"WP:MFD" redirects here. For media for deletion, see Wikipedia:Files for discussion. For modules for deletion, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.


Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

Miscellany for deletion (MfD) is a place where Wikipedians decide what should be done with problematic pages in the namespaces which aren't covered by other specialized deletion discussion areas. Items sent here are usually discussed for seven days; then they are either deleted by an administrator or kept, based on community consensus as evident from the discussion, consistent with policy, and with careful judgment of the rough consensus if required.

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

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)
  • Pages in the File namespace that have a local description page but no local file (if there is a local file, Wikipedia:Files for discussion is the right venue)
  • Any other page, that is not in article space, where there is dispute as to the correct XfD venue.

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

Before nominating a page for deletion

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

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

Please familiarize yourself with the following policies

How to list pages for deletion

Shortcut

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

Instructions on listing pages for deletion:

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

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

I.
Edit PageName:

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

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

or

{{mfd|GroupName}}
if nominating several similar related pages in an umbrella nomination. Choose a suitable name as GroupName and use it on each page.
If the nomination is for a userbox or similarly transcluded page, use {{subst:mfd-inline}} so as to not mess up the formatting for the userbox.
Use {{subst:mfd-inline|GroupName}} for a group nomination of several related userboxes or similarly transcluded pages.
  • Please include in the edit summary the phrase
    Added MfD nomination at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]
    replace PageName with the name of the page that is up for deletion.
  • Please don't mark your edit summary as a minor edit.
  • Check the "Watch this page" box if you would like to follow the page in your watchlist. This may help you to notice if your MfD tag is removed by someone.
  • Save the page
II.
Create its MfD subpage.

The resulting MfD box at the top of the page should contain the link "this page's entry"

  • Click that link to open the page's deletion discussion page.
  • Insert this text:
{{subst:mfd2| pg={{subst:#titleparts:{{subst:PAGENAME}}||2}}| text=Reason why the page should be deleted}} ~~~~
replacing Reason... with your reasons why the page should be deleted and sign the page. Do not substitute the pagename, as this will occur automatically.
  • Consider checking "Watch this page" to follow the progress of the debate.
  • Please use an edit summary such as
    Creating deletion discussion page for [[PageName]]
    replacing PageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion.
  • Save the page.
III.
Add a line to MfD.

Follow     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

XFD backlog
V Jul Aug Sep Oct Total
CfD 0 1 40 36 77
TfD 0 0 0 6 6
MfD 0 0 0 1 1
FfD 0 0 0 1 1
RfD 0 0 2 14 16
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.

October 13, 2023

Help:Introduction/feedback

Help:Introduction/feedback (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Mark historical. This page hasn't had a single piece of feedback responded to, and tons of empty requests and nonsense. I think we should depreciate these feedback pages in general, but that's a discussion for another place. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 12:21, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Keep. This page exists because Help talk:Introduction is semi-protected (out of necessity to avoid a flood of test edits). Predictably, its content often has CIR issues, but it would run counter to our ethos to provide no venue for nonconfirmed users to give feedback on the tutorial. Further, limited usefulness ≠ no usefulness. I have checked it several times in the past to get a general sense of how highly inexperienced editors are perceiving the tutorial, and gleaned some info that has helped inform its development. And on the rare occasion that a piece of feedback warrants a reply, I have replied — just on the user's talk page, not on the feedback page, since they're more likely to see it on their talk page. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 14:38, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Speedy keep, no argument for deletion. Misuse of MfD. Take the proposal to the talk page. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

October 12, 2023

User:HeatIsCool/db-hoax-notice

User:HeatIsCool/db-hoax-notice (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​
User:HeatIsCool/db-hoax-notice/doc (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Abandoned template draft from 2016 that is now redundant to Template:Db-hoax-notice. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What’s the problem, why not leave it alone?
Redundant usually means redirect. SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

October 10, 2023

User:BSveen

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

Old userpage, but some of the statements on this user page are WP:UPNOT and some are defamatory. I was going to speedy as G10 but I want to get a second opinion before deletion. Awesome Aasim 23:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nothing there is defamatory, you just don't like it. 2603:7000:CF0:82A0:9C5A:9C94:17B0:9C0D (talk) 04:34, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete - user has been gone since 2005. As for the content, I have mixed feelings:
    • I personally disagree with BSveen's fear and dislike of Muslims.
    • Some of the links are to what I'd call Islamo-skeptical or Islamo-wary sites. Some are links to downright anti-Muslim hate sites.
    • I'm normally inclined to give people a lot of latitude towards what they put on their user pages, including strong political or religious feelings I disagree with.
    • In this case, however, the net effect of the whole page is to make this place very hostile to our Muslim colleagues. It's a page of mean stuff they don't deserve to see.
--A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 04:52, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You disagree with his views, therefore they must be deleted? 23.246.110.58 (talk) 22:12, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Strong Delete as inflammatory and divisive, with obvious anti-Muslim content. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 13:20, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Given the two strong delete arguments above, I decided to proceed with a speedy deletion nomination under G10. Of course an admin can revert or can snow close this. Awesome Aasim 14:32, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Strong Keep the user dislikes a certain religion. Big deal. There's nothing "defamatory" about not liking Islam. Not to break WP:AGF, but the nominator claims to be a proud member of that religion. Should we delete his userpage too since other users might find his religion offensive? 23.246.110.58 (talk) 22:14, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    the user dislikes a certain religion. Big deal. That is not the issue. The issue is that it is written like a personal attack. Coupled with links to discredit conspiracy theorist bigoted sources it just Please take a look at WP:UPNOT - specifically, saying that you are against a religion can be interpreted as a WP:PA. Specifically WP:POLEMIC. Awesome Aasim 23:36, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Also take a look at WP:ATA - WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is rarely a good reason why something should be kept. Awesome Aasim 23:38, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Moot as the page has now been blanked. I highly doubt that BSveen will return after 18 years to restore the content. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:29, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    As the content as been restored, Blank per SmokeyJoe. Much as I strongly disagree with this user's views on the supposed "Islamification" of Europe, such views were only barely outside of the mainstream in the wake of 9/11 and 7/7 - I remember hearing the arguments. I don't think it is "defamatory" in any way. Furthermore it was from an editor with over 1k edits, not someone who made no other contributions to Wikipedia. They have long departed, just blank it and move on. Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:29, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete - Inflammatory leftover from departed user. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:44, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Blank only. “Inflammatory” is exaggeration. Good decline of the g10 tagging. There is a big difference between someone stating an opinion of their own that may be racist, and asserting something racist about a racial group. And in any case, old uncomfortable things like this should be quietly dealt with by blanking. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:44, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete per WP:UPNOT Questions? four OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:09, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Blank: If this was userpage was the only edits by this user, it'd be a slamdunk delete and nothere block if it were recent, but this user has made 1k edits. The contents of this page discriminate against Islam and contradict UPNOT. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 06:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    For the record, I restored the contents of the page per the MfD banner: 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. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 06:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

