Meta:Requests for deletion

Requests and proposals Requests for deletion Archives (current)→
Shortcut:
WM:RFD

This page hosts local (i.e., Meta-Wiki) requests for page deletion. For requests for speedy deletion from global sysops or stewards, see Steward requests/Miscellaneous. Any language may be used on this page. Before commenting on this page, please read the deletion policy, in particular the criteria for speedy deletion, and the inclusion policy. Please place the template {{RFD}} on the page you are proposing for deletion, and then add an entry in an appropriate section below. As a courtesy, you may wish to inform the principal authors of the page about the request. After at least one week, an administrator will close and carry out the consensus or majority decision.

Articles that qualify for speedy deletion should be tagged with {{delete}} or {{delete|reason}}, and should not be listed here. (See also speedy deletion candidates.) Files with no sources should be tagged with {{no source}} and need not be listed here, either. To request undeletion, see #Requests for undeletion. See Meta:Inclusion policy for a general list of what does not belong on the Meta-Wiki.

Previous requests are archived. Deletion requests ({{Deletion requests}}) can be added to talk page to remember previous RfDs.

Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Participate:

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 3 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 180 days.

PagesEdit

Submit your page deletion request at the bottom of this section.

User:KisnaakEdit

Attack page of multiple users after local block. Violation of Meta:Inclusion policy, speedy deletion under G9. Kromsipol (talk) 23:52, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Base: Hello. The text of the page seems to be written in Ukranian. Could you please read it and advice? Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:55, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
It is in Russian. Kisnaak is actually blocked on Ukrainian Wikipedia until he removes that userpage content as per Arbcom decision: uk:ВП:ПЗВ155#Рішення. So it is actually that the block is for the attacks on this page, not the other way round (except for the last section). I do agree that it probably should be deleted, it does contain a few personal attacks as well as attacks on the Ukrainian Wikipedia community as a whole, but I would abstain myself: Kisnaak and I were both members of the previous Arbcom tenure, and I have somewhat tense relations with them. --Base (talk) 12:03, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
Will reverting to this good version work. If they revert the attacks back, will suggest we restrain their ability to edit that page. I hope the closing admin will also give them a note not to add anymore attacks. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:20, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
@Camouflaged Mirage: The page contains no personal insults and therefore I don't think it violates the rules or anyone's rights, nor do I think it attacks anyone. You can verify this with using any online translator, such as Google-Translator. In addition, this deletion request looks like a personal attack and persecution. --Kisnaak (talk) 18:23, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
@Kisnaak Hello, I am taking the word from Base for the attacks. Having ran parts of it through the Google translate, for the parts I did ran through it involves commentary about ukwiki. Even if there is no attack, such commentary is out of scope for here and also unacceptable for global userpage. It might be acceptable (if trimmed down and all attacks removed - i.e. no mention about personal users / arbs etc) on an user subpage on meta, but certainly not user page. If you want to mention users, the only place is suitable is a RFC. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
@Camouflaged Mirage: I am aware of who I am having this discussion with. I am inclined to continue to believe that my user page does not contain attacks. And now, until we're waiting for react of CU or other admins, we are forced to continue this discussion. As far as I know, criticism has not been made inappropriate by the rules of the Meta. In my opinion, likewise what I have written falls well within the wording of «essay». And yes, there are a several other personal pages made similar to mine that criticize other Wikipedias, but there is no claim to them - so I consider this statement from a «newly registered member» to be persecution. If the closing admin points out specific points that violate the rules of the Meta — I'm willing to remove them, but it seems absurd to me to remove the page completely and return it to, as you put it, the «good version». The problems, what I mentioned in my user page, cannot be solved without the participation of the Ukrainian Wikipedia community with help of RFC. Because this community unfortunately does not care about what is going on inside the local Arbitration committee. Kisnaak (talk) 22:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
@Kisnaak The CU request you had filed was declined as non-actionable. I will ask you not to cast undue accusations to the nominator. Given there isn't a problem with the nomination, the least I could accept is to move the problematic revisions to an user-subpage failing which I will go with delete per Base / nom. Please keep meta scope here and specifically the point on meta isn't an appeal court - take local issues to local forums, not here. Reiterating the only acceptable place for such here is an RFC. In addition, the existence / non - existence of other user having such problematic pages isn't Germaine to this - this discussion is about your problematic userpage alone, and well if there are other such pages, feel free to list it here (with the caveat of good faith nomination and not POINTy ones though). I won't close this as I feel sufficiently involved. I hope you will understand my point and do clarify if necessary. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
And the author of the request for deletion registered his account specifically for make this request. I have already make my request for checkusers about this. --Kisnaak (talk) 18:32, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
The page consists of criticism of the Ukrainian Wikipedia, but does not contain insults or personal attacks regarding its members. And the place where I really made an inappropriate comment about another user after a dialogue with him was removed from the page. --Kisnaak (talk) 18:42, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
@Kisnaak + Here: Criticism on a Wikipedia version isn't acceptable on global userpage, this we fairly uphold for all users here. Hope you get it. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
This page contains only insults of the Ukrainian Wikipedia, individual users in particular and all users in general. The fact that these insults have been here for so long is a nonsense, and the fact that it has been discussed for so long is completely absurd. Ping administrators who understand russian @Base, Amire80, 1234qwer1234qwer4, Kaganer, and Vermont:. What you read on this user page does not violate meta:Inclusion policy? Kromsipol (talk) 15:02, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
(RU) Я прочел. Похожие тексты с похожей критикой в адрес сообщества русской Википедии я уже ранее тоже встречал. Наверное, в такой критике (и в адрес украинского, и в адрес русского разделов) есть своё рациональное зерно. И там и там есть проблемы, с которыми локальное сообщество не справляется или справляется не очень хорошо. Но в данном случае я вынужден присоединиться к @Camouflaged Mirage: глобальная страница участника - это неподходящее место для подобных критических эссе. Единственное подходящее место и единственная подходящая процедура для публикации критических замечаний в адрес целого сообщества какого-то раздела или отдельных участников (когда эти замечания невозможно разместить в самом этом разделе) - это RFC.
Такой запрос можно сделать и на русском, но, естественно, форму изложения придется всё равно скорректировать. Для RFC недостаточно декларировать, что вас кто-то обидел и вы в чем-то разочаровались. Придется сосредоточиться на описании конкретных проблем (с примерами), показать, что сообщество с ними не справляется и, вероятно, сделать какие-то предложения, которые другие участники могли бы обсуждать.
----
(EN) I've read. Similar texts with similar criticism about community of the Russian Wikipedia, I also met earlier. Probably, in such criticism (both in the address of the both Ukrainian and Russian editions) there is a rational grain. In the both communities are problems that the local community does not cope with or does not cope very well with. But in this case, I have to support @Camouflaged Mirage: a global userpage is not the right place for such critical essays. The only appropriate place and the only appropriate procedure for posting criticisms of an entire wiki-community or individual wikimedians (when they cannot be placed in this wiki-edition itself) is RFC.
Such a request can also be made in Russian, but, of course, the form of presentation will still have to be improved. It is not enough for the RFC to declare that someone offended you and that you are disappointed in some way. We will have to focus on describing specific problems (with examples), show that the community is not coping with them, and probably make some suggestions that other participants could discuss. Kaganer (talk) 15:42, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
I agree with Kaganer. While criticism of projects can be in scope of Meta as part of discussions (though unsubstantiated insults are usually removed there too), this userpage at the very least does not respect Global user pages#Content. I suggest reverting it to the previous state as per Camouflaged Mirage; not sure if further action (such as revision deletion) would be required. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
16:48, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Looks like this user has specifically registered only to make a protest nomination for deletion. SummerKrut (talk) 20:44, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
@SummerKrut The status of the nominator is irrelevant, unless of course the CU can find something, where the page i question did indeed exceeds the scope of meta userpage. Hence, the nomination is valid. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:48, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Wow, I've never thought that a user can be fooled so easily. SummerKrut (talk) 07:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
@SummerKrut Proper commentary will be appreciated, but your comment isn't helpful or relevant in the first place. Given the declined CU, there is no reason to doubt the nominator and such commentary against the nominator without refuting the allegations will not be helpful. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:01, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Delete and tagged RFD. Translating the content via Google shows heavy criticism with questionable civility.--Jusjih (talk) 18:46, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleted versions since 2021-08-03 as false vanishing and unacceptable use of global user page.--Jusjih (talk) 12:26, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jusjih: Do you think it's adequate and in accordance with the rules, that you first spoke out for deleting the page and then deleted it yourself? You don't think it's a conflict of interest? I would prefer to wait for an uninvolved administrator --Kisnaak (talk) 12:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
@Jusjih: So? --Kisnaak (talk) 11:37, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

User:RSSKRJEdit

Requesting deletion for page of this user as the content is impersonating my user page
أبو غاصاك (bicara) 23:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)


  • Speedy deleted, assuming it was a "test". Informed the creator. — xaosflux Talk 14:14, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. — xaosflux Talk 14:14, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

TemplatesEdit

Submit your template deletion request at the bottom of this section.

Template:Example neededEdit

One transclusion in the documentation part of Template:Round, which already includes examples. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 06:05, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

  • Delete Indiscriminately copying templates from elsewhere is the bane of wikis. * Pppery * it has begun 14:42, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Keep. I have added a link to explain better the text in the context. It is not the use of indiscriminate templates, than have scarcely common ones with other wikis. And sometimes it is the case. BoldLuis (talk) 13:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
    @BoldLuis: The link you added (at {{Round}}) has nothing to do with {{Example needed}}. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 13:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
    @NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh: Example it is not about round, but about the #expr, this is, where the template is located. Now, the user can click in the link and understand how #expr is used. BoldLuis (talk) 13:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
    @BoldLuis: If so, that specific sentence needs an {{Explanation needed}}, not {{Example needed}}. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 13:55, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
    Agree. I wanted to say it needs explanation and some examples. In any case, I did it in the simpliest way, including a link to understand #expr and how it works. On the other hand, I could not use "explanation needed" template, because it is not included in Meta. I am sure both template are going to be used in Meta. BoldLuis (talk) 13:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
KeepIlovemydoodle (talk) 06:04, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Why? * Pppery * it has begun 14:46, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
@Pppery: This is used partially as a documentation wiki (not for mediawiki), so this is useful if documentation is missing an example. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 11:54, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Transl-1 and 7 othersEdit

Potentially superseded by Lua-based Template:Transl-n. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Deprecate as high-usage template. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 06:05, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Language combination and 2 othersEdit

One transclusion: Category:Translator's Templates. I think a big table this is not a very nice way to showcase links to subcats and templates, considering the number of languages we support. As for the subcats part, it can be replaced with an inputbox that links to Category:Catname?subcatfrom=Translator foo-bar. Also, Translator foo-bar templates will soon be deprecated and nominated for deletion as I'm writing a Lua module that supersedes their function. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:46, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Turns out that inputbox doesn't have a go-to-exact-link function. type=search can be used however. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 00:42, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Delete all per nom; the table is effectively unusable. * Pppery * it has begun 20:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Lang name templatesEdit

Extended content

Superseded by #language. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 22:43, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Template:User language and subpagesEdit

Superseded by {{#babel:}}. The following pages are transcluding at least one of them and will be affected:

Extended content

NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 08:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Flex columnsEdit

Unused, broken import. * Pppery * it has begun 18:59, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Global:Template pseudo-namespaceEdit

