Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

(Redirected from Wikipedia:MFD)

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)
  • 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

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

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.

Edit PageName:

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

for a second or subsequent nomination use {{mfdx|2nd}}


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
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.
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
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 Dec Jan Feb Mar Total
CfD 0 0 3 24 27
TfD 0 0 0 0 0
MfD 0 0 0 0 0
FfD 0 0 0 3 3
RfD 0 0 0 42 42
AfD 0 0 0 12 12

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.

March 24, 2023


Portal:War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Derelict portal. Of the 61 "featured" articles in rotation, 48 have been delisted. Under WP:MILHIST ratings, two are now A-class, six are GA class, ten are B class, twenty-six are C class, and four are Start class. Portal:War/Featured article/5 points to Lord's Resistance Army, a B-class article, instead of Lord's Resistance Army insurgency (also B class), where LRA was moved in 2008. These entries have all been copy-pasted from their host article rather than transcluded. Very few of these entries have been updated since they were created in 2005 and 2006. This has led to some inaccurate/outdated information being presented to readers, such as the fact that apparently no Medal of Honor has been awarded since 2020. Portal:War/Featured picture/1 is a deleted image. Portal:War/Featured picture/7 claims that the M4 carbine is heavier than the M16A2 (it is definitely not!). Someone has gone to the trouble of transcluding entries on Portal:War/Selected conflict, however something must be done about the images. Some of the entries are causing text sandwiching issues on my screen in Vector 2022.

See also: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Tanks (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Crusades, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Biological warfare (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Royal Navy and every other military-related portal deletion. Schierbecker (talk) 23:20, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Delete per nom, but I'm interested in this portal being substantially reworked during this discussion: not featuring sub-par articles, switching to transclusion and implementing more robustness in every other potentially needed way, so that not much maintenance is needed (making it so that the kind of information that is likely to become outdated and needs reviewing from time to time is not even presented on the portal in the first place), not presenting false/outdated information, fixing formatting issues identified by the nom. If all of this is done I will switch to keep. —Alalch E. 10:37, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete - Moribund portal, lack of maintenance; actually harmful for users to keep it around in its current state... --WaltClipper -(talk) 14:53, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Unsourced information is not valuable

Wikipedia:Unsourced information is not valuable (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

I suggest this page for userification, i.e., that it be moved to User:Veverve/Unsourced information is not valuable.

I started to clean up some of the grammar errors, but I gave up because I decided that this is sufficiently far from the community's views that it is better kept as a user essay. As examples:

  1. "In the overwhelming majority of cases, adding unsourced information on Wikipedia amounts to nothing more than digital graffitis." – Check Special:RecentChanges for unsourced contributions, and see whether that lines up with your idea of graffiti or any other type of vandalism.
  2. "References which are too imprecise to identify where the information is supposed to be found in the source, or to identify the source itself, can be discarded. Those include, but are not limited to: * works with no publication date" – Most websites don't give a publication date, and we don't discard them.
  3. Loads of unsourced data and material on something are useless noise, for they do not comply with Verifiability. Information in itself is worthless. – The author seems to have confused cited with verifiable, as in able to be verified. "Smoking tobacco is a major risk factor for lung cancer" is verifiable regardless of whether it's cited.
    Also, sometimes that "useless noise" is an effort at explaining something in simpler language or building the web to related content. For example, one of the author's most recent edits was to added the uncited statement that "Heresy has a specific meaning in the Catholic Church when it applies to someone's belief", and I don't think that contribution is either "useless noise" or "worthless". If we believed that information per se was worthless, none of us would be here.

I'm all in favor of full-throated support for citing sources (after all, I am the top editor for Wikipedia:Inline citations), but this particular one seems to go beyond support for citations towards an uncollegial approach to building the encyclopedia.

(The author is unfortunately blocked again, so he won't be able to comment.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:50, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Tentative userfy Wait - We certainly allow latitude for users to post essays in project-space to share their opinions or editing philosophies. However, this is not a well-constructed essay. It contains too many sections, many of which do not flow in a logical order. Moreover, as stated above, some of the statements such as {"loads of unsourced data and material ... are useless noise" are just misleading at best and completely false at worst.
That being the case, I am not a fan of nominating essays for deletion when the author who would otherwise be able to rebut/revise is temporarily blocked. I'd much rather suspend this MfD until after the block is lifted. There is no harm in waiting. --WaltClipper -(talk) 15:01, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait: for Veverve's block to expire so that they can participate in any discussion.  — Archer1234 (t·c) 16:06, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft:Adam Sandoval