October 7, 2023

Draft:Tool Tower Defense

Draft:Tool Tower Defense (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Blatantly promotional draft now orphaned as the advertising account has been permablocked. Admin rejected a CSD tag I put on it and told me to take it here to MfD AntiDionysius (talk) 14:25, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hear, hear. Yeet 'n' delete. JayCubby (talk) 20:53, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete as promotion of a YouTube site, which being the sole source makes everything on the page unusable. WP:TNT applies. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:05, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete looks like an obvious G11. Tehonk (talk) 22:39, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak Keep - It needed rejecting, and was rejected. I concur with the admin who declined the G11; not blatant enough to speedy-delete a draft. Leave it as a honey pot. If any new account resubmits it or edits it, file an SPI. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:06, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete per SmokeyJoe. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 13:18, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete: This is unacceptable and should've been rejected (as it was), but, without tenacious resubmission, there isn't really a reason to delete and it'll get G13ed in 6 month's time anyways. With that being said, however, since we're already here, and the creator has been blocked, this doesn't need to lay around. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 06:14, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Cyberpunk2077JohnnySilverhand
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. ✗plicit 12:12, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Cyberpunk2077JohnnySilverhand

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Cyberpunk2077JohnnySilverhand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This was nominated for deletion before by Praxidicae, and closed as delete, but then restored at DRV as there was not a clear consensus. I am nominating again, as this is an obvious vandal we should not be giving attention to (per WP:DENY), the page is not particularly helpful in its current form and appears to have become a target for other vandals. --Ferien (talk) 20:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Delete. I'm inclined to agree with some comments from the previous MfD. It's not an informative page, and it's an obvious enough vandal. If we need to reference anything, the Chinese LTA page would probably suffice. And in this case SPI can be used for any other information. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:34, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete. There is nothing worth keeping about this page; on top of that, it is becoming a target for other vandals, as the nominator noted. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 01:18, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete per checkuser User:Zzuuzz.
MfD should have no authority over SPI and LTA subpages, as it lacks competence. Deletion of these pages should be entirely at the discretion of checkusers and SPI clerks. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:13, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
SmokeyJoe, had I not created this MfD, the page would just be sat there, as a vandal playground with no useful info to anyone. If deletion of them should be entirely at the discretion of checkusers and clerks (not even of "normal" admins), creation should be the same - there are quite a few LTA pages out there that do not meet the conditions laid out at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse. SPI clerks and checkusers already have quite a lot on their plate, why should we add to that? --Ferien (talk) 21:33, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Because, few participants at MfD have sufficient knowledge experience etc with SPI and LTA. If you want to help in this area, ask at WT:SPI. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:09, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete as per Zzuuzz. Ferien writes: SPI clerks and checkusers already have quite a lot on their plate, why should we add to that? Yes. Do not add the responsibility of randomly reviewing at MFD LTA files that are nominated by editors who are uselessly trying to help. Checkusers and clerks already do all of the useful work on long-term abuse. We don't need to have random users randomly coming up with their own ideas. Leave LTA to SPI clerks. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Or become an SPI Clerk. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:34, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete: Not an LTA. I, however, disagree with the sentiment that MfD isn't the right place for this. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 06:17, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Old business


October 2, 2023

Draft:A17 Bionic

Draft:A17 Bionic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​
(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 01:49, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not 6 months old yet, but stale draft that contains purely speculation, nothing that isn't present in the Apple A17 article that has been created in the meantime. alexiaa (talk) 11:38, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Question - Why are some editors in a hurry to delete stale drafts? What harm do they do? Why spend additional time by the volunteers at MFD?
  • Redirect to Apple A17. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:13, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • This is not your average everyday stale draft. It's a speculative draft that basically never really served a purpose, though I don't know if there's a policy against such. Technically it wouldn't really hurt anyone to leave it there for two more months, but I asked what to do about it in #wikipedia-en and received no response so I thought I'd ask here.
    • (I'm fine with a redirect outcome, but it's worth noting that the title isn't even correct – "Bionic" was a good prediction but it's actually "Pro", and either way it doesn't follow the naming convention of the existing chip articles.) alexiaa (talk) 21:24, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 01:49, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Delete due to its speculative nature, and for being obviously stalled. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 11:43, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Closed discussions

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates