Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

(Redirected from Wikipedia:RfD)
If you think a page should be deleted, read the deletion policy to make sure.
Then follow these instructions on how to request a page for deletion. To find more information on what discussed deletions and quick deletions are:
PLEASE READ THIS

Before nominating: checks and alternatives Edit

Prior to nominating article(s) for deletion, please be sure to:

A. Read and understand these policies and guidelines
  1. The Wikipedia deletion policy, which explains valid grounds for deletion.
  2. The main four guidelines and policies that inform deletion discussions: notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), reliable sources (WP:RS), and what Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)
  3. Subject-specific notability guidelines, which can be found at Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines
B. Carry out these checks
  1. Confirm that the article does not meet the criteria for quick deletion.
  2. If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources. (See step D.)
  3. Review the article's history to check for potential vandalism or poor editing.
  4. Read the article's talk page for previous nominations and/or that your objections haven't already been dealt with.
  5. Check "What links here" in the article's sidebar, to see how the page is used and referenced within Wikipedia.
  6. Check if there are interlanguage links, also in the sidebar, which may lead to more developed and better sourced articles. Likewise, search for native-language sources if the subject has a name in a non-Latin alphabet (such as Japanese or Greek), which is often in the lede.
C. Consider whether the article could be improved rather than deleted
  1. If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for RfD.
  2. If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.
  3. If an article has issues try first raising your concerns on the article's talk page, with the main contributors, and/or adding a cleanup tag, such as {{notability}}, {{hoax}}, {{original research}}, or {{advert}}; this ensures readers are aware of the problem and may act to fix it.
  4. If the topic is not important enough to merit an article on its own, consider merging or redirecting to an existing article. This should be done particularly if the topic name is a likely search term.
D. Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability
  1. The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects.
  2. If you find a lack of sources, you've completed basic due diligence before nominating. However, if a quick search does find sources, this does not always mean an RfD on a sourcing basis is unwarranted. If you spend more time examining the sources, and determine that they are insufficient, e.g., because they only contain passing mention of the topic, then an RfD nomination may still be appropriate.
  3. If you find that adequate sources do appear to exist, the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination. Instead, you should consider citing the sources, or at minimum apply an appropriate template to the page that flags the sourcing concern. Common templates include {{unreferenced}}, {{refimprove}}, {{third-party}}, {{primary sources}} and {{one source}}.

Discussed deletionEdit

Put the deletion tag on the article.
  1. Click "Change source" at the top of the page to be deleted.
  2. In the edit box, add this tag: {{rfd|REASON}}. Put it at the top of the page, above the rest of the text. Then, replace the text "REASON" with a short reason why the page should be deleted. Do not be too specific here. You can add more details on the discussion page (see below).
  • It is a good idea to write a change summary to let others know what you are doing. You can say "nominating for deletion", "requesting deletion", or something like that.
  1. Click "Save changes" at the bottom to save the page with the deletion tag at the top.
  • You can also check the "Watch this page" check box to add the page to your watchlist. This lets you know if the page for deletion has been changed. If the deletion tag is removed any time before the discussion is closed, it should be put back.
Create a discussion page.
  1. If the deletion tag has been added to the page, a box should appear at the top of the article with a link saying "Click here to create a discussion page!" Click that link.
  2. You should be taken to a page starting with "Creating Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/..." along with the current year and the name of the article to be deleted. In the edit box, the following tag should have already been added: {{RfD/Preload/Template}} . Replace the text PLACE REASON HERE with a more detailed reason why the page should be deleted.
  • It is helpful to include links to the various policy pages about Wikipedia (that begin with Wikipedia:). Here are some examples of this: "This article is [[Wikipedia:COMPLEX|not easy to understand]]" or "Not a [[Wikipedia:notable|notable]] topic''. This will make others more aware of why the page is not acceptable under Wikipedia's policies.
  1. Click "Save changes" to save the new discussion page when you are done.
  • A change summary you can write for this page is "creating discussion page", "starting deletion discussion", or something like that.
  • As with the page for deletion, you can check the "Watch the page" box. This will let you know if someone else has replied to your discussion.
List it here
  1. Copy the title of the discussion page to the clipboard. You can do this by dragging the mouse over the text from "Wikipedia" to the end of the page title to highlight it, then right-clicking and selecting "Copy".
  2. Go to the list of deletion requests, and click "change source" beside the words "Current deletion request discussions".
  3. At the top of the list of discussions, paste the title from the clipboard (right-click and select "Paste"). Add a pair of curly brackets before and after the title to make a template that will copy the content of the discussion page onto the main deletion page, like this:
{{Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2020/(name of page to be deleted)}}
  1. Finally, click "Save changes" to add the discussion to the list. If the page saves successfully, you should see your deletion discussion at the top of the list. And that's it!

