Meta:Requests for deletion/Archives/2022

Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in 2022, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

My mistake

Please delete CNBanner:CommunityWishlist-CommunityWishlist-CNTranslationProposal1-title/qqq. I added translation to the wrong page. --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 18:18, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

@আফতাবুজ্জামান: Done, you may use {{delete}} in the future. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

User talk:DenisWasRight

Requesting the deletion of this talk page. Thank you in advance! -- DenisWasRight (talk) 13:46, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Speedied as uneeded redirect. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:15, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

IP soul mate

The following discussion is closed.

This page is purely original research, and I see no point to keep it here. Stang 22:06, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

That page was not "research", but rather intended for humour. I have addressed the concern by rephrasing it into an essay. While I would prefer to keep it, I wouldn't mind otherwise. Kind regards and have a nice day. Elominius (talk) 01:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Seems in line with the other pages we have about editors, I think this can be humor and leaning keep. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Kept. Tagged humorous too. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 22:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:46, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Beruang Perkasa

Request for deletion of a user page and block from [[:meta:]] as the user use this account to promote their own products. This user is already banned in wikipedia:id: for the same reason Azmi1995 12:14, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

@Azmi1995 Deleted as out of scope. I don't see too much of a spam, so warned for now. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:18, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:46, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Gorillawarfare.jpg

Redundant to similar version on commons. Unused. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. @Minorax: Could you please tag these files with {{RFD}}? * Pppery * _{it has begun} 16:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 12:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Bruno.png

Redundant to File:Bruno2.jpg. Unused. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 16:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 12:03, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Kumar.jpg

Redundant to similar version on commons. Unused. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Speedy delete per F3. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 16:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
@Pppery You meant I3? There's no F3 but I3 seems to meet. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:19, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes, sorry. I'm primarily an English Wikpedia editor, and the English Wikipedia uses the code "F", not "I" for file speedy deletions. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 13:55, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Kumar1.jpg

Redundant to similar version on commons. Unused. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 16:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 12:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Kumar.png

Redundant to similar version on commons. Unused. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 16:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 12:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Tech/News/2022/08/ak

This translation has no links and can't be fixed. I'm not even sure if the text is a translation of the source. Several translations from user:Ohvet have already been deleted, and the user has been warned several times. They haven't taken the advice given into account. Thank you, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 16:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Trizek (WMF): Thanks. I've deleted the page. If the user is not translating pages correctly after being warned, we could consider suspending (via a partial block limited to the Translations namespace) their translation permissions (absent a better option). Please ask in RFH if we've reached that level. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:01, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @MarcoAurelio. I will follow up there. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 17:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:37, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

sd wikinews pages

The following discussion is closed.

Out of Meta's scope. Don't think that there is a need to move this to incubator as it seems to be a low quality translation of wikinew's policy. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 16:54, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. I was wondering what exactly these were when I stumbled upon the pages some time ago. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:39, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:20, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:20, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Subpages of Meta:Sandbox

Deleted, Salted. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:52, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Don't see a need to have a sandbox for every language. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:09, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Delete all per nom. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 13:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --Magogre (talk) 13:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Delete all. There is only one sandbox. Thingofme (talk) 14:36, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 15:54, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Category:User groups or Category:Users by access

The following discussion is closed.

I request to merge these two categories by deleting Category:User groups and then move Category:Users by access to Category:User groups. —— Eric Liu_（Talk） 13:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Oppose the former is a category about groups, the later about users - these should not be merged. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:19, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Oppose per Xaosflux. --Hulged (talk) 07:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
Oppose per above. --𝑇𝑚𝑣 (𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑘) 02:25, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Oppose. These two are not entirely the same.--Jusjih (talk) 20:42, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Keep both, per above, absolutely differents between both concepts. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Kept - no consensus to delete. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:23, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Gay

The following discussion is closed.

Implausible redirect. Sandsandsandsa (talk) 11:57, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Oppose someone could write gay to look for lgbt guidelines--Pierpao (talk) 12:48, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Kept. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:13, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Aiuto non tradotto en it

Seems to be a template but created in main namespace. There's only one incoming link which is from a sandbox. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 22:01, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

delete unused and we can't have a "suggestion to translate" template for each language--Pierpao (talk) 15:24, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Delete --Svartava (talk) 12:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Deleted - per unanimous consensus and expired {{looks useless}}. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:42, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:38, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Category:CC-BY-2.5

Being empty for now and acceptable on Commons, do we need it here?--Jusjih (talk) 20:45, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Delete Not very useful, files licensed so are fully Commons allowed. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:02, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Delete per Liuxinyu970226--Pierpao (talk) 12:47, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Comment: There are at least 59 files with no machine-readable license data (thousands more lack machine-readable author and/or source). Are we sure that we won't be needing this category if, one day, we manage to go through this forgotten backlog? —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:28, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

This discussion is closed and will be archived shortly. Please do not modify it. Withdrawn with {{do not delete category}}--Jusjih (talk) 04:18, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Template:Humour

Duplicate of Template:Humor/fr. Little usage that can be replaced afterwards -or- we can redirect it to Template:Humor/fr. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Replace uses and then redirect to Template:Humor. Use of the British English spelling is not by itself sufficient to indicate French. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 16:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Replace and redirect. As there are probably more people in the UK, Singapore, Canada, Australia, India, Ireland or really most Commonwealth countries than the total number of French speakers, I would expect that more people would probably end up looking for the English version. SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 11:56, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Replace and redirect per SHB2000. Hulged (talk) 05:43, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Replace and redirect per SHB2000 archive talks and delete translation subpages--Pierpao (talk) 11:48, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Done (Think I got it all, if anything is missing just ping me on my talk page). — xaosflux ^Talk 13:44, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Hulged: following up here; the discussion above appears to be that there should be one callable template, {{Humor}} - which is in English, and that anyone using {{Humour}} should get {{Humor/fr}}. Are you expecting a different end result? If there is some other specific cleanup outstanding, please let us know exactly what still needs to be done. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:10, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
  Xaosflux, no. I missed something while writing to you. Everything looks good. This can be marked as resolved. Regards, Tartafs (talk) 15:24, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 15:40, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

SRC

~~Author requests speedy deletion, but I feel we should keep this as a useful shortcut. —Svārtava (t/u) • 02:33, 2 April 2022 (UTC)~~

Delete SRCU is sufficient. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 04:28, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, I should have checked for an already-existing shortcut. Then, as you point out, since SRCU is sufficient, I'm withdrawing this request and restoring the speedy tag placed by the creator. —Svārtava (t/u) • 05:51, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deleted per G6. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 07:23, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —Svārtava (t/u) • 05:51, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism

Tagged for speedy deletion with reason: Cross-namespace redirect. I'm neutral because of the existence of a better shortcut WM:VN but also because I don't think it does any harm. Since it's a widely linked page as can be seen in WhatLinksHere and not a recent creation, I would like to see a consensus here before its deletion. —Svārtava (t/u) • 10:40, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Keep. It might be good to convert it into a disambiguation page for e.g. Meta:Vandalism § See also or other pages that deal with vandalism. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:05, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Keep I use it myself sometimes. Useful enough. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 18:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Keep per NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 09:48, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Kept - no consensus to delete and nom voted neutral, so technically there isn't a need for deletion in the first place. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:46, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:41, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

User:Yumetori/global.css and User:Yumetori/global.js

I have been renamed and want to have the redirects above deleted. Konno Yumeto 07:57, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Done --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:06, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:06, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

User:Nischaya photography

Spam. I can't do anything about it at en-wiki. Thanks. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Speedied by Minorax as G7. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:20, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:20, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Unemployed Wikimedians

The following discussion is closed.

Out of project scope. In addition many of the accounts listed either do not exist or have not added themselves to the page. --Johannnes89 (talk) 16:20, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Delete Truly useless and OOS. Only three links from old translations, which can be easily removed. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:38, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Delete - ah, a 2004 relic. Can probably be deleted or marked historical. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Delete not only out of scope but rife for privacy violations. Next will come the job listings. --Rs chen 7754 19:17, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:47, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:48, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Vikiçelebici's user templates

Babel templates for personal use. Subst-ed all except Template:Kullanıcı kutusu, which should be moved to userspace. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:34, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Ad. Added 4 more. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 15:57, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

You could also translate it from Turkish to English, or you could edit it. I don't think it will be a candidate for deletion. @Minorax Vikiçelebici (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Delete all per nom. Meta has no specific policies about what pages are candidates for deletion here so the above comment is a non-sequitur. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:51, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
(Edit conflict.) Delete per nom. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 14:53, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:59, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:59, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Vikiçelebici's user templates 2

Per above section. User specific templates for personal use. Subst and delete. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 10:46, 28 April 2022

Delete all except from {{'}} which is a shortcut for ‎<nowiki>'‎</nowiki>. Cf. en:Template:'. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:02, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Deleted all except {{'}}. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:06, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:06, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Template:Username

The following discussion is closed.

