Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion#November 19, 2025

Skip to: Table of contents / current discussions / old business (bottom). Purge this page

WP:MFDWP:MFD

Please do not nominate your user page (or subpages of it) for deletion here. Instead, add {{db-userreq}} at the top of any such page you no longer wish to keep; an administrator will then delete the page for you. See Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § G7 for more information.

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

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:,^[a] Event: and the various Talk: namespaces
Userboxes, regardless of the namespace
File description pages when the file itself is hosted on Commons
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.

Notes

^ The vast majority of pages in the MOS: namespace are redirects, which should be discussed at RfD. MfD is only applicable for the handful of its non-redirect pages.

Before nominating a page for deletion

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.
Deletions in draftspace	Unlike articles, drafts are generally not deleted solely due to lack of demonstrated notability or context. Drafts that have not been edited in six months may be deleted under criterion for speedy deletion G13 and do not need nomination here. 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. For further information on draft deletion, including when nomination here is appropriate, see WP:NMFD
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

Wikipedia:Deletion policy – our deletion policy that describes how we delete things by consensus
Wikipedia:Deletion process – our guidelines on how to list anything for deletion
Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – a how-to guide whose protocols on discussion format and shorthands also apply here
Wikipedia:Project namespace – our guidelines on "Wikipedia" namespace pages
Wikipedia:User page – our guidelines on user pages and user subpages
Wikipedia:Userboxes – our guideline on userboxes

How to list pages for deletion

Shortcut

WP:MFDHOWTOWP:MFDHOWTO

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

XFD backlog
v
t
e
V	Oct	Nov	Total
CfD	8	53	61
TfD	4	13	17
MfD	0	0	0
FfD	0	5	5
RfD	0	37	37
AfD	0	0	0

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

Archived discussions

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

Current discussions

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.

November 28, 2025

User:Samreet groups

WP:NOTWEBHOST, WP:UP#NOT. See also Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Savi Tiwana. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 03:21, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. — ERcheck (talk) 05:40, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Drm310. —Fortuna, imperatrix 11:30, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Disney Legacy Animated Film Collection

Should have been A10'd (for Lists of films released by Disney), not moved to draftspace. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:55, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 27, 2025

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Surinder Kaur Maan

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. Speedy-deleted by Jimfbleak as G11. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 10:52, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Surinder Kaur Maan

WP:NOTWEBHOST, WP:UP#NOT. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:35, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Wikipedia is not a repository for book chapter drafts. AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:17, 27 November 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.

November 26, 2025

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:KILLGOESE/sandbox

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: speedy delete. I've speedied this as a hoax, no point in wasting more community time discussing it (esp. as it was heading for SNOW anyway). DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:03, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:KILLGOESE/sandbox

This is a list of U.S. presidents that speculates the RFK Jr. will follow Trump, followed by Bernie Sanders and Nick Fuentes. Then there's whatever the "Wikipedia GODS" section is about. It mentions @Acroterion, so courtesy ping to them. Whether this is a hoax, a crystal ball, or it's polemic (again, I'm not sure what to make of that last section), I don't think this belongs on Wikipedia. Chess enjoyer (talk) 03:49, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a fake article. Stupid, but fake. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:02, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it seems that the other users would want the sandbox deleted even if Fuentes was removed. Also, the user does not seem to be open to changing things, or at least not enough. Wikieditor662 (talk) 06:07, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@KILLGOESE Even your sandbox is supposed to only be used to assist you in editing Wikipedia (even though the scrutiny is lower). Were you testing features, or only using it for fun? If it's the latter, then you may need to either change or remove it. Wikieditor662 (talk) 04:05, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Were you testing features"

I was testing ffeatures i already explained this to another person. KILLGOESE (talk) 04:08, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~I see. If I'm not mistaken, you're allowed to use the sandbox for testing Wikipedia features.~~

However, I would still strongly advise that you remove Nick Fuentes from the list on there, even if you think you're right, as it is raising suspicion about your motivations.

Are you willing to do that? If so, then I'd say you should be allowed to keep your sandbox.

~~Wikieditor662 (talk) 04:14, 26 November 2025 (UTC)~~[reply]

Delete. Incompatible with Wikipedia. SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:30, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Too easily mistaken as an article despite being outside mainspace. The inclusion of Fuentes is far from the only disinformation in the table. This is not a fantasy election site. General Ization ^Talk 05:18, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:59, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This sandbox uses the names and images of living persons in a manner contrary to fact. The biographies of living persons policy applies in all namespaces. There are other reasons to delete also, but BLP is enough. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:26, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Suggest early close per snowball clause . Also note that the editor has continued to edit the page today, removing some false and offensive material but adding some more. If we were hoping a hint would be taken, none has. Accordingly, I think, they have now been blocked indef. General Ization ^Talk 02:03, 27 November 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.

User:Savi Tiwana

WP:NOTWEBHOST content. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 02:24, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Delete User:Savi Tiwana/sandbox too, the same thing. Clear NOTWEBHOST violation by a non-contributor. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:04, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Also appears to be AI-generated (90.76% ZeroGPT score). --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 12:10, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All - I have tagged the sandbox. This would have been U5 before U5 was revised, but it still should be deleted. This appears to be some sort of promotion. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:23, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually a school project, judging by the section listing group members at the bottom of the page. This is more common than one might think. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:25, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then they are not the only ones, it seems. Look at these userpages as well:

--Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:05, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 25, 2025

Draft:Greenwood County School District 52

Attack page filled with BLPGROUP and BLPCRIME violations both of which is unsupported by significant coverage in multiple independent secondary sources--Trade (talk) 00:02, 26 November 2025 (UTC) @G1B71:--Trade (talk) 00:05, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question - The log shows that BLP-violating material was redacted by an administrator on 26 November, after the nomination was made. Is this nomination for deletion still necessary, or has that been taken care of by revdeling the offensive material? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:32, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Depends. Does the two other "Controversy" sections still counts as an attack page you think? Trade (talk) 05:31, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon:--Trade (talk) 05:32, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This is not an attack page, and the Controversies section is not an attack page or an attack section. An attack page is a page, in any namespace, that exists primarily to disparage or threaten its subject; or biographical material that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced or poorly sourced. The purpose of this page is not to disparage or threaten the school district. It is not entirely negative, and it appears to be adequately sourced. Whether it is adequately sourced for article space can be decided by the AFC draft review process, or by AFD if it is moved to article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:27, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Harsh Vardhan ( AI)

Duplicate of Draft:Harsh Vardhan after original page was declined at AfC. Editor should work on original draft instead of recreating the page when it is declined. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 12:28, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I created this draft based on coverage in reliable sources like ET CIO and Analytics India Magazine. I've addressed potential promo issues by neutralizing the tone and adding more independent refs (see edits below). Happy to make further changes for approval. ~~~~ DeepHiveEditor (talk) 12:36, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Draft:Harsh Vardhan. Multiple copies of drafts are problematic. Redirection is an Alternative to Deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:17, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect today’s Draft:Harsh Vardhan ( AI) to last week’s Draft:Harsh Vardhan. Discourage forks. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:16, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Draft:Harsh Vardhan, per nomination and both of the above. An older account, probable sockpuppet/meatpuppet, created another one an hour after Draft:Harsh Vardhan ( AI) at Draft:Harsh Vardhan (Apollo Tyres), and then complained about its rejection at AFC helpdesk: [1]. Wikishovel (talk) 12:35, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn’t notice that other page Draft:Harsh Vardhan (Apollo Tyres), thanks for pointing it out. Perhaps it could receive the same outcome as this MfD when it closes? SnowyRiver28 (talk) 21:49, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 1, 2026

Seems to be a malformed TFA blurb for Nine Elms, which is not a featured article. Sugar Tax (talk) 11:11, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless the originator provides an explanation within seven days. I am not sure what this is meant to be, but it appears to be some sort of error. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:29, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:59, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rager7/sandbox/draft2

WP:FAKEARTICLE with potentially highly offensive word substitutions, like "Is real" for "Israel" and "imagination" for "immigration". Not to mention that it's some weird sort of alternative/wished-for history, or something. Not what userspace is for, at any rate. Graham87 (talk) 05:15, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm not trying to do alternate history or anything like that. Those are just typos. Rager7 (talk) 05:22, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What are you trying to do, then? Graham87 (talk) 05:29, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just trying to compile a period of time (in this case a series of wars) in Middle Eastern history into one article, that's all. Typos and mistakes are bound to happen. Rager7 (talk) 05:31, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We already have the article Arab–Israeli conflict, which serves that purpose quite nicely. Graham87 (talk) 05:44, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but I'm trying to go more in depth and be specific. Like the article Arab–Israeli conflict is more about the general long term conflict. While I'm trying to explain more about the four major wars within the overall conflict. Does that make sense? Rager7 (talk) 05:46, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not to me it doesn't. I'll leave others to comment further. Graham87 (talk) 05:57, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I recognize this is a very sensitive topic area, where unusual contributions provoke some concern. But I start from a presumption of significant latitude for potentially encyclopedia-related userspace sandbox content by a long-term, varied-topic editor. @Graham87:, can you elaborate what you found "potentially highly offensive"? I wasn't highly offended by anything based on a quick glance, and I hesitate to censor based on potentiality of offensiveness and second-guessing what some other editor might or might not find useful for their editing. But I'm also aware that some of these long-term contentious editing conflicts use coded language that those of us outside do not immediately recognize. Martinp (talk) 11:25, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Martinp: FWIW this was how the page was when it was nominated for deletion, with the incorrect words that I noted (not all have been fixed; and I honestly don't know what to think of the user's explanation, but autocorrect can be interesting). I barely edit in the topic area either. But stuff like "Israel for the most part have [sic] now cordial relations with the neighboring Arab countries despite past grievances" is flatly contradicted by the fact that both Lebanon and Syria, two countries that border Israel, don't recognise it, along with the very next sentence in the user page, "Relations are still tense despite the various peace deals and agreements.". The whole thing feels like an ill-thought-out mishmash of ideas that will be of little use to anyone and ignores Israel's incursions into universally recognised Arab sovereign states like the 2006 Lebanon War and the 2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon. Re the "potentially encyclopedia-related userspace sandbox content by a long-term, varied-topic editor" bit, I don't think this user has the bredth or depth of experience to overhaul a topic area like that; but then again, neither do I. I'd feel differently if the author was a recognised subject matter expert and/or had a strong reputation among editors in the topic area, but I don't think we have that here. Graham87 (talk) 13:00, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  The part where I wrote: "Israel for the most part have [sic] now cordial relations with the neighboring Arab countries despite past grievances" are place holders. Obviously, that's not accurate. After all, I will change it later on when I have better information to put down. Rager7 (talk) 14:16, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: hmmm, there is the [[Arab–Israeli War disambiguation page (created relatively late in Wikipedia's history, in 2014) and this American University source seems to describe the early history of the Israel-Arab conflict this way. But my question is: would anyone else actually find a page like this in article space useful? To me it feels like a page on, say, World War I or World War II that only focuses on a few of the major battles/events. Encyclopedia articles are supposed to be comprehensive. Graham87 (talk) 13:28, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I've asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration. Graham87 (talk) 13:43, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think you’re applying too high a bar in asking “could this as-is be useful in article space”. It’s a user sandbox. So I think the bar is more “could this be useful to this user in eventually making edits in article space”. And I’m disinclined to second guess that, absent actual disruption. There’s enough preamble on the subject age that it can’t be mistaken for an actual article.

As to factual accuracy, meh. If a sandbox claims the world population of kangaroos is 5 billion, I may have grave doubts about it, but I won’t advocate deleting the sandbox as a result (I’d ask for a source if put in article space though). I realize this is an oversimplification given the contentious area here but I think we just don’t need to police user sandboxes like this absent a real problem. Martinp (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – we already have Arab–Israeli conflict which does the same thing. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:46, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep in the absence of a more specific reason by the nominator - This should be treated as a draft, and drafts are not deleted for notability or sanity. However, this is not a draft that we need, because the article already exists. I will ask the usual annoying question, and that is why the nominator is reviewing user sandboxen. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:18, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I found this user page while briefly checking the creating user's contributions (their latest edit was to the nominated page at the time) and the combination of the unusual word usage, the odd-seeming slant/scope, and the controversial topic area prompted me to bring this user page here. Perhaps talking to the user about it (or consulting privately about what to do, as I was thinking of doing) might have been a better idea. I didn't think this was relevant enough to mention in the nomination statement but I have quite a fraught history with the user who created the page, which also led me to wonder whether views of it from other people besides me would be helpful. I don't usually patrol user pages and have no intentions of doing so in the future, either for this user or in general. Graham87 (talk) 09:12, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 23, 2025

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Magic

Deletion sorting venues are supposed to divide discussions into niches so people most knowledgeable or interested in them can participate. This area, 'magic', is so niche I don't find any use of it. How many magicians are there really to justify its inclusion? It only gets a few entries per year. Magic (illusion) is defined as a performing art; thus, related articles that do fit this odd category can instead go into the art deletion sorting. jolielover♥talk 05:42, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probably, but you should post a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting, and add yourself to the WikiProject membership. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:27, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. jolielover♥talk 13:20, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - This should be discussed at the deletion sorting talk page, WikiProject Deletion sorting. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:05, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tango

This WikiProject has no listed participants, no subpages and no activity since it was created 3 August 2022. Also, a WikiProject with the same name was deleted in 2011. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 01:38, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The activity of a WikiProject takes place on its talk page, but the talk page of this project is empty, because there never was an activity. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No participants and the talkpage was never even created. It does not seem like this went thru the proper wikiproject creation process. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 02:51, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Retain": I am the editor for this page and I apologize for taking such a long time to work on this. It was my intention to bring the authors of the several independent tango-specific wiki sites into Wikipedia, these sites already have deep entries for a number of tango terms and lexicons, and it simplifies update from one to the other with some degree of integration. (An example would be the annual world championship which has a list of winners, and this has to be updated in wikipedia when it already has updates in the tango sites. ) The reason for the delay is that most people outside Wikipedia has a steep learning curve to learn how it works, and I was unable to rush them in this process. I hope we can be given more time to pursue this goal, and bearing in mind we are all doing this in our spare time we do not have a definite date of completion, except maybe to review our status every six months or so. — Abrazos (talk • contribs) 02:56, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As of today, nobody is signed up for this project and the project has gone nowhere since the day it was (re)created over 3 years ago. Since you are still interested in having a project like this, I will agree to withdraw the nomination if you will agree to move this to a subpage in your user space. From there, you can recruit people and later move it back to project space when it's ready. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 03:45, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
move to userpage of the creator. If this is just currently just a solo project then it's better off as a user subpage --Lenticel ^(talk) 13:01, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 20, 2025

User:Kimera Kat/Three word story

Wikipedia isn't the place to be creating things like this. It isn't a webhost or your own personal website, so this should be deleted. You may note that it has been tagged with the humor tag, but this happened quite a long time ago, before humor was clearly defined on Wikipedia. If we go to Wikipedia:Humor#Humor outside of articles, it has a handful of examples on what is acceptable. This page doesn't meet any of them, it doesn't illustrate any point, it doesn't document any funny articles, etc. Most importantly, it is not very related to Wikipedia like the end article is, the beginning of wikipedia page is, or like how the other end of wikipedia article is. It was previously kept because of these reasons, but I think I have rebuked them. User:Easternsahara_{review this} 18:23, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Pages like this, light hearted community interactions, were a feature of the early days of Wikipedia, and they were a good thing. This page, 2007, is more like the peak growth period than early, but these things used to be normal. The early days also featured a lot of bad stuff, and rules and practices have tightened since then, but they have not tightened around harmless good-willed fun. The page is also historical, and the nomination seeks to erase history, and has no apparent good purpose. SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:56, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's look at the page stats. The page has found a resurgence in edits, with the number of edits in 2024 to present being more than previous years, and it had mostly died out from 2023-2012. Unregistered editors, who are by large part not part of the "wikipedia community", make up a fifth of the edits and the top 10 editors make up half the edits. This means that this page still distracts from constructive editing, that it wasn't created by a "wikipedia community" and that it wasn't created collaboratively. Thus, I do not see what value this page would provide by being tagged as historical, as other pages are. This contains no policy proposal or anything useful at all. This may be good-willed fun but Wikipedia has user page guidelines which this is violating. WP:NOTSOCIALNETWORK, WP:NOTWEBHOST, and most importantly this isn't something that is related to Wikipedia. I get keeping humor pages like wikispecies because those allow editors to read about common user behaviors in a humorous way. I also understand keeping guestbooks to build community, although I do not support those. But I don't think that this is similar to those things and does not help with editor retention significantly. User:Easternsahara_{review this} 04:12, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. You should stop looking in others’ userspace for things you don’t approve. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:51, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You should stop disregarding user page guidelines when they're against old pages or experienced users. User:Easternsahara_{review this} 18:52, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It's harmless humor, and part of the Department of Fun! The Master of Hedgehogs (talk) (contributions) (Sign my guestbook!) 13:58, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
keep and trout the nominator for being a self-appointed fun police. ltbdl (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Harmless. To the nominator: you'll find the community's appetite to police whether subpages of productive (or formerly productive) editors' userspace are on the right or wrong side of the fuzzy line of WP:NOTWEBHOST is low. That's absent some stronger element of disruption, or BLP or copyright issues. This may feel frustrating to you. The reality is that absent a few specific bright lines, Wikipedia deletion policy is descriptive rather than prescriptive. Given how popular Wikipedia has become, it has become necessary to police that users are not actively abusing it as a general-purpose hosting platform, and for self-promotion in particular. The list of what Wikipedia is WP:NOT keeps having to grow. But no one really has the appetite to pore through dusty archives and second guess precisely what pages from back then were useful for what purpose then, whether they violate today's WP:NOT or not, and whether that warrants or requires deletion. Especially applied to active or retired users, it feels icky, which is why people react a bit harshly, with disgust. Martinp (talk) 19:58, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:~2025-34140-84

