Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, 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]

Krina (film)[change source]

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Upcoming Indian movie, contested QD ("advertising"), therefore we go through RfD. Let me perhaps add: WP is no crystal ball, so if the movie is not "about to be released", we should probably delete the article, no matter what it looks. Eptalon (talk) 07:20, 26 May 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]

  • There seems a flood of Indian films which have not been shown and so cannot be professionally assessed. They should all be deleted as lacking notability, and also as advertising. This one seems to be a translation of a page on another wiki, see its non-Simple categories. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:22, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete per my same vote on a related article. Created by a now locked xwiki sock/spammer. Chrissymad (talk) 15:09, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 07:20, 2 June 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Reshma(mallu actress)[change source]

Reshma(mallu actress) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Indian actress, active in B-movies. Contested quick deletion (notability). Article has references, some of which are in English. I propose to go through regular RfD, which will give all involved parties time not voice their opinion. Eptalon (talk) 07:09, 26 May 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]

  • There's no evidence for notability. The links are to porn industry shills. Where is the independent professional critique? Why are we looking at this? Delete. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:08, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete created by an xwiki sock/spammer. Chrissymad (talk) 15:08, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 07:09, 2 June 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Tanisha Singh[change source]

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Article about an Indian model/actress, who has been active in TV commercials, TV productions and movies. She won 'Miss Mumbai' in 2008. Article has references, all in English; some may confer notability. Article was deleted from EnWP (notability). It was nominated for QD (notability) here as well, but this was contested. I therefore propose we use the regular RfD process. Eptalon (talk) 07:03, 26 May 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 07:03, 2 June 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Suman Kumar Mallick[change source]

Suman Kumar Mallick (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

BRPever has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Subject lacks sufficient sources and context, reference says he was choosen chief of a non-notable organization. The context also mention him as a member of a political party but that might not be enough to claim notability. Thanks BRP ever 11:20, 25 May 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]

Sir,I have now added sufficient context to the subject and I have also added sufficient references which shows the notability of the subject . This page belongs to a notable politician of India and it shouldn't be deleted because people of India wants to know about their leader in simple words in Simple English Wikipedia .

  • Delete Non-notable politican. This same issue (page being created, deletion discussion, etc.) ensued on the English Wikipedia, resulting in extensive block evasion. Vermont (talk) 14:54, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
  • SEWP is the first hit on Google, after a few social media sites, and youtube. Very likely, the politician is not notable, so delete.--Eptalon (talk) 20:40, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Being a normal person doing sensible jobs is to be not notable for an encyclopedia, so delete. And let me add that the En wiki sockpuppet investigation deserves looking at. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:55, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 11:20, 1 June 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Roop-Mard Ka Naya Swaroop[change source]

Roop-Mard Ka Naya Swaroop (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: A TV series, in Hindi, starting end of May of 2018. Potential reach 400-500 million people, real reach: no idea. Originally listed at QD G12 (copyright), I have not found the page it is copied from. In contrast my last nomination below, there is a plot section, so we at least get an idea what this series is going to be about. Problem though: The series is not in English, so I don't know if we are the right wiki? - Btw: Searching for the name of the series in Google turns up SEWP as first hit, so there are probably notability issues as well... Eptalon (talk) 09:00, 20 May 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]

  • Update: Plot section has been removed by original author (copyright issues)--Eptalon (talk) 14:31, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I didn't link to the specific sources in the QD since there were so many. Search results on one sentence that lead to more. The "sources" are two blogs that are clearly advertising and pr. No byline for authors by name on these pr blogs, so no accountability. No coverage in reliable news outlets. If a television program becomes notable after being broadcast for a while it will get direct coverage (not just a tacked on mention in an article about another TV program) in more prominent and reliable press. This hasn't even been broadcast yet (if ever really). Delete. We are not here to provide seo and links for promotional purposes. --Gotanda (talk) 01:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. Promotional with no independent reports. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:43, 25 May 2018 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 09:00, 27 May 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Krishna Chali London[change source]

Krishna Chali London (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Article about an (upcoming?) Indian TV series. What we have is probably part of the EnWP article. Problem though: According to the article, the original language of the series is Hindi. With this, it can potentially reach between 400-500 million people who will understand it (as Hindustani) mostly in the northern part of India, and part of Pakistan. Nevertheless, from the article we have I have no idea on what the reach of the programme is. We also get no idea what the programme is about. If these issues cannot be addressed, I propose deletion; in any case: I am looking for community input. Eptalon (talk) 08:30, 20 May 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]

  • Star plus is a popular indian channel and the language is hindi and as anything broadcasted nationally is notable I am with keep here.-BRP ever 14:49, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
    looking at en:List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India, Hindi looks very prominent (420 million speakers, compared to 80m for Bengali, 75m for Telugu, and 70m for Marathi). Put differently: 42% of the Indian population speaks Hindi (as of 2001)...--Eptalon (talk) 20:27, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I Think You Should not delete the article Krishna chali london because it is not copyrighted. Akir333456 (talk) 14:13, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Not being copyrighted is not a reason to keep an article. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:21, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I added some info about the storyline from IMDB, and I think as long as the channel is popular, that gives it some notability, so I'll go with a keep MohamedTalk 21:46, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • As above with Roop-Mard Ka Naya Swaroop, the "sources" are a business blog that is clearly advertising and pr. One of those stories isn't primarily about the program. No coverage in reliable news outlets. If a television program becomes notable after being broadcast for a while it will get direct coverage (not just a tacked on mention at the very end an article about another TV program as in this case) in more prominent and reliable press. This hasn't even been broadcast yet. Delete. We are not here to provide seo and links for promotional purposes. --Gotanda (talk) 01:09, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as promotional. It doesn't have coverage in reliable independent sources. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:46, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment/question: Could someone please point to the notability guideline that says being on a national or popular network makes a program notable? That seems at odds with the guideline that notability is not inherited. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:21, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
W:WP:NMEDIA only says likely to be notable but I have seen this being mentioned in many RFDs in enwiki like 1, 2, 3 and so on. Plus the show is already aired and has produced around 5 episodes. The search results have increased since the release and the article has some reliable sources like The Times of India. I think this shows increase in media coverage. As star plus is a popular tv-channel and as a large population is able to understand Hindi I thought the show might be considered notable. But if it is by any means for the promotional purpose or if it is still too soon then it can be deleted.-BRP ever 02:23, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Delete. I do not see any professional critique in the Times of India links. I have never been happy with the idea that because it is on a national channel it must be notable. Because a channel is notable does not mean all its content is notable. Surely that's obvious? The present media are channel-rich and content-poor, because technology has boosted the means of broadcast without increasing the funds for content creation. We should stick to principles: articles should show why they are notable, giving reliable sources. In cases like this, the sources should link to critiques by professional film and tv critics. Otherwise we will most often just be duplicating IMDb. It's not our place to advertise films. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:34, 26 May 2018 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 08:30, 27 May 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]

Related pages[change source]