Jump to content

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"WP:MFD" redirects here. For media for deletion, see Wikipedia:Files for discussion. For modules for deletion, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.


Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

Miscellany for deletion (MfD) is a place where Wikipedians decide what should be done with problematic pages in the namespaces which aren't covered by other specialized deletion discussion areas. Items sent here are usually discussed for seven days; then they are either deleted by an administrator or kept, based on community consensus as evident from the discussion, consistent with policy, and with careful judgment of the rough consensus if required.

Filtered versions of the page are available at

Information on the process

[edit]

What may be nominated for deletion here:

  • Pages not covered by other XFD venues, including pages in these namespaces: Draft:, Help:, Portal:, MediaWiki:, Wikipedia: (including WikiProjects), User:, TimedText:, MOS: (in the unlikely event it ever contains a page that is not a redirect or one of the 6 disambiguation pages) and the various Talk: namespaces
  • Userboxes, regardless of the namespace
  • Any other page, that is not in article space, where there is dispute as to the correct XfD venue.

Requests to undelete pages deleted after discussion here, and debate whether discussions here have been properly closed, both take place at Wikipedia:Deletion review, in accordance with Wikipedia's undeletion policy.

Before nominating a page for deletion

[edit]

Before nominating a page for deletion, please consider these guidelines:

Deleting pages in your own userspace
  • If you want to have your own userpage or a draft you created deleted, there is no need to list it here; simply tag it with {{db-userreq}} or {{db-u1}} if it is a userpage, or {{db-author}} or {{db-g7}} if it is a draft. If you wish to clear your user talk page or sandbox, just blank it.
Duplications in draftspace?
  • Duplications in draftspace are usually satisfactorily fixed by redirection. If the material is in mainspace, redirect the draft to the article, or a section of the article. If multiple draft pages on the same topic have been created, tag them for merging. See WP:SRE.
Deleting pages in other people's userspace
  • Consider explaining your concerns on the user's talk page with a personal note or by adding {{subst:Uw-userpage}} ~~~~  to their talk page. This step assumes good faith and civility; often the user is simply unaware of the guidelines, and the page can either be fixed or speedily deleted using {{db-userreq}}.
  • Take care not to bite newcomers – sometimes using the {{subst:welcome}} or {{subst:welcomeg}} template and a pointer to WP:UP would be best first.
  • Problematic userspace material is often addressed by the User pages guidelines including in some cases removal by any user or tagging to clarify the content or to prevent external search engine indexing. (Examples include copies of old, deleted, or disputed material, problematic drafts, promotional material, offensive material, inappropriate links, 'spoofing' of the MediaWiki interface, disruptive HTML, invitations or advocacy of disruption, certain kinds of images and image galleries, etc) If your concern relates to these areas consider these approaches as well, or instead of, deletion.
  • User pages about Wikipedia-related matters by established users usually do not qualify for deletion.
  • Articles that were recently deleted at AfD and then moved to userspace are generally not deleted unless they have lingered in userspace for an extended period of time without improvement to address the concerns that resulted in their deletion at AfD, or their content otherwise violates a global content policy such as our policies on Biographies of living persons that applies to any namespace.
Policies, guidelines and process pages
  • Established pages and their sub-pages should not be nominated, as such nominations will probably be considered disruptive, and the ensuing discussions closed early. This is not a forum for modifying or revoking policy. Instead consider tagging the policy as {{historical}} or redirecting it somewhere.
  • Proposals still under discussion generally should not be nominated. If you oppose a proposal, discuss it on the policy page's discussion page. Consider being bold and improving the proposal. Modify the proposal so that it gains consensus. Also note that even if a policy fails to gain consensus, it is often useful to retain it as a historical record, for the benefit of future editors.
WikiProjects and their subpages
  • It is generally preferable that inactive WikiProjects not be deleted, but instead be marked as {{WikiProject status|inactive}}, redirected to a relevant WikiProject, or changed to a task force of a parent WikiProject, unless the WikiProject was incompletely created or is entirely undesirable.
  • WikiProjects that were never very active and which do not have substantial historical discussions (meaning multiple discussions over an extended period of time) on the project talk page should not be tagged as {{historical}}; reserve this tag for historically active projects that have, over time, been replaced by other processes or that contain substantial discussion (as defined above) of the organization of a significant area of Wikipedia. Before deletion of an inactive project with a founder or other formerly active members who are active elsewhere on Wikipedia, consider userfication.
  • Notify the main WikiProject talk page when nominating any WikiProject subpage, in addition to standard notification of the page creator.
Alternatives to deletion
  • Normal editing that doesn't require the use of any administrator tools, such as merging the page into another page or renaming it, can often resolve problems.
  • Pages in the wrong namespace (e.g. an article in Wikipedia namespace), can simply be moved and then tag the redirect for speedy deletion using {{db-g6|rationale= it's a redirect left after a cross-namespace move}}. Notify the author of the original article of the cross-namespace move.
Alternatives to MfD
  • Speedy deletion If the page clearly satisfies a "general" or "user" speedy deletion criterion, tag it with the appropriate template. Be sure to read the entire criterion, as some do not apply in the user space.

