Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

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.
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

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	9	42	51
TfD	6	16	22
MfD	0	1	1
FfD	0	2	2
RfD	0	24	24
AfD	0	6	6

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 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]

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]

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]

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]

November 19, 2025

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ohyeainfo/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: delete. WP:SNOW The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:21, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ohyeainfo/sandbox

WP:NOTWEBHOST, no reason for these NSFW (not safe for work, or pornographic) images to exist together in a sandbox, and was created as the first and only edit by the editor. cyberdog958^Talk 02:52, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Justice Potter Stewart said, of hard-core pornography, that he could not define it, but "I know it when I see it". He knew that the film in question was not hard-core pornography, and voted to overturn the conviction. I know it when I see it that this sandbox is hard-core pornography and has no encyclopedic value. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:15, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's porn for Christ's sake, surely this should be gone immediately?. GarethBaloney (talk) 09:03, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GarethBaloney, see Wikipedia:User pages#Images that would bring the project into disrepute for your answer. Howvever, since we're now at MFD, I don't think anything should be removed until this discussion is closed. Chess enjoyer (talk) 18:06, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This sandbox consists entirely of images that would bring the project into disrepute. Wikipedia is not censored, but it also isn't gratuitous. This could not possibly be interpreted as a draft for an article. Chess enjoyer (talk) 18:06, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete let's just invoke WP:NOTWEBHOST and call it a day --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:32, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: sandbox consisting of only pornographic images, also the creator's only edit so far. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 18:02, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If I saw this turn up in CAT:G3, I'd delete it without a second thought. Meets the letter and intent of WP:Vandalism#Image vandalism. What I'm wondering, and why I haven't speedied it yet, is how (at least) the six experienced users above could have looked at it without even one coming to the same conclusion. —Cryptic 03:15, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your reasoning makes perfect sense and I probably should have at least started with that. This would have been the fastest U5 that there ever was, but since that isn’t a thing anymore, I was trying to see if it would fit neatly into any of the other categories. Now that you mention that section specifically, it clearly meets the criteria, but I guess I overthought it and came here instead. cyberdog958^Talk 03:47, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a page created not for the benefit of the project, by a non-contributor. SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:28, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete its hard core p*rn shane (talk to me if you want!) 22:12, 22 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 18, 2025

Draft:Joey Primiani

In mainspace, it's got nine substantive deletions I can find among Joseph Primiani, Joey Primiani, and Joseph C. Primiani (and a handful more A1's and redirects), with afds at the first two titles and an overly-optimistic DRV for the second. More to the point, between this title and Draft:Joey Primiani (2), it's been submitted at least eight times, G13'd eleven times, and credulously restored seven times without appreciable improvement. We've been hosting this person's resume - sometimes glorified, as at present, sometimes quite literally - since he was an 18-year-old college student in 2006. Enough. —Cryptic 05:09, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete from draft space. Drafts are not deleted for lack of notability, and are seldom deleted except for tendentious resubmission. This is a case of tendentious existence and undeletion of a draft. Deletion of the draft will prevent refunding at Requests for Undeletion. Also, because of the use of different forms of his first name, put his surname, Primiani, on the Title Blacklist. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:14, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - normally, drafts are left for G13 to deal with, but in this case, G13 is not working so deletion via MFD is appropriate. -- Whpq (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:31, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 17, 2025

User:Kerville9/sandbox

Another fantasy version of List of presidents of the United States but with the 46th and 47th president changed, with the page mixed with sections from Mass shootings in the United States. This page seems to be the creator's exclusive editing interest, so they are clearly WP:NOTHERE. Creator has been inactive for almost a year now, however, the page continues to be edited by several users and IPs I suspect are sockpuppets of the creator. TruenoCity (talk) 16:36, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Wikipedia is not a web host for fantasy elections. -- Whpq (talk) 20:16, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This also uses the names and images of living persons to provide contrary-to-fact information, so that this is a biographies of living persons violation. There are other issues, but the BLP violation is enough. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:43, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:08, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sella Sanjani

WP:NOTWEBHOST, content already repeated in user's sandbox Drm310 🍁 (talk) 12:58, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - also not in English. GarethBaloney (talk) 18:05, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Not voting at this time until I review the user page policy as to whether draft articles are permitted. Machine translation shows that this is a draft article in Indonesian about gambling machines that will not be accepted because it has no references, but should not be deleted from draft space. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:48, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - After reading the user page policy, my interpretation is that there is no explicit rule against a user page that is a copy of a non-English sandbox, but that that runs against the apparent intent of the guidelines, and MFD should use common sense as to the intent of the guidelines. The originator of this user page is a recently active user, and I will reconsider my vote if the originator provides an explanation, in English, of why they should have this user page. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:23, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - ~~For me, this sounds like a gambling promotion.~~ Edit: after considering the content, this may not be promotional, but I still support deletion because it is redundant with the user's sandbox. Penyuwangi (talk) 10:46, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:08, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete at this location, as noncontroversial cleanup . User is new and clearly finding their way. This is one of their only 2 edits so far. The other pasted exactly the same text at User:Sella Sanjani/sandbox, which is a better location for it and keep it there. The text itself, after machine translation, isn't promotional or otherwise objectionable, and could plausibly be used to edit articles on gambling machines on en.wp, though of course such editing will need to follow our guidelines. Martinp (talk) 16:51, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete under G11 (including the sandbox). To me, this looks like typical SEO spam, likely AI-generated. It conveniently namedrops whatever "RESMI777" is multiple times throughout in a way that does not suggest the typical practice of providing examples (notice that the text names no other gambling companies?); the absence of an external link is likely an artifact of the AI-generation process (I see some AI slop drafts with "See Also" sections without links at all, as well as citations without any links even if they are available online either). It is worth noting that the user is blocked on Wikidata for being a "promotion only account" and has triggered edit filters related to "Wrong language spam" (I can't view them in detail as I'm not autoconfirmed), so this user should probably be globally blocked for cross-wiki spam. OutsideNormality (talk) 23:05, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 16, 2025

Draft:Windows 12

WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL, also been rejected more times than I can care to count. Tank ish guy 15:48, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral as per the last MFD in which there was No Consensus, but ECP Salt to prevent edits by temporary accounts and new accounts. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:04, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This 2025 reference is enough to justify keeping this in draftspace. Rumour sources belong in draftspace, not in mainspace. This is draftspace performing its function. The page can be blanked and re-started without deleting the history. I would clear all the old notices, move them to a talk page archive. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:16, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do not apply any protection. Doing so defeats an important purpose of draftspace. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:17, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Lesmtu

WP:NOTWEBHOST, content repeated at Draft:Space Food for Interstellar Missions and the Gummy‐Dried Ration Concept Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:31, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - Not a valid user page, and selfpromotional. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:12, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not allowed as per WP:FAKEARTICLE. This and the draft (same thing) also read like an AI-generated text to me. GarethBaloney (talk) 18:19, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:08, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Uruguay at the 2026 Winter Olympics

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: redirect to Uruguay at the 2026 Winter Olympics. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Uruguay at the 2026 Winter Olympics

Uruguay at the 2026 Winter Olympics already exists and is more detailed than this draft and better sourced. -- Sangjinhwa (talk) 00:13, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the histories and then delete. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:28, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect the draft to Uruguay at the 2026 Winter Olympics. This will avoid the need to merge the histories because both histories will still exist. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:41, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above; a history merge shouldn't be done here as no cut-and-paste move has occurred. Graham87 (talk) 05:15, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:26, 17 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 12, 2025

User:Ali kanane

(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.)

Salvio giuliano

14:40, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user page is not in English (it's written in French), is promotional, and appears to be AI-generated content. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 06:14, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question for the originator - Was this misplaced, and intended to be posted in the French Wikipedia? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:27, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,

Salvio giuliano

14:40, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. We generally extend leeway to userspace, and it wouldn't be the first time either a new user's well-intentioned 1st version of their user page reads like a CV. Nor would it be the first time a well-intentioned user creates their first draft article not only in their userspace, but accidentally as their user page. However, in this instance the combination of 1) promotional bio in article style, presumably an undeclared COI, 2) little evidence of notabiity, 3) one and only contribution by this user, who hasn't been seen in the 10 days since, 4) not English, 5) edit summary translating as "draft article" not something like "introduce myself", together act as too many strong ocean waves against that leeway. Martinp (talk) 23:05, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old business

Everything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began 10:32, 16 November 2025 (UTC) ended today on 23 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.

November 15, 2025

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:RK/What being an American citizen means

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: keep. $Salvio giuliano$ 10:06, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:RK/What being an American citizen means

Not related to Wikipedia, WP:NOTWEBHOST. contributor has been inactive for ~5 years User:Easternsahara_{review this} 00:47, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – I can't think of a reason to keep this; it was created before the user pages guideline was created. Graham87 (talk) 06:56, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Blank only if you think it’s an old NOTWEBHOST violation, blanking is a sufficient fix. The user was an active contributor, and deserves more respect due to that. Their userspace pages are a small fraction of their edits, and so it is within reasonable leeway. Policing others’ userspace is an unfriendly thing to do, and shaming old users with an MfD discussion is completely unjustified. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:16, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And I do not agree that it is a WP:WEBHOST violation. There is no plausible notion that it is was was used for an offsite purpose. It would well be reference material of intended mainspace contributions.

And reasonable leeway is not about “experienced users should be treated any different than new ones”, but is about rations. This user has 10,633 contribution edits, and only 1.5% of them are in the user namespace. This is a very strong indication that the user is a productive Wikipedian, not an abuser.

Length of inactivity of a once productive Wikipedia is never a justification to mess with their userspace. They will return, and presuming that they won’t will be a self-fulfilling professy.