Quick deletionEdit

If you think a page has nonsense content, add {{non}} to the top of the page.

If you think a page does not say why the subject is important, add {{notable}} to the top of the page.

If you think a page should be deleted per other quick deletion rules, add {{QD|reason}} to the top of the page.

Notifying the userEdit

Generally, you should try to be civil and tell the user that created the page to join the discussion talking about the page. This can be done by adding {{subst:RFDNote|page to be deleted}} ~~~~ to the bottom of their talkpage.

DiscussionsEdit

  • The discussion is not a vote. Please make suggestions on what action to take, and support your suggestion with reasons.
  • Please look at the article before you make a suggestion. Do not make an opinion using only the information given by the nominator. Looking at the history of the article may help to understand the situation.
  • Please read other comments and suggestions. They may have helpful information.
  • Start your comments or suggestions on a new line. Start with * and sign after your comment by adding ~~~~ to the end. If you are responding to another editor, put your comment directly below theirs and make sure your comment is indented (using more than one *).
  • New users can make suggestions, but their ideas may not be considered, especially if the suggestion seems to be made in bad faith. The opinion of users who had an account before the start of the request may be given more weight or importance.
  • Suggestions by users using "sock puppets" (more than one account belonging to the same person) and IP addresses will not be counted.
  • Please make only one suggestion. If you change your mind, change your first idea instead of adding a new one. The best way to do this is to put <s> before your old idea and </s> after it. For example, if you wanted to delete an article but now think it should be kept, you could put: "Delete Quick keep".
  • If you would like an article to be kept, you can improve the article and try to fix the problems given in the request for deletion. If the reasons given in the nomination are fixed by changing, the nomination can be withdrawn by the nominator, and the deletion discussion will be closed by an administrator.
  • Try to avoid confusing suggestions, such as delete and merge.

Remember: You do not have to make a suggestion for every nomination. You should think about not making a suggestion if:

  1. A nomination involves a topic that you do not know much about.
  2. Everyone has made the same suggestion and you agree with that suggestion.
  • All times are in UTC.

Current deletion request discussionsEdit

CMV MusicEdit

CMV Music (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Operator873 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Corresponding page on enwiki was deleted and I find the same reasons apply here. This agency doesn't meet notability requirements and fails the significant, in-depth coverage requirement. Operator873talkconnect 16:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 16:55, 4 April 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Intellectual Dark WebEdit

Intellectual Dark Web (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Gotanda has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: WP:OR and non-neutral POV Gotanda (talk) 05:37, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

  Keep There is a page on the English Wikipedia on the Intellectual Dark Web. A number of its members such as Dave Rubin have actually embraced the term. A number of notable publications including The Atlantic, Quillette, the Huffington Post, The National Review, The Nation and the New York Times have commented on the Intellectual Dark Web using that term to laud it, criticism it, or to dispute the existence of an Intellectual Dark Web. The phrase has become a common enough term vis-à-vis today’s parlance as it regards political discourse that it is relevant to provide its definition. Especially considering that most of the so-called Dark Web intellectuals such as Ben Shapiro, Dennis Prager and Jordan Peterson are notable and have their own pages on Wikipedia including the Simple English Wikipedia and as such I support the continued inclusion of this article. This request is due to close on 05:37, 4 April 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Khaoula SlimaniEdit