Please familiarize yourself with the following policies

[edit]

How to list pages for deletion

[edit]
Shortcut

Please check the aforementioned list of deletion discussion areas to check that you are in the right area. Then follow these instructions:

Instructions on listing pages for deletion:

To list a page for deletion, follow this three-step process: (replace PageName with the name of the page, including its namespace, to be deleted)

Note: Users must be logged in to complete step II. An unregistered user who wishes to nominate a page for deletion should complete step I and post their reasoning on Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion with a notification to a registered user to complete the process.

I.
Edit PageName:

Enter the following text at the top of the page you are listing for deletion:

{{mfd|1={{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}}}
for a second or subsequent nomination use {{mfdx|2nd}}

or

{{mfd|GroupName}}
if nominating several similar related pages in an umbrella nomination. Choose a suitable name as GroupName and use it on each page.
If the nomination is for a userbox or similarly transcluded page, use {{subst:mfd-inline}} so as to not mess up the formatting for the userbox.
Use {{subst:mfd-inline|GroupName}} for a group nomination of several related userboxes or similarly transcluded pages.
  • Please include in the edit summary the phrase
    Added MfD nomination at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]
    replace PageName with the name of the page that is up for deletion.
  • Please don't mark your edit summary as a minor edit.
  • Check the "Watch this page" box if you would like to follow the page in your watchlist. This may help you to notice if your MfD tag is removed by someone.
  • Save the page
II.
Create its MfD subpage.

The resulting MfD box at the top of the page should contain the link "this page's entry"

  • Click that link to open the page's deletion discussion page.
  • Insert this text:
{{subst:mfd2| pg={{subst:#titleparts:{{subst:PAGENAME}}||2}}| text=Reason why the page should be deleted}} ~~~~
replacing Reason... with your reasons why the page should be deleted and sign the page. Do not substitute the pagename, as this will occur automatically.
  • Consider checking "Watch this page" to follow the progress of the debate.
  • Please use an edit summary such as
    Creating deletion discussion page for [[PageName]]
    replacing PageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion.
  • If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
  • Save the page.
III.
Add a line to MfD.

Follow   this edit link   and at the top of the list add a line:

{{subst:mfd3| pg=PageName}}
Put the page's name in place of "PageName".
  • Include the discussion page's name in your edit summary like
    Added [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]
    replacing PageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion.
  • Save the page.
  • If nominating a page that has been nominated before, use the page's name in place of "PageName" and add
{{priorxfd|PageName}}
in the nominated page deletion discussion area to link to the previous discussions and then save the page using an edit summary such as
Added [[Template:priorxfd]] to link to prior discussions.
  • If nominating a page from someone else's userspace, notify them on their main talk page.
    For other pages, while not required, it is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the miscellany that you are nominating. To find the main contributors, look in the page history or talk page of the page and/or use TDS' Article Contribution Counter or Wikipedia Page History Statistics. For your convenience, you may add

    {{subst:mfd notice|PageName}} ~~~~

    to their talk page in the "edit source" section, replacing PageName with the pagename. Please use an edit summary such as

    Notice of deletion discussion at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]

    replacing PageName with the name of the nomination page you are proposing for deletion.
  • If the user has not edited in a while, consider sending the user an email to notify them about the MfD if the MfD concerns their user pages.
  • If you are nominating a WikiProject, please post a notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council, in addition to the project's talk page and the talk pages of the founder and active members.

Administrator instructions

[edit]
XFD backlog
V Nov Dec Jan Feb Total
CfD 0 0 6 2 8
TfD 0 0 1 0 1
MfD 0 0 2 0 2
FfD 0 0 41 5 46
RfD 0 0 82 7 89
AfD 0 0 0 0 0

Administrator instructions for closing and relisting discussions can be found here.

Archived discussions

[edit]

A list of archived discussions can be located at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates.

Current discussions

[edit]
Pages currently being considered for deletion are indexed by the day on which they were first listed. Please place new listings at the top of the section for the current day. If no section for the current day is present, please start a new section.

