Wikipedia:XfD today

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Deletion today)
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion
Shortcuts

This page transcludes all of the deletion debates opened today on the English-language Wikipedia, including articles, categories, templates, and others, as a convenience to XfD-watchers. Please note that because this material is transcluded, watchlisting this page will not provide you with watchlist updates about deletions; WP:DELT works best as a browser bookmark checked regularly.


Speedy deletion candidates[edit]

Candidates for speedy deletion
User talk:Bowlita b
File talk:Donald Trump official portrait.jpg
Draft:EScheduleIt
User:JamesDress/the perfect spelling reform
John Gage (Landowner)
Lee Chin Koon
Mohamad Nabil Hegab
User:Omri Boiman
SPECULOOS-3 b
Tan Yinglan
Draft:V5iD
User:Walktalkeatsleep
Draft:William Dissen

Articles[edit]

< May 28 May 30 >

Purge server cache

Mathematics education in New York[edit]

Mathematics education in New York (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Almost entirely unsourced and out-of-date. Insufficiently distinct from Mathematics education in the United States. Possibly could be redirected to New York Regents Examinations. Walsh90210 (talk) 02:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Czech Republic men's national water polo team[edit]

Czech Republic men's national water polo team (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can find evidence that a "Czech Republic men's national water polo team" actually exists. A few clues:

  • According to European Water Polo Championship, a men's team from Czechia hasn't been fielded since ~1993 when competition was in the name of Czechoslovakia.
  • The sole source on the page links to the women's team. The men's team link is blank going back to 1993.
  • The name of the team on the page, "Český svaz vodního póla," is actually the name of the Czech Water Polo Federation, which organizes domestic competition. The only international competition it references is junior/U16 men, not a senior men's national team.
  • No other reliable sources that I can find, in Czech or English, refer to any variant of a men's national water polo team that actually competes internationally.

Open to other sources that editors may find, but until they appear I cannot even confirm that this subject exists. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:41, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KUGB-CD[edit]

KUGB-CD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KBPX-LD[edit]

KBPX-LD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG; most sources are from the FCC. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:33, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Baláž (boxer)[edit]

Peter Baláž (boxer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

With only primary sources listed, this article clearly fails WP:NBOX and WP:GNG. My Google searches came up with Peter Baláž (Esperantist) and a motorcycle driver, both of which are Slovak, but nothing about a boxer with the same birth name. I can't see this article lasting longer-term on Wikipedia. Clara A. Djalim (talk) 09:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no medal means no notability under WP:NSPORT. Can't find any secondary coverage via a search. BrigadierG (talk) 10:42, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, subject was the starring role in a movie about himself (Goat (2015 film)), and his involvement was covered by such outlets as The Hollywood Reporter[1]. I'm thankful for the nomination because it gives us a chance to improve the article, although I think the nominator did not do WP:BEFORE by looking up the actor's name with the movie's name (Koza) and addressing those sources. --Habst (talk) 12:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I AM the nominator. Sure, not everyone has the same Google search results. Clara A. Djalim (talk) 10:27, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, per the excellent find by Habst. A movie about the subject! BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Just to be clear, the movie is fiction, about a fictional Olympic champion. This article is about a fighter who badly lost his only Olympic fight in the round of 32. Boxrec shows he won 3 of his 57 pro fights.[2] He's not notable as a boxer, but feel free to debate his notability as an actor. Papaursa (talk) 04:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:28, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

V. N. Srinivasa Rao[edit]

V. N. Srinivasa Rao (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I do not think that this person meets the criteria for notability. I have been unable to find any reference to him other than the The Hindu article (https://web.archive.org/web/20240317044514/https://www.thehindu.com/features/friday-review/history-and-culture/the-lawyer-as-a-writer/article4683660.ece), which just effectively said it was nice to read. And cryptic metadata from library websites who happen to have the book (which seems to just be stanford and nyu https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/in00000071311 ) Mason (talk) 02:01, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Law, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:25, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment he was pretty clearly a Madras barrister[3]. He's cited for appearances a number of times in the Madras Law Journal[4]. I'm not finding a lot more than that.
    Are you questioning whether the Madras chief justices book exists? It is held by 8 WorldCat Participating libraries. The comment about cryptic metadata doesn't make sense. Oblivy (talk) 07:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I believe you are confusing notability and verifiability. Just because a source is hard to find doesn't mean it isn't reliable. See WP:PAYWALL. Goldenarrow9 (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Page fails WP:GNG. No significant coverage on the subject in the sources which are also very likely poor. Subject does not meet basic criteria to be considered notable due to insignificant coverage in multiple published, secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. If this criteria can be met, I would reconsider my vote. RangersRus (talk) 12:25, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to Closer. Page was created by sockpuppet and is good for WP:G5 speedy deletion. RangersRus (talk) 12:29, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RangersRus, this article is not eligible for CSD G5. You've made this kind of comment several times which is a mistaken interpretation of G5. Please review WP:CSD carefully. G5 is for block evasion, not simply for being the work of a sockpuppet. Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided. Just FYI, a general comment for all AFDs, when an editor says "seems like" or "likely" or "appears to be" it means to me that the editor hasn't read or seen the sources and are basing their opinion on attributes like the title or the publisher. If that's the case, it's good not to have an absolutist opinion on what should happen with an article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Executive Committee of Gagauzia[edit]