Khaoula Slimani (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

BRPever has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable, most of the sources are not reliable or do not establish notability and there isn't any claim that would make them notable in the content. I did a quick search on them to see if there are any reliable sources but couldn't find anything. The pages on other wikis are created by new users and I think it's another creation of paid editing circle. Thanks BRP ever 21:19, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete. I concur with the notability and paid editing arguments. Hiàn (talk) 22:38, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete - It is not notable because it does not have reliable sources. This article really needs more reliable sources. Arthurfan828 - CHAT 00:14, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
    • @Arthurfan828: The current state of sourcing of an article is not a valid reason for/against deletion. Please ensure that you are familiar with the relevant policy. Chenzw  Talk  00:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete. Claims are made under four categories, but I don't think she is notable under any of them. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 21:19, 3 April 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


KonkanilandEdit

Konkaniland (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Zaxxon0 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Hoax article by a chronic LTA. Zaxxon0 (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit


This request is due to close on 20:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


My Little Pony (2021 film)Edit

My Little Pony (2021 film) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Case of WP:CRYSTAL here as this could easily be canned with it over a year away. DJSasso (talk) 01:00, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 01:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Magneto (comics)Edit

Magneto (comics) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Zaxxon0 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: WP:OR Zaxxon0 (talk) 20:09, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

There are several comic book characters who have Wikipedia pages including on the Simple English Wikipedia. You and I have both worked on a number of them. Magneto has a page on the English Wikipedia. I’m perfectly fine with altering the page to incorporate more information vis-à-vis his relevance but I don’t believe it should be deleted. Of course, it is entirely possible for me to be wrong but if I am I would greatly appreciate an explanation of your reasons for disagreement. Thank you 198.200.115.29 (talk) 01:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC) Also I don’t believe that there is any original research in this article 198.200.115.29 (talk) 20:34, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

  Keep I added refs to the article and removed the content without ref. He is an important character, present in dozens of interwikis. He is also considered as one of the greatest villains of American HQs. ✍️A.WagnerC (talk) 03:32, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

  Keep As I said in the discussion earlier without casting a vote there is no original research within the page. 198.200.115.29 (talk) 15:24, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Keep There is nothing on the page that looks like OR to me. And he is very clearly a notable character in fiction. -DJSasso (talk) 17:36, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:09, 30 March 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Amit BhadanaEdit

Amit Bhadana (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

1997kB has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non notable, cross-wiki spam. No in-depth reference, just namedrops or interviews. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:30, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete - 1. There are only 3 references which there must be more sources per WP:BLP. 2. This page was deleted on The English Wikipedia multiple times. 3. Poor grammar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthurfan828 (talkcontribs) 11:26, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, though I note that the above 3 reasons by themselves are not strong (or even valid) reasons for deletion. Chenzw  Talk  12:51, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete. You-tubers need more than You Tube likes to make a person notable to us. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:56, 28 March 2020 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 15:30, 29 March 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Recently closed deletion discussionsEdit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  -- Enfcer (talk) 23:06, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Chiranjiv MakwanaEdit

Chiranjiv Makwana (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Chenzw has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Seemingly unremarkable author. Claims are unsupported and no evidence seems to be available, either. Chenzw  Talk  16:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

  Delete - 1. Everybodywiki is not a reliable source. 2. Clearly not notable, and last but not least, 3. Since there are very few sources and most of the very few sources are not reliable, some of the content may be misleading or fake. Arthurfan828 (talk) 17:08, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

  Delete Does not cite reliable sources --Thegooduser Let's Talk! :) 🍁 17:15, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

  Delete Per others, can't find any reliable sources or notability. Reception123 (talk) 17:15, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 16:46, 25 March 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Quickly deleted as a hoax. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:06, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Spingebill Boxpants The SeriesEdit

Spingebill Boxpants The Series (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Arthurfan828 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable. Arthurfan828 (talk) 20:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 20:42, 31 March 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  -- Enfcer (talk) 23:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Dano CashhEdit

Dano Cashh (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Thegooduser has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Does not seem to pass the musician notability guidelines. Article is promotional in the way it is worded. Little is found in a Google Search, the only mentions of him is very little in a press release blog. Thegooduser Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