Out of scope per precedent at Meta:Requests_for_deletion/Archives/2021#Pages in Category:GlobalWiki test wiki pages * Pppery * it has begun 14:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Maintenance categoryEdit

Indiscriminately copied from Wikipedia with no useful function here. * Pppery * it has begun 14:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Imported templatesEdit

Mass of templates indiscriminately imported from Wikipedia that are out of scope on Meta. * Pppery * it has begun 13:29, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Trim bracketsEdit

Unused, out of scope, created as part of indiscriminate template import. * Pppery * it has begun 13:50, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Module:Transclusion count/data/DEdit

Dependent on bot that doesn't run on Meta. * Pppery * it has begun 13:50, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Large category TOCEdit

Used in one place, Category:Wikimedia template categories, where the template is nowhere near warranted by the size of the category and can just be removed. Part of a mass import of Wikipedia templatecruft in 2018. * Pppery * it has begun 15:56, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Cat diffuseEdit

Used in one place, Category:Language user templates, where it's not useful since the category has no subcats to diffuse members to. Part of a mass import of Wikipedia templatecruft in 2018. * Pppery * it has begun 16:03, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Category TOCEdit

Used in two places, neither of which have enough pages to warrant a TOC. Part of a mass import of Wikipedia templatecruft in 2018 * Pppery * it has begun 16:03, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

CategoriesEdit

Submit your category deletion request at the bottom of this section.

Category:GlobalEdit

A category grouping otherwise unrelated things that include the word "global" in the name is not useful. * Pppery * it has begun 15:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

*Strong keep* . It is a category for the Global project that include global templates (orientative, not obligatory, templates, than any Wikimedia project can use. See the consensus proposal Global-Wiki. BoldLuis (talk) 08:25, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
@BoldLuis what is "the Global project". What is the main page for that project? Is it Global-Wiki? In which case this category should probably be Category:Global-Wiki. This seems to include other odd things like, Category:Global council 2021 that (a) doesn't seem to have a page that describes was it is, (b) contains other pages that also don't explain that. — xaosflux Talk 14:11, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Category:Templates using data from WikidataEdit

A tracking category is not needed for one template. * Pppery * it has begun 14:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

FilesEdit

Submit your image deletion request at the bottom of this section.

RedirectsEdit

Submit your redirect deletion request at the bottom of this section.

Requests for undeletionEdit

Submit your undeletion request at the bottom of this section.

WM:SYSOPEdit

This is a shortcut to Meta:Administrators and is useful. 154.121.56.249 15:25, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

  SupportIlovemydoodle (talk) 05:55, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Per WM:DDR. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 05:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Also, it should not have been deleted in the first place. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 05:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Comment: Since it is just a redirect, I do not see why it cannot simply be recreated, rather than having to getting an admin undelete it. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 06:01, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
  • The deleted version is identical to what is it there right now, so there isn't a point to undelete right now. In addition, the deletion is done via a speedy, thus, there is no reason why it cannot be recreated when the original CSD doesn't apply. This can be seen as a contestation of the speedy which the consensus here seems to not oppose the creation, though participation is minimal I will note. The result is therefore   permit recreation. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Requests for new languages/BugineseEdit

Hello, I'm currently researching the history of Buginese Wikipedia, and there was some gaps in the earliest discussion, which I believe was deleted in this page. I'm requesting to undelete this page, and merge history with Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Buginese to preserve its history for the future.

I'm also requesting the deleted contributions from User:Zaidpjd~metawiki and User:Riyanz, both supposed to be the original proposer of the bug.wp, but their contribution pages are missing their contributions/discussion for this project, especially Riyanz'. Please let me know which pages other than "Template:Requests for new languages/Buginese" that their contributions was deleted (cleaned up). Thank you. Bennylin 17:04, 9 August 2022 (UTC) ---

  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. — xaosflux Talk 14:07, 10 August 2022 (UTC)