This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Articles for deletion page. |
|
Frequently asked questions Q1: I don't like this page's name. I want to rename it to Articles for discussion or something else.
A1: Please see
Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Rename AFD. Note that all of the "for discussion" pages handle not only deletion, but also proposed mergers, proposed moves, and other similar processes. AFD is "for deletion" because the volume of discussion has made it necessary to sub-divide the work by the type of change. Q2: You mean I'm not supposed to use AFD to propose a merger or a page move?
A2: Correct. Please use
Wikipedia:Proposed mergers or
Wikipedia:Requested moves for those kinds of proposals. Q3: How many articles get nominated at AfD?
A3: Per the
Oracle of Deletion, there were about 470,000 AfDs between 2005 (when the process was first created) and 2022. This comes out to about 26,000 per year (2,176 per month / 72 per day). In 2022, there were 20,008 AfDs (1,667 per month / 55 per day). Q4: How many articles get deleted?
A4: Between 2005 and 2020, around 60% of AfDs were closed as "delete" or "speedy delete". This is about 270,000. More detailed statistics (including year-by-year graphs) can be found at
Wikipedia:Oracle/All and
Wikipedia:Wikipedia records#Deletion. Q5: Is the timeline strict, with exactly 168 hours and zero minutes allowed? Should I remove late comments?
A5: No. We're trying to get the right outcome, not follow some ceremonial process. If the discussion hasn't been closed, it's okay for people to keep discussing it. Q6: How many people participate in AFD?
A6: As of October 2023, of the 13.9 million registered editors who have ever made 1+ edit anywhere,
about 162,000 of them (1 in 85 editors) have also made 1+ edit to an AFD page. Most of the participants are experienced editors, but newcomers and unregistered editors also participate. Most individual AFD pages get comments from just a few editors, but the numbers add up over time. |
Deletion ( defunct) | ||||
|
This project page has been
mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
Index
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 25 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
About Deleted Articles
There are three processes under which mainspace articles are deleted: 1)
speedy deletion; 2)
proposed deletion (prod) and 3)
Articles for deletion (AfD). For more information, see
WP:Why was my page deleted? To find out why the particular article you posted was deleted, go to the
deletion log and type into the search field marked "title," the exact name of the article, mindful of the original capitalization, spelling and spacing. The deletion log entry will show when the article was deleted, by which
administrator, and typically contain a deletion summary listing the reason for deletion. If you wish to contest this deletion, please contact the administrator first on their
talk page and, depending on the circumstances, politely explain why you think the article should be restored, or why a copy should be provided to you so you can address the reason for deletion before reposting the article. If this is not fruitful, you have the option of listing the article at
WP:Deletion review, but it will probably only be restored if the deletion was clearly improper. List Discussions
WP:Articles for deletion WP:Categories for discussion WP:Copyright problems WP:Deletion review WP:Miscellany for deletion WP:Redirects for discussion WP:Stub types for deletion WP:Templates for discussion WP:WikiProject Deletion sorting WT:Articles for deletion WT:Categories for discussion WT:Copyright problems WT:Deletion review WT:Miscellany for deletion WT:Redirects for discussion WT:Stub types for deletion WT:Templates for discussion WT:WikiProject Deletion sorting |
When an article is deleted on en-WP but also exists on other Wiki's, should a notification be automatically posted on the article page (or talk page) of those Wikis?
For example, this article by a skilled UPE (i.e. lots of well constructed refs, but mostly unsuitable on close inspection) was deleted today Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akuma Saningong on en-WP, but it still exists-created by the same UPE-on the French and German Wikis.
I have put a note on the talk pages of those wikis about the AfD but I wonder if this should be done automatically? thanks. Aszx5000 ( talk) 12:46, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, can someone please fix the AfD for Honorary Chaplain to the King, regards Atlantic306 ( talk) 20:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Please file an AFD for Kottankulangara Festival. The rationale is "Not large enough to split. A section already exists in the main article. Besides, article size is 6616 bytes (markup), fails WP:SIZESPLIT & WP:SIZERULE. Title is also somewhat misleading as Chamayavilakku is only one among multiple events held as part of temple festival." 157.46.158.170 ( talk) 10:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Occasional references does not make something notable 2605:B40:13E7:F600:D034:1B79:2140:1EDF ( talk) 21:12, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
The redirect Wikipedia:Articles for destruction has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1 § Wikipedia:Articles for destruction until a consensus is reached. Mondtaler ( talk) 17:48, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
I would like to nominate Racial hoax for deletion with the following rationale:
Thanks in advance, 35.139.154.158 ( talk) 22:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
All that's here is primary sources, listicles, and toys. 2605:B40:13E7:F600:80D4:D0B3:B66:64D9 ( talk) 00:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Really just says "he exists." 2605:B40:13E7:F600:A0A5:D7A8:85CC:1EBC ( talk) 18:01, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Both have no real impact shown 38.15.33.113 ( talk) 21:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Once again, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/Today is not displaying a list of today's nominations. Instead, it has a link to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 13. I wish people would leave the mostly harmless articles alone, like England women's cricket team in Ireland in 2024 alone (wait a few months and it will become a obviously notable topic) and concentrate on hoaxes and unverifiable claims. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 22:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The article does not meet the notability criteria and merit. The 1 source is not a reliable source that verifies notability. It is a forum like site for local community, which serves as self published blog. http://ruhollywood.com/2018/11/12/miss-russian-united-states/
4 source is a self published interview on an ads website, not reliable secondary source at all. http://www.spektrummagazine.com/fashion/getting-to-know-lika-osipova/
6 source is an article on a gossips site about dating life of a Russian media person, barelly mentioning the figure of the Wikipedia. https://www.eg.ru/showbusiness/66399/
Sources 7 and 8 are different links to the same poster to the city of the city. It is rather a primary sourse not a secondary source to verify notability. https://www.weho.org/home/showdocument?id=26793
Source 9 - a link to the so called LAF.It is not a film festival, it is a monthly paid competition, not recognized in media or the professional community. The link only mentions name of the person, and does not provide any evidence to verify notability. https://www.lafilmawards.net/single-post/june-2021
To summarize- 6 out of 9 sources used for the page do not meet even closely any possible notability verifications. The figure has barely any professional credits, zero recognition in American or Russian media beyond a self proclaimed pop star status. 2 2603:8000:B6F0:8A10:7412:7312:39D6:FAAA ( talk) 05:48, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Article was created by a user with same name as article, on 14 September 2009 (their only contribution to Wikipedia). Speedy deletion on creation day; First nomination on 28 January 2010-Keep. This organization article is missing independent, reliable sources to establish notability. The only reference is a dead link. After searching, found only social media, but no comprehensive, in-depth coverage of this specific organization. Please submit for "Second nomination" as I'm not sure how to do this correctly. Thanks. JoeNMLC ( talk) 12:27, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
"He is large." That's mostly it. 2605:B40:13E7:F600:E1EB:7896:3BB9:E89F ( talk) 02:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Article was created on 25 February 2009, then was first time nominated for deletion on 17 March 2009 (UTC) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newshouse. Article has zero references (one dead link), and unable to find comprehensive, in-depth coverage of this specific Indian weekly newspaper for children. Please submit for "Second nomination". Thanks, JoeNMLC ( talk) 09:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
I would like to nominate Supersci for deletion with the following rationale:
Thanks in advance, -- 62.166.252.25 ( talk) 18:36, 22 May 2024 (UTC)