A copy of {{User link}}. Redirecting seems implausible. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:33, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Speedied, troll creation. Sgd. —Hasley 20:53, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Sgd. —Hasley 20:53, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Lagen David Atuka and Christine Butegwa

Can't see how these are in scope, though they have been staying here for quite a while. Perhaps they should be moved to Wikipedia. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 08:27, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Delete/transwiki Per nom. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:42, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Transwiki - should be on enwp. Out of scope here. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:06, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope here. Kromsipol (talk) 23:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Agreed these are out of scope for Meta. If the consensus is to transwiki them to enwiki I suggest to lodge a request on w:Wikipedia:Requests for page importation so they can assess if these are worth importing. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:10, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
@Sandra Aceng: before I delete these, do you want them moved to drats on the English Wikipedia? — xaosflux ^Talk 18:41, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Yes, please move it to English Wikipedia. Thank you Sandra Aceng (talk) 19:09, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Yes i agree, sorry, this was a mistake. Kindly help it move it to Wikipedia Sandra Aceng (talk) 19:01, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Doing... — xaosflux ^Talk 13:13, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
Done transwikid to w:en:Draft:Christine Butegwa and w:en:Draft:Lagen David Atuka. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:16, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 13:16, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Category:0x010C

Category referring to a user, only one member. Does not seem to be useful. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Delete Seems to be a test page according to history. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 12:54, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:11, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 13:11, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Subtemplates of User SUL Box

No useful content. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:26, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:34, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 18:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

$1

Don't think this redirect is necessary. Stang 01:56, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

I think this serves a good purpose. If we delete the page there will be a lot of links to $1 in the Translations: namespace, as a result of which, this page will show up in the Special:WantedPages. To avoid that, it should be kept, IMO. Hulged (talk) 04:01, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Kept as there is good use case identified and no other support for deletion. — xaosflux ^Talk 12:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 12:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

User:Ilovemydoodle

Can I please have my account deleted and my edits reattributed. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 03:49, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@Ilovemydoodle: Accounts cannot be deleted. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 07:17, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Template:Wish list

Unused; apparently related to Meta:Requests for deletion#WikiLang pages, so no longer needed here. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:31, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Also, the link above should have pointed here. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 18:12, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:38, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:38, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Catégorie:Modèle extension de fichier

French category (in main namespace) for non-existent templates about file extensions. There's only one incoming link from Template:Vid. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 04:31, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Delete as out of scope. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:41, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:36, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:36, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaways/Nominations/Dainus36

Nominated themself. Maybe troll. Kromsipol (talk) 23:56, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't see a need to delete the page. The Merchandise staff can archive it if it is out of scope or against the rules. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:56, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
Maybe @Vermont might wanna take a look at this. Seems okay to be declined. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:18, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Closed as Keep, it isn't overtly disruptive as discussed above, the product team will deal with it as needed. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:19, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
As a note, the page wasn't even tagged for deletion. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:35, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:19, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

User:XKV8R

Per w:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:XKV8R, not webhost and out of scope. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 00:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. en:WP:COVERT? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 01:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:50, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:51, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Babel templates

Depreciated templates. Convert to use {{#babel:}} and delete. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 15:59, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Done except for the first one for now; can anyone please help update User:LuCKY? – when I try to replace {{User tr}} by {{#babel:plain=1|tr}}, it gets misaligned with the userbox below. Thanks. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:31, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
The cause is that Babel boxes floats to the right by default (left if RTL). AFAIK, the only way to fix is using a CSS rule with higher specificity since {{#babel}} gives us no parameters for styling purposes. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
As a work around, I'm styling {{User SUL Box}} instead. However, this required adding another parameter, |float={{{float|left}}}, to its sub-templates. Since {{User SUL Box/he}}, the only one written in a RTL language, was not stylized with |float=right, my edits should be non-controversial. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, I swapped out to babels, some of the styling is off but will leave that as an exercise for users that want to redesign their userpages. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:17, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Some of the styling could have easily been fixed by using plain=1 (even mentioned in the above conversation), which I just did myself. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:17, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

uk:Шаблон:Користувач проти пропагування, виправдання і афішування ЛГБТ

Does Wikimedia allows explicitly racist templates for user pages? I don't think so... This stuff has been around since 2013, it's time to delete it. --95.247.5.67 14:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Not done This is not a page on Meta-Wiki, and thus not eligible for Meta-Wiki's RfD process. On the Simple English Wikipedia we deleted a similar template a few years back. I'm unsure on ukwiki's deletion processes, but this is a topic for them. Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 14:29, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:12, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Pages created by Noeeleesa

Can't see how these are in project scope. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:24, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Seems to be a mistakenly-created page by a confused "newcomer". NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted both.Jusjih (talk) 18:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jusjih (talk) 18:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Template:Zoology

Unused; unclear how this is related to zoology or Meta's project scope. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:01, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:53, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 18:53, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Template:WikiIndaba2020ScheduleItem

Unused; WikiIndaba conference 2020/Submissions has never existed either. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 12:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 23:02, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 23:02, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Annual Report (2019-2020)

Confusing redirect from broad title to a very specific one resulting from page move. Target page was under this title for a month but the redirect is not currently getting page views. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:49, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Speedy delete per CSD § M2. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 10:57, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:55, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 18:55, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Template:User templates/dialect

Unused template. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:18, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom; {{User templates}} has been deleted years ago already. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:19, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:21, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 10:21, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia 15 events in LANGUAGE

One member. The whole Category:Wikipedia 15 events tree has no categorisation by language, so this does not seem useful. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Seems to be no problem to delete the category. —— Eric Liu_（Talk） 09:54, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:23, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 10:23, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Meta:Links which may be misspelled and its subpages

Look useless to me. There's only one incoming link from a 2009 archive page. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:11, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:32, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 18:32, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Subpages of Special:PrefixIndex/ESEAP Strategy Summit 2019/

Empty (or near empty) with no usable content. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 07:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted — xaosflux ^Talk 18:33, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 18:33, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

User:Stuartyeates

Forming a circular link with en:User:Stuartyeates now that page has been deleted (by myself). Stuartyeates (talk) 20:52, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Speedy Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 22:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 22:38, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Template:CE Insights report navbar/2018

Unused. Superseded by Community Insights/2018 Report/Navigation. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 2022-06-09T07:49:12‎

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:20, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:20, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Template:Mutipleauthors

Unused. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 22:24, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:21, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:21, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Template:Purge/anchor/

Unused. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 06:26, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Some subpages of WikiFundi/2021

Copied from Spanish Wikipedia. Out of scope as well. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 15:21, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

+1 --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 15:41, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete all per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:43, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:43, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Category:Translator templates/pt and Template:Translator por-eng/pt

Unused category/template. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 09:42, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:42, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:42, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Redirects start with "$"

Ambigous redirects; no links apart from translations. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:04, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:10, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 02:10, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Template:Basic information

Ill-defined, overly broad navbox. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Strong keep. this is a direct parallel of an existing navbox, en: Template: Basic information. right now, there is no resource which helps visitors to find various resources at the Meta website. we can reduce this navbox, or edit if you wish. Please don't remove it. I feel that this navbox provides a helpful resource to assist others to find items here at meta website. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 13:51, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Keep This or something like it is commonly used on projects, including multilingual ones. I think it's valuable in principle and if a particular article should be added/removed, then it can be changed, but I don't see how deleting would be helpful to users. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:07, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
I don’t understand how this navbox can be useful. It doesn’t link any “basic” thing, actually. There are already many portals and lists which painfully try to stay up-to-date. How do you evaluate some information as more “basic” than other ones? --Pols12 (talk) 13:49, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Keep I find this template useful. So far as I know, this is the best navigation box for directing people to different major categories of content on Meta-Wiki. If there are better comparable resources then please share links. If this is overly broad then that is a reason for editorial discussion and revision, not deletion. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:23, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Kept per discussion above. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:53, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:53, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Template:Wiki Indaba/Footer1

One transclusion; can be replaced by {{Wiki Indaba/Footer}} with the corresponding bottom text. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:52, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Merge and delete per nom. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 12:25, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:36, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 15:36, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Template:Divstyleaqua and 16 others

Superseded by Template:Divbox/styles.css. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 21:55, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:30, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 15:30, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Subpages of Special:PrefixIndex/Skanwiki/Ugens_artikel/ and Special:PrefixIndex/Skanwiki/Dagens_artikel/

Pages are out of Meta's scope and should be deleted. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 11:44, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete all of them and mark Skanwiki/Ugens artikel as historical. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 12:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:40, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Category:Skanwiki has a deletion template linking to this section. Is it to be deleted, or can the template be removed? —Tacsipacsi (talk) 12:44, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Hmm, I suspect that maybe @Minorax: may have also wanted to nominate Special:PrefixIndex/Skanwiki/Ukens artikkel/ but did not include it in the discussion above? — xaosflux ^Talk 13:54, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
@Xaosflux and Tacsipacsi: Seems like I missed it out. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:43, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
No worries, think these are also safe to delete under this same umbrella. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:11, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted as well. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:07, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Deleted what? Because the category page still exists, still has pages in it, and still contains a deletion template pointing to this section. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 23:38, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
  There are still tens of them in Utvald artikel, Utvalgte artikler and Vekas artikkel. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 23:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

This request for deletion was specific to: Subpages of Special:PrefixIndex/Skanwiki/Ugens_artikel/ and Special:PrefixIndex/Skanwiki/Dagens_artikel/ , and was then expanded to include Special:PrefixIndex/Skanwiki/Ukens artikkel/. Category:Skanwiki was not part of this discussion (which would belong in Meta:Requests_for_deletion#Categories) and is not empty, those other sets of pages mentioned above were also not part of this nomination despite appearing to be similar in nature. If someone wants to nominate those, please start a new section - this one has dragged on for long enough. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:48, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
- Category:Skanwiki has a deletion template pointing to this section (added by Minorax). This deletion request is not done until either the category gets deleted, or the deletion template gets removed. It looks like probably the latter is wanted, but then it should be done before we can call this request done. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 00:19, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
  - Removed, as it was never listed in categories for deletion, and is populated by pages not discussed for deletion. Without prejudice for future nominations of either. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:20, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:20, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Vietnam Encyclopedia conference

Out of scope. This conference has nothing to do with Wikimedia. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 18:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

{{on hold}} to give creator, @Tttrung: a chance to comment. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:52, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:17, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:17, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Template:Translator