Executive Committee of Gagauzia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG, Single source is primary, nothing found in BEFORE that meets WP:SIRS, addressing the subject 'directly and indepth. Nothing sourced in article for a merge, but no objection if there is a consensus for a redirect to Autonomous territorial unit of Gagauzia  // Timothy :: talk  02:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:21, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - there appears to be coverage in English-language scholarly sources ([5] [6], both paywalled but which had substantial text matches in Google Scholar results snippets), and likely more in Romanian, Gagauz, Turkish or other languages. signed, Rosguill talk 15:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 01:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was Speedy keep‎. Withdrawn, sources found (non-admin closure) PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Wanderer in the Spirit Lands[edit]

A Wanderer in the Spirit Lands (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

One review. Fails both WP:NBOOK and GNG. I have failed to find a second review despite searching on Newspapers.com, Google News, etc. It is an old book so stuff might be out there that I can't find. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:05, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Forgot to mention I did find this one thing. But I'm honestly not sure what it is. It is in Icelandic (?) And might be referring to this book. It is in the newspaper "Heimskringla" from 7 April 1926, page 2. I can't tell how in depth it addresses it either way. If it is a review/analysis/discussion of this and is more than a few sentences I can withdraw this. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:11, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PARAKANYAA: Well putting it through Google Translate does seem to show it's somewhat about the book, but Google Translate isn't exactly the best. Interestingly, it gives an alternate name, simply "The Spirit Lands", though searching this also gives little results.
This book, however, is for some reason mentioned in one of Arthur Conan Doyle's works (The Edge of the Unknown), though it doesn't exactly go in-depth:

In a remarkable book, A Wanderer in the Spirit Lands, published in 1896, the author, Mr. Farnese, under inspiration, gives an account of many mysteries including that of fairies. What he says fits in very clearly with the facts that have been put forward, and goes beyond them. He says, speaking of elementals, "Some are in appearance like the gnomes and elves who are said to inhabit mountain caverns. Such, too, are the fairies whom men have seen in lonely and secluded places. Some of these beings are of a very low order of life, almost like the higher order of plants, save that they possess independent motion. Others are very lively and full of grotesque unmeaning tricks... As nations advance these lower forms of life die out from the astral plane of that earth's sphere and succeeding generations begin at first to doubt and then to deny that they ever had any existence."

ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 01:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's also some fairly decent length coverage in Borderland (magazine) (p.241-242, not sure abt reliability) and some short coverage (p. 385) in The Bookseller. A case could also be made for WP:OLDBOOK since it's been mentioned a few times in the 20th/21st century. Based on this and the above, it's probably best to keep. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 02:01, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with that, I'll withdraw this. I just couldn't find anything minus the one review, and we've found more than that through this AfD so all is well. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:03, 29 May 2024 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Master of Science in Global Finance[edit]

Master of Science in Global Finance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This appears to be one program for one university that does not seem to be notable in itself. Sargdub (talk) 00:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Monirul Molla[edit]

Monirul Molla (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find anything beyond match and roster reports—some three years old—that briefly mention him. This may be a WP:TOOSOON situation, but realistically, I think it just fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Anwegmann (talk) 00:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yaroslav Kysil[edit]

Yaroslav Kysil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The only reference I can find on him is, unfortunately, related to the death of his father in the Russo-Ukrainian War. On his own, nothing but match reports and routine coverage—far short of WP:SIGCOV. Anwegmann (talk) 00:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Florencio Badelic Jr.[edit]

Florencio Badelic Jr. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'll admit that I'm a bit unsure about this article. There are a lot of citations in the article, but all of them are routine and/or match reports. There seems to be little or no WP:SIGCOV here. Anwegmann (talk) 00:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alex O'Connor[edit]

Alex O'Connor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not yet notable per WP:BIO or WP:ENT. He hosts a podcast that has interviewed many notable people, but on Wikipedia notability is not inherited. The best independent, secondary coverage I can find of O'Connor himself in a WP:BEFORE search is the Oxford Mail story about Hitchens walking out on him during a podcast, but this amounts to WP:BLP1E. The rest of what I can find is all WP:PRIMARY, including YouTube clips of him appearing on GB News, Uncensored, this clip on Daily Caller of Hitchens walking out, etc. Wikishovel (talk) 00:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Religion, Internet, and England. Wikishovel (talk) 00:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: No coverage used in the article now in RS and I can only find coverage in Catholic Answers, which I'm not sure is a RS and likely somewhat biased. Agree that the rest of the sources are primary. Oaktree b (talk) 00:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files[edit]

Categories[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS[edit]

Category:Chinese-language-only video games[edit]

Nominator's rationale: The China-exclusive video games list is pretty short, doing this will expand it, but some of these game were developed in Taiwan or outside Mainland China. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:55, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video games by language[edit]

Nominator's rationale: The reason why I'm deleting these categories are only for video games supported in a single language, and none of these categories are fully-populated either. More importantly many titles only available in a single language can alternatively be found in Category:Region-exclusive video games QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English-language-only video games[edit]

Nominator's rationale: I am deleting this category along with other Video games by language categories, (expect Chinese-language-only video games, which will merge with China-exclusive video games). Reason: Not every single English-language-exclusive title's listed. But then comes argument that has to populated... QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Migrant to the Ottoman Empire people from British India[edit]

Nominator's rationale: option A: merge, three categories for only one article is not helpful for navigation. Option B:delete, the article is already in Category:Emigrants from British India and Category:Immigrants to the Ottoman Empire which seems to suffice. For a citizen of the Ottoman Empire it is irrelevant which specific Indian ethnicities all of his ancestors had. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would support either merge or delete, because these categories are very much not helpful for navigation.Mason (talk) 03:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Which option?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:59, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same question: which option?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:33, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Centro de Estudios Puertorriqueños faculty[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This is an institute Centro de Estudios Puertorriqueños within Hunter college. This category is too small to be helpful with navigation right now. Mason (talk) 02:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, the upper-level category of City University of New York faculty is for a system of colleges and institutes, and the articles in it should be diffused into the appropriate subcats for each of the different colleges within the system in the same way as categories are done for other university systems. Ideally, all of the articles in the CUNY faculty cat would be diffused into subcats of the different colleges or institutes. Additionally, from what I understand, the centro is housed at Hunter College, but is a separate institute within the CUNY system. Semper Fi FieldMarine (talk) 03:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. No objection to diffusion as such, as long as it colleges are big enough to contain lots of articles, but that does not seem to be the case here. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:32, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sugar[edit]

Nominator's rationale: They are too similar MRTFR55 (talk) 16:34, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Sugars. Comments on a potential rename of the plural category would be appreciated!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Japanese-language-only video games[edit]

Nominator's rationale: There is only a single article in this category, first things first. Second things second, literally every single video game that's only available in the Japanese language is already located in the pre-existing category Japan-exclusive video games. You see, Japan really only speak Japanese and not much else. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Analysts of Ayodhya dispute[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Alternative name sounds more consistent with other categories in Scholars and academics by subject Mason (talk) 04:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - as the page creator. I have no objection. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 04:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete in the spirit of WP:PERFCAT, this is just one of many topics that the subjects in this category were involved. No objection to listification. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: rename or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW: I was on the fence between deletion and renaming when I made the nom. My hope was that other folks who have strong opinions/knowledge. Mason (talk) 03:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: same question: rename or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:10, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Meal planning apps[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Only a single article inside. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 00:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects[edit]

Betamine[edit]

Recommend deletion of this redirect, unless a reliable source can be found that betamine = betanin. Currently, the only evidence that's been presented is a 1980 {{subst:URL to diff|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Betanin&diff=1226176232&oldid=1226163969%7Clabel=patent}} that doesn't exactly say betamine = betanin. Google Scholar turns up three results and Google turns up nothing relevant. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:55, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules[edit]

Template:Arusha Rural District[edit]

Propose merging Template:Arusha Rural District with Template:Arusha District.
{{Arusha Rural District}} is fuller. Template:Arusha District should be turned into a disambiguation because {{Arusha Urban District}} exists as well. Aldij (talk) 14:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Template:Arusha District shouldn't be turned into a disambiguation page and the Rural District main link links to the same article as the main district template. And on top of that, we have Template:Districts of Arusha which features all the same links on the main Arusha navbox, Template:Arusha. This may be a case of merging everything to one template, having sections for all these links, and deleting the rest of the navboxes. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 17:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 00:20, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dag[edit]

