Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:RfD)
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]

Dali Mpofu[change source]

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

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable activist. DJSasso (talk) 18:16, 15 August 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 18:16, 22 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Gina McKie[change source]

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

MyPeople76 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Article has been here since 1st September 2012. It looks highly like a Curriculum Vitae type and it's only reference is a dead 'coming soon' website. I did a Google search of her and found this source [[1]]. So I brought it here for others to weigh in. Regards MyPeople76 (talk) 11:29, 10 August 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 15:09, 22 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Vuyani Pambo[change source]

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

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable student activist. DJSasso (talk) 17:47, 15 August 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 per nom. - Additionally, the list of "who's who" for the Fees Must Fall organization that MyPeople76 created should also be mass deleted unless they are capable of meeting notability requirements sans the organization. Operator873talkconnect 17:51, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Yeah I am slowly going through them. There are possibly notable people mixed in which is why I haven't done a mass nomination. -DJSasso (talk) 17:54, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 17:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Chumani Maxwelle[change source]

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

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable student activist. DJSasso (talk) 17:09, 15 August 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 per nom. Subject is only notable because of the "cause" and notability cannot be inherited. Operator873talkconnect 17:19, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 17:09, 22 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Busisiwe C Seabe[change source]

Busisiwe C Seabe (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Did not find any sources that meet WP:GNG. Nothing in depth. Just a passing mention. DJSasso (talk) 16:48, 15 August 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 16:48, 22 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Tallaght Gangland[change source]

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

BRPever has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not encyclopedic. Couldn't find much about this area. Article is here since January. BRP ever 16:12, 15 August 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 - Test page? Copied from somewhere else (possibly decline AfC on enwiki?) My concern is the unreferenced negative comments about a place or group of people. I doubt we have any libel concerns here, but the article isn't notable and not encyclopedic. Operator873talkconnect 06:03, 16 August 2018 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 16:12, 22 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Template:OKC Thunder roster[change source]

Template:OKC Thunder roster (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unused template that is way out of date. DJSasso (talk) 14:27, 15 August 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 - Like many other tech thingies, death's name is obsolete. Operator873talkconnect 06:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 14:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Michael Koch[change source]

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

Nepaxt has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not Notable. //nepaxt 03:35, 15 August 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. Assuming those Forbes covers are real, he may (that's may) actually reach notability. But the page is clearly promotional. StevenJ81 (talk) 10:58, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Well, I think the intent is promotional. That's the reason the article is here. Notability is too marginal, so I go for delete. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:23, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - Subject is a CEO of a tech company in Romania. Being a CEO isn't notable. No other claims of notability are proven with references. Operator873talkconnect 05:50, 16 August 2018 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 03:35, 22 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Roy Dekel[change source]

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

Icem4k has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Most of the references here take you somewhere else i think he passes the notability standards. Chabota (talk) 21:15, 14 August 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 and definitely promoting the person. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep - I have to start out by saying I'm not a fan of this article. It is promotional and seems a little inflated. It smacks of PR or off-wiki resume padding. That being said, this reference is probably enough to meet notability requirements, but the article needs work. Operator873talkconnect 05:46, 16 August 2018 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 21:15, 21 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Sanskrit Movement[change source]

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

BRPever has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Another attempt of advertising Manoj. I don't think this article has sufficient claims to meet our notability guidelines. en:Sanskrit revival may be notable but this article currently has no information that may be included in that article and if someone wants to create that article they can create with same title as Enwp. Thanks BRP ever 07:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

There is a discussion at Talk:Sanskrit Movement that might be helpful.-BRP ever 07:06, 10 August 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 with present content as no claim of notability and is vaguely promotion. Or WP:NUKE and begin with objective description of the Sanskrit movement. Operator873talkconnect 21:17, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • The page is poor, as indicated on its talk page. It doesn't really show that there is such a movement. There have always been people interested in Sanscrit, but this page is just vague hand-waving. And its sources are not in English. Delete. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:07, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. (But @Mac, policy explicitly notes that RS do not have to be in English. I fully grant that when sources are not in English, it's often harder for us to judge reliability. But reliability is the rule, not English.) StevenJ81 (talk) 13:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Whether or not we have a specific rule, editors reponding to an RfD are entitled to read any supporting evidence as to notability. Where there is no rule, we can use common sense. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:16, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • This article has only references that are not in English - for what I know it therefore lacks references. Other than that: There is an Esperanto movement, of usually young, educated people (mostly university students/graduates); there is the Interlingue language, which has similar ambitions, I also think there's Ido, a variant/spinoff of Esperanto. Yes, Sanskrit is an old language, and not similar to the constructed ones I mentioned. I would still expect references I can use as an English speaker. Even in India, there are English-language newspapers. If they haven't reported on it, likely the movement is not notable ebnough yet. So: delete--Eptalon (talk) 13:52, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  • References do not have to be in English. In fact policy tries to make that very clear, because requiring English sources adds in a systemic bias which would be against NPOV. -DJSasso (talk) 10:59, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment:The Hindi sources are not reliable. I was unable to find the first one, it only says "Sanskrit movement in india". Second one is a blog with some pictures and the third one looks like someone's opinion which tells very little about this movement.-BRP ever 12:31, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 07:03, 17 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


World Travel Guild[change source]

World Travel Guild (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

BRPever has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I am unable to verify the notability of this article. The sources might not be enough to prove the notability of this guild. Thanks BRP ever 06:17, 10 August 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 - Content is complex English and Google searches do not provide much information. Reference #3 from HuffPost only contains passing mention. Reference #4 is a book which specifically mentions the award, but there's no in-depth information. Reference #5 is a primary reference. I attempted to locate better references to prop up the article, but wasn't able to easily locate any. Operator873talkconnect 21:27, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. I have a vague memory that we've had this one before. Its wording is vague. As one of the sources says, there is a plethora of awards in the hospitality and tourism business, of which this is one. I don't think there is much independent evidence of the significance of these awards. I see this as one of many pages that get put up by PR agents for the benefit of their client(s). Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:40, 15 August 2018 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 06:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Dhakad Chhora[change source]

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

BRPever has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: There is no clear evidence of notability. It is claimed that this movie broke box office record with no clear evidence. What kind of box office record is also not indicated. QD request was declined so brought it for discussion here. Thanks. BRP ever 05:10, 10 August 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]

  • I see user:Auntof6 declined your user:BRPever QD request on the basis of breaking box office which is a valid reason to decline QD considering how big an achievement that is. But after doing a Google search I found that Dhakad Chhora only has youtube sites reporting on it. Also its only one reference "seems" not to open on my device despite trying to open it a number of occasions. The claim of box office equally doesn't have a source supporting it. I don't know how the article has been here since 24 February?? Therefore, it's a Delete for me. Regards MyPeople76 (talk) 10:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • No source and no content apart from the claim, so delete. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:50, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - unsupported claim of notability. Operator873talkconnect 21:29, 10 August 2018 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 05:10, 17 August 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.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 05:13, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Internet Wala Love[change source]

Internet Wala Love (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Upcoming Hindi TV series; what we have is a copy of the EnWP article. Article also has a high number of red links. Other than a problem of notability, i see a problem of target audience: Most of the editors here do not speak/understand Hindi. How likely is an English version? - So we are probably better off deleting. Eptalon (talk) 07:33, 9 August 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]

  • Crystal ball: the shooting has not yet started, the sources are copies of PR fliers, there cannot be any evidence of quality, and who knows when it will be seen by critics? It's just an idea. This is using WP as advertising. No evidence of notability, so delete. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:44, 9 August 2018 (UTC).
  • Yes, per past experiences. It is hard to find sources for this kind of article and the ones that are available are not enough to prove notability.-BRP ever 07:56, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment i tried a Google search of this series. Also the sources on EN seem not complex. However, I see the two sources from Times of India which I suppose is a national newspaper in India. So I will remain neutral MyPeople76 (talk) 09:22, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
The notability of a newspaper is not a 'given' for all of its content. Its news, leader columns, signed opinion columns and expert reviews are likely to be reliable. The web versions of even respectable newspapers contains much advertisement and other material which cannot be used to support the reliability of an article here. Check the links referred to and see. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:34, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 07:33, 16 August 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) 05:12, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Religious democracy[change source]

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Term with unclear definition; there is an EnWP article, but it doesn't help much: 1) There are states where the clergy has a lot of power; these are usually called Theocracies (eg. Iran, Andorra, Vatican City); Even in Iran, some government officials are elected, so they are democracies (Iran is an Islamic Republic I think) 2) There are states which have no state religion, but one or two religious communities are predominant; while this does not officially affect politics, the influence of religion on moral values in politics is big (e.g. France) 3) Some states are clear case monarchies, where constitution does not limit the power of the monarch (probably UAE, Saudi Arabia) - In that context coming up with a term such as "religious democracy" is problematic; I don't see a clear definition, or a clear field where I could say this state is a "religious democracy". Given these problems, and the problems of poor references, I propose to delete the article. Eptalon (talk) 20:47, 8 August 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 - per nom. The scope and usage of this term is very problematic. Any states that might fall under the vague and ambiguous term "religious democracy" are better described with existing terminology (theocracy, etc). The updated references I added to the article are still very weak. Operator873talkconnect 20:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. I don't see any way of improving this. It doesn't make sense, and is just two unclear sentences. The discussion on its talk page shows that editors could not see a way forward. The En wiki article is poor, and probably on its way out, as its talk page suggests. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:35, 10 August 2018 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 20:47, 15 August 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]