Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

Skip to: Table of contents / current discussions / old business (bottom). Purge this page

WP:MFDWP:MFD

Please do not nominate your user page (or subpages of it) for deletion here. Instead, add {{db-userreq}} at the top of any such page you no longer wish to keep; an administrator will then delete the page for you. See Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § G7 for more information.

Miscellany for deletion (MfD) is a place where Wikipedians decide what should be done with problematic pages in the namespaces which aren't covered by other specialized deletion discussion areas. Items sent here are usually discussed for seven days; then they are either deleted by an administrator or kept, based on community consensus as evident from the discussion, consistent with policy, and with careful judgment of the rough consensus if required.

Filtered versions of the page are available at

Information on the process

What may be nominated for deletion here:

Pages not covered by other XFD venues, including pages in these namespaces: Draft:, Help:, Portal:, MediaWiki:, Wikipedia: (including WikiProjects), User:, TimedText:, MOS:,^[a] Event: and the various Talk: namespaces
Userboxes, regardless of the namespace
File description pages when the file itself is hosted on Commons
Any other page, that is not in article space, where there is dispute as to the correct XFD venue.

Requests to undelete pages deleted after discussion here, and debate whether discussions here have been properly closed, both take place at Wikipedia:Deletion review, in accordance with Wikipedia's undeletion policy.

Notes

^ The vast majority of pages in the MOS: namespace are redirects, which should be discussed at RfD. MfD is only applicable for the handful of its non-redirect pages.

Before nominating a page for deletion

Before nominating a page for deletion, please consider these guidelines:

Deleting pages in your own userspace	If you want to have your own userpage or a draft you created deleted, there is no need to list it here; simply tag it with {{db-userreq}} or {{db-u1}} if it is a userpage, or {{db-author}} or {{db-g7}} if it is a draft. If you wish to clear your user talk page or sandbox, just blank it.
Duplications in draftspace?	Duplications in draftspace are usually satisfactorily fixed by redirection. If the material is in mainspace, redirect the draft to the article, or a section of the article. If multiple draft pages on the same topic have been created, tag them for merging. See WP:SRE.
Deleting pages in other people's userspace	Consider explaining your concerns on the user's talk page with a personal note or by adding `{{subst:Uw-userpage}} ~~~~` to their talk page. This step assumes good faith and civility; often the user is simply unaware of the guidelines, and the page can either be fixed or speedily deleted using {{db-userreq}}. Take care not to bite newcomers – sometimes using the {{subst:welcome}} or {{subst:welcomeg}} template and a pointer to WP:UP would be best first. Problematic userspace material is often addressed by the User pages guidelines including in some cases removal by any user or tagging to clarify the content or to prevent external search engine indexing. (Examples include copies of old, deleted, or disputed material, problematic drafts, promotional material, offensive material, inappropriate links, 'spoofing' of the MediaWiki interface, disruptive HTML, invitations or advocacy of disruption, certain kinds of images and image galleries, etc) If your concern relates to these areas consider these approaches as well, or instead of, deletion. User pages about Wikipedia-related matters by established users usually do not qualify for deletion. Articles that were recently deleted at AfD and then moved to userspace are generally not deleted unless they have lingered in userspace for an extended period of time without improvement to address the concerns that resulted in their deletion at AfD, or their content otherwise violates a global content policy such as our policies on Biographies of living persons that applies to any namespace.
Policies, guidelines and process pages	Established pages and their sub-pages should not be nominated, as such nominations will probably be considered disruptive, and the ensuing discussions closed early. This is not a forum for modifying or revoking policy. Instead consider tagging the policy as {{historical}} or redirecting it somewhere. Proposals still under discussion generally should not be nominated. If you oppose a proposal, discuss it on the policy page's discussion page. Consider being bold and improving the proposal. Modify the proposal so that it gains consensus. Also note that even if a policy fails to gain consensus, it is often useful to retain it as a historical record, for the benefit of future editors.
WikiProjects and their subpages	It is generally preferable that inactive WikiProjects not be deleted, but instead be marked as {{WikiProject status\|inactive}}, redirected to a relevant WikiProject, or changed to a task force of a parent WikiProject, unless the WikiProject was incompletely created or is entirely undesirable. WikiProjects that were never very active and which do not have substantial historical discussions (meaning multiple discussions over an extended period of time) on the project talk page should not be tagged as {{historical}}; reserve this tag for historically active projects that have, over time, been replaced by other processes or that contain substantial discussion (as defined above) of the organization of a significant area of Wikipedia. Before deletion of an inactive project with a founder or other formerly active members who are active elsewhere on Wikipedia, consider userfication. Notify the main WikiProject talk page when nominating any WikiProject subpage, in addition to standard notification of the page creator.
Alternatives to deletion	Normal editing that doesn't require the use of any administrator tools, such as merging the page into another page or renaming it, can often resolve problems. Pages in the wrong namespace (e.g. an article in Wikipedia namespace), can simply be moved and then tag the redirect for speedy deletion using {{db-g6\|rationale= it's a redirect left after a cross-namespace move}}. Notify the author of the original article of the cross-namespace move.
Alternatives to MfD	Speedy deletion If the page clearly satisfies a "general" or "user" speedy deletion criterion, tag it with the appropriate template. Be sure to read the entire criterion, as some do not apply in the user space.

Please familiarize yourself with the following policies

Wikipedia:Deletion policy – our deletion policy that describes how we delete things by consensus
Wikipedia:Deletion process – our guidelines on how to list anything for deletion
Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – a how-to guide whose protocols on discussion format and shorthands also apply here
Wikipedia:Project namespace – our guidelines on "Wikipedia" namespace pages
Wikipedia:User page – our guidelines on user pages and user subpages
Wikipedia:Userboxes – our guideline on userboxes

How to list pages for deletion

Shortcut

WP:MFDHOWTOWP:MFDHOWTO

Please check the aforementioned list of deletion discussion areas to check that you are in the right area. Then follow these instructions:

Instructions on listing pages for deletion:

To list a page for deletion, follow this three-step process: (replace PageName with the name of the page, including its namespace, to be deleted)

Note: Users must be logged in to complete step II. An unregistered user who wishes to nominate a page for deletion should complete step I and post their reasoning on Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion with a notification to a registered user to complete the process.

I.

Edit PageName:

Enter the following text at the top of the page you are listing for deletion:

{{mfd|1={{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}}}
for a second or subsequent nomination use {{mfdx|2nd}}

or

{{mfd|GroupName}}
if nominating several similar related pages in an umbrella nomination. Choose a suitable name as GroupName and use it on each page.

If the nomination is for a userbox or similarly transcluded page, use {{subst:mfd-inline}} so as to not mess up the formatting for the userbox.

Use {{subst:mfd-inline|GroupName}} for a group nomination of several related userboxes or similarly transcluded pages.

Please include in the edit summary the phrase
Added MfD nomination at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]
replace PageName with the name of the page that is up for deletion.
Please don't mark your edit summary as a minor edit.
Check the "Watch this page" box if you would like to follow the page in your watchlist. This may help you to notice if your MfD tag is removed by someone.
Save the page

II.

Create its MfD subpage.

The resulting MfD box at the top of the page should contain the link "this page's entry"

Click that link to open the page's deletion discussion page.
Insert this text:

{{subst:mfd2| pg={{subst:#titleparts:{{subst:PAGENAME}}||2}}| text=Reason why the page should be deleted}} ~~~~
replacing Reason... with your reasons why the page should be deleted and sign the page. Do not substitute the pagename, as this will occur automatically.

Consider checking "Watch this page" to follow the progress of the debate.
Please use an edit summary such as Creating deletion discussion page for [[PageName]]
replacing PageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion.
If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
Save the page.

III.

Add a line to MfD.

Follow this edit link and at the top of the list add a line:

{{subst:mfd3| pg=PageName}}
Put the page's name in place of "PageName".

Include the discussion page's name in your edit summary like
Added [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]
replacing PageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion.
Save the page.
If nominating a page that has been nominated before, use the page's name in place of "PageName" and add

{{priorxfd|PageName}}
in the nominated page deletion discussion area to link to the previous discussions and then save the page using an edit summary such as
Added [[Template:priorxfd]] to link to prior discussions.

If nominating a page from someone else's userspace, notify them on their main talk page.
For other pages, while not required, it is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the miscellany that you are nominating. To find the main contributors, look in the page history or talk page of the page and/or use TDS' Article Contribution Counter or Wikipedia Page History Statistics. For your convenience, you may add
{{subst:mfd notice|PageName}} ~~~~
to their talk page in the "edit source" section, replacing PageName with the pagename. Please use an edit summary such as
Notice of deletion discussion at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]
replacing PageName with the name of the nomination page you are proposing for deletion.
If the user has not edited in a while, consider sending the user an email to notify them about the MfD if the MfD concerns their user pages.
If you are nominating a WikiProject, please post a notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council, in addition to the project's talk page and the talk pages of the founder and active members.

Administrator instructions

XFD backlog
v
t
e
V	Oct	Total
CfD	70	70
TfD	38	38
MfD	0	0
FfD	11	11
RfD	5	5
AfD	1	1

Administrator instructions for closing and relisting discussions can be found here.

Archived discussions

A list of archived discussions can be located at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates.

Current discussions

Pages currently being considered for deletion are indexed by the day on which they were first listed. Please place new listings at the top of the section for the current day. If no section for the current day is present, please start a new section.

November 5, 2025

Draft:Peter Botting

The individual in question is non-notable and was declined twice. It is unlikely that the subject would become a Wikipedia article. Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 00:05, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NDRAFT. Tenshi! (Talk page) 00:07, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 3, 2025

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shadowfax33/Userboxes/Groyper

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. WP:SNOW ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 16:11, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Shadowfax33/Userboxes/Groyper

WP:HID Dog whistle for white nationalism LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 15:59, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To the trash can of history with it and their ilk. —Fortuna, imperatrix 16:13, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - such userboxes. GoodDay (talk) 16:47, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:UBCR, considering the main purpose of the Groyper movement is to be inflammatory and divisive. -insert valid name here- (talk) 17:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I very seldom have an opinion on userboxen, but, as noted, the whole objective of Groypers is to be inflammatory and divisive. A lethal dose of anti-inflammatory drugs may be in order. (Sometimes the plural of 'box' is 'boxen'.) Robert McClenon (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete honestly. This is WP:IAR level, since it is not explicitly vandalism, but it is certainly hateful. -1ctinus📝🗨 20:21, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Should not be encouraged Schützenpanzer (Talk) 00:15, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete inflammatory and divisive. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 01:13, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:41, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

User:SkamidaZoltar/sandbox

WP:NOTWEBHOST: "user pages do not serve as personal webpages, blogs, or repositories for large amounts of material irrelevant to collaborating on Wikipedia." This page contains a bunch of lyrics of unkown copyright status containing what appear to be features. Even if best scanerio that these are the user's lyrics, they contain features which are of unkown copyright status. Either way, this is entirely unencyclopedic from a mostly noncontributer. -1ctinus📝🗨 15:19, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It's a sandbox, and the user has been playing in the sand. We should only consider deleting sandboxen if there is clearly something troublesome with them, not if there is nothing obviously right with them. (Sometimes the plural of 'box' is 'boxen'.) Robert McClenon (talk) 18:57, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see this as troublesome, as the page hosts a bunch of blatantly unencyclopedic lyrics.

Sorry for not really explaining a rationale, so I'll quote the rationale. My apologies.

Lyrics are especially problematic since their copyright status is unknown. -1ctinus📝🗨 20:11, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 2, 2025

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Skyttejp/sandbox

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

The result of the discussion was: speedy delete. WP:U6 ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 16:14, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Skyttejp/sandbox

Per WP:COPIES and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ComparePages?page1=User%3ASkyttejp%2Fsandbox&rev2=874310317 Paradoctor (talk) 17:39, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nominator, and also as U6, abandoned work of non-contributor in user space more than six months ago. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:35, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. Progress escaped me there. Paradoctor (talk) 21:00, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:32, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

User:Hoodedninja22

Unsourced BLP. Paradoctor (talk) 17:32, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This is not only an unreferenced BLP, but appears to satisfy all of the criteria for U6, work of a non-contributor more than six months ago. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:32, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, next time. Paradoctor (talk) 20:59, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a subpage, so U6 doesn't apply. See also Wikipedia:Replacement of CSD U5 FAQ at "Why are top-level userpages exempted? What do I do with them instead?" ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 16:23, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:33, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:SlayerFace/sandbox

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

The result of the discussion was: speedy delete. WP:U6 ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 16:17, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:SlayerFace/sandbox

Unsourced BLP. Paradoctor (talk) 17:26, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This appears to be not only an unreferenced BLP, but a U6, a coprolite from someone who made no other contributions more than six months ago. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:30, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, you're right. Need to get used pronto to the new rules. Paradoctor (talk) 20:57, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:34, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Draft:List of people who died by being hit by a cow which got hit by a train and flew through the air whilst urinating on train tracks