Propose merging Template:Dag with Template:Dagger.
I'm going slightly more "discussion" with this TFD than anything, primarily thinking that {{dag}} should either be merged into {{dagger}} or renamed to make it more obvious as to why it's being used (though expanding the name might then make it longer than just typing out the <sup>...</sup> pair...). As it stands, {{dag}} by itself is potentially confusing (e.g. "what is a dag", or why it gives a superscript output) so I feel like something needs to be done. Primefac (talk) 14:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I find it strange that we still use archaic print notations instead of hyperlinked notes. How are either of those better than a regular {{efn}} note? Gonnym (talk) 15:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Primefac: The preferred option is to redirect {{dag}} to {{dagger}}. Given its minimal use, merging simplifies matters. However, if retaining the functionality is crucial, renaming {{dag}} to "superscript-dagger" or "dagger-sup" would clarify its purpose, albeit making it longer. Anoop Bhatia (talk) 02:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, it's basically only used as part of {{TAAR ligands}}. Do we need a template for this at all? Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 08:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Primefac: If choose to merge and retain functionality
{{#if: {{{s|}}} | <sup>†</sup> | † }}

{{dag}} will output †
{{dag|s}} will output <sup>†</sup>
Anoop Bhatia (talk) 13:01, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 00:14, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany[edit]

Deletion review[edit]

Various redirects to List of Argentine films of 1995[edit]

No te mueras sin decirme adónde vas (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)
No te mueras sin decirme adonde vas (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)
Mariposa china (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)
Historia del cine argentino (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)
Noches aticas (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)
Noches áticas (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)
Ninos envueltos (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)
La Nave de los locos (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)

Deleted with the rationale "redirect to a list with no other useful information beyond a repetition of the name" which is clearly not a WP:CSD; Template:R to list entry are fairly common in fact many of which offer minimal information. Of course sometimes these are deleted at WP:RFD, but they should receive a discussion where the community has an opportunity to review before being deleted. Deleting admin has not responded to the request for undeletion, as such I am bringing this here. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:FD37:E902:E246:5D16 (talk) 00:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILM has an established consensus that film titles should not be mere redirects to "list of films of YYYY lists". For various reasons, the titles in Category:Argentine film redirects are not helpful; sometimes the title is not actually present in the list it's been redirected to at all; sometimes it is present and linked as a recursive redirect right back to the same page you're on; sometimes it's present in the list but links a different spelling or capitalization of the same title so it redlinks out from the page; sometimes it's been linked to the wrong list and the film was actually released in a different year; and there's been more than one case identified where the primary topic for a title wasn't actually a film at all, such as Malevo, a dance troupe who you've seen on Got Talent, but whose name was being coopted as a "film-redirected-to-list" whose existence was unverifiable (well, there was a film of that title, but not in the year the title was redirecting to or even a year in the same decade, and certainly not a film that would have held primary topic status over the dancers.)
The helpfulness of such redirects has already been discussed by NFILM, where a consensus was established that they are not valuable, and no further input from new participants (especially anonymous IPs) is either needed or desired, as all the relevant issues have already been hashed out. And RFD has already indicated that they don't want to see every last one of these for days and days of discussion, and has directed me that I am justified in acting boldly on a case-by-case basis after assessing the value and utility and "is there another place this could be redirected to instead of this bad target" reuseability of these redirects.
So no, I'm not taking any clapback from any anons about it, because this has all already been hashed out by active editors. Bearcat (talk) 00:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The community hasn't authorized you, or whoever "they" at NFILM are, to delete these pages by fiat. You can bring them to RFD like anybody else. —Cryptic 01:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The last time I brought a batch of them to RFD, I most certainly was explicitly told to just be bold with them instead of bringing them to RFD over and over again. And where else would one discuss such an issue as the utility of content, besides the WikiProject for that subject area? Bearcat (talk) 01:27, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As an administrator you are expected to know deletion policy, if you think a handful of people saying you should be bold in a single RFD overrides the strong global consensus the community has embodied at WP:CSD then you should seriously consider refraining from use of the deletion tool until you have refamiliarized yourself with community expectations. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:FD37:E902:E246:5D16 (talk) 01:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have a phrase for administrators who "are bold" with deletion, with ample precedent. That phrase is "desysopped for cause". —Cryptic 01:45, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProjects have no special power over content, and any user whether registered or unregistered explicitly has a right to request an explanation for administrative actions. If you believe the pages should be speediable then go to WT:CSD and get a consensus for it, but neither you, me, nor anyone else is above deletion policy. Furthermore speedy deletion is fundamentally not the place for boldness, and I would seriously reconsider recalibrating your approach to use of the deletion tool. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:FD37:E902:E246:5D16 (talk) 01:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProjects most certainly do have the authority to establish a consensus around how to deal with the issues that crop up in their domains of expertise, such as "no, film titles that do not have articles should not be summarily redirected to mere lists of films" and/or "no, we do not need to individually rediscuss each separate reiteration of the same thing we've already gone over 200 times, and already established a clear consensus against, before". Bearcat (talk) 01:27, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They in fact do not, and you have no policy basis for that claim. WP:LOCALCONSENSUS cannot override policy. Go to WT:CSD and get policy changed, but you are not allowed to ignore deletion policy. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:FD37:E902:E246:5D16 (talk) 01:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:XfD_today&oldid=1222059439"