Meta:Requests for deletion

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
(Redirected from WM:RFU)
Jump to: navigation, search
Requests and proposals Requests for deletion Archives (current)→
Shortcut:
WM:RFD
This page hosts local requests for page deletion. For requests for speedy deletion from global sysops or stewards, see Steward requests/Speedy deletions. Any language may be used on this page. Before commenting on this page, please read the Deletion policy, in particular the criteria for speedy deletion, and the inclusion policy. Please place the template {{RFD}} on the page you are proposing for deletion, and then add an entry in an appropriate section below. As a courtesy, you may wish to inform the principal authors of the page about the request. After at least one week, an administrator will close and carry out the consensus or majority decision.

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

Previous requests are archived. {{Deletion requests}} can be added to talk page to remember previous RfDs.
Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Participate:

This box: view  talk  edit

Contents

[edit] Pages

Submit your request at the bottom of the section.

The following discussion is closed.

Help:Turkish characters/fr

This page has no content, apart from some templates and a category. Mathonius (talk) 09:31, 20 April 2012 (UTC)


Deleted per consensus. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 16:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Help:User style/de/myskin.css

Someone probably made a mistake when creating this page. It isn't used anywhere and I doubt it could be used anywhere. Mathonius (talk) 09:31, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete. Again tempted to speedy delete ... --Aphaia (talk) 12:13, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
  • delete, of no evident value — billinghurst sDrewth 12:18, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
    • Yes check.svg Done per unused and this request. –BruTe talk 07:24, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Templates

Submit your request at the bottom of this section.


None currently

[edit] Categories

Submit your request at the bottom of the section.

The following discussion is closed.

Category:Fellowship Proposals

Nominated by RedYoshii for being an empty category, though it shouldn't be speedy deleted imo. Trijnsteltalk 21:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


Kept. Per consensus. –BruTe talk 10:56, 4 May 2012 (UTC)


The following discussion is closed.

Category:Ignore XWiki reports

Nominated by RedYoshii for being an empty category (and yesterday deleted by Micki), though it shouldn't be speedy deleted imo. Trijnsteltalk 21:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

  • Oppose Oppose as this category may still be used for the usual cross-wiki reports. Trijnsteltalk 21:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment I think it should be called "Ignored XWiki reports" instead. Please ask User:Beetstra for his thoughts. —Marco Aurelio (audiencia) 10:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
  • I think this can be deleted, they should indeed all be in Category:Ignored XWiki reports - I think it is something that we had in the beginning, where the categorising template was not properly programmed. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 07:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Ignore all rules, as well XWiki reports - heh. I concur with Beetstra, it seems now redundant with Category:Ignored XWiki reports and hence safe to delete, even speedy. --Aphaia (talk) 12:19, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
  • delete as superfluous — billinghurst sDrewth 12:21, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Deleted, empty and unused category, scope covered by Category:Ignored XWiki reports. Savhñ 14:41, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


The following discussion is closed.

Category:Education Program

Nominated by RedYoshii for being an empty category (and yesterday deleted by Shizhao), though it shouldn't be speedy deleted imo. Trijnsteltalk 21:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

  • Speedy delete. Speedy was correct IMHO. Is an empty cat w/o any description and its creator blanked it minutes later. Thanks. —Marco Aurelio (audiencia) 10:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
    • I didn't notice the creator blanked it soon after he created it. Then the speedy delete was fine I guess. :) Trijnsteltalk 13:13, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete. Concur with MarcoAurelio. --Aphaia (talk) 12:17, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
  • deletebillinghurst sDrewth 12:21, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Deleted per CSD M4, empty category. Savhñ 14:35, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Submit your request at the bottom of the section.


None currently

[edit] Requests for undeletion

Submit your request at the bottom of the section.

[edit] User talk:PeterSymonds/Trusted user

Hi, I'd like to ask local sysop to restore (or consider restoring) the page User talk:PeterSymonds/Trusted user, which was deleted by PeterSymonds

(Deletion log); 18:36 . . PeterSymonds (talk | contribs) deleted page User talk:PeterSymonds/Trusted user ‎(please go away)

As I read yesterday, there was/were a question(s) to PeterSymonds from Open Proxy, however, I do not think it can be marked as trolling and removed this way from Meta. Therefore, deleting of this page as an answer of this question is unfair and going against the concept of transparency of Wikimedia projects. The reason "please go away" is not valid reason for deleting the page. If PeterSymonds does not want to answer, he can just ignore the page (which is, I think, good solution) or delete the text there, however history of the page might to be accessible for others and not deleted by sysops. (PS: and just make it clear, I was not the Open proxy. My critics is all the time signed ;) by my real user account). --Chmee2 (talk) 06:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

  • Surely recover. Delete instead reply is an error and not only due to the related RFC. --Tlusťa (talk) 07:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
  • A) I should have been notified about this RfD; B) it is in my userspace, so if I choose to delete it, that is my choice. The IP who created the page is now blocked. Please stop spreading this nonsense. PeterSymonds (talk) 13:44, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
    • No, this is something, where you are wrong. Hiding questions/discussions by admin edits, which you don't want answer, is wrong because of transparency of Wikimedia projects. I understand, that you don't want (for example) have subpages on your talk-page, however right way was move questions to your talk page and just ignore it (If I will be you, I will make it the same, just ignore it). But your solution is going against the issue of open-project where edits are traceable. Or is there some other reason for deleting? Do you think, that this edit was vandalism?
    • Sorry, that I did not inform you. I did not realized it that it is necessary. Next time, I will do it. Regards --Chmee2 (talk) 11:02, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Leave deleted. A user may request deletion, or if an admin delete themselves, any content in their user space especially if it is vandalism. QU TalkQu 14:47, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
    • Was it vandalism? I can not agree with you, I saw only several (useless) comments/questions for PeterSymonds, but nothing for deleting by admin. --Chmee2 (talk) 11:02, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep deleted, user subpages are not the place for questions or trolling. Please assume good faith and use talk pages for proper questions. Savhñ 14:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
    • Yes, you are right with using talk page for comments, however it was not possible for new users and IP's cause PeterSymonds talk-page was locked. It is strange when somebody locked talkpage. For this reason the openproxy probable used subpage. This situation was changed now, thanks to Snowolf. --Chmee2 (talk) 11:02, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose per above micki 19:21, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Personal tools

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Beyond the Web
Print/export
Toolbox