Not suitable for wikipedia Theknoledgeableperson (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This is such a hideously convoluted set of circumstances that a comedy writer would question who on earth would suspend their disbelief to buy this. Also, WP:BLP1E. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:18, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - It's a draft, and drafts are not deleted for notability, and drafts are not deleted for stupidity unless they have any of certain specified types of stupidity. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:46, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per above and WP:NDRAFT. - Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 23:05, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per NDRAFT. Just let the draft go undisturbed for a while and when it doesn't get edited (I doubt many edits will happen to it due to the sheer specificity of the circumstances described in the title) the draft can be deleted automatically. Gommeh 📖 🎮 00:29, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NDRAFT: If we just leave this alone, it will probably go unedited for six months and be eligible for G13. On the other hand, it could be expanded and eventually become a featured list! There's no rush to delete it now. Chess enjoyer (talk) 04:33, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While this article doesn't have a chance of meeting our notability in our current form, WP:NDRAFT and WP:NMFD are clear that notability guidelines don't apply in draft space. If anything, let G13 take its course. ~ Matthewrb ^{Get in touch · Breadcrumbs} 06:56, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This draft does not meet notability requirements and should be deleted before the six months end.

Theknoledgeableperson (talk) 14:16, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We don't delete drafts for not meeting notability requirements in general, as it's assumed that the draft can always be edited to meet notability standards later. If it doesn't meet notability standards six months after it was created then the draft will get automatically deleted. Why do you think we should delete it before the six months are over? Gommeh 📖 🎮 14:57, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: It's one thing to create a gag article, but the fact that exactly one person died in this specific way does not constitute allowing the draft to continue. Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 00:07, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:AnomieBOT/Nobots Hall of Shame

Anomie maintains a list titled "Hall of Shame" to include editors in good standing who have opted out of bot notifications. This is a massive WP:BLP, WP:CIVIL, and WP:NPOV violation concerning presumably living editors. This is also apparently how Anomie responds to stimuli such as bugs and errors from its own bot. Anomie also states that it's an actually a list of bots (dozens), not editors (over 1,000 entries) — how incredulous. The bot just collects and lists users. Not bots. The disparate justifications don't explain why this aggressively pejoratively titled list needs to include a list of hundreds and hundreds of username entries. There is no acceptable reason to maintain such a "Hall of Shame" that simply collects usernames. See the dithering. After an unreasonably dismissive response from Anomie, I asked for a move/retitle. Anomie has failed to do so. I initially gave a one-day notice of intent, but in light of the dismissive reply, it's time for this Hall of Shame, after existing for over a decade. JFHJr (㊟) 05:19, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This seems a strong reaction. SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:35, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would you feel any differently if you were named in a Hall of Shame in an admin's botspace? JFHJr (㊟) 05:37, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is the page title a joke?

Does the list serve a purpose for the bot owners? Eg, does a cluster of nobot flags signal a bot problem? SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:46, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The BLP joke exception. Noted. JFHJr (㊟) 05:56, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(And no, of course it's not a joke. It's a judgment. And if it were a joke, I'd be an involuntary punchline. It's uncivil.) JFHJr (㊟) 06:32, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There’s a conversation at User talk:AnomieBOT/Nobots Hall of Shame. Could this be resolved by an apology for an unintended insult and a page rename? SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:01, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems doubtful. JFHJr seems intent on finding something to be offended over here. Anomie ⚔ 13:04, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. A neutral title would be fine. And it would moot this discussion for closure. JFHJr (㊟) 21:00, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And I don't need an apology. A move alone would suffice. JFHJr (㊟) 21:00, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retitle to something descriptive and bland. SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:47, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, this nomination seems misguided at best. If the page title is problematic, then it should be moved, not deleted. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 08:47, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We're clearly heading towards WP:SNOW territory here. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 12:09, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep and a WP:TROUT for JFHJr. Find something useful to do instead of digging for something to be offended over and dismissing the explanations as "dithering" and "desperate justifications", and purposefully mischaracterizing the page after you've already been informed better. The pages are useful for bot operators who want to find unreported bugs and for gnomes who want to clean up unnecessary bot exclusions, and the title is a minor bit of humor that, if it disparages anything, disparages bots that need to be excluded from a lot of pages. It doesn't even list users as claimed, it lists bot exclusions and the pages those exclusions are present on. Anomie ⚔ 13:04, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disparate, not desperate; these are very different things. I would never characterize your actions as desperate. I'm sorry about any confusion. Cheers. JFHJr (㊟) 21:16, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Nominator seems extremely uninformed of what it actually does. It's a list of all pages that exclude a bot, not just someone's talk page. I fail to see their argument that a list of pages that excludes bot(s) is a massive WP:BLP, WP:CIVIL and WP:NPOV violation concerning presumably living editors. Furthermore, they haven't tagged the subpages of it either. Tenshi! (Talk page) 13:18, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The "shame" is being applied to bots, not users. A page rename could be considered for clarity. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:55, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I too don't see the issue here, nor even a need to rename. This is reporting an easily-verifiable factual claim, and nothing more than that - I don't see how that makes a BLP issue. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:20, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am not voting Keep at this time because I am completely confused. It is clear to me that the nominator has missed something, but the combination of this nomination and the now-dismissed G10 nomination are so bizarre that I wonder whether I have also missed something. This makes no sense at all to me. I don't even understand what the error has been. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:42, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and no need to rename. While the page could be moved to a bland and banal title that would not confuse or offend anyone, I think a better fix would be for those editors to develop a better sense of humour. – SD0001 (talk) 09:12, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and snow close. This page title in in User space, is innocuous (or a slightly in-poor-taste attempt at humor at worst), and never needs to be looked at by anyone except its creator. Let's focus on the millions of actual errors and problems on live Wikipedia articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:56, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Authenyo/Democratic People's Republic of Irisland

