This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ema--or (talk | contribs) at 23:57, 25 February 2021 (→Mansigh: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 23:57, 25 February 2021 by Ema--or (talk | contribs) (→Mansigh: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Skip to table of contents |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Articles for deletion page. |
|
view · edit 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 Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages:Proposed mergers or Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages:Oracle/All and Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages 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 continue 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. |
This project page has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
Archives |
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, 78 |
|
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 discussionsWP: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 |
AFD help
Can someone please help me add the AFD for “Drive the Boat” to the main page? I’m very new to this. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 20:15, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- Already done Cyberbot I added it to today's log for you. Iffy★Chat -- 20:34, 8 February 2021 (UTC) Huh? Possible to add afds to Main Page? Ne'r heard o' this. Ema--or (talk) 23:42, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
AFD help
Can someone please help me add the AFD for “Rahul Pillai” to the main page? CRICKETMANIAC303 (talk) 21:49, 11 February 2021 (UTC) CRICKETMANIAC303 (talk) 16:19, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
- Done I've added both AFD's you've created to today's log for you. Iffy★Chat -- 16:34, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Why?
Why do we need separate processes for the deletion of articles, categories and redirect pages? Borsoka (talk) 06:29, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
"your obstructionist attack on the deletion process is making Misplaced Pages worse."
See the argument here: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/D._Liyanarachchi.
Since when did AfD become a space where anything other than "delete" -- even if it is just a comment that does not argue either way -- become an "obstructionist attack on the deletion process"? If this is now policy, it is certainly not on the project page. Gnomingstuff (talk) 09:34, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
- For context, I am a returning editor from the 2000s, using a new account per WP:VALIDALT (privacy reasons; my old username is traceable to my real-world identity, which was not so much an issue in college but is as an adult). I am very familiar with the process of creating an article, as well as the AfD process. I am not familiar with any precedent for which anything but a delete argument is "making Misplaced Pages worse." If this is the case, the project certainly has changed a great deal. Gnomingstuff (talk) 10:00, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Gnomingstuff: - The viewpoint you encountered there with "your obstructionist attack on the deletion process is making Misplaced Pages worse" is not a mainstream view in most parts of the AFD process. I will note that application of the notability process has gotten a bit stricter since the 2000s, so AFD isn't quite like it was. Particularly in the area of sports, which is where the AFD where that was encountered occurred, there is a growing consensus that a marginal pass of some of the more inclusive WP:NSPORTS guidelines with no GNG-meeting coverage often doesn't warrant an article (I am not passing a judgment on the notability of that specific AFD, as I have not conducted a WP:BEFORE on that subject, and I do not speak any of the non-English languages sources about him could be in). But still, that comment does not reflect the mainstream viewpoint in AFD (at least the areas where I frequent), and is not civil, either. Hog Farm Talk 03:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Gnomingstuff: The comment in question was made by John Pack Lambert. This is best dealt with at WP:ANI where recent threads include Johnpacklambert AfD nominations and Uncivil and hostile comments and edit summaries. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:46, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
@Gnomingstuff: As Andrew says, we had a lengthy discussion about this recently, and the overall consensus is that John Pack Lambert hasn't done anything harmful enough that sanctions would be necessary to protect the encyclopedia. Personally, I think JPL is making a good point in a bad way - many articles, once they pass the perusal of New Page Patrol, sit around uncared for and undeveloped for years and years and years. This has never been a policy issue (cf. WP:RUBBISH) but it doesn't mean the basic premise is not true. It's a general problem with an encyclopedia with over 6 million articles and not enough editors to go round; stuff gets neglected and forgotten about. Ritchie333 13:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- To be clear, I'm not asking for any kind of sanctions, nor do I particularly care about any of the sports articles. I find the million sports nominations per day kind of weird, but -- as I've mentioned multiple times at this point -- I have no real opinion on whether they should be kept; my concern there was the glib comments about someone's name masquerading as a delete argument and, from what I have seen, going unchallenged. Nor is this really a complaint about civility; I'd be equally offended by this comment if it were delivered politely.
- In other words, what I care about is the sentiment being expressed, which I find appalling. Something has gone terribly wrong when the default assumption is that this is "the deletion process" -- i.e., rather than a discussion about whether the deletion process should happen -- in which any comment or dissent is seen as "obstructionism that is making Misplaced Pages worse." This is the most egregious case yet, but I've seen it a lot -- "stop improving the article" is something else that's been said recently -- and generally it goes unchallenged. Going unchallenged leads to precedent; precedent leads to policy. Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:44, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- FYI, John Pack Lambert is actually subject to a topic ban due to their history of nominating sports articles for deletion. This was enacted in 2017 and the exact conditions are
Johnpacklambert is indefinitely banned from nominating any articles at WP:AFD to a maximum of ONE article in any given calendar day, determined by UTC. If JPL, wants to nominate a group of articles in one discussion, they must refrain from any further AFDs for the same number of days as the count of articles nominated. This restriction does not apply to nominating articles through WP:CSD or WP:PROD.
- Their record of AfD nominations seems consistent with this restriction and the AfD in question was nominated by a different editor. The general state of affairs is described at Deletionism and inclusionism in Misplaced Pages but that perhaps needs updating.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 20:30, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- FYI, John Pack Lambert is actually subject to a topic ban due to their history of nominating sports articles for deletion. This was enacted in 2017 and the exact conditions are
- Pinging @Johnpacklambert: who I don't believe has actually been told this discussion is happening. First, I'm assuming JPL misread, or didn't take the time to read, Gnomingstuff's comment; it's a complete non sequitur. JPL owes GS an apology for not taking the time to read GS's comment before responding, and (if this is a habit) needs to stop responding to comments without reading them. Second, even if GS had actually been voting keep, that's not an acceptable level of discourse, and the hyperbole of "obstructionist attack on the deletion process" makes everyone just incrementally less likely to pay any attention to your point of view, so it's self-defeating. JPL owes GS another apology for being pointlessly rude, and (if this is a habit) needs to stop being pointlessly rude. Third, considering that JPL complained at ANI recently about someone being rude to him at AFD, his being rude to a completely uninvolved editor concerns me. And fourth, @Gnomingstuff:, while this kind of comment is not cool and should be discouraged, I've noticed that AFD is a toxic place for keep voters and delete voters alike, and until some kind of systematic cleansing can occur, I'd advise staying away. That's pretty much what I do. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:37, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- It's funny, because I actually considered myself a deletionist back then, don't not these days, and I don't think my view is what's changed (per the main AfD page, I just don't comment when the only thing I have to say is that I agree with consensus.) I don't think it's just the notability standards, either. I think the turning point for me was the Theresa Greenfield thing; I fully agree with all of Jimmy Wales' comments on it. I don't bring it up to re-re-re-litigate it, just that it expresses my thoughts better than I can, particularly with regard to "our notability standards are largely fine, our process/interpretation is frequently not working." I see arguments to avoid all over the place -- particularly rampant are 1.7, 3.1 and 3.6 -- gone largely unchallenged, and there seems to be significant resentment against people who claim these are poor arguments for deletion (especially 3.1). The logical extension of that would be what we have in the subject line here. As far as staying away/it being a "toxic place," unfortunately I think the low participation just makes it worse. Gnomingstuff (talk) 04:33, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
- I apologize for my comment. I am sorry for expressing my frustration. It is very clear that the person in question was not anywhere close to being notable. On the other hand I would note some of the comments above are down right vicious and they falsly use some terms.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:52, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
AFD assist
can someone nominate Levy Rozman into afd, that YouTuber isn't notable at all. 49.151.173.220 (talk) 02:07, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
Announcement: (essay) WP:SOLDIER deprecated
Any regular of AfDs will surely have encountered this when discussing military figures. Per a recent RfC at the WikiProject Military History discussion page; it's been found to be inappropriate and there was consensus to deprecate it. Just letting you know in case you end up upon it still being cited in relevant discussions.
For WikiProject Military history,
RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Mansigh
Hi there, I'm looking for a place to apologise and explain my actions regarding the subject above. My previous questions e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Help_desk&oldid=1008441157, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Editor_assistance/Requests&oldid=1008958784 did not satisfy. Thanks for help!...?? Regards Ema--or (talk) 23:57, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Category: