위키백과:삭제용 미스셀라니

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 빠른 삭제였다.WP:G7, WP:IAR. 이것에 대해 논쟁하는 건 의미가 없어.리치333 14^(cont):14, 2022년 3월 4일(UTC)

사용자:Ritchie3333/Userbox Boris

사용자:Ritchie333/Userbox Boris(토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집) – (View MfD)

WP:G10, 합리적인 비판을 넘어 의도적으로 선동적인 모욕 영역으로 넘어가는 생활주제에 대한 공격 페이지, 그리고 일반적으로 관리자로부터 서투른 형태.드론보거스 (대화) 01:29, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)

• 계속. 만약 우리가 정치적 사용자 박스를 계속 허용하려고 한다면(그러지 않았으면 좋았을 텐데), 이번처럼 "X는 Y"라고 말하는 것에 못 미치는 강한 의견의 표현은 "이 사용자가 생각하는..."으로 미리 맞서는 것이 허용되어야 한다.나는 Ritchie333이 그 사람에 대한 기사를 편집하는 것을 자제하기를 기대한다; 그러나 나는 긍정적이든 부정적이든, 관리적이든 아니든 어떤 주제에 대해 그렇게 강한 의견을 가진 편집자의 기사를 나는 기대한다.우리는 편집자들이 강한 의견을 갖는 것을 금지하지 않는다; 우리는 편집자들이 중립적일 수 없을 정도로 강한 선호의 주제를 피하도록 요구한다. 그리고 나는 이 사용자 박스가 그러한 극복할 수 없는 충돌을 선언할 만한 가치가 있다고 생각한다.Yngvadottir (대화) 08:56, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)
  • 그러나 이것은 짧게 그치지 않고, 문자 그대로 "X(BoJo)는 Y(nincompoop)"라고 쓰여 있다.나는 이것에 대한 사람들의 의견에 대해 조금도 개의치 않지만(그리고 일반 정서에 동의한다) 사용자 박스에서 이름을 부르는 것은 WP:BLPTAK에 반하는 유치한 행동이다.드론보거스 (대화) 09:03, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)
• 계속, 진짜?wikt:nincompope : "(해석) 어리석거나 어리석은 사람."이 구식 별명은 18세기 명예의원이 나올 것으로 예상할 수 있는 것이다.내가 존슨을 생각하면, 다른 말로 하면, 그들 중 많은 수가 생각난다.가장 중요한 것은 거짓말이다.나는 Ritchie가 그의 파이프에서 "완전한 닌콤프"를 위해 사용하는 하이퍼링크가 WP라는 것에 주목한다.Johnson의 기사에 쉽게 사용될 수 있는 RS.Yngvadottir에 따르면, 리치가 편집하지 않기로 결정한 기사들에 의해 공평성이 입증되어야 한다(그리고 필요하다면 점검해야 한다).마르티네반스123 (토크) 09:57, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC) p.s. 나는 내 사용자 페이지에 "보리스 존슨은 빌어먹을 쿤트다"라는 명랑한 글에 링크를 추가해야 한다는 것을 기억해야 한다.
  • 너의 주장은, 내가 오해하지 않는다면, "존슨이 형편없고, 닌콥이 바보 같은 모욕이고, 가디언 링크가 있고, 또한 JRM을 너무 망쳐놓기도 해서 좋아."라는 것 같다.그것들 중 어느 것도 내가 이것을 추천한 이유가 아니다.순전히 살아 있는 사람을 모욕하기 위해 존재하는 것이고, 그것은 분명히 모욕이며(아주 온화하고 정보에 밝은 사람일 뿐) 지능적으로 표현된 비평이 아니기 때문에 내가 지명한 것이다.드론보거스 (대화) 10시 40분, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)
    • 글쎄, 나는 "JRM을 너무 망쳐"를 포함한 어떤 단어들도 넣었던 것을 기억하지 못한다.하지만, 그것은 "매우 온건하고 정보에 입각한" 모욕이다.가디언이 아니라 아이뉴스인 것 같아.마르티네반스123 (대화) 13:43, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)

• DeletepaceYngvadottir, 그러나 나는 여기서 BLPTAK가 주요 논쟁이자 우리의 주요 책임이라고 생각한다.만약 우리가 이 상자를 잃어버린다면, 우리는 여전히 다른 정치적 사용자들을 제거할 필요가 없을 것이다; 나는 말하는데 있어서 많은 차이가 있다고 본다.이 사용자는 공산주의자/나지/흔들린터 및 바퀴벌레라고 말하며 이 사용자는 BLP를 닌콤푸프/asshole/mofo라고 생각한다.그것은 그 주장이 남자인지 아니면 공인지에 달려있다; BLP는 전자에 기반을 두고 있고 말 그대로 정책적으로 우리가 후자를 할 수 없도록 막는다.그러나 이것이 그 상자가 하는 일이다: 광고 홈.
  우연히도, 나는 이것이 리치의 트럼프 유저박스(또한 논의 중에 있음)와는 다른 사례라고 생각한다. 이는 강력한 주장을 하는 반면, 그들은 단순히 모욕적인 주장보다는 구체적으로 트럼프의 정책에 기초하고 있기 때문이다.
  Yngvadottir, re.나는 Ritchie333이 문제의 인물에 대한 기사 편집을 자제하기를 기대한다.그러나 이 (보리스 존슨)과 이 (파티게이트)는 1월부터이다.바라건대 더 깊이 파고드는 것, 즉 내가 시간이나 에너지가 부족한 것이 더 많은 예를 들지는 못할 것이다.SN54129 13:40, 2022년 3월 4일(UTC)
  • 그렇다, 사람들을 싫어하는 편집자들은 그들의 기사를 편집하게 된다.하지만 훨씬 더 큰 위험은 큰 지지자지만 그 사실을 선언하지 않는 편집자들의 기사 편집이라고 생각한다.마르티네반스123 (대화) 13:49, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 빠른 삭제였다.WP:G7 WP:IAR. 이것에 대해 논쟁하는 건 의미가 없어.위키백과에서 명시적으로 언급된 내용을 찾을 수 없다.관리자 게시판/IncidentArchive951#in_doubt 그러나 나는 내가 첫 번째 이의에 따라 그들을 제거하려고 의도했다고 믿는다.리치333 14^(cont):13, 2022년 3월 4일(UTC)

사용자:Ritchie3333/Userbox Trump

사용자:Ritchie333/Userbox Trump (Talk history link watch logs 편집) – (View MfD)

WP:G10, 합리적인 비판을 넘어 고의적으로 선동적인 모욕영역(고드윈의 법칙은 말할 것도 없고)으로 이어지는 생활주제에 대한 공격 페이지, 그리고 일반적으로 관리자로부터 서툰 형태.드론보거스 (대화) 01:28, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)

• 계속. G10은 사람들이 자신의 사용자 페이지에 정치적 신념을 선언하는 것을 막기 위한 것이 아니라고 생각한다.특히 시사점을 감안할 때 편집자들이 (과거 또는 현재) 강력한 정부 지도자들을 사용자 페이지에서 비판하도록 허용하는 편에서 실수를 해야 한다고 생각한다.28바이트(대화) 04:41, 2022년 3월 4일(UTC)
• 삭제하라. 나는 영국에서 태어나서 많은 시간을 보낸 사람으로서 이 일을 하게 된다. 그리고 지금은 80대에 나는 호주에서 많은 시간을 보냈다. 그래서 나는 만약 우리가 많은 나라의 정치인들을 비난하는 사용자 박스를 갖게 된다면 어떻게 될까 자문한다.이 상자는 너무 멀리 가고 있어. --Bduke (토크) 07:40, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)
• 계속. 정치적 유저박스를 계속 허용하려면(그렇지 않았으면 좋았을 텐데), 강한 개인적 의견의 표현이 허용되어야 한다.사용된 동사 "세부사항"은 사용자의 의견을 가리키며, 구체적인 주장은 링크에 의해 뒷받침된다. 하나는 해석이지만 다른 하나는 의견 기사에 연결된다.확실히 하려면 "이 사용자는 인간의 삶보다 골프를 더 중요시하는 신나치 동조자로 간주하는 도널드 트럼프를 혐오한다"는 표현을 선호한다.나는 또한 Ritchie333이 그 사람에 대한 기사를 편집하는 것을 자제하기를 기대한다; 그러나 나는 긍정적이든 부정적이든, 관리적이든 아니든 어떤 주제에 대해 그렇게 강한 의견을 가진 편집자의 것을 기대한다.우리는 편집자들이 강한 의견을 갖는 것을 금지하지 않는다; 우리는 편집자들이 중립적일 수 없을 정도로 강한 선호의 주제를 피하도록 요구한다. 그리고 나는 이 사용자 박스가 그러한 극복할 수 없는 충돌을 선언할 만한 가치가 있다고 생각한다.나의 전반적인 선호도는 중립적인 백과사전을 쓰고 공동체의 화합을 위해 긍정적이든 부정적이든 모든 정치적 사용자 박스를 금지하는 것이다; 나는 내 동료들이 정치적, 사회적 문제에 대해 어떻게 생각하는지, 그들이 어떤 정당을 지지하는지, 그들이 어떤 정치인을 좋아하거나 싫어하는지 알지 못하는 것을 선호한다.하지만 우리가 있는 곳이 그곳이 아니고, 이 사용자 박스는 "도널드 트럼프는 Y라는 X"라는 말에 그친다.Yngvadottir (대화) 09:11, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)
• Yngvadottir에 따라 보관하십시오.비록 존슨 박스와 나란히 균형이 잘 잡혀 있기는 하지만(비교적으로 트럼프가 우리의 영광스러운 지도자를 아인슈타인처럼 보이게 만든다고 해도)다시 설명자들은 WP에 연결된 것처럼 보인다.RS 소스(아마도 더 많은 것이 있을 것이다.마르티네반스123 (대화) 10:27, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)
• WP별 보관:'노텐세어드'와 '하 하 하'는 진지하기만 하다.Yngvadottir가 정확하게 표현했듯이, 사용자 상자의 주요 목적은 (백과사전을 쓰고 개선하기 위한 목적) 대체로 해석하자면, 도널드 트럼프와 관련된 어떤 기사에 대해서도 편집하거나 행정 조치를 취하도록 요구해서는 안 된다는 것이다. 왜냐하면 나는 그에 대한 편견을 가지고 있기 때문이다. 그리고 퍼플을 위해 그렇게 하는 것을 철회해야 한다.중립적인 백과사전의 백과사전나는 또한 그 상자가 User에 있는 몇몇 것들보다 훨씬 덜 염증적이라고 말할 것이다.나는 이전의 토론이 그들이 남아있을 수 있다는 합의에 도달했다고 믿는다.리치333^(talk)(cont) 11:58, 2022년 3월 4일(UTC)

  덧붙여서 - 나는 선거운동의 외모를 피하기 위해 그것을 하지 않을 것이지만, 누군가가 그들의 사용자 페이지에 있는 상자를 초월하는 사람들에게 이 토론을 알리고 싶어할지도 모른다.리치333 12^(cont):06, 2022년 3월 4일(UTC)

  • User:EENG의 페이지는 내 페이지를 건전하고 체계적으로 보이게 한다.드론보거스 (대화) 12:34, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)

    비교해서 다른 사람들을 제정신으로 느끼게 하는 것은 위키피디아에서 가장 중요한 역할 중 하나라고 나는 항상 생각해 왔다.EENG 15:28, 2022년 3월 4일(UTC)

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 공격 페이지로 신속하게 삭제하는 것이었습니다.Barkeep49 (대화) 18:55, 2022년 3월 3일 (UTC)

사용자:아바지나/케이이스 올베르만

사용자:Avazina/Keith Olbermann(토크 히스토리 링크 감시 로그 편집) – (View MfD)

살아있는 사람을 무상으로 모욕하고 오랫동안 사라진 사용자들의 두 개의 사용자 페이지에서만 사용된다.나는 이것을 버림으로써 어떤 중요한 것도 없어질 것이라고 생각하지 않는다.드론보거스 (대화) 11시 3분, 2022년 3월 3일 (UTC)

• WP:BLPTAK.--WaltCip-(토크) 13:49, 2022년 3월 3일(UTC)에 따라 삭제

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 철회였다.Graham87 09:52, 2022년 2월 27일(UTC)

사용자 대화:발터 괴를리츠

사용자 대화:Walter Görlitz(주제 기록 링크 감시 로그 편집) – (View MfD)

2022-02-26T18:33:30과 2022-02-26T18:35:41 사이에 내 토크 페이지에 편집된 내용을 삭제하거나 최소한 가시성을 변경할 수 있을까?그들은 모욕적이고, 모욕적이고, 불쾌하며, 편집자가 방해하려는 시도였다.월터 괴를리츠 (대화) 18:44, 2022년 2월 26일 (UTC)

나는 오늘 명백하게 파괴적인 편집의 가시성을 바꾸었다.너무 많이?버스터D (대화) 18:58, 2022년 2월 26일 (UTC)

경험 있는 위키백과 전문가로서 가시성 변경을 요청하기에 적절한 포럼이 아니라는 것을 알고 있으므로 이 프로세스를 취소하시겠습니까?MfD 주제가 보관되기 전에 이 문제에 대해 더 논의하거나 여기서 논의를 완료할 수 있어 기쁘다.버스터D (대화) 20:33, 2022년 2월 26일 (UTC)

철수했다.고맙지만 너무 많은 개정안이 삭제되었다.나는 그들이 없어지는 것을 개의치 않는다.

BTW, 이런 콘텐츠가 삭제되기 가장 좋은 곳은 어디일까?월터 괴를리츠 (대화) 20:35, 2022년 2월 26일 (UTC)

만약 나였다면, 그리고 예전에도 나였다면, 난 아무 역할도 하지 않은 행정관을 찾았을 것이다.내 타임 스탬프가 가까이 보이면 나를 찾아와.내가 기꺼이 도와줄게.최악의 경우 ANI에서 권한이 없는 관리자를 요청하는 간단한 메모를 보내십시오.좀 더 조용하게 하고 싶으면 내 강연을 즐겨라.난 지루해.아무도 따라오지 않는다.버스터D (대화) 21:11, 2022년 2월 26일 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz:WP의 지침을 따르십시오.REVDEL Request 또는 WP:재료를 재설계할지 또는 과시안을 원하는지에 따라 RFO. 192.76.8.77 (토크) 00:30, 2022년 2월 27일 (UTC)

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는: 신속한 근접성, 잘못된 장소, 비관리자 폐쇄.10파운드 해머 • 18:54, 2022년 2월 26일(UTC)

단계별 방법

진행 단계(토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집) – (MfD 보기)

잘못 생성된 불필요한 직접 PepperBeast (대화) 18:10, 2022년 2월 26일 (UTC)

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 삭제였다.中 12시 44분, 2022년 3월 5일(UTC)

위키백과:삭제/사용되지 않는 마이그레이션된 사용자 상자에 대한 잘못된 셀러

템플릿:콘솔 게이머(토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집) – (MfD 보기)

템플릿:민주당 위키피디아인 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:친아사드 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:자랑스러운 미국 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:공화당의 위키백과 사람들 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:주 사형제 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:UBX-nes (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:UBX-닌텐도스위치 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:UBX-닌텐도스마늘라이트 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:UBX 프리퀄하이트 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:사용자 브라우저:모질라 파이어폭스 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:사용자 WP 마그누센 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:사용자 WP 말도나도 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:Userbox Magnussen (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:Userbox/POC (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

템플릿:Userbox/사용자 시도 종류 (토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집)

사용되지 않은 모든 항목과 이후 "사용자"의 적절한 네임스페이스를 사용하여 사용자 상자로 변환된 항목.템플릿 공간에서는 템플릿이 생성되었지만 실수로 또는 나중에 템플릿으로 변경되는 특정 유형의 템플릿이 있기 때문에 템플릿 공간에서는 이 템플릿이 생성되었다고 가정한다.그러나 현재 사용자 페이지에서 사용되는 사용자 상자는 변환되거나 마이그레이션된다.템플릿 공간에 보관할 필요가 없음.사용자가 보고 싶을 경우 리디렉션할 수 있다. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:10, 2022년 2월 26일(UTC)

• 삭제. 그래, 내가 그랬어.템플릿의 특정 유형을 userbox라고 한다.내가 따르고 있는 과정을 마이그레이션이라고 하며 여기와 여기에 기술되어 있다.네가 직접 보지 못했을 수도 있다는 건 알지만, 최근 들어 이런 MfDs(그리고, 틀리게, TfDs)가 많이 생겨났어, 이런 것도, 이런 것도, 이런 것도.나는 다소 참을성 있고 매번 삭제하는 것을 허용해왔지만, 나는 모든 불법거래가 업데이트되고 나면 이러한 것들은 빨리 삭제되어야 한다는 것을 다시 한번 강조하고 싶다.그렇기 때문에 그것에 대한 정비 범주가 있는 것이다.앞으로 한 번에 12개의 알림 템플릿으로 내 토크 페이지를 날려버릴 필요는 없을 것이다(물론 나는 단수 알림에 감사하지만).또한 리디렉션에 대한 제안을 꺼냈으므로, 이러한 사용자 상자의 대부분은 처음부터 템플릿 네임스페이스에 있어서는 안되었기 때문에, 템플릿 공간에서 사용자 공간으로 리디렉션할 자격이 없다는 점을 다시 한 번 강조하겠다.고마워요.— 2022년 2월 26일 01:15(UTC)

  편집자들은 다른 MfD에 대해 몰랐던 것처럼(내가 직접 MfD를 지명하기 전에 몰랐던 것처럼) 이 MfD에 대해 알지 못할 것이다.향후 템플릿의 경우, 알림 수신을 위해 이러한 템플릿을 직접 빠른 속도로 지정하면 된다.곤니름 (대화) 06:28, 2022년 3월 3일 (UTC)

  응, 그런 생각이 들었고 아마 관리인이 정비 카테고리를 보고 있는 게 분명해서 그렇게 할 거야.하지만 누구든지 빠른 삭제를 위해 태그를 달 수 있다; 그것은 내가 될 필요는 없다.

  나는 위에서 유목민이 다른 사람들에 대해 몰랐을 수도 있다는 것을 알아챘지만, 그들은 분명히 이 숙제를 열기 전에 숙제를 하지 않았다.내 사용자 토크 페이지, 논의 중인 템플릿 내의 첫 번째 링크 또는 설명서의 간단한 개요는 사용자 상자의 내용 또는 사용자 상자 마이그레이션과 같은 필요한 배경의 일부를 제공했을 것이다.일반적으로 나는 어떤 것이 먼저인지 이해하기 위해 귀찮게 하지 않고 삭제할 것(또는 여러 가지 사항)을 지명하는 것은 좋지 않은 생각이라고 생각한다.

  또한, 나의 사용자 토크 페이지를 폭파한 첫 번째 편집자는 이력이 있다.다른 사람들은 그 나쁜 선례를 맹목적으로 따르고 있다.이 명목은 트윙클을 사용하지도 않았으니 그것을 하나의 통지로 묶지 않는 것에 대한 변명은 정말 없다.이것은 결국 단일 MfD이다.— 22:12, 2022년 3월 3일(UTC)

  모든 알림에 대해 미안해, 대화 페이지에서 해당 알림에 대해 계속 얘기하지 말고 제거할 수 있어.둘째, 이러한 것들은 사용되지 않은 데이터베이스 보고서에서 지명되었으며, 모든 것이 다음 범주에 속하거나 곧 분류될 것이다.마이그레이션된 사용자 상자 스텁그래서 내가 이 공천을 받기 전에 숙제를 안 했다고 하는 것은 공평하지 않다.나는 사용자박스 마이그레이션과 Tfd나 Mfd의 이전 논의의 이력을 알고 있다.그리고 마지막으로 트윙클을 사용하지 않기로 했다.수동으로 하고 싶은데 그게 내 선택이야. --WikiCleanerMan (대화) 22:33, 2022년 3월 3일 (UTC)

  괜찮다.나의 좌절의 대부분은 구체적으로 당신에 대한 것이 아니라, 문서화된 과정을 따라가고 있을 때 TfDs와 MfDs의 갑작스러운 공격과 관리자 지원의 부족이 있다.미안하지만, 나는 네가 숙제를 했는지 아닌지에 대해 정중히 반대한다.너의 요청은 도처에 널려 있었다.자신의 인정에 의하면, 이것들이 무엇인지, 왜 만들어졌는지, 혹은 왜 그것들이 옮겨졌는지 알 수 없다.당신은 분명히 그들의 이력, 나의 토크 페이지, 최근의 TfDs 또는 이러한 모든 "특정 유형의 템플릿"에 사용된 템플릿의 설명서를 확인하려고 하지 않았다.사용자 상자 마이그레이션에 대한 경험이 있다면, 가정하는 대신 좀 더 구체적일 수 있었을 것이다.내 토크 페이지의 공지사항들은 결국 자동으로 보관될 것이다; 나는 그것이 네 번째 일어났을 때 그것을 토해내고 나서 Gonnym의 제안에 응답하는 것만큼 "그들에 대해 계속" 하고 있지 않았다.마지막으로, 트윙클에 대한 나의 언급은 (다른 사람들이 그랬던 것처럼) 내 토크 페이지의 수량에 대해 자동화를 탓할 수 없다는 관측만큼의 비판은 아니었다.— 00:55, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)

  이게 뭔지 몰랐다면 지명하지 않았을 겁니다.분명히 거짓이다.공천을 잘못 읽고 있는 거군그러나 그럼에도 불구하고 이 문제는 처리되었다. --WikiCleanerMan (대화) 01:06, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)

  아마도.그럼에도 불구하고 나는 템플릿의 설명서를 업데이트했다.이것은 더 이상 2007년이 아니다; 이주로 인한 먼지가 가라앉았다.— 15:02, 2022년 3월 4일 (UTC)

• nom당 모두 삭제하십시오.* 페퍼리 * 01:26, 2022년 2월 26일 (UTC)
• 명목당 모든 것을 삭제하고 이것들을 리디렉션으로 남겨두는 것에 반대하는 것에 대해 voidxor와 동의하라.곤니름 (대화) 06:26, 2022년 3월 3일 (UTC)

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 삭제였다.中 12시 43분, 2022년 3월 5일(UTC)

초안:코미토 분석

초안:Komito Analytics(토크 내역 링크 감시 로그 편집) – (MfD 보기)

WP의 일부로:FOSS 나는 순찰 중 이 기사를 발견했다.비록 이 주제가 우리의 가장 중요한 분야지만, 이 소프트웨어는 소스 코드 개발이 1년 전에 중단되었기 때문에 Notability를 통과할 기회가 없으며, 이는 단지 SEO의 노력인 가브리일라드미트리에프(talk • the/the) 05:22, 2022년 2월 26일(UTC)

• 우리가 여기 있기 때문에 삭제하라, 하지만 이것은 삭제되었을 것이다, 아마도 오늘 늦게, 6개월 동안 버려진 초안으로, 어쨌든 그것이 마지막 날이었을지도 모르는 일에 지명되었다는 것을 제외하고는 말이다.폐기된 초안을 삭제 대상으로 지명하는 것은 필요하거나 유용하지 않다.그들은 6개월 후에 만료된다.예를 들어, 제안자에 의해 초안이 처리되고 있는 경우, 삭제는 순서가 될 수 있다.로버트 맥클레논 (대화) 06:16, 2022년 2월 26일 (UTC)
• Comment 이 페이지는 CSD G13 오래된 초안으로 오늘 삭제될 예정이었다.다만 MFD에 지명돼 일주일 더 걸리고 유지 결정이 내려지고 페이지에 추가 편집이 없으면 2022년 9월까지는 다시 G13 지위에 오를 수 없게 된다.FYI, 당신은 초안의 페이지 기록을 확인하고, 삭제해야 한다고 생각되면 MFD를 시작하기 전에 6개월 만료일이 가까운지 확인해야 한다. 리즈 19:36, 2022년 2월 26일(UTC)
• 삭제하라, 그렇지 않았다면 초안이 G13'd였을 것이기 때문이다.나는 MfD에서 케케묵은 초안을 지명하는 것은 도움이 되지 않는다는 Robert와 Liz의 의견에 전적으로 동의한다: WP:NMFD. 특별서면 (토크) 01:14, 2022년 3월 5일 (UTC) 참조

널리 퍼진 비판에 감사한다.나는 그 문제를 이해하고 내가 야기시킨 것에 대해 미안해.그러나 나는 여기 있는 모든 참가자들에게 이것이 WP의 일반적인 사례가 아닌지 묻고 싶다.스노우볼_클라우스?내가 실수를 했지만 그것은 고칠 수 있고 나는 아무도 초안 GavriilaDmitriev (대화 • 그들/그들) 06:24, 3월 5일 (UTC)에 찬성하지 않는 동안 더 이상 문제를 복잡하게 만들 이유가 없다고 본다.

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 다음과 같다: 위키백과로 이동:토론용 파일/2022 2월 26일 파일:Aardakh 1944.jpg (비관리자 폐쇄) * Pppery * 01:23, 2022년 2월 26일 (UTC)

파일 대화:아르다흐 1944.jpg

파일 대화:Aardakh 1944.jpg(주제 기록 링크 감시 로그 편집) – (View MfD)

• 표시된 출처는 초고화질(람블러(포털))이 아니며 사진의 원본과 작성자에 대한 자세한 내용은 제공하지 않는다.
• 사진 속의 트럭은 1946년 이후에야 생산되었기 때문에 체첸의 추방에 사용할 수 없었다(자세한 내용은 여기에서 참조).
• 화물차의 모델과 번호판과 일치하는 1947년 우크라이나인 추방을 그린 것과 같은 이미지를 인터넷에서도 찾아볼 수 있다.알랙시스_¿question? 12시 59분, 2022년 2월 25일 (UTC)
• 잘못된 지명.WP:FFD는 오른쪽의 세 번째 문이다.숨막힘 (대화) 14:13, 2022년 2월 25일 (UTC)

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 삭제였다.✗ 12:23, 2022년 3월 4일(UTC)

위키백과:사용자 상자/인터넷/메모

위키백과:Userbox/Internet/Memes(Talk history link watch log 편집) – (View MfD)

비어 있는 사용자 상자 범주, 더 많은 22Aug/코퍼 너비 정사각형. --Finngall 01:51, 2022년 2월 25일(UTC)

• 삭제 - 무의미한 사용자의 의미 없는 작업.로버트 맥클레논 (대화) 04:52, 2022년 2월 25일 (UTC)

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 삭제였다.✗ 12:23, 2022년 3월 4일(UTC)

위키백과:사용자 상자/언어/프린스

위키백과:Userbox/Language/Phrases(Talk history link watch log 편집) – (View MfD)

WP에 따라 생성자가 차단된 사용되지 않은 사용자 상자 범주:실제로 백과사전을 개선하기보다는 프로젝트 공간에서 이와 같은 에너지 생산의 대부분을 할애한 NOTHERE. --Finngall 01:47, 2022년 2월 25일(UTC)

• 삭제 - 쓸모없는 편집자의 쓸모없는 작업.로버트 맥클레논 (대화) 04:51, 2022년 2월 25일 (UTC)

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 삭제였다.✗ 12시 58분, 2022년 3월 3일(UTC)

위키백과 대화:WikiProject 소프트웨어/무료 및 오픈 소스 소프트웨어 태스크포스/아카이브 템플릿

위키백과 대화:WikiProject Software/Free 및 오픈 소스 소프트웨어 태스크포스/아카이브 템플릿(제목 기록 링크 감시 로그 편집) – (보기 MfD)

이 페이지는 13년 이후 사용되지 않으며, 이 페이지는 Wikipedia_talk를 위해 고안된 태스크포스:WikiProject_Software/Free_and_open-source_software_task_force는 여기에서 볼 수 있는 바와 같이 MiszaBot을 사용한다.

여기서 연결된 보관소는 계속 사용 중이지만 이전 리디렉션도 제거해야 함:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Free_Software/Archive_1
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Software/Free_Software/Archive_2
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Software/Free_Software/Archive_3 GavriilaDmitriev (대화) 05:28, 2022년 2월 24일 (UTC)
• 약한 삭제(유명인 기준)로버트 맥클레논 (대화) 14시 40분, 2022년 3월 2일 (UTC)

위의 토론은 토론의 기록으로 보존되어 있다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

다음의 논의는 아래 잡지의 삭제 제안에 대한 보관된 토론이다.수정하지 마십시오.이후 코멘트는 해당 토론 페이지(페이지의 토크 페이지 또는 삭제 검토 등)에서 작성해야 한다.이 페이지를 더 이상 편집하지 마십시오.

토론의 결과는 빠른 방향 전환이었다.✗ 12:59, 2022년 3월 3일(UTC)

드래프트:제1장:이상한 땅의 이방인

초안:제1장:이상한 땅의 이방인(토크 히스토리 링크 감시 로그 편집) – (MfD 보기)

빠른 삭제를 요청해야 하는지 모르겠지만, 여기에 맞는 옵션이 보이지 않았다.메인 스페이스에 이미 이런 기사가 실렸고 나는 두 기사를 병합해서 이제 삭제될 수 있게 되었다 - Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 21:57, 2022년 2월 23일 (UTC)

• 빠른 속도로 기사로 이동하십시오.사용자:Kaleeb18 - 기사가 있을 때 초안이 삭제되지 않고 리디렉션된다.이제 알겠지.로버트 맥클레논 (대화)22:11, 2022년 2월 23일 (UTC)

  @Robert McClenon: 아 고마워! - Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 22:15, 2022년 2월 23일 (UTC)

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.

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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:03, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Matthew Medney

Draft:Matthew Medney (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

This page has been created likely in return for undisclosed amounts of money, if you ask an admin, you can see that the creators user page (now deleted) even admits that they work with Matthew Medney, as I recall, the user page said they worked with or for Matthew Medney. Zippybonzo (talk) 19:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

May I also add that the page was rejected at AFC because the draft had few reliable sources and did not meet notability guidelines. Zippybonzo (talk) 19:15, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

• Comment - This draft was not rejected at AFC, but declined. Some editors prefer precision in usage. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Weak Keep - Needed declining or rejecting, and was declined. The sanctions for undisclosed paid editing do not normally include quick deletion of drafts, because Wikipedia requires that work by paid editors be reviewed, not blackholed. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 00:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

User:Qwertyfish11/WikiProject Graphic Plugin

User:Qwertyfish11/WikiProject Graphic Plugin (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Fake WikiProject created in userspace in 2009. user has no other edits of note. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:11, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete - Seems to be an abandoned page by a departed user. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:44, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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: no consensus. Pathan (film) and Pathan (2022 film have both been salted. The authors can make as many drafts as they want, but it seems rather clear that they're not going to make it into mainspace anytime soon. Recommend continuing to reject the drafts if they are submitted for review, and escalating blocks for the author(s) if they continue making forks in draft space. — ScottyWong — 22:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Pathan (film)

Draft:Pathan (film) (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

It is a rejected draft which won't be accepted anymore. Also the mainspace article about the same topic has been deleted after an discussion. Shinnosuke15, 10:49, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• Redirect to the article. The content of this draft seems to be copied entirely without attribution to create the mainspace article. So this should be a redirect to preserve page history with attribution on the talk page. -- Ab207 (talk) 11:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