Nearly unused template. When checking the first time, I saw four transclusions, in which two are accidentally, via a Transl-n template. Now, there's only two usages left, one on an user page of a deceased user who seems to intended to use it as an userbox, and one on a 2006-archived page, which can be easily subst'ed. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 14:45, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:16, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: Would you mind undeleting Template:Translator/sandbox? Despite being an associated subpage, its content has nothing to do with our discussion here regarding the main one. Also, please remove or comment out the template call in User:KageTora. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 07:53, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Undeleted that page. – Ajraddatz (talk) 22:27, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: This this is all sorted now. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:18, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

$wp

Ambigous redirect; no actual links. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 14:50, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

@NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh what's going on with the hundreds of links in to this first? — xaosflux ^Talk 14:36, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: It is not actually linked to as a redirect to en:WP:SISTER. Most of those links refer to Wikipedia, some others Wikimedia projects, Wikipedia 15, Wikipedian or simply a Wikipedia page. The solution is perhaps to either delete it or choose another target. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 14:51, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

@NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh I agree this is a bad redirect, but am concerned about all the links that will end up becoming redlinks. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:57, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't think we have a Redirects for discussion process, hence this section. It doesn't need to be deleted. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:00, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Tagging as {{interwiki redirect}} may be appropriate for now. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:24, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

This appears to be only linked on translation pages anyway. See phab:T308425. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:11, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 20:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Keeping, updating to use iwredirect template suggeted above. Without prejudice for a local "sister projects" description page that it could be retargeted to one day. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:31, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:31, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Wikimobocracy

Unhelpful rant by a since-WMF-banned user. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 20:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Pffft, what am I reading? It's an absolute joke and a rant and I really question how it even managed to make its way to mainspace in the first place. Delete. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 08:13, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:17, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 17:17, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Category:Major Lyte Portfolio

I do not think that this category matches with Meta:Categories: Try to keep the number of categories on Meta-Wiki as low as possible. A list of projects that have been organized by one person could be placed on a user page, but we should not use categories for this. --Ameisenigel (talk) 14:50, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Delete, no objection to listifying this to User:Major Lyte or a subpage thereof. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:18, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleted, or we would allow too many categories per users.--Jusjih (talk) 19:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

This discussion is closed and will be archived shortly. Please do not modify it. --Jusjih (talk) 19:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC))

WM:SYSOP

This is a shortcut to Meta:Administrators and is useful. 154.121.56.249 15:25, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Support – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 05:55, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Per WM:DDR. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 05:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, it should not have been deleted in the first place. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 05:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Comment: Since it is just a redirect, I do not see why it cannot simply be recreated, rather than having to getting an admin undelete it. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 06:01, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

The deleted version is identical to what is it there right now, so there isn't a point to undelete right now. In addition, the deletion is done via a speedy, thus, there is no reason why it cannot be recreated when the original CSD doesn't apply. This can be seen as a contestation of the speedy which the consensus here seems to not oppose the creation, though participation is minimal I will note. The result is therefore permit recreation. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

User:RSSKRJ

Requesting deletion for page of this user as the content is impersonating my user page
— أبو غاصاك (bicara) 23:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deleted, assuming it was a "test". Informed the creator. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:14, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:14, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Requests for new languages/Buginese

Hello, I'm currently researching the history of Buginese Wikipedia, and there was some gaps in the earliest discussion, which I believe was deleted in this page. I'm requesting to undelete this page, and merge history with Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Buginese to preserve its history for the future.

I'm also requesting the deleted contributions from User:Zaidpjd~metawiki and User:Riyanz, both supposed to be the original proposer of the bug.wp, but their contribution pages are missing their contributions/discussion for this project, especially Riyanz'. Please let me know which pages other than "Template:Requests for new languages/Buginese" that their contributions was deleted (cleaned up). Thank you. ✒ Bennylin 17:04, 9 August 2022 (UTC) ---

Done @Bennylin: mostly - I restored the page and put it blanked at Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Buginese/Template-Requests for new languages-Buginese, I don't want to intermingle the page histories with a merge. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:07, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:07, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Flex columns

Unused, broken import. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 18:59, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Delete all (including Module:Flex columns/styles.css). Creations by a vandal, IIRC. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 21:22, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:32, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:32, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Category:Global

A category grouping otherwise unrelated things that include the word "global" in the name is not useful. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

*Strong keep* . It is a category for the Global project that include global templates (orientative, not obligatory, templates, than any Wikimedia project can use. See the consensus proposal Global-Wiki. BoldLuis (talk) 08:25, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@BoldLuis what is "the Global project". What is the main page for that project? Is it Global-Wiki? In which case this category should probably be Category:Global-Wiki. This seems to include other odd things like, Category:Global council 2021 that (a) doesn't seem to have a page that describes was it is, (b) contains other pages that also don't explain that. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:11, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Xaosflux:. Thank you a lot. We can also use this name. So the page can be moved to this suggested category name. BoldLuis (talk) 06:44, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

So what does, for example, Global rollback have to do with Global-Wiki? This category is fundamentally a hodgepodge of unrelated things, and renaming it does not solve the problem. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I support the proposed solution, although can change the initial idea. Another ways is conserving them both. There are some global actions. BoldLuis (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Category deleted. @BoldLuis: this category is a bit of a mess. This deletion is without prejudice for something possibly related being created, but first please note:
1. In general, there should be a primary page that describes the topic.
2. In general, pages should only be added to a category if they are clearly related to the primary topic. Category inclusion should be about relation to the topic, not broad criteria such as sharing a word in the page title.
- Here is an example: Category:Abstract Wikipedia. It has a primary page (Abstract Wikipedia) that outlines the topic, and the pages in that category are clearly related to that main topic. While I mentioned Global-Wiki above, that page is a closed rfc from 5 years ago, it isn't an appropriate main category page as-is (and it also shouldn't be getting edited anymore). — xaosflux ^Talk 14:45, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:45, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Example needed

One transclusion in the documentation part of Template:Round, which already includes examples. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 06:05, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Delete Indiscriminately copying templates from elsewhere is the bane of wikis. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:42, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Keep. I have added a link to explain better the text in the context. It is not the use of indiscriminate templates, than have scarcely common ones with other wikis. And sometimes it is the case. BoldLuis (talk) 13:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
@BoldLuis: The link you added (at {{Round}}) has nothing to do with {{Example needed}}. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 13:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
@NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh: Example it is not about round, but about the #expr, this is, where the template is located. Now, the user can click in the link and understand how #expr is used. BoldLuis (talk) 13:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
@BoldLuis: If so, that specific sentence needs an {{Explanation needed}}, not {{Example needed}}. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 13:55, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Agree. I wanted to say it needs explanation and some examples. In any case, I did it in the simpliest way, including a link to understand #expr and how it works. On the other hand, I could not use "explanation needed" template, because it is not included in Meta. I am sure both template are going to be used in Meta. BoldLuis (talk) 13:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Keep – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 06:04, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Why? * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:46, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pppery: This wiki is used partially as a documentation wiki (not for mediawiki), so this is useful if documentation is missing an example. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 11:54, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete. Source en-wp template is aimed for main namespace, not for template documentation. This "Wikipedia-style" talking through using warning-like templates is unappropriate for Meta. If you want documenting things - you just do it. If you want for someone else documenting things - you just ask someone else directly or post your request in the talkpage. Kaganer (talk) 14:01, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. Mostly per the arguments that sending our contributors to an article about audiences on the English Wikipedia, and having this template try to add pages to a non-existent, inapproriately named category (Category:All articles needing examples). — xaosflux ^Talk 13:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 13:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Language combination and 2 others

One transclusion: Category:Translator's Templates. I think a big table this is not a very nice way to showcase links to subcats and templates, considering the number of languages we support. ~~As for the subcats part, it can be replaced with an inputbox that links to Category:Catname?subcatfrom=Translator foo-bar.~~ Also, Translator foo-bar templates will soon be deprecated and nominated for deletion as I'm writing a Lua module that supersedes their function. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:46, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Turns out that inputbox doesn't have a go-to-exact-link function. type=search can be used however. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 00:42, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete all per nom; the table is effectively unusable. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 20:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:15, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 15:15, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Maintenance category

Indiscriminately copied from Wikipedia with no useful function here. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete. As below. Kaganer (talk) 22:10, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Module:Transclusion count/data/D

Module:Transclusion count/data/D

Dependent on bot that doesn't run on Meta. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 13:50, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:26, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:26, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Large category TOC

Used in one place, Category:Wikimedia template categories, where the template is nowhere near warranted by the size of the category and can just be removed. Part of a mass import of Wikipedia templatecruft in 2018. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:56, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete. As above. Kaganer (talk) 22:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:28, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:28, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Transl-1 and 7 others

Potentially superseded by Lua-based Template:Transl-n. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Deprecate as high-usage template. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 06:05, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

No consensus to delete. However, no concerns with deprecating by changing these to redirects, assuming the existing markup across all uses is supported. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Xaosflux: I said deprecate, meaning that it would be a redirect, but it would have a 'deprecated message' saying that it should no longer be used. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:33, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
  Don't output that to invocations; but feel free to update the documentation on them to point to the target once it is all working seamlessly. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Trim brackets

Unused, out of scope, created as part of indiscriminate template import. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 13:50, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Solutions must be offered for global templates. It would not need importantion, only using them. Supported in Wikimedia.BoldLuis (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete. Possible global usage is not relevant cause for creating any local template in this site. If global templates proposal will be realised, then will be another situation. Until this milestone all uncaused imports will be considered as clogging the common workspace. Kaganer (talk) 22:09, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:34, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:34, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:Cat diffuse

Used in one place, Category:Language user templates, where it's not useful since the category has no subcats to diffuse members to. Part of a mass import of Wikipedia templatecruft in 2018. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 16:03, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pppery: is this supposed to be for Template:Category diffuse and Template:catdiffuse? — xaosflux ^Talk 14:35, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, apologies for being unclear (although the latter page you linked is a redirect to the former). * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:36, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete. As above. Kaganer (talk) 22:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:28, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:30, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:User language and subpages

Superseded by {{#babel:}}. The following pages are transcluding at least one of them and will be affected:

Extended content

NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 08:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Deprecate – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 01:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Closing as delete, will be a bit of a slow process to ensure that everything is taken care of along the way. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:28, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
- (pages above marked as "^^" are converted now, "--" don't need to be done). — xaosflux ^Talk 15:39, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Doing... — xaosflux ^Talk 01:23, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:30, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 01:30, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Category TOC

Used in two places, neither of which have enough pages to warrant a TOC. Part of a mass import of Wikipedia templatecruft in 2018 * Pppery * _{it has begun} 16:03, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

It is used Template:CategoryTOC. BoldLuis (talk) 12:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

No it's not. That's a completely unrelated template that this one is redundant to, and a near textbook example of why people should pay more attention when importing templates from other wikis. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The best is no needing to import. Because can be an alternative solution. BoldLuis (talk) 14:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete. Unused unneeds variants. Also Template:User language subcategory is may be added to this list. Kaganer (talk) 17:45, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Weak Delete unless there are any actual large categories here (which I doubt). – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:38, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 12:38, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 12:38, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:User_hyw

Superseded by {{#babel:hyw}}, I think. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:10, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Speedy delete: Author request – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 06:17, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

How is this an author request? --MF-W 10:20, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

It certainly is not, but I'm going to speedy it per the mass cleanup that was done via Meta:Requests_for_deletion/Archives/2022#Template:User_language_and_subpages recently, given that it is unused. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:15, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg: I think the page said something like "This isn't necessary" before it was deleted. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 05:21, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:15, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 11:15, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:PP-template/1

Created as a response to #Template:Permanently protected; in which everyone except the creator agreed that merging in this way rather than deleting was unwanted. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

This is wrong in two ways:

I am not the creator (as you can see here)
The consensus to merge

I am currently working on the full merge at test2wiki, and will soon make an edit request whence I am done. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 20:26, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

– Ilovemydoodle (talk) 20:26, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Invalid closure
(non-admin closure) Speedy keep: nominator's rationale is invalid as I am not the creator of the template and the consensus was to merge. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 21:14, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

"The creator" referred to the the creator of this template, not of Template:PP-template.
I, to be honest, have no idea what you are trying to say here.

And I'll oppose your edit request; this is more unmotivated code bloat of exactly the sort that got you in trouble on Wikiquote. Finallly, it's egregiously out of process for you to close this discussion, as you are involved in it. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 23:26, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@Pppery:

I am going to say this again for the third time: I did NOT create {{Permanently protected}}
It is not out of process as the majority of commenters supported merging.
What "trouble" did I get into on Wikiquote?? I got a few templates deleted, but I was never block or banned, or even came close to it. Admins where slightly bother by the unexplained creation of seeming unneeded templates, but no "trouble" happened.

– Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:58, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

"This template" means Template:PP-template/1, not anything else
The "out of process" action is closing this discussion, in which it is not the case that the majority of commenters supported merging (as no one other than me and you have commented). What is happening elsewhere is irrelevant, and in any case the majority of commenters [of #Template:Permanently protected isn't even true, as I count only two people out of four supporting merging, which is not a majority.
The trouble I was referring to is q:User_talk:Ilovemydoodle/Archives/Archive_2#Note. Being explicitly told if I see you importing another template wholesale from Wikipedia (like Db-g12) that is not applicable to this project and/or not adapted to this project, I'm going to block you without further warning. is clearly coming close to being blocked.

This will be my final reply to you in this thread, since, as seems to be typical when discussing things with you, we are going around in circles and getting nowhere. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 00:04, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Going against my edit request would be out of process as my edit request would be on behalf of the consensus formed in the previous discussion. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 00:03, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

There is no such consensus, despite your wishful thinking. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 00:05, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. I hope no further "templates to make a point" are created. --MF-W 10:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 11:10, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:User autoconfirmed

A template that says that you have made ten edits is almost entirely useless. It also negatively impacts editing by making new users care more about their user rights and edit count than actually improving the project. The templates also has very little usage, only 25 users, most of which are trolls. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 06:29, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Keep - having little usage doesn't mean this is totally useless. While I also hate people caring about user rights, it's not a wrong thing to display rights. And I don't think User:1234qwer1234qwer4 is a troll, and hence given there are legitimate users using it, I don't see any harm of keeping this. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:13, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@Camouflaged Mirage: I did not say that all users using this template are trolls, just that a large portion of them are. Also, my main point was not that it was 'useless' because of low usage, but about the entire point of it to begin with. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 17:07, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Keep. I do not see any issues with the content of this template, the nominator does not appear to understand what they are doing. The claim that this is "mostly used by trolls" does not appear to match up with reality - in my check of 4 user I found 3 good faith users (including 2 admins) and one blocked sock - and is not a good reason to deleted templates anyway. The claim that it "makes users care more about user rights" is also without any evidence of this occurring. 163.1.15.238 18:01, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

I guess I just got unlucky I check only like three or four users and most of them were blocked. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

How do I not know what I am doing? You may disagree, but I do not understand how this nomination makes me incompetent. – 23:11, 2 September 2022 (UTC) Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:11, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@Ilovemydoodle Every single comment you have made here has been disruptive and has required other editors to waste their time explaining policy and common sense to you. You have jumped into a category deletion discussion despite not having read this projects categorisation policies and have had to change your vote when other editors pointed out that your comment did not align with policy. You have nominated #Template:User autoconfirmed for deletion on the basis on a nonsense rationale that does not hold up to scrutiny. In the discussion for #Module:Check for deprecated parameters you pulled a completely ridiculous "this must sit around for 1 year before being deleted" policy out of thin air, then derailed the discussion with irrelevant comments about a completely unnecessary bot that you'd just thought of. At #Template:Permanently protected discussion you performed a completely inappropriate merge in the middle of the discussion that has no consensus. At #Imported templates you make the completely ridiculous and unworkable suggestion that admins here should move copies of templates from other projects to a project that doesn't actually exist. At #Lang name templates you state that we should depreciate the template per two other users who have complete opposite views on what to do with the page - "Deprecate" is a completely meaningless vote that makes no sense. Your remaining edits to this project largley consist of you pestering and harassing other users about issues on other projects, asking ridiculous questions in inappropriate places and jumping into discussions that you clearly don't understand with unhelpful comments, e.g. [1], [2]. It sure looks like a major W:WP:CIR problem to me. 163.1.15.238 10:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I withdraw. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 14:22, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Keep per above. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Closed as Keep. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:14, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 18:14, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Gaswali

There's no language called "Gaswali", searched many Wikipedias and Bing etc. got nothing about linguistic informations. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:36, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

It is a language for which no language information can be found, and Garhwali uses the Devanagari alphabet, so this also does not match. Since there is no language information, it is deleted immediately. --Sotiale (talk) 12:55, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 15:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Which templates should be global?

Pretends to be an official policy, when it is just a fake policy for a proposal that is no where near passing. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 20:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

@Pppery: Thought you might be interested in this. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 20:12, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Keep It does not mention or imply that it is a policy. It is a list of notes. Perhaps you simply disagree with the recent edits (for example) that altered the introduction? -- It is always helpful to examine a page's recent edit-history, and it is often best to raise a concern on the related talkpage, before bringing a page to XfD. Quiddity (talk) 20:20, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
@Quiddity: Yes, but it is a proposal. By not specifying that it is a proposal and using language implying that it is official, it makes it self seem like a policy or other official documentation. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 20:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Keeo While I don't necessary agree with the content of this essay, that doesn't constitute a good reason to delete it. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 20:24, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
@Pppery: It does not appear to be an essay, rather it instructs the user on how they should be editing, without being a policy. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 20:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Huh? I see no such instruction. And stop bludgeoning the process. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 20:29, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Instructing the user on which templates "should" be "globalized" seems like an instruction to me. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 20:33, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

For example: It has a "to do" list of things that "should" be globalized, despite there being no way of doing this yet. (unless you want to create a broken pseudo-namespace) – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 20:32, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Keep. Completely valid essay/set of notes on a proposed project. The nomination statement is utterly ridiculous and suggests the nominator hasn't read or understood the page they have nominated for deletion. I suggest (yet another) block for the nominator for a lack of editing competence, perpetual time wasting and disruption. 192.76.8.74 21:09, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
You may disagree with my nomination, but a block is ridiculous. I have reported dozens of LTAs, vandals, spammers, promoters, and other undesirable users and made many other contributions to this wiki. Just because two reasonable RfDs got rejected, shouldn't mean I should be blocked. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 21:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
It's not just the "two RfDs" that are the problem. Look at this page. Look at it. Every discussion here is full of you making stupid comments which other people have to waste their time correcting, bludgeoning discussions with tons of comments making the same argument over and over, and jumping into discussions that you clearly haven't read or understood with impulsive votes that you've had to go back and change when other people have to point out how stupid they are. I don't think you've made a single useful comment on this page. 192.76.8.74 21:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Then I'll stop editing on this page. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Withdrawn – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 21:13, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 21:13, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Module:Check for deprecated parameters

Module:Check for deprecated parameters

I seem to have tagged this for deletion on August 10, intending for this to be part of #Template:Trim brackets, but not listed it there, so relisting here. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 19:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Keep useful module even if the way it was used wasn't useful. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:36, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

It makes no sense to keep templates around just because people think they might be useful at some undetermined time in the future. This was created in November 2021 and is still unused, so your claim that it is useful is contradicted by history. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 02:11, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pppery: ~~Then, re-list it if it is not used by Nov. 2022.~~ – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 04:54, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete as unused and with no obvious use on this project. The request that we arbitrarily keep this for a couple more months so it can exist unused for exactly one year is complete nonsense - it has no basis in policy or any rational reason for being done. 163.1.15.238 11:10, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete, but make it into a bot. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 22:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

What on earth do you mean by "make it into a bot"? Why would implementation as a bot be desirable? If it wasn't used as a template, why would it be used as a bot? 163.1.15.238 15:59, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

I mean a bot that automatically converts deprecated parameters. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 17:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Why is that bot proposal relevant to this deletion discussion for a template, and why should the deletion of this template be dependent upon it? A template deletion discussion is not an appropriate place to get consensus for a bot task! I genuinely cannot tell if you are trolling of if you just don't have the slightest clue what you are doing. 163.1.15.238 17:55, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

I am not trying to start a bot discussion, I was just mentioning the possibility of a bot in my comment. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:12, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Category:Templates using data from Wikidata

A tracking category is not needed for one template. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Keep. This is the first one of its species w:Category:Templates using data from Wikidata. BoldLuis (talk) 12:41, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

This does not answer the question of why a category containing one template is useful. If the answer is "I plan to import even more templatecruft to fill it further", then that's not convincing at all. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

This is a stub category. Let time to produce results. Or I think you do not want give the needed time. BoldLuis (talk) 14:52, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Please explain your plans more detailed. Kaganer (talk) 22:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Weak Keep very specific, but it does seem quite useful. Also, there is no rule banning overly specific categories.

Strong Delete per Pppery

Merge per Pols12 – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:39, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Is Try to keep the number of categories on Meta-Wiki as low as possible (from Meta:Categories) not such a rule? * Pppery * _{it has begun} 02:11, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

If this tracking category is listed via Special:TrackingCategories then I'm afraid that we should only delete by a RFC consensus, and add comment codes for their corresponding MediaWiki: namespace messages (so that they are disabled), as such categories are of course populated by MediaWiki software itself or its extensions. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

This category is not populated automatically by MediaWiki. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 04:31, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I think it duplicates category:Wikidata templates. We should probably merge them. -- Pols12 (talk) 09:51, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Deleted, merged only template in this category in to category:Wikidata templates. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:47, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 15:47, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

User:Syum90

Please restore the last version of my userpage, I'm going to try recovering a bit my crosswiki activity (not much unfortunately) and it will be useful. Thanks.--Syum90 (talk) 15:37, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Doing... — xaosflux ^Talk 15:40, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Done — xaosflux ^Talk 15:41, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 15:41, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Permanently protected

Template:Permanently protected

Only one legitimate use. People can figure out that a page is protected without needing a template to remind them. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 18:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Conditional keep/edit make it into a top-icon. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:35, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:PP-template already exists as a top icon. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 02:11, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pppery: {{PP-template}} has no indefinite/permanent indicator. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 04:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ilovemydoodle Yes it does. If applied to a permanently protected page the rollover text automatically changes to say that the page is permanently protected. 163.1.15.238 11:07, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

But, {{PP-template}} provides no way to have a topicon for a permanently protected page. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 22:48, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Merge instead? If the icon purpose is the only potential keep reason from you then I would rather suggest to keep just one icon template for such padlock icons, and technically delete all others. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:28, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Support – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 00:13, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Merge into one template for all protection options, including the option to choose if it should be an ambox, topicon, or both. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 22:59, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete as an unnecessary and hardly used template. We already have a selection of top icon templates for tagging protected pages, there is no need to tag these twice. The instructions on how to use an edit request are also unnecessary - if you attempt to edit a protected template the edit notice already contains instructions and a wizzard to guide the editor through submitting an edit request. 163.1.15.238 11:16, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Note I am currently in the process of merging this template into {{PP-template}}, please do not close this until I am done merging. Thanks, –Ilovemydoodle (talk) 05:15, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I've reverted that merge, which no one other that you asked for and seems like unnecessary feature creep to me. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@Pppery: What do you think of this? – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 22:10, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

This is still inherently a solution in search of a problem. People's arguments on Commons have no relevance to Meta. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 22:12, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

That doesn't make the argument any worse. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:10, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

I am still working on making a (proper) merge on test2wiki. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 22:11, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: I am almost done, and this discussion is still active, so can you please leave this open. Thanks. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:57, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree with PPpery and would strongly oppose a merge here. Template:Permanently protected is useless and redundant to the existing protection templates, the message it contains doesn't add anything useful to the existing protection templates, and it is completely unnecessary bloat to add a template used on one page to a module used on thousands. 192.76.8.74 14:30, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

There is a significant difference between "permanent" and "indefinite", see this comment. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 14:57, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

@Ilovemydoodle Why on earth is a message on another project about the technical distinction between "permanent" and "indefinite" relevant to my response? How does that refute any of the points I made about this being pointless, barley used template bloat that allows you to repeat essentially the same message on a page twice? 192.76.8.74 21:06, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Who cares if it's on another project if it's still a good argument.
It is referring to this template on this wiki.
None of it matters any more since the user who made that comment later retracted it.

– Ilovemydoodle (talk) 21:12, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Are you trolling or are you genuinely this clueless? It's not a "good argument" because it is completely irrelevant to the point I am making. Why is repeating two copies of the essentially the same message on the same page useful functionality? Why is it necessary to have the same information presented in both a banner and a top icon? Why is the banner useful to editors, and not just clutter? Why is it useful to add functionality that is used on one page to a module used on thousands? 192.76.8.74 21:31, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

It is still a demo, it is NOT a finished version. Please stop responding as I have stoped participating per your request. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 21:49, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Also, the ability to create a banner is not a new feature, it is present in the current version and is, in fact, the current name of the template. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 21:51, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

I know that the template can produce banners, again that's not the point I'm making. There is no point having a top icon with rollover text that says "this template has been fully protected permanently" another top icon that says "this template has been permanently protected" and a banner which says "this template has been protected permanently" all at the same time - it is just pointless clutter. There is no point having three slightly different copies of the same message on the same page - it doesn't add anything useful. This template is basically unused and it would be innapropriate template bloat to merge it into a heavily used template. I don't see the argument about your attempted merge being a demo - a bad idea is a bad idea regardless of the completeness of the implementation. 192.76.8.74 22:13, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

This has a corresponding Category:Protected indefinitely, which might need to be considered together with this nomination. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:44, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Looks unrelated; that's populated by Module:Protection banner * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@1234qwer1234qwer4: Do you support merging? – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 07:17, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

DMacks also makes a good point in this comment. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 04:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@DMacks: Courtesy ping. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 14:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete and not merge. Whether it's protected is important to know at a glance...that's why we have the padlock icons at all. Whether it's permanent or not (and how is "permanent" different from "a very long definite end"?) is not so important to readers or editors. Too much info in the icon makes it less immediately recognizable (i.e., the purpose of an icon) IMO. And it's one click away if anyone actually cares. DMacks (talk) 16:47, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
@DMacks: There would not be an over-complicated or multi-function icon, instead there would be two simple icons: one for the protection level and one representing that it would be permanent. See an early WIP demo here. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 19:14, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

@Glrx: Courtesy ping. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 21:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 15:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Global:Template pseudo-namespace

Out of scope per precedent at Meta:Requests_for_deletion/Archives/2021#Pages in Category:GlobalWiki test wiki pages * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Within scope in Global-Wiki, there's consensus for this Global-Wiki proposal. Domain names: meta.wikimedia.org . A lot of this was also inclided in the wishlists:

To include Global features included in the Community Wishlist Surveys:

BoldLuis (talk) 16:11, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

None of this is relevant as long as global templates are still pie-in-the-sky. Kaganer's argument below is just as applicable here. Note that I did not object to the existence of pages associated with mw:Multilingual Templates and Modules, since that project has an actual workable implementation (even though it later broke), where as this seems to be "let's build some stuff now and hope it's useful later." * Pppery * _{it has begun} 19:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete even IF such a wiki was created, this should still be deleted as it would exist on that wiki, rather than as a entirely useless pseudo-namespace on a unrelated wiki. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 19:56, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete, out of project scope per the previous discussion. I don't see the use of a bunch of templates that have been copied from other projects without attribution in a pseudo-namespace, e.g. Global:Template:Warning is just W:Template:Warning with the doc template name changed. If this project ever is created templates can be properly imported into that project (complete with history for attribution). 192.76.8.74 21:16, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Closing as delete. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:48, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Actually I was about to vote keep on Category:Global templates but apparently forgot to do so. It didn't quite fit the description as applied to the rest of the pages anyway, but can I just recreate it or should this follow some formal process? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:45, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
@1234qwer1234qwer4 well I suppose it depends: why do we need it at all? For a category: Is there a primary page about the topic? Global templates is an off-project redirect. What type of pages would go in said category here? (As there are not any actual "global templates"). The prior category was bereft of any useful information, making it a subcategory of Category:Templates. If there is no main topic, and no pages to categorize in to a category - there isn't really a good reason to maintain it. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:00, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
You have just removed it from the pages it was used on: Special:Diff/23845309, Special:Diff/23845310, Special:Diff/23845311. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:02, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
I have no objection to a recreation of this category. I suspect the reason I nominated it was that I interpreted it as a category intended to contain "Global:Template:Foo" pages that were deleted here. That said, I think a better name for the category you are trying to create would be "proposals for global templates", to clarify it's about proposals rather than templates themselves. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 01:45, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

@1234qwer1234qwer4 yes, but you didn't really answer my questions. None of those are a good primary topic page for "Category:Global templates". One might be for a new "Category:Global-Wiki" - maybe. Proposals to start two different new projects, and a essay looking page don't seem that related. If a new project that may host "Global templates" (along with possibly other things) does get created, they probably should be categorized on that project. Without more information, I don't think there is actually any need for this right now. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:21, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: * Pppery * _{it has begun} 17:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Template:Title2