This nomination is a net negative. RK (talk · contribs) deserves more respect. SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:38, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would also like to add that the user's last 500 go back to 2009, I don't think their "return" is very likely. I don't think that this matters at all but you seem to care about this. Also I am not messing their userspace up as you say, it does not seem to meet rules 2 and 5 of notwebhost so i am nominating it for deletion. I am also not arguing that this contributor is bad, only that this page is bad. So your points about their contributions makes little sense. While I would like to assume good faith that you are assuming good faith, I am going to point you to WP:AGF as you think that I am "shaming old users" or trying to prevent this editor from returning. As mentioned previously, this material already seems to be online on other websites. I suspect that the ideas here or this entire comment was generated using a LLM due to the language and weakness. User:Easternsahara_{review this} 02:15, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Editors matter.

Policing other’s userspace is unfriendly, and deletion of inactive users’ userpages is unwelcoming to them in their return.

I disagree that this page violates WP:NOTWEBHOST #2 or #5, and certainly not to the extent that it overcomes the negativity of policing others’ userspace.

What content do you allege is LLM-generated? The usersubpage edit dates makes this very unlikely. Do you suspect I am using LLM? I assure you that I am not.

- SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:09, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ignore as in Weak Keep - There is no harm to keeping this visible, and no obvious benefit either to deleting it or blanking it. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:10, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOHARM if you think that Wikipedia userpages that don't serve any purpose to the encyclopedia but are "harmless" shouldn't be deleted then you should create an RfC on the userpage guideline page. However, being harmless doesn't mean that this shouldn't be deleted if it is a breach of policy, that would be selective enforcement of Wikipedia's policies. User:Easternsahara_{review this} 02:20, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I very seldom see any reason to blank things without deleting them. That is my opinion. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:10, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This user has over 10,000 edits and although they don't seem to be active now, they should at least have been notified. It seems harmless to me and bringing up NOTWEBHOST seems harsh, although I can't see how it's related to writing an article. Should probably just be blanked. Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:50, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I gave a notice to the user. No real opinion on this otherwise. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 21:05, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think WP:NOTWEBHOST's application is intended primarily for pages which are absolutely clearly not related to editing Wikipedia. I see plausible reasons how this could be intended to be helpful for a user's WP editing, and am disinclined to second-guess whether it likely is or isn't in this instance, absent some disruption. There is none here. As to inactivity, I can understand that we will eventually need to develop some sort of policy of deleting long-inactive users' user space flotsam and jetsam. But we don't have such a policy, don't seem to (yet) have a crying need for one, and this doesn't seem to be a compellingly problematic page to serve as impetus for developing one. Martinp (talk) 12:04, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response I don't think experienced users should be treated any different than new ones. Wikipedia isn't a soapbox and this isn't a userbox either, its an essay. If it were a userbox, I wouldn't even bother because those rarely get deleted. Also Martin mentions that there could be reasons that this could be helpful to a Wikipedia's users contributions but does not name them at all. At least in its current state, it does not resemble anything like an essay which advises people to only focus on American content or to make sure that "American principles" such as Christianity, freedom or whatever else are present in Wikipedia. If it was like the latter, then that sound's like advocacy which isn't what user essays are supposed to do, and if it were the former then it's almost like we have a dedicated Wikiproject. I agree with Martin that this doesn't need a new policy, that policy would be a solution without a problem, but it already treats Wikipedia like storage, which isn't allowed. User:Easternsahara_{review this} 22:19, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is (presumably) the text of a fairly well-known speech that is notable and has its own Wikipedia article. I doubt there is a copyright issue. We don't know what use RK intended (or intends, if they ever intend to come back) for it However, an Occam's Razor explanation is that it might be used for improving the article in question, or other articles about that US historical period. Who knows, but I think NOTWEBHOST should be used in instances where there is no plausible use of the material for encyclopedic purposes, not where the Occam's-Razor explanation is, in fact, an encyclopedic one. Martinp (talk) 12:53, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Re-reviewing. @Easternsahara:, double checking that when you nominated this, you realized this is the text of a (moderately famous) speech by a U.S. President, the article on it linked in the first sentence of the page? Your comments above, "it's an essay" vs userboax etc, make me wonder if your nomination assumed that this was RK soapboxing in their own words? Martinp (talk) 10:09, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I knew but having very long quotes like this would not be useful to many pages to my understanding. I also think it can be found online this as an example User:Easternsahara_{review this} 15:28, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This is potentially a tainted nomination. I've done my best to AGF, however I've been puzzled by its motivation, plus inconsistencies in the nominator's followup responses in the discussion. How and why does someone stumble across a user subpage of a several-year-inactive editor? The subpage's only incoming link, other than now related to this MFD listing, is from RK's top-level userpage. Given the page is a pretty short, unremarkable, and clearly related to a Wikipedia article (to which it conveniently links), having landed there, why bother second-guessing what specific intended use its creator had for it earlier, and may or may not have for it going forward, rather than moving on? I then see that RK is (was?) an editor with a strong interest regarding Judaism. The nominator appears to have a strong interest in Palestine, and nominated this userpage for deletion in the midst of a range of edits related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Absent some additional information about the sequence of events leading to this nomination, I'm left with the unfortunate suspicion that it is a microaggression related to differences of opinion on the Arab-Israeli conflict, just being "played" outside of the spotlight en.wp imposes on this contentious area. With apologies if there is a compelling alternate explanation, but AGF has limits. Martinp (talk) 12:27, 22 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.

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]