  Oh, I didn't know that the article is restored and isn't CSDed as per deletion review.Shinnosuke15, 12:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• Redirect to Pathan (film) as per Ab207. Shinnosuke15, 12:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
• I agree that it looks like a copy/paste: cross-page diff. One hint is that the refs all have access-date=5 October 2021. Since the revisions are non-overlapping except for the MfD tag, listing at WP:Requests for history merge would repair the history best. There are a few other pages that need to be cleaned up: Pathan(2022) (already deleted), Draft:Pathan(2022), Draft:Draft:Pathan(film), Pathan(film), and Pathan (Film). I warned the re-creator, User:OE1995, with {{uw-c&pmove}}. Flatscan (talk) 05:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Right, its better if there's a histmerge since this was clear copy-paste move. -- Ab207 (talk) 07:00, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
    • To be clear, I will file the history merge request if this MfD is closed without fixing the problem, as it is out of scope. Flatscan (talk) 05:23, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Keep in draft space. It appears that the promoters of the film are, mostly successfully, trying to confuse the jury and create an article in article space, after two AFDs have deleted the article, most recently Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pathan (film) (2nd nomination). Robert McClenon (talk) 14:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - Admin action or title blacklisting may be needed at this point. We do not need a history merge, which would just put a whitewash on the article that should be in the black hole. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
  • I think that merging Pathan (film)'s history into Draft:Pathan (film) produces a cleaner single history, but I don't have a strong opinion. The other pages should all be deleted. Flatscan (talk) 05:44, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pathan (film) (3rd nomination). AFD, like MFD, is a content forum. Can we keep this at a content forum, or does it need to go to WP:ANI? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
  • You were given this link already on your talk page, but for other readers: WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Re-creation of deleted articles by OE1995. Flatscan (talk) 05:44, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - OE1995 has been blocked for two weeks for disruptively re-creating deleted articles. Pathan (film) has been nominated for deletion from article space a third time. This MFD was started on 20 February, and the AFD was started on 22 February. I am asking that the closer Relist this MFD on 27 February to see what the result of the AFD is (unless there is snow). Robert McClenon (talk) 17:24, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
• Draft:Pathan (2022 film) was created before the block and needs deletion too. Flatscan (talk) 05:27, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment - User:Flatscan In my opinion, that, and any other drafts, should be redirected to the draft that is under discussion, which, as I have said, should be kept, because the film might come out this summer. Then again, it might not. The film seems to be in post-production limbo. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:48, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
    • The issue with redirecting instead of deleting is that the histories – Special:PageHistory/Draft:Pathan(2022) and Special:PageHistory/Draft:Pathan (2022 film) – contain unattributed copies that need to be repaired per WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Repairing insufficient attribution. If {{copied}} templates are used, they must not be removed. Edit summaries are tamper-proof, but their links break if the source page is moved. Flatscan (talk) 05:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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. — ScottyWong — 19:24, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

User:Max808/Liz Sloan

User:Max808/Liz Sloan (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

User:Max808/Dave Schwep (edit talk history links watch logs)

WP:STALEDRAFT of an article previously deleted in 2011. Wouldn't survive given that only source is a personal blog Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:04, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

• Is it a copy of the article that was deleted? If so, delete, otherwise keep because STALEDRAFT isn't met. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:16, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• @Rhododendrites: Dave Schwep has an article, of which this seems to be a copy. Liz Sloan had an article but it was deleted some time ago. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:10, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

• What does "seems to be" mean? Whether it's a copy is the basis for my !vote. Barring unusual circumstances, users are allowed to create drafts of topics which have previously been deleted -- just not copies of the articles. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 04:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete - Crud by long-departed user. (Someone may say that we should leave this in case the long-departed user comes back.) Robert McClenon (talk) 14:59, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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. — ScottyWong — 19:24, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Comparison of number bases

Draft:Comparison of number bases (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

This draft is a WP:REDUNDANTFORK of both Radix#In numeral systems and List of numeral systems#Standard positional numeral systems. Moreover, the small part of the draft that is not in the articles seems WP:OR.

Therefore, even with major improvements, there is no chance that this draft becomes eventually an article in the main space. So, it is better to apply immediately the WP:Snowball clause, and delete it immediately. D.Lazard (talk) 20:39, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

• Comment I was the one who originally PRODDED the article. At first, it read like an essay, and had original research problems. The original title was Best number base. I suggested the move to Draft:Comparison of number bases and created the template for the current form of the draft. I can see how the WP:OR concerns still stand, as much of the content still has a similar style to the old article, but the redundancy I didn't foresee when the article was moved. The problem is that there are not enough reliable sources explicitly comparing the number bases, so it's hard to create a comparison article on this topic. I think this draft could still be salvageable, but it would take a lot of work to fix. 2601:647:5800:1A1F:3162:853D:E27:61C2 (talk) 21:00, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

  Comment I was the one who added {{prod2}} to the originall form of the article, under WP:NOTESSAY. I agree with nom per my comments at the talkpage. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 22:30, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

  I'm probably biased, but I do agree that the draft should be salvageable. Username142857 (talk) 00:45, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

  Delete and transwiki to Fandom Based on other arguments over here, I think it would be better if this page was deleted. However, it might find a better home at a Fandom wiki. Fandom wikis have different standards for inclusion, so the article could find a home there. I suggested to the user who created this page that they transwiki it to Googology Wiki, and User:Skarmory suggested it should be transwikied to Wikiversity. Based on the discussion on the talk page, the best thing to do would be to delete the page and transwiki it, most likely to Fandom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:5800:1A1F:3162:853D:E27:61C2 (talk • contribs) 22:19, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

  Comment: I saw Wikiversity's wikiversity:Help:Essay page; does this cover the original idea of this draft? Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete I saw this mentioned over at WT:MATH, checked it out, and concluded that it was a WP:NOR-violating essay attempt that, even if completely overhauled, would be redundant with radix. I know there can be a sentiment against deleting drafts at MfD rather than letting them expire, but when a draft is never going to be an article, it's better to get the matter over with. XOR'easter (talk) 21:25, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

  Well, you could argue that radix is redundant with mathematics. But if 'redundant with radix' is the problem, can the article be incorporated with radix? Username142857 (talk) 00:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

  No, radix is not redundant with mathematics by any stretch of the imagination. And as I said, the problem is not just that it is currently redundant, but that it would be redundant even if all its other problems were fixed. The content is opinionated soapboxing, which is not suitable for an encyclopedia. XOR'easter (talk) 19:46, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. PatrickR2 (talk) 00:05, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment. The author of the draft edits it actively (at least 18 edits today). It seems that this is for making it deliberately less encyclopedic, for example by using systematically base 6 instead of the common decimal base: It also uses senary everywhere except the table of contents. D.Lazard (talk) 11:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

  Come on! This is why base 6 should be preferred over base 10. Please stop! Username142857 (talk) 11:51, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete. The primary editor apparently has a good motive --- helping readers understand why someone might choose one base over another. But the article is written like an opinion piece. Crucially, it does not proceed from reliable sources. It is written in an informal, non-encyclopedic style. That can be fixed later, but it would take some work. My recommendation is that the primary editor spend a while improving the related Wikipedia articles (Radix, List of numeral systems, etc.), learn what the common practices are, and then decide whether another article is warranted. Mgnbar (talk) 14:15, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

  I think it's warranted as the other articles, despite claims, don't quite fit with the scope of what I'm trying to do. Username142857 (talk) 14:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• DeleteOriginal research/opinion piece with no hope of being accepted. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:04, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

  I see you've been going at me for a while now. Is that the real reason, or is it because I written the article? Username142857 (talk) 16:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

I suggest you don't cast aspersions at other editors. As it stands, your draft article is headed for deletion. The reasons have been stated over and over again. Nobody has a vendetta against you. User:Username142857, I'd suggest you back down and try to understand what the experienced editors around here are saying to you. If you don't do this, you may end up being blocked indefinitely for not getting the point. 2601:647:5800:1A1F:3942:60E9:D569:2E31 (talk) 19:43, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• Joke Username3021213 (Username142857 converted to senary) has converted the page to senary. GeoffreyT13132 (GeoffreyT2000 converted to senary) (talk) 34:044, 32 February 13210 (22:28, 20 February 2022 converted to senary) (UTC)

Anyway,

• Delete Unlikely to become notable with a fully-fledged article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 22:42, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Did you mean fledged? :) 2601:647:5800:1A1F:3942:60E9:D569:2E31 (talk) 00:29, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I haved fixed the typo. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:11, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

