Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:BEFORE)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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 [change source]

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 deletion[change source]

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|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/2018/(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 deletion[change source]

See also: Category:Deletion requests

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 user[change source]

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.

Discussions[change source]

See also: Wikipedia:Deletion review
  • 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 discussions[change source]

Seven dirty words[change source]

Seven dirty words (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Probably the article is copied from enwp; I had a quick glance, and there are several passages that are a little on the complex side. In addition, we have issues with (realtively many) red-links, and the usual missing categories, that come when an article is copy-pasted from enwp without much simplification. I do however also have another observation: This seems to be some kind of artistic programme, in what way is it encyclopedic? -I owuld thererfore opt for deletion, but go thorugh regular RfD, given that this article raises a number of issues.If kept, the article must be encyclopedic and simple enough for our average reader... Eptalon (talk) 22:12, 16 October 2018 (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.

Discussion[change source]

  • Comment It does need to be simplified and attributed. But it is most certainly encyclopedic. It is possibly one of the most famous (english) comedy routines that have ever been done if not the most famous. But the article is more about the topic that the routine is making fun of. It is very much notable. -DJSasso (talk) 10:49, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  • The article is a word for-word copy of the complex En wiki version, and so does meet QD requirements. The bit of the contents which is worthwhile is the section about Lenny Bruce and George Carlin. The article, like so many others, is American-centered. All tv systems round the globe have similar self-censorship. The BBC has had a list of words you can't say since before WW II! All communist states have been similarly uptight, plus bans on speaking against the state, plus bans against unauthorized printing. The issue of words-you-can't-say is really best dealt with under obscenity, which is what it is really about. I would delete this page, and create one for media sensorship. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:23, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 22:12, 23 October 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Dinosaur Mountain[change source]

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

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability not shown for this museum exhibit. We don't have an article on the museum itself, and neither does enwiki. Auntof6 (talk) 05:47, 15 October 2018 (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.

Discussion[change source]

  • Delete. This fails for lack of evidence for notability. In any event, it would be peculiar to focus on the displays, which are simply models, and there is nothing special about that. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:32, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Apart from lacking references, the name is not sufficiently unique. If I am talking about the Atomium, it is pretty clear that it is a structure bulit for the world exhibition in Brussels, in 1958. Same for the Eiffel Tower (bilt for the wolrd exhibition 1889). Given the name of the article, this could be pretty mch any attraction in a theme park). So there are two options: extend, and make sufficiently unique, or delete. I propose deleting...--Eptalon (talk) 19:50, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 05:47, 22 October 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Jimmy Hibbert[change source]

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

BRPever has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable. There are no sources to verify the notability. BRP ever 17:17, 11 October 2018 (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.

Discussion[change source]

  • Delete as not notable. Not widely known, and doing jobs is not evidence of notability. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:22, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm inclined towards keeping this. He has been the voice artist and/or scriptwriter for multiple notable cartoon and children's shows originating in the UK but seen throughout the world. He was also a founder member of a moderately notable band, see en:Alberto y Lost Trios Paranoias. I've added three references to the article. The one from the Manchester Evening News has a reasonable amount of biographical information. Voceditenore (talk) 08:00, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 17:17, 18 October 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Jacksepticeye[change source]

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

Macdonald-ross has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Subject is is a YouTuber who is not notable by virtue of the lack of independent professional reviews. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:50, 11 October 2018 (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.

Discussion[change source]

This request is due to close on 14:50, 18 October 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Recently closed deletion discussions[change source]

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.

G4'd -DJSasso (talk) 12:49, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Mohammad ghorbanpour[change source]

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

Operator873 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable artist. Many of the references have nothing to do with the subject. Others are blatantly bad references like YouTube and another wiki Operator873talkconnect 20:03, 15 October 2018 (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.

Discussion[change source]

  • G4 only applies to articles that have gone through an Rfd. Not speedies. (No comment on if it should actually be deleted here yet) -DJSasso (talk) 12:34, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Now that I have looked into it, it is a delete. Not a speedy though since it talks about being made an official singer for the country which while a silly claim is a claim. -DJSasso (talk) 12:41, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:03, 22 October 2018 (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  Keep. Withdrawn following improvements. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:17, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Aristeia[change source]

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

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I was borderline on whether to qd, but decided to go with rfd. This is basically a dicdef, which should be deleted. Auntof6 (talk) 11:30, 15 October 2018 (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.

