Meta:Requests for deletion

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
(Redirected from Meta:RfD)
Requests and proposals Requests for deletion Archives (current)→

This page hosts local (i.e., Meta-Wiki) requests for page deletion. For requests for speedy deletion from global sysops or stewards, see Steward requests/Miscellaneous. 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.) Files 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 ({{Deletion requests}}) can be added to talk page to remember previous RfDs.

Wikimedia Meta-Wiki


SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day.


Submit your page deletion request at the bottom of this section.




List of articles every Wikipedia should have[edit]

  • List of articles every Wikipedia should have - This project doesn't seem to be as actively maintained as the Vital articles project on the English Wikipedia. I think for this reason, I think it would be better for the two lists to be consolidated. Interstellarity (talk) 23:59, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep Not a reason for deletion. * Pppery * it has begun 04:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep: Actually, the English Wikipedia is NOT the only language of Wikipedia. —— Eric LiuTalk 08:45, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep: The project is active in other language versions, which do not have a project "vital articles". Deleting the page from Metawiki would disrupt those project. Furthermore the list is still useful for small Wikipedias, that still lack many neccessary articles. Flaverius (talk) 09:56, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep: I agree with Flaverius Xosé Antonio (talk) 19:45, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep : per Flaverius. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 14:13, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep: Come on, there is more to the world than English ;) Nadzik (talk) 23:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep: In Korean Wikipedia, we are using this 'List of articles every Wikipedia should have' concept and each Wikiproject importance scale instead of vital articles. I definitely oppose for deletion. --LR0725 ( Talk / Contribs ) 06:54, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep : the project is active, even if it has a different vision from English Vital articles project. --Algovia (talk) 09:07, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep It's a very important page for many Wikipedias. Reprarina (talk) 22:58, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Speedy keep; as per others, bogus request. — Yerpo Eh? 14:29, 26 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep; Is this a joke? This list is one of the most important pages for all Wikipedias in hundreds of languages across the world. It is SUPPOSED to be as static as possible, so that all editors can always refer to the most globally important topics, when building up their respective language Wikipedias from scratch. "The joke is bad and you should feel bad". The user proposing has tried to enforce so many changes to this page without any consensus and now this deletion? This suggestion borders on vandalism. --- AntekVeganova (talk) 10:30, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Submit your template deletion request at the bottom of this section.


Appears superseded by {{#babel:}} (by the way could someone perhaps link me its documentation?) as this just produces redlinks. Perhaps we could convert to wrapper but I’m not sure how. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:50, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm, it seems like this used to be an (ugly) wrapper before User:NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh misguidedly broke it by importing from Wikipedia. There's also diff but the diff in the edit summary does not appear to exist. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:12, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Aaron Liu: I edited the template on June 22, 2022. All but one current user page transclusions of this template were introduced later to that (old usages were manually fixed). The only exception is this one which transcludes {{Babel}} without providing any arguments. That this template produces nothing but red links is merely the result of it not being used correctly and should not be a basis for deletion. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 05:08, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh What is the correct use then? After you fixed them, new usages such as User:Rhyswynne have still popped up. The existence of this template is confusing and actively hurts those new to meta. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:14, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Deleting the template will only create more red links. I don't see how that resolve the problem (if there is one). NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:39, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I believe that reverting the template to a wrapper with a deprecation message is essentially the same as deletion. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:54, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose For the same reason en:Module:Babel is still useful. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 05:11, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The English module is only useful because every language code is a template. On meta, most templates do not exist, and the magic word transcludes template when it can’t find the language code anyways. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:12, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Then those should be created instead. Or the module should be modified. There's no need for deletion. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:59, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Why do you need the module when you can quite easily wrap the template around the magic word? Why do you want to rely on the module? Aaron Liu (talk) 16:00, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete - redundant to the magic word. – Ajraddatz (talk) 18:35, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep: To preserve historical content. Could be reverted back to a revision that works like before. —— Eric LiuTalk 09:09, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ericliu1912 You mean the version that was basically a wrapper? Aaron Liu (talk) 12:44, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Submit your category deletion request at the bottom of this section.


Submit your image deletion request at the bottom of this section.


Submit your redirect deletion request at the bottom of this section.

Requests for undeletion[edit]

Submit your undeletion request at the bottom of this section.