February 8, 2025

[edit]

Draft:Kuerton

[edit]
Draft:Kuerton (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Draft written entirely in Russian which appears to be an attempt at a biography of Sovpel Artyom Sergeevich (Kuerton); No references cited, thus fails WP:SIGCOV. No showing of notability per WP:GNG. Product of single edit by IP editor with no later attempt to add references or otherwise improve the draft. Not likely to be accepted as an English Wikipedia article as it is entirely in Russian. Geoff | Who, me? 18:05, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Neil Monaco & K9 Brandy: The Birth of FAA Canine

[edit]
Draft:Neil Monaco & K9 Brandy: The Birth of FAA Canine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

WP:G11 nominated by CycloneYoris and declined by Espresso Addict. This is a promotional piece with no citations about a living person and his dog that is clearly written by family/friend/self. Neither the person nor the dog are likely to be notable. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:32, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • I was hoping this might go quietly by BLP prod, or at least a quest for sources would help with determining whether any notability exists for any of Monaco, K9 Brandy or FAA Canine. While much of the current article is unpromising, we have many articles on dogs that have won national awards and appeared on television. The creator's main edits are to Military Working Dog Teams National Monument, so I think more likely a former colleague than any closer association -- perhaps Soapboxlogic could comment? Espresso Addict (talk) 04:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Most of those edits to that page were to add an unreferenced and undue section about the 10th anniversary of the monument. I removed much of the cruft and added some maintenance tags to the article. voorts (talk/contributions) 04:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I think some combination of Brandy and the dog organisation might well be notable. Proquest has several articles/documents (eg The Dogs Of War. Government Executive Vol. 37, Iss. 15, (Sep 1, 2005): 11; & Canine Program Celebrates 35 Years of Dedicated Service; Program Continues Dramatic Expansion Since 9/11. Department of Homeland Security Documents / FIND; Lanham, (Mar 9, 2007). & Explosive Detection Canines Security Today; Gurgaon (Feb 2009). & Spano, Susan. HER WORLD; All in a dog's day for bomb sniffers: Los Angeles Times 28 Sep 2003: L.7.). There will no doubt be contemporary news coverage from 1972 as well. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:53, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Brandy might be notable, but I doubt that Monaco is. In any event, there is nothing salvageable in this uncited, promotional draft. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:31, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Coming down on keep, repurpose to be about Brandy, the 1972 incident and the foundation of the FAA programme, for which sourcing is available (above, provided by creator, and an abundance of contemporary news coverage via Newspapers.com). I haven't found yet found very much that explicitly names Monaco but there's a paragraph in Kingston Sunday Freeman June 22, 1975 Page 17 and three (partially overlapping) paras in the same newspaper on May 21, 1975 Page 11, which confirm the broad outline of his early career. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:37, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Why not just delete this one per G11 and let the author try to write a new draft at Draft:Brandy (dog)? voorts (talk/contributions) 23:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I think we should leave that up to the article creator. I've asked them if they would like us to delete the existing draft to start with a clean sheet. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:29, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Good Morning. Can you please identify to me what specific issues you have with the creation of this page. The purpose of me writing this article was to provide a historic narrative of the man whose actions in 1972 at JFK airport directly led to President Richard Nixon establishing the FAA program. If you are seeking additional references please refer to
    https://www.hsdl.org/c/view?docid=460232
    I can also put you in direct connection with Mr. Monaco, as well as retired TSA Canine Instructor Robert SCHNELL to verify the authenticity of this work. Additionally I can provide you photos and contacts with the NYPD bomb squad Soapboxlogic (talk) 19:05, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Soapboxlogic (talk) 21:59, 8 February 2025 (UTC)I am a retired USAF MWD Handler who has direct knowledge of the subject material in this article. As for my contributions to the article on the US Military Working Dog Teams National Monument, I did those based on the fact that I was directly a part of the installation, unveiling, care, maintenance, and 10 year anniversary recognition of that Monument.[reply]
    In reference to this article, I have added a list of references, as requested, for the claims of the article. If needed I could put the individual responsible for making the final decision on this article in direct contact with Mr. Neil Monaco himself or any number of NYPD Bomb squad members needed to verify the history contained in this article. If it is the style or tone of the writing that is disagreeable I could edit it to make it less personal and more academic.
    In reply to the coment raised by Voorts, I would argue that the accomplishments of the specific dog team whose discovery of an explosive device led to ensuring that the security and safety of JFK and TWA were ensured and that a criminal terrorist was thwarted is noteworthy in itself. However, moreso when the success of their actions is reported to the POTUS who then directs his Transportation Secretary to create the FAA Canine program via the USAF which now stands as an independent entity that continues in partnership with the USAF. This historic event deserves to be remembered and recognized for it is the spark that lit the fuse resulting in the creation of the premeir k9 program Soapboxlogic (talk) 21:59, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This historic event deserves to be remembered and recognized for it is the spark that lit the fuse resulting in the creation of the premeir k9 program I agree that Brandy probably deserves a Wikipedia article. However, what you've written is far away from the standards that Wikipedia has for one. Every Wikipedia article must be written in a neutral tone and have citations to reliable sources, not to your personal knowledge or to the personal knowledge of your friends and colleagues. Wikipedia needs direct citations to things like newspapers, books, etc., so that our readers can verify what you're saying is true. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:09, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete per nomination. LarryL33k (Contribz) 04:34, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I disagree with Espresso Addict in that I think that it should have been deleted from article space as G11, but that is kess important. What is more important is, first, that the promotional content exceeds any hope of a future article, and, second, it is an unsourced biography of a living person. It doesn't belong in either article space or draft space. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:38, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Good mornig
    What promotional material are you refering to. Can you please be more specific. Soapboxlogic (talk) 19:06, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Soapboxlogic: you wrote this article as if you were writing an essay about how great Monaco and his dog are. For example:

    Neils life testifies to the truth to never underestimate the impact of a single life doing their job. As Ronald Reagan once said “There is no limit to the amount of good you can do if you don’t care who gets the credit.

    That is not how Wikipedia articles should be written. You also need to include at least one inline citation in every paragraph. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:30, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vroots thank you for the constructive criticism. I accept your advice and will make the requested edits.
    I do feel though that rather than simply recomending an article for outright deletion without consideration for affording the author the opportunity to learn, grow, and correct their article, fellow writers might better support one another by recognizing the intent of the writing and providing more direct and thourough feedback. I humbly request that you reevaluate the article with this in mind as I make the edits you identified. Soapboxlogic (talk) 22:10, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That is just one example. I think that you should probably start a new draft called Draft:Brandy (dog) and work on writing an encyclopedic article there. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:11, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @VROOTS Thank you. I am in the process of rewriting the article. I do believe that both the handler and canine are equally historic in the context of the events that transpired. After all the canine does not train itself or operate without the handler. The two are an inseperable team. With that said I request that you support the article inclusive of both the dog and handler. Soapboxlogic (talk) 22:47, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia articles may only be written about subjects that have received significant coverage in independent, secondary, reliable sources. While there are several articles about Brandy, there appears to be almost nothing written about Monaco in newspapers, books, journal articles, etc. That is often the case with famous animals. Brandy got an obituary in the Daily News, while Monaco's retirement went unnoted. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:17, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I humbly request reconsideration for this article to be posted as is. I am more than welcome to discuss the facts and relavance of this story with any of the wikepedia editors who desire. This is a true and factual story written by myself Christopher Dion. I know Neil personally and can confirm the notability of this story. It is a history that is shared with every graduating K9 Nclass at the TSA Canine Training Center Soapboxlogic (talk) 18:51, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Soapboxlogic: since you know Neil personally, you have a conflict of interest. Please review our conflict of interest policy and comply with it. Additionally, this draft will not be posted as is. It is not written in a neutral, unbiased way and it does not have enough citations to reliable sources. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:33, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Soapboxlogic, I have declined the draft and given you some feedback on what you need to improve in order for reviewers to judge whether or not this topic merits an article. qcne (talk) 21:43, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and incubate in draftspace: Might be viable article here, might not be. I've reviewed and given the editor some advice. qcne (talk) 21:44, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Given that your advice to the editor was to start the scratch from draft, it doesn't make much sense to keep this current version. My nomination is effectively WP:TNT. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:03, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair, but the author can just work on the draft article instead of a deletion and the subsequent re-creation. qcne (talk) 22:40, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 5, 2025

[edit]

User:Wikiedime

[edit]
User:Wikiedime (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

This user page claims that it's for a bot account. However, this account does not appear to be a bot, and the supposed bot operator is just the user themself. The user in question has also made the same identical page on en.wikiquote, en.wikibooks, ko.wikibooks, and meta.wikimedia. JJPMaster (she/they) 13:22, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remove the tag. Warn the user with being blocked for violating bot policy, or misleading others about being a bot. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:35, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 4, 2025

[edit]
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:The Gang's All Queer: The Lives of Gay Gang Members
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete. WP:SNOW applies. ✗plicit 23:53, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:The Gang's All Queer: The Lives of Gay Gang Members

[edit]
Draft:The Gang's All Queer: The Lives of Gay Gang Members (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

User:Mpayne69

[edit]
User:Mpayne69 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

WP:COPIES, content was copied 2012-05-02 from special:permalink/490251646 or nearby. Paradoctor (talk) 13:50, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, copy. -Samoht27 (talk) 15:39, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Thalli Manasu

[edit]
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Thalli Manasu (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Misplaced COI declaration. Retract While I still think crud shouldn't be allowed to accumulate in the corners, if for no other reason than attention economy, I don't see this going anywhere. Let's blank and be judged for it. Paradoctor (talk) 02:47, 4 February 2025 (UTC); edited 15:21, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 16, 2025

[edit]
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Trump and Vance's Portrait Edit War
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 00:05, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Trump's Portrait Edit War

[edit]
Wikipedia:Trump's Portrait Edit War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

I fail to see the humor value of this page. It calls out specific editors for being part of "sides", and does not provide any actual humor, nor does it really have the potential to do so. I am unsure if moving to userspace is even appropriate - I lean not, because it is borderline an attack page on editors on "specific sides" of the conflict, and it attempts to categorize people as "Trump supporters" or "Kamala supporters" when that isn't even the argument. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 22:32, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Old business

[edit]


January 30, 2025

[edit]
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:PowerVia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:17, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:PowerVia

[edit]
Draft:PowerVia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Looks like a troll-article. Is handled by neutral and vendor-unspecific Backside power delivery anyway. Smartcom5 (Talk?) 20:42, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Whatever this is, it is not salvageable. Ca talk to me! 14:44, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, feels promo.
-Samoht27 (talk) 20:34, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

January 27, 2025

[edit]

Wikipedia:Mornington Crescent Championship

[edit]
Wikipedia:Mornington Crescent Championship (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Do we still need this page? Inside joke of 2 decades ago. Proposal for a game that never actually took place. See also Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikington Crescent Championship. Polygnotus (talk) 04:48, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Wikipedia:Department of Fun/Wikipedia:Mornington Crescent Championship. The subject of the page appears not to be Wikipedia related, but, read WP:FUN. It’s sad that Wikipedians no longer value fun, and pages like this will probably be rapidly delete at WP:NOTWEBHOSTING, but this was not the case then, especially where Wikipedia pioneers were collectively involved. Keep as a record of the past culture of Wikipedia. Add an Keep the current appropriate and sufficient archived tag. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:08, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How is it fun to store all failed attempts to have fun for decades? There is literally nothing fun about the page. And this is just an old signup page, the real thing is supposedly at Wikipedia:Wikington Crescent Championship but that has already been deleted. Polygnotus (talk) 08:58, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fun is subjective. What do you do for fun? SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:42, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SmokeyJoe: I annoy my wife. Polygnotus (talk) 21:41, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should try to be more fun, more fun than seeking deletion of old attempts at fun. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
SmokeyJoe, the old attempt at fun, as you describe it, has already been deleted, see Wikipedia:Wikington Crescent Championship. If the consensus, for some reason, is to never clean up useless old trash then I am happy to accept that. But if that is the case then no one has mentioned that to me yet. — Polygnotus (talk) 02:30, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t believe in using deletion to clean up old things. I think archiving, including by redirection, is preferable, and that deletion should be reserved for things that should never have been created.
This page is on the edge. By todays Wikipedia culture, it would be deleted, but in the early years, it was ok, tolerated. The early Wikipedians were much more tolerant. SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep - An MFD nomination requires volunteer time to review it. Before nominating anything useless for MFD, please consider whether any harm is done by keeping it, and whether the cost of getting rid of it exceeds any harm that is done by keeping it. This has already been tagged as historical. If the nominator can identify any reason to delete this expired game, we can consider the tradeoff of cost. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question - User:SmokeyJoe says to add an archived tag. What does that mean? Does that mean to mark it as historical? This page has been marked as historical since September 2006, when a PROD tag was mistakenly applied to it and then the PROD tag was removed. Is there some other sort of "archived tag", or does this mean that User:SmokeyJoe replied before giving it a second more detailed reading? If the latter, an overly quick comment, then it also illustrates that nominating archaic stuff that is already tagged as historical is a waste of reviewer time. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:41, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The mfd tag caused me partial hatnote blindness. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Irrelevant noise. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:35, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and move. These sorts of pages have historical value for researchers of (the history of) online collaboration and wiki communities. One man's irrelevant noise is another's cultural artifact. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:39, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Closed discussions

[edit]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion&oldid=1274721573"