikiProject talk page when nominating any WikiProject subpage, in addition to standard notification of the page creator. Looking through there is lots of precedent for not deleting as Creating Wikipedia:Subpages is a permitted use. Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 13:56, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Keep or Redirect to the primary project alerts page, but in the absence of a clear cut WP:DELREASON no need to waste community time in an WP:MFD. Q28 I get that you're trying to tidy things, but it's fairly unusual to run across a page where that can't be handled by blanking or redirecting, deletion is only needed when there's good cause to hide the history, but most such cases are already covered by the CSD. Regards, 213.193.27.121 (talk) 18:33, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

TimedText:YannyLaurel.ogg.en.srt[edit]

TimedText:YannyLaurel.ogg.en.srt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Subject to a ton of pointless edits and I don't think this could ever be useful (the dispute over what the clip says is the whole reason why it's relevant). Elli (talk | contribs) 05:22, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Comment I'll try and take this one on since it seems no one else is interested. WP:TIMEDTEXT is an accessibility feature, and in general quite helpful for deaf readers. Now, while being subject to many pointless edits is not a WP:DELREASON (but potentially a reason for protection), I'm not sure if this needs to be retained either. The only conceivable use for this file is Yanny or Laurel which already explains things in such a way that the timedtext is redundant. But this doesn't fall into the class of redundant files as we usually think of them. At this point my common-sense thought is to delete as useless at the present time, but I'm not really firm in that assessment, and I'm unlikely to be able to follow up here. If no one else is interested call this a weak delete, if someone presents a case for why this accessibility feature is in fact needed just ignore this comment. Regards, 188.232.146.110 (talk) 16:50, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
Timed text is an accessibility feature. It isn't just for deaf people, but for people who are hard of hearing or just need help understanding what is being said. There's endless reasons why timed text is useful and I have never encountered a situation where Wikipedia benefits from having it removed. The fact that you nor I can really see a benefit to this isn't a reason to delete, as there may be someone who actually does benefit from this. Accessibility is an important enough concern IMHO that vague ideas of people maybe being helped is enough for me to !vote keep. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 04:19, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
@Chess: I understand how timedtext works. Timedtext is supposed to provide an accurate transcription of spoken words. There is no possible way to accurately transcribe this clip. There is one word spoken, and it is either "yanny" or "laurel", and the fact that no one can determine what word it is is the entire reason this audio clip is used. If you look at the history of this page, this has never been valid srt, and therefore never actually displayed when someone turned on captions for the audio. It therefore provides, and cannot provide, any accessibility benefit to anyone. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:02, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

December 8, 2021[edit]

Draft:Faculty of Law, University of Lucknow[edit]

Draft:Faculty of Law, University of Lucknow (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Draft resubmitted after rejection (see Special:Diff/1051620643/1059203195) for lack of notability, though it is unlikely that the IP who did the new submit, 103.85.96.243 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is connected to the draft author, Parantak.yadav (talk · contribs). Rejecting user Dodger67 (talk · contribs) recommended merging select content into University of Lucknow. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:55, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

  • Keep I think it takes a very strong case that a piece of content being worked on in user space could never become valuable encyclopedic content in order for it to be deleted and I don't see that here, at least not right now. Merging useful content into University of Lucknow and moving on is fine, but otherwise I'd say leave it alone until it's clear it could never serve a purpose. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 05:11, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Redirect to University of Lucknow. disruptively resubmitted after rejection by blanking decline notices, and no evidence of notability independent of the university. A redirect will allow content to be merged from the page history. 192.76.8.80 (talk) 10:56, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete and salt for bad faith. While there used to be some improvements made by Parantak.yadav, as of 9 August, everything since then has been resubmits and deletions of AFC declines and rejections, showing that the author doesn't have any more good faith to fix the draft to make it notable, nor agreeing to include a short section at the main university page. The author should work on the University of Lucknow section pertaining to the Faculty of Law and expand that, and then present a split proposal showing independent notability of the faculty. The verbiage itself on the article is still rather promotional and peacock language about how great the faculty are and using honorifics throughout. I know that's not really a concern for a draft in progress but even that hasn't even been cleaned up since August in preference to tendentious resubmitting. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:49, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
    Salting Draftspace titles is worse than pointless. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:31, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Redirect per 192. They were already told to merge this, and they will still be able to do so post-redirect, but resubmission at this point is just tendentious. I don't see a need for preemptive protection of the redirect, but I'd watch it just in case semi proves neccessary in the future. Regards, 213.193.27.121 (talk) 16:03, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep: Suitable content for mainspace, just not necessarily as a standalone article. At worst, redirect to University_of_Lucknow and encourage consideration of merging from the history. Draftspace is poorly used for thin spinout topics, but deletion is not the way forward. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
SmokeyJoe, the suitable content would have to be rewritten to a section, not the monstrosity that is currently there, and that can be done directly in the mainspace article. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:08, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Yes SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:29, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Closed discussions[edit]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates

source: https://web.archive.org/web/20220103214314/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion

Leave a Reply