Fails WP:NOTWEBHOST. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:45, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I don't think bad faith was evident so it's ineligible for G3, but it is still is not appropriate for inclusion as it is just made up. I'm guessing that MfDs like these will become much more common since U5 was repealed. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 04:18, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - If this were in draft space or article space, it would be a hoax. One can argue over whether it is a hoax in user space, but there is no question that it doesn't belong in any namespace, because it states fiction as fact. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:02, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia is not a web host for your made-up country. -- Whpq (talk) 22:29, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:34, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I just noticed that the events are in 2030 through 2034. This is not stating fiction as fact, but it is contrary to Wikipedia is not a crystal ball (which is a policy). Wikipedia is not for alternate history, regardless of whether it is in the past or the future. The applicable policies may change, but the result is still that it isn't permitted. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:16, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cali Boy 09

Althistory cruft that goes against userpage guidelines. I previously left a warning on the user's talk page in September but user has continued to use their userpage for this purpose. Bait30 ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 02:03, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for various reasons, including that the names of likenesses of living persons are being used contrary to fact, which is a BLP violation. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:04, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and warn, fantasy alternate history is not ok anywhere on Wikipedia. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:22, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep These are very clearly public figures--Trade (talk) 14:48, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is exactly why we should delete, as the page contains misleading information about them. (WP:BLP) Gommeh 📖 🎮 00:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

False information, on a site that endeavours to be reliable, is not OK. SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:34, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note - the MFD tag was removed by the author when thye blanked their user page. I have restored the MFD tag. -- Whpq (talk) 14:40, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 1, 2025

User:Milaenvy/sandbox

This has been edited several times over the years but has always been an unsourced BLP. To make matters worse, it is an autobiography and some revisions (including the current one) have been promotional. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:12, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As an unsourced BLP. Autobiography doesn’t make it worse, writing unsourced BLP material is worse if it is about someone else. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:04, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unreferenced BLP. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:47, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:05, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and warn as clearly promotional and unreferenced BLP. Additionally WP:TOOSOON. Gommeh 📖 🎮 00:33, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October 31, 2025

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Whyiseverythingalreadyused/on the Christian persecution complex with ChatGPT

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. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 15:56, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Whyiseverythingalreadyused/on the Christian persecution complex with ChatGPT

This appears to be a transcript of a chat session between User:Whyiseverythingalreadyused and ChatGPT. This doesn't seem relevant to any wiki project, and an entire page set aside for this seems excessive, even for an established editor. Sunmist (talk) 18:01, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: You can just G15 this. Contains communication intended for the user NicheSports (talk) 22:04, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aight thanks Whyiseverythingalreadyused (talk · contribs · he/him) 23:27, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Whyiseverythingalreadyused - if you wish to have this user page deleted, you can add a WP:U1 to the page. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:43, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, they are currently indef'd. - Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 04:27, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete under G15 per above: Wholly and very obviously LLM-generated content, with communication intended for the user. - Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 04:25, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No relevance to Wikipedia Schützenpanzer (Talk) 00:19, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:37, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Under G15. This is clearly AI generated content just copied to this page so qualifies for G15.GothicGolem29 (Talk) 12:51, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per WP:G15. —Fortuna, imperatrix 13:03, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