• Comment The article creator has been indefinitely blocked by Bbb23 for not being here to build an encyclopedia. XOR'easter (talk) 01:35, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment Should we close this as WP:SNOW, based on the uniform support for deletion? 2601:647:5800:1A1F:51BE:AD2B:DA8:B1FC (talk) 02:01, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete as needing to be blown up and started over if there is hope for this. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - Any further discussion can go to the likely block review. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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. — ScottyWong — 19:23, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Category talk:AfC submissions by date/17 January 2021

Category talk:AfC submissions by date/17 January 2021 (edit subject history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

This category talk page is useless because it is like a draft article Vitaium (talk) 03:07, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete. It is a copy of a declined AFC submission. Neocorelight (Talk) 06:09, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
• Weak Keep and Hat - Entering a declined draft on a category talk page was a blunder, but that doesn't require deleting the page (even if the page did not previously exist). Stupid stuff on talk pages should be collapsed, or in extreme cases redacted. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:12, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment I have hatted the relevant section. It might be helpful to replace the current content with a talk page header, as this is still a valid talk page. 2601:647:5800:1A1F:3162:853D:E27:61C2 (talk) 21:09, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. This is the talk page of a dated maintenance category - there is no legitimate need to have any discussions at all on the talk page. Once all the submissions in the category have been processed the category is simply deleted. If kept this should be blanked rather than hatted as it is currently polluting the AFC categories. This could arguably have been WP:G6'd as a duplicate page created in the wrong namespace. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 13:31, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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 deleted. (non-admin closure) (non-admin closure) 94rain ^Talk 22:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

User:2A00:23C4:139C:DB01:ACA5:9B2E:BB41:36B4/Sample page

User:2A00:23C4:139C:DB01:ACA5:9B2E:BB41:36B4/Sample page (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

userspace subpage of an IP address, nonsense 94rain ^Talk 22:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• User:94rain, next time just tag that as db-g3. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 22:32, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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. — ScottyWong — 19:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Template:DaftPunkTeachersLyric1

Template:DaftPunkTeachersLyric1 (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Template:DaftPunkAlbumRAMFavorite (edit talk history links watch logs)

Template:DaftPunkAlbumHOMEWORKFavorite (edit talk history links watch logs)

Series of userboxes made by now-blocked editor that are unused except on userbox directories. Suggest userfying as userboxes "in Template: or Wikipedia: namespaces [are] expected to adhere more tightly with certain policies and guidelines, especially Neutral point of view and What Wikipedia is not" (WP:UBXNS) and WP:NOTFORUM - these have nothing to do with building an encyclopedia. (Also, they do not start with "User" as templatespace userboxes are supposed to.) eviolite (talk) 19:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Move to user:UBX not remotely offensive or disruptive even if it’s in the wrong namespace and created by a blocked user. Going through and deleting everything they ever did to unperson them is gratuitous WP:RAGPICKING. Dronebogus (talk) 09:20, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

  As I stated in my nomination, I suggest userfying them rather than deleting everything they ever did. eviolite (talk) 18:06, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete - unused and unlikely to be used userbox by a socking editor. Whpq (talk) 19:17, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Delete. A great amount of these are left forever unused. These specifically were created by a blocked user, so they won't be using them and serve no real collaboration effort. Gonnym (talk) 20:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 00:14, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

User:TwentyTwoAug/fishyuserboxhehelol

User:TwentyTwoAug/fishyuserboxhehelol (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Zero color contrast, rickroll boxes surely already exist Dronebogus (talk) 16:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete preferably ASAP, as the creator has since been blocked for socking (note "since": G5 is not officially an option) so the spirit of WP:DENY should apply. SN54129 16:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete - useless userbox Whpq (talk) 19:19, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 00:13, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

User:UBX/Sussybakauserbox

User:UBX/Sussybakauserbox (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Zero text-to-background contrast, Missing image (due to copyright violation) and generally a stupid meme nobody above the age of 12 finds funny. Dronebogus (talk) 16:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete, per nom, though I personally know some 13- and 14-year-olds who think it's hilarious. Also worth noting that this was created by a now-blocked sockpuppet. Firefangledfeathers 16:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete - useless userbox Whpq (talk) 19:21, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

• heh, sussy baka. Delete as a userbox for fans of among us might be better suited for the encyclopedia, and this is not that. ☢️Plutonical☢️ᶜᵒᵐᵐᵘⁿᶦᶜᵃᵗᶦᵒⁿˢ 13:57, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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: userfy. ✗plicit 00:11, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Template:User DanTDM fan

Template:User DanTDM fan (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Unused. Created by a a now blocked user who littered Wikipedia with ill thought out templates and other crap. Whpq (talk) 15:22, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Keep and userfy totally harmless, the userbox is not guilty of the sins of the creator. Dronebogus (talk) 15:49, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Userfy - no reason to stay in templatespace per WP:NOTFORUM eviolite (talk) 19:40, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete. Unused, created by a blocked editor and has no real collaboration value. Gonnym (talk) 20:08, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• Keep and Userfy as a harmless userbox that isn't useless or misleading. ☢️Plutonical☢️ᶜᵒᵐᵐᵘⁿᶦᶜᵃᵗᶦᵒⁿˢ 21:58, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 00:10, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Template:User YouTube channel

Template:User YouTube channel (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Template:YouTubeChannel/Put name here (edit talk history links watch logs)

Unused and inferior to {{User YouTube}}. Created by a a now blocked user who littered Wikipedia with ill thought out templates and other crap. Whpq (talk) 15:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Dronebogus (talk) 11:00, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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 deleted (G3) by Anthony Bradbury (non-admin closure) — csc^-1 16:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Dalton shaw, the 30th president of the usa

Draft:Dalton shaw, the 30th president of the usa (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

This draft seems to be a hoax because the content tells Dalton Shaw is the 30th president of USA, the actual 30th president of USA is Calvin Coolidge. Vitaium (talk) 13:36, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Speedy delete as hoax event in the Berenstein Universe Dronebogus (talk) 14:02, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete as hoax. This page is a bad joke. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:17, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment So this is here because a reviewer came along and couldn't be bothered to tag it for speedy deletion themselves? You know, that happens a lot. Why are we giving them a pass on showing any responsibility in blatantly obvious cases? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 15:03, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

  The nominator seems to make a lot of questionable edits in project space. I have no idea how they came across a month and a half old hoax, or why they decided it needed an MFD discussion. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 16:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• I've tagged it for G3 deletion as an obvious hoax/vandalism. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 16:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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 per author request. ✗plicit 12:55, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Talk:ASCII Art

Talk:ASCII Art (edit subject history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Incorrectly placed article template on redirect page's talk page C933103 (talk) 11:40, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@C933103: I've tagged this for speedy deletion under criteria G7 as an author request, and G6 as a page created in error. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 12:53, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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. — ScottyWong — 19:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Adil Teli

Draft:Adil Teli (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

not reliable source and written like advertisement AlexandruAAlu (talk) 10:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Keep. Nowhere near the level of terribleness that would be required for deletion as a draft. It needs a lot of clean-up and is likely to be the work of UPE, but that alone isn't reason to delete - it might be possible for an editor to clean it up into something publishable. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 11:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Keep I think there are enough sources for this to be published as is. (I removed one unsourced promotional statement). Better that many of the sports stubs in existence. MB 16:39, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Keep as a draft. No good reason to accept and no good reason to delete. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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: soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the page's undeletion. ✗plicit 00:16, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Working from home for American office-based employees during the COVID-19 pandemic

Draft:Working from home for American office-based employees during the COVID-19 pandemic (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

An abandoned draft, the image deletions on commons reset the 6 month clock NOT ESSAY and a snowballs chance of making it to mainspace Gbawden (talk) 06:27, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Weak Delete - Should have been left alone for another six months anyway, but we are here. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:27, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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. (non-admin closure) Imcdc (talk) 07:55, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Firas Zahabi