It's a long story, but I gave a temp user a userpage as an experiment as the temp user proposed in the Village Pump that temp users have userpages, and I wondered if those could be created already. Such a userpage will remain permanently, however, and this user has used it for political promotion. I think we should delete it until consensus is reached in the Village Pump ✨ΩmegaMantis✨^blather 02:23, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the userpage seems to traffic in various conspiracies. The user is self-evidently WP:NOTHERE, or their user page clearly portrays as such. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 04:40, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~. It is not political promotion, it is introduction of the user’s political bias. This is allowed, even encouraged, on userpages. I think “the userpage seems to traffic in various conspiracies” is nonsense.

It is a reasonable main Userpage. The temporary user should be urged to WP:Register and move it to their proper main Userpage. The temporary Userpage might be well deleted when the temporary account expires.

- SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:21, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The kirk conspiracy theory gives it away. And though i myself also display my political affiliation on my user page, the insinuation that kirk was killed by israel and trump is entirely inappropriate. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 16:38, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

at the very least i think im fine with the far right declaration. The association between trump and epstein might be skirting the line of blp, but as the user isnt stating it in wikivoice its probably fine?

but the israel trump kirk stuff should probably be deleted. I think there is some precedent in MfD for that.

not sure about the village pump discussion, temp account user pages are strange to me, and not sure temp accounts are implemented to rotate like IPs right? User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 16:52, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. You have a point.

I am hesitant to support MfD in getting into judgement, and refinement, of what users may write along the lines of conspiracy theories. We would delete a userbox that asserted these things. The Trump BLP angle is borderline, but there. Blaming Israel for Kirk is looney.

Userpages are not read as WikiVoice. Users are allowed to have their POV, and to be wrong, and it is better for bias or lunacy to be declared.

I’m not sure. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:04, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well you much rather want bias declared than someone hiding it. And no, you can not delete my user page because of my political opinion. What if it was the other way around? Wikipedia has a conservative userbase and they were going to delete a user page that supports Palestine and progressive politics? ~2025-34140-84 (talk) 03:25, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it even allowed to delete someones user page if they're active? I dont think your supposed to do that normally. ~2025-34140-84 (talk) 03:27, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Wikipedia is not a personal web host. Userpages sometimes get deleted on MFD for various reasons. TruenoCity (talk) 18:53, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old business

Everything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began 13:56, 21 November 2025 (UTC) ended today on 28 November 2025. Editors may continue to add comments until the discussion is closed but they should keep in mind that the discussion below this marker may be closed at any time without further notice. Discussions that have already been closed will be removed from the page automatically by Legobot and need no further action.

Closed discussions

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates

[1] The vast majority of pages in the MOS: namespace are redirects, which should be discussed at RfD. MfD is only applicable for the handful of its non-redirect pages.

[a]