Unused; appears to have only been intended to be used in context with Wikimedia Indonesia, according to which it is categorised. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:48, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Ping @Siska.Doviana for attention. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 17:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. Kind regards, — Tulsi 24x7 07:18, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — Tulsi 24x7 07:18, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Template:Tn (old)

Not transcluded anywhere. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 23:00, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. I probably would have just used {{looks useless}} if I had seen this rather than listing it here. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 17:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
+1. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:00, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. Kind regards, — Tulsi 24x7 07:16, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — Tulsi 24x7 07:16, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Duplicate cats

Seems to be redundant to Category:Javanese Language Wikipedia Revitalization Project 2012: Welcome to the activity report of Javanese Language Wikipedia Revitalization Project 2012-2013. The project itself in Javanese is called "Papat Limpad" or in English Fantastic Four (Javanese Language Wikipedia Revitalization Project 2012-2013/Activities). I suggest deleting (or redirecting) these and keeping the one named in line with the pages it contains. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:32, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete both per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 17:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. Kind regards, — Tulsi 24x7 07:13, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — Tulsi 24x7 07:13, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

SanFramBan

SanFramBan → Office actions

There is no content at the target page about Fram's ban in 2019. As such, this is an unsuitable redirect. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 10:45, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 17:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. Kind regards, — Tulsi 24x7 06:55, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — Tulsi 24x7 06:55, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Wake Up Afrique/Wiki Wake Up Afrique Burkina Faso

Salut à toutes et à tous. Je viens demander la suppression de cette page car elle était déjà créé. je demande donc la suppression pour éviter le doublon inutile voici il s'agit de la page Wiki Wake Up Afrique/Wiki Wake Up Afrique Burkina Faso . cordialement.--Adoscam (talk) 15:20, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

@Adoscam Deleted, next time a {{delete|g6}} will do the same without the hassle of filling it here. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:00, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Merci et bien à vous Adoscam (talk) 22:40, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:56, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia 15/Events/Gaming Visit

This does not seem to be in scope. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:37, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Delete - out of scope. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Deleted per above. Kind regards, — Tulsi 24x7 02:58, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — Tulsi 24x7 02:59, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Title

Confusing redirect created by overwriting some vandalism; should probably have been deleted at that point instead. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:04, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Deleted.--Jusjih (talk) 01:44, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Jusjih (talk) 01:44, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

WMD

Does not seem to have any useful content. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

How so? Nemo 05:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

We do not seem to be usually creating separate pages for typos. However, the additional meaning referring to WMDE makes it more plausible, thanks. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 08:22, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I think I created this back in the day together with a bunch of initialisms for Wikimedia-related entities. I was utterly confused by people writing "WMD" so I wrote an explanation for what they might be coming from. Probably there were incoming links back then, which disappeared in the meanwhile. It's still a useful disambiguation page to avoid incorrect links/initial use. Nemo 19:00, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Fine, I'm withdrawing this nomination in that case. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:57, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Kept - nominator withdrawn without any other opinion to delete, defaults to keep outcome. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:10, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — Tulsi 24x7 03:25, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

File:WJLogo2.png

Unused. Redundant to File:WJlogo.svg. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 12:57, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Deleted per nomination. Kind regards, — Tulsi 24x7 03:28, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — Tulsi 24x7 03:28, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Meta:Let’s Connect Peer Learning Program/About

Duplicates Let’s Connect Peer Learning Program/About; should not be in Meta namespace. Since there are no linked page, keeping a redirection (as it used to be) is useless and seems to confuse its author. --Pols12 (talk) 13:48, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Deleted through a speedy deletion process after discussion with its author. --Pols12 (talk) 19:02, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Pols12 (talk) 19:02, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

User:David ben Joseph Profeta & Messia degli Ultimi Giorni (Cesnur alla voce SUKKA DAVID)

Spam page and probably a global LTA.--14:18, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deleted by another admin. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Module:No globals

Deprecated and now unused. Legoktm (talk) 01:48, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 19:05, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Deleted per nomination. Kind regards, — Tulsi 24x7 06:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — Tulsi 24x7 06:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

User:Kisnaak

Attack page of multiple users after local block. Violation of Meta:Inclusion policy, speedy deletion under G9. Kromsipol (talk) 23:52, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Base: Hello. The text of the page seems to be written in Ukranian. Could you please read it and advice? Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:55, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

It is in Russian. Kisnaak is actually blocked on Ukrainian Wikipedia until he removes that userpage content as per Arbcom decision: uk:ВП:ПЗВ155#Рішення. So it is actually that the block is for the attacks on this page, not the other way round (except for the last section). I do agree that it probably should be deleted, it does contain a few personal attacks as well as attacks on the Ukrainian Wikipedia community as a whole, but I would abstain myself: Kisnaak and I were both members of the previous Arbcom tenure, and I have somewhat tense relations with them. --Base (talk) 12:03, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Will reverting to this good version work. If they revert the attacks back, will suggest we restrain their ability to edit that page. I hope the closing admin will also give them a note not to add anymore attacks. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:20, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

@Camouflaged Mirage: The page contains no personal insults and therefore I don't think it violates the rules or anyone's rights, nor do I think it attacks anyone. You can verify this with using any online translator, such as Google-Translator. In addition, this deletion request looks like a personal attack and persecution. --Kisnaak (talk) 18:23, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@Kisnaak Hello, I am taking the word from Base for the attacks. Having ran parts of it through the Google translate, for the parts I did ran through it involves commentary about ukwiki. Even if there is no attack, such commentary is out of scope for here and also unacceptable for global userpage. It might be acceptable (if trimmed down and all attacks removed - i.e. no mention about personal users / arbs etc) on an user subpage on meta, but certainly not user page. If you want to mention users, the only place is suitable is a RFC. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

@Camouflaged Mirage: I am aware of who I am having this discussion with. I am inclined to continue to believe that my user page does not contain attacks. And now, until we're waiting for react of CU or other admins, we are forced to continue this discussion. As far as I know, criticism has not been made inappropriate by the rules of the Meta. In my opinion, likewise what I have written falls well within the wording of «essay». And yes, there are a several other personal pages made similar to mine that criticize other Wikipedias, but there is no claim to them - so I consider this statement from a «newly registered member» to be persecution. If the closing admin points out specific points that violate the rules of the Meta — I'm willing to remove them, but it seems absurd to me to remove the page completely and return it to, as you put it, the «good version». The problems, what I mentioned in my user page, cannot be solved without the participation of the Ukrainian Wikipedia community with help of RFC. Because this community unfortunately does not care about what is going on inside the local Arbitration committee. Kisnaak (talk) 22:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

@Kisnaak The CU request you had filed was declined as non-actionable. I will ask you not to cast undue accusations to the nominator. Given there isn't a problem with the nomination, the least I could accept is to move the problematic revisions to an user-subpage failing which I will go with delete per Base / nom. Please keep meta scope here and specifically the point on meta isn't an appeal court - take local issues to local forums, not here. Reiterating the only acceptable place for such here is an RFC. In addition, the existence / non - existence of other user having such problematic pages isn't Germaine to this - this discussion is about your problematic userpage alone, and well if there are other such pages, feel free to list it here (with the caveat of good faith nomination and not POINTy ones though). I won't close this as I feel sufficiently involved. I hope you will understand my point and do clarify if necessary. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

And the author of the request for deletion registered his account specifically for make this request. I have already make my request for checkusers about this. --Kisnaak (talk) 18:32, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

The page consists of criticism of the Ukrainian Wikipedia, but does not contain insults or personal attacks regarding its members. And the place where I really made an inappropriate comment about another user after a dialogue with him was removed from the page. --Kisnaak (talk) 18:42, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@Kisnaak + Here: Criticism on a Wikipedia version isn't acceptable on global userpage, this we fairly uphold for all users here. Hope you get it. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

This page contains only insults of the Ukrainian Wikipedia, individual users in particular and all users in general. The fact that these insults have been here for so long is a nonsense, and the fact that it has been discussed for so long is completely absurd. Ping administrators who understand russian @Base, Amire80, 1234qwer1234qwer4, Kaganer, and Vermont:. What you read on this user page does not violate meta:Inclusion policy? Kromsipol (talk) 15:02, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

(RU) Я прочел. Похожие тексты с похожей критикой в адрес сообщества русской Википедии я уже ранее тоже встречал. Наверное, в такой критике (и в адрес украинского, и в адрес русского разделов) есть своё рациональное зерно. И там и там есть проблемы, с которыми локальное сообщество не справляется или справляется не очень хорошо. Но в данном случае я вынужден присоединиться к @Camouflaged Mirage: глобальная страница участника - это неподходящее место для подобных критических эссе. Единственное подходящее место и единственная подходящая процедура для публикации критических замечаний в адрес целого сообщества какого-то раздела или отдельных участников (когда эти замечания невозможно разместить в самом этом разделе) - это RFC.

Такой запрос можно сделать и на русском, но, естественно, форму изложения придется всё равно скорректировать. Для RFC недостаточно декларировать, что вас кто-то обидел и вы в чем-то разочаровались. Придется сосредоточиться на описании конкретных проблем (с примерами), показать, что сообщество с ними не справляется и, вероятно, сделать какие-то предложения, которые другие участники могли бы обсуждать.
----
(EN) I've read. Similar texts with similar criticism about community of the Russian Wikipedia, I also met earlier. Probably, in such criticism (both in the address of the both Ukrainian and Russian editions) there is a rational grain. In the both communities are problems that the local community does not cope with or does not cope very well with. But in this case, I have to support @Camouflaged Mirage: a global userpage is not the right place for such critical essays. The only appropriate place and the only appropriate procedure for posting criticisms of an entire wiki-community or individual wikimedians (when they cannot be placed in this wiki-edition itself) is RFC.