Discussion[change source]

  • Keep Not at all a dictdef. There is a deference between explaining the meaning of something and a dictdef. If you look at wiktionary you will see what a dictdef looks like. This is a notable topic, though could definitely be expanded. -DJSasso (talk) 14:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I realize now that it was much improved since nomination, much better than it was when nominated. -DJSasso (talk)
  • I had expanded and referenced the article and came here to say keep. But it looks like I don't need to. SMirC-smile.svg This concept has been widely written about and has articles on the English, German, French, Spanish and Italian Wikipedias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Voceditenore (talkcontribs)
  • Comment: @Some Gadget Geek: When an RFD is closed because the article gets improved enough to be kept, that is not a snow closure. @Voceditenore: The fact that a topic is widely written about and has articles elsewhere doesn't mean that the article here is necessarily kept: it depends on what's in the article here. All that being said, I thank Voceditnore for their improvements. I think the article is now in good shape and I withdraw the nomination. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:15, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 11:30, 22 October 2018 (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.  --Auntof6 (talk) 04:43, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Marc Sellam[change source]

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

EulerObama has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not a notable topic. Reason : This article has been already deleted for this reason from french and english wikipedia (double deletion), see [1], [2]. Thanks. EulerObama (talk) 15:48, 6 October 2018 (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.

Discussion[change source]

  • Yes, I think this fails notability. Delete. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:33, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 15:48, 13 October 2018 (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. as not notable per comments BRP ever 18:26, 14 October 2018 (UTC).

Chetan Kumar N R[change source]

Chetan Kumar N R (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Hiàn has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Contested QD and BRPever suggested taking the article to RfD. The article is of a promotional nature with extremely weak claims with little references to back the claims up. A quick Google search turns up little to no third-party references. Also worth noting is the cross-wiki spam by related IPs at lawiki and wikidata. Hiàn (talk) 16:16, 7 October 2018 (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.

Discussion[change source]

  • Keep Shall I add more reference?2409:4071:200E:339D:0:0:22B0:10AC (talk)
    • Yes please, as many reliable, significant, secondary sources as you can. Thanks-BRP ever 17:51, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
    • Key words are verifiable third-party references. Half the links you have added are user-generated and not verifiable and you still haven't demonstrated in any way whatsoever how this person is notable. Hiàn (talk) 18:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - as is, notability not established. Article largely relies on questionable references like the movie database that shall not be named and buzz feed. Operator873talkconnect 19:15, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. Clearly not notable. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:13, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Keep One more reference added2409:4071:200E:339D:0:0:22B0:10AC (talk)
I have struck the second "keep" from this IP. You can only vote once. Voceditenore (talk)
  • Delete This totally fails notability. Delete this with no prejudice against the article being recreated once notability is established. Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 14:25, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

*Keep This is clearly notable.Wikibot46 (talk)

Note that Wikibot46 also attempted to create Pavan Kumar N R on the Portuguese Wikipedia. It was quickly deleted. Voceditenore (talk) 13:10, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Fails to pass notability criteria. All references are either user-generated or PR pieces, including those on HighBeam to which I have a subscription. They are clearly labeled there as the source being PR Newswire. Note also that articles on this subject have been deleted numerous times on English Wikipedia as Pavan Kumar N R (twice), Pavan kumar n r, and N R Pavan Kumar. An article on one of his mobile app inventions SweChat has been deleted twice. The IP who created the article here is currently blocked on English Wikipedia [3] as a sock of the globally locked account User:N R Pavan Kumar who created 30 sockpuppet accounts on English Wikipedia in his attempt to get his autobiography published there. Voceditenore (talk) 12:50, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
@BRPever, Vermont: Seven days have passed; please delete this page so its Wikidata item can be deleted. Mahir256 (talk) 18:21, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 16:16, 14 October 2018 (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.  --Auntof6 (talk) 02:52, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Don't Wanna Think About You[change source]

Don't Wanna Think About You (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Title song of a children's movie, released in 2004. The movie is a sequel., to anotrher one, no idea if it saw theatrical release. Article is a little on the complex side (enWP copy/paste), and has many red-links. Article was created by an IP editor. In short: I propsoe dleeting it. Eptalon (talk) 23:02, 5 October 2018 (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.

Discussion[change source]

  • Delete as unsimplified copy of En article. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:19, 12 October 2018 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 23:02, 12 October 2018 (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 pages[change source]