Draft:Firas Zahabi (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Main article has been created for Firas Zahabi. Draft page no longer needed Imcdc (talk) 05:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Redirect And I advised to do what we usually do with draft articles that have been moved to main space, turn it into a redirect. We have tens of thousands of redirects from Draft space to main space. That would have been much simpler than starting a week-long discussion over a draft article. Deletion isn't the solution to what really isn't a problem. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:34, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 01:31, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Jigsie Awards

Wikipedia:Jigsie Awards (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Redundant award page created as one of several weird projectspace pages by author who has since been indef'd for sockpuppetry and per WP:NOTHERE. --Finngall ^talk 00:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Delete: no clear purpose. Is there a way to bulk handle all these vanity projects from the same user? _signed, Willondon (talk) 00:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete as useless gameplaying, and of no value in project space (or anywhere else), and as work of an abusive user. Yes, nominations at MFD, like at other deletion forums, can be bundled. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:59, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete as TwentytwoAugcruft, including all connected and related pages. Stifle (talk) 11:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete - absolutely no benefit to writing or improving an encyclopaedia. Can't speedy per WP:G5 as it was created hours before the creator was indef blocked. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:16, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete- useless and nothing of value will have been lost. Jip Orlando (talk) 14:59, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete nonsense that is doing nothing for Wikipedia. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete - just more crap from a now blocked editor Whpq (talk) 04:29, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
• Deletwuntil the relevant discussion at TFD has run its course. If it does turn out in favor of deleting, thenDelete per 192.76.8.77 ☢️Plutonical☢️ᶜᵒᵐᵐᵘⁿᶦᶜᵃᵗᶦᵒⁿˢ 11:28, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

  @Plutonical: I think you have your arguments back to front there. The templates exist to support the project space page, not the other way round. It should be decided whether the idea of the Jigsie rewards is worth keeping here, at which point the fate of the templates is basically set. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 12:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• Weak Delete. Of the TwentytwoAug/Copperwidth project space creations this is probably the least objectionable in that it seems to actually be related to Wikipedia editing and makes some kind of sense. That being said do we really need a duplicate of barnstars? Probably not. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 13:36, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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. ✗plicit 01:35, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

User talk:Amogus

User talk:Amogus (edit subject history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

This page is excessive content unrelated to Wikipedia. -³²²UbnBr₂ (Talk Contributions Actions) 00:36, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Keep and hat. Stupid or irrelevant material on talk pages is normally dealt with by hatting, or in extreme cases by redaction. In this case, redaction is not required, and collapsing is sufficient. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:47, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Keep and blank. It is extremely rare for user talk pages to be deleted, this does not seem to be a case where deletion is required. Remove the stupid IP comments and leave it since there is a user with this name. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 11:26, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Keep; no apparent reason why deletion would be necessary. Feel free to blank or hat if you must, although I fail to see why it wouldn't just be best to let sleeping dogs lie. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 01:33, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Madan Gowri

Draft:Madan Gowri (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

This is getting absurd, the creator has no intention of imporving said draft and it has been deleted nearly a dozen times in mainspace and as a draft. Creator (and a sock) continue to edit tendentiously, repeatedly submitting after decline, rejection, afds, deletion. This is just becoming a honeypot for a spammer and isn't notable as decided numerous times. CUPIDICAE💕 16:36, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Comment, @Praxidicae, The creator of this draft is User:APPU. I had expanded it thinking the subject is notable but did not move to main space since I could not find more reliable english sources. I think a better option would be to indefinitely protect it. The subject is one of the most popular youtubers in Southern India and there are sources with WP:SIGCOV in Tamil language. I'm planning to expand it when I have time. - SUN EYE 1 17:00, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I disagree there is sigcov, as with much of Indian media, it's puffery, churnalism and blatant paid for publications. In fact, the top sources for him are simply interviews, and not independent coverage. CUPIDICAE💕 17:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Praxidicae, I said there are sigcov in Tamil Language. - SUN EYE 1 17:04, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't see how that changes anything that I said. CUPIDICAE💕 17:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Praxidicae The subject publishes his videos in Tamil language and there is more coverage in Tamil than english. I'll just create it again when I find it notable then. - SUN EYE 1 17:14, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Again, that doesn't change my statement. Churnalism exists in all languages. Tamil is no different. Also please do not ping me for every response. Thanks. CUPIDICAE💕 17:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

• delete and salt. Repeat spam. The number of subscribers, views, likes, etc don't affect notability – unless there is independent and secondary discussion of it. --bonadea contributions talk 21:49, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete: Delete as already determined to be not notable as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madan Gowri (2nd nomination). It is also too promotional. Forbid recreation anywhere, unless limited to listing WP:THREE, not more, sources, and getting agreement that yes the person is now notable. SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

  A finding by consensus at AfD that the topic is not notable is a valid prejudice against drafting in draftspace. MfD can does and should take note of the AfD consensus. AfD is the forum for testing notability and should be respected for that.

  If a topic advocate wants to overturn the AfD consensus, the method is WP:THREE, not pedestrian re-creation. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:09, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete based on the combination of deletion from article space, tendentious submission after rejection, and sockpuppetry. (Deletion from article space is not in itself a reason to delete a draft, but tendentious resubmission is.) Robert McClenon (talk) 01:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

  Tendentious resubmission is not a sufficient reason to delete a draft on a notable topic. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:10, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 03:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:CASCADE (disambiguation)

Wikipedia:CASCADE (disambiguation) (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Pointless disambiguation page in Wikipedia space. Whpq (talk) 12:25, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete Useless page. The only link here that is actually reasonable to have on a dab page is WP:CASCADE, the link to the list of cascade protected items is already in a hat note at the redirect target, and the link to the mountain article does not belong on a project space dab page. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 01:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
• I think this is a draft in the wrong namespace (see page history). —J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 02:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
  • @J947: The creator seems to be using fake edit summaries to pretend that they're using a script, e.g. see this edit: [1]. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 02:12, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete as a useless and distracting DAB in project space. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 03:43, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:PageCDN

Draft:PageCDN (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

advertisement for non-notable software-- no substantial reliable sources. DGG ( talk ) 11:09, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete: per WP:NOTPROMOTION SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:37, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
• Weak Delete as a promotional draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 03:44, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Robert Clinton Bogard

Draft:Robert Clinton Bogard (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

This is a personalized political biography of a small town politician, designed for the promotion of the subject and the promulagation of his views. It has no place in an encyclopedia--It's a misuse of WP. The sources are listings and routine local new items.

If he ever were to become notable, it would need to be started over by someone without the blatant and obvious conflict of interest. DGG ( talk ) 11:06, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

• Weak Delete in view of the history, which is that the editor maintains this, so that it doesn't expire. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:22, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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 deleted (G10) by Athaenara (non-admin closure) — csc^-1 14:56, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Bangor HS "Boob" Scandal

Draft:Bangor HS "Boob" Scandal (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Unencyclopedic content, not notable subject. TL The Legend ^talk 00:38, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete as an unsourced BLP. — SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:25, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

• Speedy. I've tagged it for G10 deletion as a completely negative and completely unsourced article about some children getting in trouble at school. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 01:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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 as G5. ✗plicit 00:48, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Alfred Edward "Michael" Cota-Moch

Draft:Alfred Edward "Michael" Cota-Moch (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Unsourced self-referential draft from an editor who's been indeffed for sockpuppetry, edit warring and making legal threats. Violates WP:V, WP:GNG, WP:COI. Wikipedia isn't a roleplaying game where you get to publish articles of your own fantasy life. Ravenswing 00:21, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

• This is G5-eligible as the user was evading a block from 2009. I've tagged as such. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 00:23, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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 Global catastrophic risk. Whether it's deleted or redirected doesn't make much difference. I'm opting to redirect as the least destructive method, and to keep the page history intact. — ScottyWong — 19:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Existential risk

Draft:Existential risk (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

It looks like this content has been integrated into Global catastrophic risk. -- Beland (talk) 00:06, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

• Redirect to above article. Delete Dronebogus (talk) 01:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. I don't see a reason to redirect a Draft page to mainspace, in this case. -- GreenC 02:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Ob, right, I didn’t think about that. Dronebogus (talk) 07:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
• Redirect to Global catastrophic risk. I declined this as mostly duplicating the article one-and-one-half years ago, and said it should be merged. It has been deleted as G13 since then, and rescued from extinction. We don't need it drifting around forever. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - Yes, a draft can be redirected to an article. It is done all the time, whenever a draft is accepted. Occasionally that is done to a different title, if the reviewer changes the article title, e.g., to disambiguate it. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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. — ScottyWong — 19:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:1975 in Nagaland

Draft:1975 in Nagaland (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

No hope of becoming a legit page, per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1964 in Nagaland. This one page was coincidentally moved before the AFD, and thus avoided the group nom. Geschichte (talk) 13:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

• Weak Keep - Deletion from article space does not establish a need for deletion from draft space. This would need declining or rejecting if submitted. This is a real year in the past in a real place. Leave it alone until August 2022 in Nagaland. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:31, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
• Keep. It is completely acceptable to use draft space to have another go at creating/improving articles that were deleted at AFD. The topic here is a plausible article (although it might be better organised by decade if the individual year pages were a bit sparse) and in no way reaches the standard that would be required for deletion as a draft. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 18:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 23:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:The NFT wars

Draft:The NFT wars (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

This draft context is about NFT wars in Cryptoland on November 16 2034 but we don't know it will happen or not. And remember, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball Vitaium (talk) 05:34, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete Since it's been brought here, but this really did not need an MFD discussion and should have been left for G13. This is obviously made-up, but WP:A11 only applies to articles, and I'm not sure WP:G3 is really a good fit. This was declined by a reviewer, which is the correct way of dealing with these drafts, I don't see why it was felt necessary to also MFD it? That being said this has a 0% chance of ever becoming an article, so we may as well delete it while it's here. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 11:15, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete this event only happens in the Berenstein Universe and obviously ended up here via a massive quantum tunneling incident. Dronebogus (talk) 11:40, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
• Weak Delete - This is stupid, and needed rejecting, and was declined. Since we are here, we might as well delete it, but it need not have come here. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete could be deleted as a hoax. Elli (talk contribs) 23:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete G1 C933103 (talk) 11:47, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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. — ScottyWong — 17:30, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedian Peace Treatment Organization

Wikipedia:Wikipedian Peace Treatment Organization (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Unclear what the "Wikipedian Treatment Peace Organization" is supposed to be or do. In case it's a Wikiproject this should probably moved to Wikiproject space – if we deem that this is useful. So far it appears that the page doesn't serve any purpose other than being a playground for two editors who have created similarly useless pages in project space, e.g. Wikipedia:Entertainment theater or Wikipedia:GAMEtxt – NJD-DE (talk) 00:35, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

• Move to projectspaceKeep it’s harmless, good-narured and at least appears to have a vaguely defined goal (which is um… peace). No real reason to delete it over other similarly dumb abortive projects like WP:concordia or the WP:volunteer fire department. Dronebogus (talk) 01:29, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

  The page is already located in project space and it doesn't belong there IMO since it seems to have little connection to Wikipedia. Both those pages you link to are ancient and date to the point when we were still figuring out how to run this place, both of them are also shut down and marked historical. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 02:22, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

  And if you were proposing to turn this into a wikiproject - new wikiprojects really should go through the WP:WikiProject Council, who I am 99.99% sure would decline this for being complete and utter nonsense. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 02:36, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete. I was thinking of nominating this myself actually. This is another weird project space page made by TwentytwoAug/Copperwidth (I'm fairly certain both accounts are the same person) that seems to have no relation to Wikipedia and is borderline patent nonsense. This particular page seems to be some kind of crossover between a wikiproject, dispute resolution and wikilove? The text of the main page consists of a dictionary definition of what peace means, some famous peace related quotes and a selection of userboxes. There's no explanation at all what this organisation is actually supposed to be doing (apart from vague "spread the peace" rubbish) or why it's related to Wikipedia. The remaining subpages are almost completely blank and also contain no context as to what on earth this is supposed to be about, e.g. what on earth are you supposed to be pledging to do? I see no real reason to keep it, and the creator needs to stop making these odd pages in wikipedia space. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 02:22, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

  Noting for the record that Dronebogus has bypassed this MFD and copy-pasted the content to User:Dronebogus/Basement. This probably complicates this MFD, because despite there being a consensus to delete it here it will now probably have to be kept in some form for attribution/copyright purposes. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 22:55, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

  • Move it to userspace and redirect it. Dronebogus (talk) 23:38, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
    • Do you understand how copyright works when dealing with other people's contributions on wikipedia? You cannot just copy and paste other people's work - you need to provide proper attribution following the instructions at WP:Copying within Wikipedia. Even ignoring the copyright concerns your actions here are objectionable - if a deletion discussion is heading towards deleting something you want kept then copying and pasting it into your user space so that it cannot be deleted is purely disruptive. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 00:51, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
      • I did not intended it to be disruptive. I’ve deleted 90% of the content so now it presumably is fine under copyright requirements. Feel free to delete it. Dronebogus (talk) 18:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
• Weak Keep as harmless. It is unlikely to reduce existing conflicts in Wikipedia, which are due largely to nationalism, but it is even more unlikely to worsen existing conflicts in Wikipedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:34, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete - Concur with 192.76 on the reasoning. I have no objection to userfying this if the originator actually put some real effort into defining what this is. -- Whpq (talk) 17:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete per 192.76.8.70. Article creator appears to be more interested in creating weird new pages in projectspace than in building the actual encyclopedia. TwentytwoAug/Copperwidth has been blocked for socking and per WP:NOTHERE. --Finngall ^talk 00:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete this nonsense page, per the reasons above. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. ✗plicit 12:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Entertainment theater

Wikipedia:Entertainment theater (edit talk history links watch logs) – (View MfD)

Brand new project space page that seems to be trying to be a cross between the teahouse, a wikiproject and the community portal. The text at the top of the page is near nonsensical, and a look through the page history makes it clear that even the creator isn't even sure what this is supposed to be. This is redundant to the teahouse, wikiproject entertainment and the community portal which do much better jobs of being a place for newcomers to ask questions, discuss entertainment related articles and link to community resources respectively. I can see no reason to have this odd hybrid page, it serves no useful function while having the potential to confuse newcomers and as such should be deleted.

MfD listing filed by SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:49, 14 February 2022 for 192.76.8.70 (talk · contribs) [2]

Delete If anything, the vague purpose seems to be shaping up as a place to discuss entertainment, not Wikipedia articles about entertainment. A place where you can make, think, and talk about entertainment! Wikipedia simply isn't for making entertainment. The first (empty) section I see here is named "Trivia, Questions, etc." It's definitely not within the scope of the Wikipedia project. I also note that the vast majority of the creator's edits are to their user space, to build this project, to work on Template:Explosive Dog, and make experimental (if harmless) edits to add redundancy to a Wikilink [3], template a Help page as {{Edit semi-protected}} [4] then immediately remove the template, etc. I'm not saying there aren't improvements in any of the mainspace edits, but this has been created by and large by a tinkerer (nothing wrong with that per se), who doesn't seem to be entirely motivated by buiding the project. My two cents. _signed, Willondon (talk) 04:23, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

The creator appears to have tried to make an edit notice for this page which seems to be a knock-off of the teahouse edit notice, which is why I suspected it was supposed to be a tea house equivalent.Template:ETEN. If this page is deleted the template should be G8'd. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 10:41, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

• Delete - serves no clear purpose. -- Whpq (talk) 04:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete per above comments ― Levi_OP^Talk 18:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete this theater is structurally unstable, below code, needs to be torn down like the Wp:Beerhouse. Dronebogus (talk) 01:32, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. Redundant to the things the nominator mentions. Stifle (talk) 10:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. Redundant; fails WP:NOTFORUM. Minkai (rawr!/contribs/ANI Hall of Fame) 13:56, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. As per above comments. Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk) 15:08, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
• Delete as one of several weird projectspace pages created by this entity. Creator has been blocked for socking and per WP:NOTHERE. --Finngall ^talk 00:24, 18 February 2022 (UTC)