October 29, 2025

User:Smaddy Wend102

Unsourced BLP. Paradoctor (talk) 22:04, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have tagged it (along with User:Smaddy Wend102/Sample page) under speedy deletion criteria U5: "A non-contributor misusing Wikipedia as a web host". Autobiographical self-publicity. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:41, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. Didn't even notice the auto part. I'm getting too old for this shit. Paradoctor (talk) 00:17, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both as an unreferenced BLP and as web hosting. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:21, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:49, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 19:16, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both - they are unreferenced BLPs with no proof of notability and also per WP:WEBHOST as said above. Gommeh 📖 🎮 00:36, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Smaddy Wend102/Sample page

Unsourced BLP. Paradoctor (talk) 22:04, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unreferenced BLP. It is also web hosting of an autobiography, but U5 is in flux.
Comment - These two nominations could have been bundled. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:20, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. I shall endeavour to reform. Paradoctor (talk) 01:33, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:49, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 19:16, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both - they are unreferenced BLPs with no proof of notability. If the other page is deleted (which let's face it, it obviously will be) then G8 applies here too won't it? Gommeh 📖 🎮 00:37, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Over the topSOMME/sandbox

Draft:Sovereign State of Ironland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User:Over the topSOMME/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

These two rejected submissions appear to be part of a loosely coordinated off-wiki campaign to create an article about a so-called micronation. They are now calling it the Sovereign State of Ironland because the title Ironland has been extended-confirmed protected both in article space and in draft space, Draft:Ironland.

Delete Both as nominator.

ECP SALT Draft:Sovereign State of Ironland as nominator. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:16, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Salt, per nom -Samoht27 (talk) 15:13, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Salt per nom. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 19:17, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:06, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Tottenham Hotspur F.C./to do

Stupid bizarre IP duck and refusal to speedy, this should be deleted WP:G6 and requested WP:G7, shouldn't need this process at all. It's no longer being used. Govvy (talk) 15:25, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this is a very clear case of WP:!G6, and there are simply too many non-trivial edits by others for it to qualify as WP:G7. It is however now at the correct venue for deletion. For now I offer no other opinion on the nomination. 204.111.137.106 (talk) 15:49, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per request of the primary author. Toadspike [Talk] 16:57, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mark Historical if this once had a purpose and has served its purpose. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:45, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Minnow to nominator for a common error about G6. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:45, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mark Historical per Robert McClenon. Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:43, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question Mark as historical? It didn't serve any purpose in the end, no one read it far as I am aware, no one helped with the pages I wanted help with, so it failed in it's purpose, nothing historical about this. Govvy (talk) 18:09, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Toadspike. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 19:18, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October 28, 2025

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:SMBFriss/sandbox

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. $Salvio giuliano$ 20:52, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:SMBFriss/sandbox

WP:COPIES: Draft that was copy-pasted to Warren Sarrell, and should then have been redirected there per WP:STALEDRAFT #5. Article was G11ed a few hours later, at which time that redirect should have been G8ed. Paradoctor (talk) 17:14, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Originator came, created this coprolite, and departed. The article was deleted as G11, and this can also go G11. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:39, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:50, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 19:19, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

October 23, 2025

Draft:Personal color analysis

(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.)

Salvio giuliano

07:16, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blatant AI slop, zero chance of ever being accepted into mainspace, yet declined for CSD G15. Author has been pasting identical copies of this exact same content across multiple different titles too. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 20:11, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question for the nominator, User:Taking Out The Trash - What are specific indications that this draft is the work of artificial intelligence? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:25, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The tone and writing style is quite obviously the output of ChatGPT or an identical program/software. I utilize these tools for legitimate purposes often enough that I can recognize their styles, especially when it's this blatant. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 19:30, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AI-assisted, maybe, but I doubt it was blatantly written by ChatGPT; its editing history shows a natural incremental work, and I do not see any blantant WP:AISIGNS, just unencyclopedic essay-like writing. Ca ^{talk to me!} 03:59, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Salvio giuliano

07:16, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do nothing, unfortunately. It's Copypasta from an offline source, but not deletable as such. Will not be accepted in mainspace so just ignore. Star Mississippi 21:26, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old business

Everything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began 01:07, 29 October 2025 (UTC) ended today on 5 November 2025. Editors may continue to add comments until the discussion is closed but they should keep in mind that the discussion below this marker may be closed at any time without further notice. Discussions that have already been closed will be removed from the page automatically by Legobot and need no further action.

Closed discussions

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates

[1] The vast majority of pages in the MOS: namespace are redirects, which should be discussed at RfD. MfD is only applicable for the handful of its non-redirect pages.

[a]