Draft:Adam Sandoval (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Repeatedly-recreated vanity puff piece by agent of the subject; no evidence of actual notability Orange Mike | Talk 21:53, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft:Amar Jit Singh Sandhu

Draft:Amar Jit Singh Sandhu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

First let me declare that I have no interest in the fate of this draft. This is a procedural and a neutral nomination based upon the apparent desire of the main, but not sole, contributing editor to have it deleted. The history shows that they added a PROD (inappropriate for Draft space) and blanked the page. I reverted this on the simple basis that they are neither the sole contributor, nor are they the creating editor, unless there is use of multiple accounts, something I do not allege. I recognise that Drafts are rarely deleted at MfD, and will not argue for deletion, nor for retention. I have reviewed it and declined it some time ago, and shall not review it again. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:08, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

March 23, 2023

Draft:Ram subramanian

Draft:Ram subramanian (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Appears to be a hoax. The vast majority of the sources here (down to the misleadingly labeled IMDB link at the bottom of the page) are about a man named "Mahesh Bhatt". — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:03, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Not a hoax: The editor had copied content from Mahesh Bhatt probably to write his draft within an established layout for a director. I have removed the leftover unattributed copied portions, and what is left is just an unsourced biography. —Alalch E. 16:55, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • SEVEN MINUTES after the draft is created, it goes straight to MfD? Give me a break! Keep per WP:NDRAFT. --WaltClipper -(talk) 17:12, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep unsourced biography draft as having been nominated too soon, and as not being critically bad with respect to BLP so that it would warrant deletion. —Alalch E. 17:19, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep: Let the submission for review and iterative review process take its course. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:14, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

March 21, 2023

Draft:2023 Israeli municipal elections

Draft:2023 Israeli municipal elections (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Article is a duplicate of a mainspace article Totalstgamer (talk) 14:18, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • History merge, noting User:Totalstgamer’s 14:27, 10 January 2023‎ copy-paste, following a period of accidental content forking. Remarkably, the content forking occurs with clean non-overlapping periods, making the History merge viable. Or redirect per WP:SRE. I recommend one of these over deletion, even though Totalstgamer might have the draft deleted simply by invoking WP:G7. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:02, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

March 20, 2023

Portal:Japanese football

Portal:Japanese football (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This page shows potential but needs further development before it is ready for Portal: namespace. Userify for now? Certes (talk) 15:10, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Is that something we'd do for portals? I can't tell whether or not they'd be subject to the same criteria as articlespace. It's fairly recent too, about a month old. Personally, I'd much rather weak keep this to see if there will be any further development. At the present time, it's not harming the encyclopedia to have it around, much as I feel that portals don't occupy a useful niche. --WaltClipper -(talk) 13:16, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In fact, we have basically no guidelines when it comes to portals now, since WP:POG is a failed proposal, nor do we have any conditions under which we'd CSD. We're in portal limbo. --WaltClipper -(talk) 13:18, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

March 19, 2023

Draft:Compact crossover SUV

Draft:Compact crossover SUV (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This article was created by an editor subsequently blocked then banned for prolific (and still ongoing) sockpuppetry. As this editor can no longer legitimately edit it then the only reason to keep it would be if someone else would take up the mantle - and no-one is doing so. However, there has been a subsequent edit to the page by one of the socks so it continues to be one incentive bringing the sock repeatedly back and it would be best to delete it now rather than wait until WP:G13 applies. Dorsetonian (talk) 09:54, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Report your observations at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MrDavr.
Don’t be a random user attempting SPI clerking at MfD. If the checkusers or SPI clerks thinks this should be deleted, let them say so. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:08, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fair points. The page was created prior to the block for sockpuppetry so I had not expected that would be an appropriate venue. Dorsetonian (talk) 11:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
“Subsequent edits by socks” is something to add to the SPI case page. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:02, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Redirect to Crossover (automobile)#Compact crossover SUV (C-segment). Drafts should not be used to fork mainspace content. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:12, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Redirect as per SmokeyJoe. We don't want to delete a valid search term from draft space. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:00, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

March 18, 2023

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cats/Selected article
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. Salvio giuliano 21:56, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Portal:Cats/Selected article

Portal:Cats/Selected article (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This subpage and associated sub-subpages were recently replaced by a different template in Portal:Cats while I was cleaning that portal up. Therefore, I am requesting that this subpage and its sub-subpages be deleted as unused/deprecated. SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:45, 18 March 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

Closed discussions

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates