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

Discussed deletion[change | change source]

Put the deletion tag on the article.
  1. Add this tag: {{rfd|REASON}} to the top of the page.
  2. Please use a change summary such as "nominated for deletion".
  3. Save the page.
  4. You can also check the "Watch this page" box to add the page to your watchlist. This lets you to know if the RfD tag is removed.
Create a discussion page.
  1. On the box that has appeared at the top of the article, click the link to create a discussion page.
  2. Type the page name and the reason you are requesting deletion in the right places.


List it here
  1. Look at the discussion page you have just made, and follow the instructions in the red box.
  2. Once you have done that, you may wish to remove that tag.

Quick deletion[change | 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 | 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 | 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 | change source]

Em Família[change | change source]

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

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: No indication of notability. Auntof6 (talk) 06:53, 29 May 2015 (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 | change source]

This request is due to close on 06:53, 5 June 2015 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


J-Pimp[change | change source]

J-Pimp (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rus793 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability; does not meet GNG. User:Rus793 (talk) 00:50, 29 May 2015 (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 | change source]

  • Delete. GNG is "general notability guidelines: if a topic has received important coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable". Article does not show this. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:56, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep. GNG is "general notability guidelines: if a topic has received important coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, J-Pimp presumed to be notable". This article show this on section Legal issues and has good reference. 2602:306:CFBE:D540:356F:A77:717B:76DA (talk)


This request is due to close on 00:50, 5 June 2015 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Pedestal[change | change source]

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

Hydriz has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Moved to Wiktionary (see wikt:pedestal) Hydriz (talk) 13:20, 24 May 2015 (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 | change source]

This request is due to close on 13:20, 31 May 2015 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Gross profit[change | change source]

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

Hydriz has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Moved to Wiktionary (see wikt:gross profit) Hydriz (talk) 13:15, 24 May 2015 (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 | change source]

  • Delete as a dicdef. I don't see much article potential. User:Rus793 (talk) 21:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. It is a dicdef. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:50, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 13:15, 31 May 2015 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Class action[change | change source]

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

Hydriz has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Moved to Wiktionary (see wikt:class action) Hydriz (talk) 13:08, 24 May 2015 (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 | change source]

  • Keep if expanded. Once again, being in wikt is not by itself grounds for deletion. It is a question of whether or not editors can build up the concept to make an article. This is a very important legal concept, and one which (I think) is entirely modern. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep as an important legal procedure. Made some improvements. User:Rus793 (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 13:08, 31 May 2015 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Category:Murdered African-American people[change | change source]

Category:Murdered African-American people (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Overcategorization. It might be informative to have a category for African-American people whose murders were racially motivated (or maybe just a more general one for any people murdered because of their race), but this category does not specify that. If a murder isn't racially motivated, the victim's race is not relevant. Auntof6 (talk) 06:16, 19 May 2015 (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 | change source]

  • Delete per nomination.--Peterdownunder (talk) 06:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep. A cat is considered justified if its topic is distinct enough for an article to be written about the topic. African Americans are murdered at a far higher rate than Americans of other ethnicities; an article about violent crime in the African-American community certainly could be written. Some of the people (eligible to be) in this cat have become much more well-known as a result of their (unsolved) murders, including Tupac Shakur and The Notorious B.I.G. Jim Michael (talk) 07:24, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Considered justified by whom? We've deleted cats before that could have articles, some even because an article was better than a category for some things. Remember that we keep things simple here besides just the language. A primary example of that is the category structure. We don't create categories just because we can. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete. We don't need it. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. User:Rus793 (talk) 12:18, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Let's say there is a category "Racially-motivated murders" (or similar, name of the category is not an issue at the moment), how many of our current pages can we put into that category? 10? 15? - Most of these will be in regimes that were racially-segregated to say the least. And now we take the 15 or so entries we have, and segregate by skin color? - This will leave us with 5 pages for the black people. I am not an advocate of racial segregation (by skin color), but I really think the "Racially-motivated murders" category might be a tight fit; the category we are discussing here is definitely too narrow for this wiki. Everyone is of course welcome to think differently; provide ten entries which are not stubs and which fit the category, and I will change my mind.--Eptalon (talk) 12:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
    No-one is saying that any of the people in cats like this one were killed because of their ethnicity. If we had a racially-motivated murders cat, there wouldn't be enough entries to subcat them by ethnicity. Jim Michael (talk) 16:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
    I know no one is saying that. What I'm saying is that if we aren't saying that, there's no reason for the category. We don't need to subcat everything by race. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep: I accepted the challenge of Eptalon, if I read it correctly. There are now ten articles in this category. Some are notable in their own right. None are stubs. (I added to some to make this so). All have sources... Fylbecatulous talk 14:38, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
    Which of course make this category keepable. So, it is a clear keep from me. --Eptalon (talk) 14:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
    The number of articles isn't the issue, and adding more doesn't make a category "keepable". Whether the articles are stubs is irrelevant. Whether the murders are notable also isn't the issue. The issue is that a murder victim's race isn't relevant if the murder wasn't related to their race. If the category were named something like "Racially-motivated murders of African-Americans", there wouldn't be an issue. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 06:16, 26 May 2015 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.



Recently closed deletion discussions[change | change source]

Related pages[change | change source]