Such a request can also be made in Russian, but, of course, the form of presentation will still have to be improved. It is not enough for the RFC to declare that someone offended you and that you are disappointed in some way. We will have to focus on describing specific problems (with examples), show that the community is not coping with them, and probably make some suggestions that other participants could discuss. Kaganer (talk) 15:42, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Kaganer. While criticism of projects can be in scope of Meta as part of discussions (though unsubstantiated insults are usually removed there too), this userpage at the very least does not respect Global user pages#Content. I suggest reverting it to the previous state as per Camouflaged Mirage; not sure if further action (such as revision deletion) would be required. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:48, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Looks like this user has specifically registered only to make a protest nomination for deletion. SummerKrut (talk) 20:44, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@SummerKrut The status of the nominator is irrelevant, unless of course the CU can find something, where the page i question did indeed exceeds the scope of meta userpage. Hence, the nomination is valid. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:48, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Wow, I've never thought that a user can be fooled so easily. SummerKrut (talk) 07:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

@SummerKrut Proper commentary will be appreciated, but your comment isn't helpful or relevant in the first place. Given the declined CU, there is no reason to doubt the nominator and such commentary against the nominator without refuting the allegations will not be helpful. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:01, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Delete and tagged RFD. Translating the content via Google shows heavy criticism with questionable civility.--Jusjih (talk) 18:46, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleted versions since 2021-08-03 as false vanishing and unacceptable use of global user page.--Jusjih (talk) 12:26, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jusjih: Do you think it's adequate and in accordance with the rules, that you first spoke out for deleting the page and then deleted it yourself? You don't think it's a conflict of interest? I would prefer to wait for an uninvolved administrator --Kisnaak (talk) 12:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jusjih: So? --Kisnaak (talk) 11:37, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Kromsipol on 8 May 2022 first spoke out for deleting the page, so I do not feel any conflict of interest while talking so late. My deletion is per Global user pages#Content cited by 1234qwer1234qwer4 on 8 June 2022. If any other uninvolved administrator thinks otherwise, I will consider.--Jusjih (talk) 17:48, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 13:41, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikivoyage wordmarks

Unused wordmarks, either overly condensed or contains a typo. No foreseeable use. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:37, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. --MF-W 13:42, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 13:42, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikilearntoread

Extremely amateurish and barebones proposal that had zero chance of being picked up. No point in keeping. Dronebogus (talk) 15:05, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. --MF-W 13:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 16:17, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikicareers

As per my close, this is a TED talk by an SPA, not a proposal, and its topic is obviously covered by other projects. As it’s both malformed and unoriginal I think it can be deleted as invalid. Dronebogus (talk) 13:20, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. --MF-W 13:40, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 16:17, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Wiki World Cup Hackathon 2022- Africa/Contribute and Wiki World Cup Hackathon 2022- Africa/Podcast

Both have been tagged with {{looks useless}} since 9th August, because they have not got any linked page. --Pols12 (talk) 21:57, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Ping @Kaffzz as creator. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:24, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi Pols, we were waiting to confirm certain information before we update the tabs. In the course of this week, the tabs will be updated with the necessary information. I don't think deleting the tabs is advisable. Kaffzz (talk) 11:12, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

I guess with the above, I am leaning to Keep Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Delete It's been another month and nothing's happened. These pages have so little content that recreating them if there's ever more content would be trivial. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 04:02, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Deleted, without prejudice for recreation if needed in the future. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia wordmarks

Unused. Redundant to File:Wikipedia wordmark.svg. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 12:57, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Comment For context, these files were used by Www.wikipedia.org template (which has been archived for historical interest) to display the wordmark independently of the pixel resolution. On most wiki pages, MediaWiki takes care of scaling these images automatically, but the former project portals were unusual for containing raw HTML code that the servers served up verbatim on www.wikipedia.org et al. Special:WhatLinksHere and the file usage lists don't track references in raw HTML. That said, at this point, I don't think there's any way left to preview the portal code as there used to be, so I don't think it would be a reason to keep these images. I'm not sure if there are other hidden uses aside from the old portals. – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 05:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:18, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:19, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Imported templates

The following discussion is closed.

Mass of templates indiscriminately imported from Wikipedia that are out of scope on Meta. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 13:29, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Keep. Templates used in more places than Wikipedia (Wikimedia Commons, Wikiversity, Wikispecies...), so global, not included in Meta-Wiki. Useful to explain categories and templates. BoldLuis (talk) 12:48, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm completely failing to understand what you are trying to say. These are clearly included in Meta-Wiki as global templates are currently, to my understanding, a pie-in-the-sky idea, not an actual thing. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

They are not included in Meta-Wiki. BoldLuis (talk) 14:54, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete. Possible global usage is not relevant cause for creating any local template in this site. If global templates proposal will be realised, then will be another situation. Until this milestone all uncaused imports will be considered as clogging the common workspace. Kaganer (talk) 22:09, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Move to Wikitemplates.

Delete per 163 and Kaganer – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 22:57, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

How do you propose to move these to a project which doesn't even exist yet? Even ignoring that issue why would wikitemplates want a bunch of templates which aren't designed to be used on multiple projects, and why would they want a copy of the template from meta missing all the page history instead of the original template from the project that creating it? This suggestion is nonsensical. 163.1.15.238 11:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

It does, just not officially *yet* – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 22:51, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

So you are suggesting that the admins should move this, a copy of a template from another project, to a proposed project that doesn't even exist? Are you trolling or are you genuinely this clueless? If the unofficial beta test of a project needs/wants these templates they can import them by themselves from the original project that created them. 163.1.15.238 16:02, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

I am NOT suggesting that the admins of this site do it, but to give the admins of that site the chance to do it (assuming they want to). – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 17:12, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

If the admins of that site wants these templates they can properly import them from the project that created them. These already exist on other projects and nothing will be lost by deleting them here (hence why this discussion is called "Imported templates"). The admins of meta do not have the technical ability or right to force another wiki that isn't even part of the WMF to take these. Do you understand this or do I need to explain the same thing to you again? 163.1.15.238 17:50, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Got it. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 23:13, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete. Not useful on this project, meta is not a test wiki, no point importing templates in preparation for a project which may or may not exist. 192.76.8.74 21:21, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
I agree, simple and compelling point. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 21:22, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
{{Category see also}} seems generally useful; I've been using it on other wikis. I wonder why it isn't used here... ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:30, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Because {{see also}} could serve the same purpose? * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:29, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Deleted ~~except Module:Ustring as it has use.~~ —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:37, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Correction. Ustring is not used. Deleting. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:34, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:37, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Help:Editing all-in-one guide

Despite claiming This page is a conglomeration of many other editing pages, this is not in fact an all-in-one guide but instead a messy conglomeration of Help:Editing (now a soft redirect) and Help:Wikitext examples. People looking for one of those pages are better served by visiting it directly. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 04:02, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nom. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 13:02, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Delete per nominator. This page is largely a duplicate of Help:Wikitext examples. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 12:29, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Deleted per above. Kind regards, — Tulsi 24x7 04:53, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — Tulsi 24x7 04:53, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Discussiontools-signature-prefix

The following discussion is closed.

I think it would be a status quo to return -- prefix for signatures, since that is the style that is added by the signature button on the tooltip. It would make sense for two parts of the interface to work the same way. People who dislike the -- can still just add four tildes manually, just like they either do that or remove the double-hyphen-minus when signing in plain wikicode editor. --Base (talk) 16:55, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

This had been brought up at Special:PermaLink/20426322#Proposal_to_enable_DiscussionTools_on_Meta-Wiki; this will lead to anyone with seperaters in the lead of their custom sig getting extra unwanted dashes here, forcing them to edit every entry - that sounds like a net-loss. I'm not sure what you mean about being used to manually removing dashes in the plaintext editor, I don't see any extra characters inserted that way. I also don't think we should have different behavior here only for people who have their interface language set to plain English. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:26, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

I refer to the

button. Upon click on it it inserts the tildes preceded with "--". Those people, that dislike the "--" have to remove the "--" manually (unless they use some script that modifies the button's behaviour. This is why I say that it should be the same way across the interface. Since that button does that, it has been doing that for as long as I am around, so should the automatic signature. --Base (talk) 20:15, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

The thing is we can remove those "--" before publishing the changes but that will not be the case for discussion tool. If we want to make these consistent then probably we should make this button not add "--". ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:45, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

As to the last point, I have just checked it on ukwiki, where w:uk:MediaWiki:Discussiontools-signature-prefix does exist, when I have changed my interface language to non-default there English, the double hyphen-minus was still being inserted via the reply tool. --Base (talk) 20:18, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

The default way to sign in the plain text editor has always been "use 4 tildes", which far preceded that button; the default plaintext editor also has the 4 tilde insert button in the "Insertable wiki markup" section - so it is a bit inconsistent. Thank you for the update that this ignores translations. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:59, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

"use 4 tildes" is pretty much what I recommend to people that want to use custom stuff, while on the other hand keeping the way the interface acts consistent. --Base (talk) 01:39, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Comment Might have worth to write it as a gadget instead of directly adding back that function? Such ideas to just restore one local message may likely to be failed as like put mw.toolbar back. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:57, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I don't see consensus to restore, and I plan to close this discussion as such in a couple of days unless there are any objections. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:30, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

+1. I don't see any consensus in any direction either. I think there is no consensus to restore which means the page remains deleted as it is. Hence, Not done for now without prejudice for further requests when there are changes in sentiments about the necessity of the page. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:55, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 12:07, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikilawsuits

Indecipherable, unviable proposal creator insists on keeping open after multiple attempts at closing; nominating per w:wp:IAR and w:wp:SNOW. Dronebogus (talk) 15:10, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

in User_talk:Dronebogus#you_have_closed_wikilawsuits Dronebogus has shown me a wrong sentence and i have fixed it. he has not shown me any other concrete incomprehensible piece of text from the proposal. --QDinar (talk) 07:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

The whole proposal is incomprehensible. Dronebogus (talk) 16:09, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

i cite myself from your talk page:

... there are english words, which should be comprehensible each itself. you should be able to show at least a one point in the text which is incomprehensible, like several words used together and the meaning formed by them is not acceptable, because it contradicts some well known ideas, facts, or some other place of the text.

you must had read it and now you say this. what the "whole" can mean in this context, while some parts of the text are comprehensible? i am almost sure that any normal human speech text is a binary tree. single morphemes are at branch ends. then some of them form pairs of morphemes. maybe by "whole" you mean top node of the text? most top is the title and body. but you probably do not mean that. ~~subtitles~~ subheaders are not ~~mine~~ my text. let's look at the "Project description" or "Proposal" subsections' contents. let's look at the first, it is shorter. "open way to write declarations and track and upload documents for court publicly for topics that bother many people". it is "(open way) to (write declarations) and ((track and upload) documents) (for court) publicly (for topics that bother many people)". so, i started to find groupings of morphemes from the branches side, where they are not big. further to top it goes this way: "openway to (((writedeclarations and trackanduploaddocuments) forcourt) publicly) fortopicsthatbothermanypeople". (i simplified groups from previous step by joining the words). if to simplify this further, it is like "way to write for". it is "(way to write) for", not "way to (write for)", because, there is no such usual phrase "to write something for topics of something", but "a way for topics of something" is a usual phrase. so, top branching of the text is "(open way to write declarations and track and upload documents for court publicly) (for topics that bother many people)". this is what you did not understand? are one of these 2 branches not comprehensible for you?

--QDinar (talk) 18:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Remove - not a realistic or complete proposal, though fitting given the style of wikilawyering by the proposer. – Ajraddatz (talk) 04:25, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

why it is not realistic? how it is not complete, how it can be complete? maybe you mean more elaborate? if you mean that, i do not want to write very much text. i just use this system to write idea proposals. an idea can be written with a sentence. i have not seen any rule like proposals should be elaborate and include some kilobytes of text. if short idea texts are not allowed there then i will write them into forum or wikimedia list, probably. --QDinar (talk) 16:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Delete: Largely incomprehensible proposal ("topics that bother many people"?), and it also seems to be a bad proposal. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 01:06, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
i do not know english very well. it is like "topics that are interesting for many people" or "problems that bother many people". feel free to edit. --QDinar (talk) 12:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

why, how it seems to be bad? --QDinar (talk) 16:48, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Keep, even though it's a terrible proposal (and will likely be formally rejected sooner or later). Dronebogus, you should realise that you may not always be in the right here (and this was closed per WP:SNOW). As incomprehensible as it is, it's useful to keep a track of past requests; deletion isn't always the solution for everything. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 07:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
if by "terrible" you say about the text, it is not a big problem, it can be edited. --QDinar (talk) 12:57, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

This is a behavioral issue, you should tell QDinar that they are not always in the right. I’m nominating this out of desperation to kill this hopeless project being filibustered out to no end Dronebogus (talk) 02:40, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
i do not think my behavior is incorrect or bad. deletion is not a default, usual behavior. just keeping to collect new proposals seems is default behavior. you may write discuss the proposals, you can write critics to them, you can rate them and sort them. deletion sounds like very decisive refusal. such decisive refusal should be with appropriate arguments. "it is incomprehensible" is not a proper argument. you can use that argument to anything, try to use it, and see how other people will behave. --QDinar (talk) 11:52, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
@Qdinar: my comment doesn't necessarily mean you're in the right; in fact, you should accept the consensus, stop edit warring, and move on.

@Dronebogus: I was suggesting indef full protection, and again, as I said, deletion is not the solution to everything. Keep in mind that I've always been opposed to deleting talk page discussions – my opinion is influenced by this. SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 13:01, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

there is a mistake... the proposals are not deleted, they are closed. so, this is 1 bit, 2 values rating and sorting. closed and open proposals, opens are up and closeds are down. and there are also types of closed ones. from this description, it looks like i should not be afraid so much.

but when i look to the types of the closeds i see: Rejected on red background, Procedurally closed on light brown background, Stale (could be re-opened) on pink background, Withdrawn and "Closed as part of a reform of the request process. (Could be re-opened under new policy)" on gray backround, Approved on green. there is some more elaborate description of them, but i did not read them at that time, so, i understood as that if it is closed, not {"stale" or closed as part of reform}, it cannot be reopened.

now, i have read the descriptions (legend) and i have some comment: "or is not a serious or intelligible proposal ... Procedurally closed" - i think, this says about not this level of unintelligibility as in my proposal, but something much more meaningless like random letter sequence. "stale and has few support ... tag ... Stale" - this would be proper tag for my proposal. "no consensus ... tag ... Rejected" - i cannot understand, cannot agree with this. as i understand, consensus does not mean approval, it means some agreement between people, either on approval, or refusal, or something in between. so, as i see, it was good that i reopened it, because the tag set, or that was going to be set, was incorrect.
QDinar (talk) 06:33, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Delete This page is nothing more than an attention magnet wasting everyone's time and I fail to see the value in retaining it. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 04:02, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Delete. This is largely a duplicate of Wikisource, if it is uploading existing documents that are publicly accessible and meet the necessary licensing requirements. Having said that, the overwhelming majority of documents pertaining to lawsuits include unproven allegations, boilerplate text, and similarly problematic material. In most jurisdictions that maintain public access to court documents, there are existing websites that maintain this kind of documentation in a far more useful way. And the designated names of the project are all problematic and imply that it's Wikimedia/Wikipedia/Wikimedians initiating lawsuits. So....delete. Risker (talk) 03:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
court websites in russia publish only courts' decisions, not declarations and other letters by citizens. also one of the proposed functions is the writing process. writing a document together can be done also in google documents, and probably in similar site by microsoft, but why not to use the mediawiki engine? seems there are some advantages of mediawiki and wikimedia. i cannot agree that the designated names mean that wikimedians initiate lawsuits... i still understand "wiki" as name of wiki editing technology. wikilawsuits means lawsuits written and tracked using wiki technology. --QDinar (talk) 12:29, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

"unproven allegations" - maybe they can be disallowed? if they are really unproven, maybe they are useless in court. "boilerplate text" - maybe template functionality is good for that. "largely a duplicate of Wikisource" - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:What_Wikisource_includes : " Entirely new compositions written by contributors are not appropriate here ... Works created by Wikisource users or otherwise not published in a verifiable, usually peer-reviewed forum do not belong at Wikisource. " . but i have found another critique against this proposal. seems mediawiki does not have a way to hide private data. for example, if users want to mention a person with full name, and maybe other private information like place of work, living, cites from private talk. maybe this is not a big problem if they are disallowed. because in the collective appeals defending things like human rights, there may be no usage of such private data, public data may be enough. QDinar (talk) 11:40, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Comment this RfD shouldn't discuss whether the proposal is correct or not, rather whether the proposal page should be kept or not. On the other hand it has been re-opened twice (I won't count a third) and the RfD seems to be the only way to settle the issue. Given that the proposal didn't receive support, given that its scope is not clear (mainly the overlaps with existing projects and other proposals) I plan to close both this RfD as not done and the proposal as procedurally closed. --Vituzzu (talk) 12:35, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
i announced about this in wikimedia-l only several days ago, so, can you be sure that it has not received support? about the scope: i copy a new text by me from the project's page: "for example, for collective declarations for court to defend human rights of minority groups, in various countries. to write the declarations together, and if declaration is written again for an upper level of court, to track that process." . about existing projects: WikiLaw (3) seems is for documents that are already published, come into force, and it aims to collect them all. but my proposal is for crowdsourced writing of declarations, and not aiming to collect all the laws. it is just aiming to track the cases people are interested in. it can link to the texts of laws in other websites, maybe also in wikisource. WikiLegalCases is "A wiki for legal cases an archive of all legal cases their documents and judgements for researchers". so, it is mostly for lawsuits/processes that are already done, completed, for historical purposes. but my proposition is like wikinews, for current processes. and how they, author of WikiLegalCases, planned to publish declaration texts? in russia, they are not published in court websites. also, it aims to collect them all, this proposition does not. --QDinar (talk) 12:50, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Kept per above, proposal closed. --Vituzzu (talk) 22:04, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Vituzzu (talk) 22:04, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

1980s Wikipedia

This is a blatant joke proposal, which should never be put in a serious project area. This is just embarrassing clutter. Dronebogus (talk) 23:07, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Seems to contain contributions by several editors, and in the history seems to point to a RFH thread, I think there's sufficient scrutiny in the past for it to stand in it's existing form. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 06:53, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

No consensus to delete. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:51, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 14:52, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Lang name templates

Extended content

Superseded by #language. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 22:43, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Delete all per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
For the record, I continue to support deletion, and consider the entire concept of deprecating templates or keeping them to preserve page histories to be inherently counterproductive. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 17:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Keep, to preserve histories. But we still should request a bot to replace their calls, I think. --18:40, 19 August 2022 (UTC) — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pols12 (talk)
Deprecate per nom and Pols12. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 01:25, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
Keep but mark deprecated, better to save for historical investigations. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Keep per above, I understand Pppery's argument but we have u n l i m i t e d s p a c e so I think the very marginal value of making historical revisions more readable is worth it. – Ajraddatz (talk) 06:39, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Kept: No consensus to delete. Kind regards, Tulsi 24x7 04:30, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Tulsi 24x7 04:30, 8 February 2023 (UTC)