  Delete I searched on google, and found no secondary sources. At the moment, there is no proof of notoriety. I can change my opinion if someone adds reliable references. ✍️A.WagnerC (talk) 14:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 02:56, 24 March 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  -- Enfcer (talk) 23:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Jalal MovagharEdit

Jalal Movaghar (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

BRPever has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Sorry to bring this again but I think the person in the article is not notable. I searched for sources but found none, google search gives ~400 results all either mirror sites or self-published sources by some LTA who claims to be her granddaughter and Persian text gives around 100 results which is the mention of the text in the English results I mentioned. This article has been deleted from many Wikipedias including English and Italian and is based on one source here whose reliability is questionable. There is no way to know when he became Mayor or what was the city even like back then. The article clearly doesn't meet WP:POLITICIAN. Thanks BRP ever 23:15, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete. Frankly long overdue. As far as I can tell, there isn't enough to indicate notability, not least when there isn't a single substantive source available. Hiàn (talk) 04:06, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 23:15, 23 March 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  -- Enfcer (talk) 22:59, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Rahul AhujaEdit

Rahul Ahuja (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Praxidicae has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: spammy paid for article sourced to fake media outlets run by blackhat SEO. Fails all notability criteria. Praxidicae (talk) 18:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

DiscussionEdit

  • Keep per WP:GNG. significant coverage in third-party sources He has been featured into wide international reputed media and news(General notability guideline - If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list and Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article ) and "significant coverage" in reliable sources which are already on wikipedia such as Hindustan times, The Statesman India, Zee news, The Hans India,International Business Times and he meets the criteria of independent mentions in reliable 3rd party sources.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. Miffsseek (talk) 07:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

  •   Keep Please Check All the links are reputable and he's one of the famous personalities .there will some of the mistakes in the content, but obviously, I haven't done anything which will prohibit the guidelines of Wikipedia. Miffsseek (talk) 11:16, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete - blatant advertising. I also note that some of the cited sources are merely press releases which do not originate from the publication's own journalists. Chenzw  Talk  16:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
    • @Chenzw: I have edited the article during the discussion and for your satisfaction I have only left the sources which mention that it is from the news desk specially "Reputable Media" such as ZEE NEWS and International Business Times. As Per the guidelines Sources do not have to be available online or written in English and A topic is "notable" in Wikipedia if the outside world has already "taken notice of it"( https://g.co/kgs/S28Wsj ) and if the source material exists, even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability. - Objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability. Sources of evidence include recognized reputable media sources, and other reliable sources generally. Miffsseek (talk) 04:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
      • If anything, your removal of content has led to even shakier grounds for the subject's notability (assuming said grounds existed in the first place). Coverage must be significant and independent of the subject, but what I am seeing here are tabloid pieces which merely serve to promote the subject. Number of Google hits is not a valid justification for the the subject's level of attention, unless you can give me conclusive evidence that only 1 person in the entire world has this name. Also, while you have rightly quoted the relevant guidelines, do note that "once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface." Chenzw  Talk  06:21, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
        • @Chenzw: "Referencing search engine results is a quick way to either present (what is notable)" The purpose of this is in part to ensure that articles are not erroneously deleted. Per the Guide To Deletion One is encouraged to edit a nominated article (noting in the discussion that you have done so if your edits are significant ones) and I kept the ones that you personally might consider fit . The fact that you haven't heard of something, or don't personally consider it worthy, are not criteria for deletion. example:- फेमस फ़ूड ब्लॉगर राहुल आहूजा ने किया यह काम, जानिए कैसे सोशल मीडिया पर मचा रहे धूम examining the types of hit arising (or their lack) often does provide useful information related to notability."reliable source" the definition of which for our purposes is "made available to the public in some form"."We do not have articles only because people and/or organizations are successful"; "We have articles rather because they are notable and have verifiable and reliable sources".I am a user who is making a well-argued, fact-based case based upon Wikipedia policy and in a civil manner within the provided guidelines. Miffsseek (talk) 07:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete. Not notable. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:58, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete Per Chenzw, Mac and nom. Not notable SEO spamming. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:50, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.


Related pagesEdit