Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

From Wikipedia, a free encyclopedia written in simple English for easy reading.

Shortcut:
WP:RFD

If you think a page should be deleted, read the Deletion policy to make sure, and then list it here so it can be talked about.

Contents

[edit] Marking a page for deletion

If a page is spam, vandalism, hoax or an obvious copyright violation, add this notice by typing {{delete|reason}} into the page:

Immediate deletion of this page has been requested. The reason given is: reason

If you disagree with its deletion, please explain why on the discussion page or at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion. If you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself.

Administrators - Remember to check if anything links here and the page history before deleting.

If you think a page should be deleted for other reasons, type {{delreq|your reasons}} into the page, and list the article on this page:

Deletion of this page has been requested. The reason given is: your reasons

You may join the discussion if you'd like to give your opinion on this request. Please do not remove this notice or empty this page while the discussion is happening. You are welcome to edit this page and improve it.

If you think a page has nonsense content, add a notice by typing {{non}}

Immediate deletion of this page has been requested. The reason given is: It doesn't make any sense (It's obvious nonsense)

If you disagree with its deletion, please explain why on the discussion page or at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion. If you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself.

Administrators - Remember to check if anything links here and the page history before deleting.

If you think a page is about a subject that is not notable, add a notice by typing {{notable}}

Immediate deletion of this page has been requested. The reason given is: The subject of the article is not notable.

If you disagree with its deletion, please explain why on the discussion page or at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion. If you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself.

Administrators - Remember to check if anything links here and the page history before deleting.

Not all pages marked for deletion are listed here. Check the contents of Category:Deletion requests for more.

[edit] Archives

[edit] Fast deletion requests

List newer items at the top. It is only necessary to list here under unusual circumstances. Tagging for deletion is sufficient.

[edit] Other deletion requests

List newer items at the top. Completed requests are logged at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Log. Articles are normally listed for seven (7) days, or until there is enough agreement about what to do.

[edit] Chronology

Dictionary style reference. I don't think dictionary entries are a good idea over here at Wikipedia; that's what Wiktionary is for. PullToOpen Talk 15:25, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I ofrgot to sign. -- Eptalon 17:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Christian cults and Cult

These articles are not NPOV. There is no way I can see to make Christian Cult NPOV - any group or doctrine listed will only be opinion, and somebody will disagree. Cult currently is doing the same. It points out groups that some think are cults and others do not. TK421 06:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete for Christian Cults. Keep with npov editing for Cult. Listing Cults would seem to alway be a matter of opinion (see talk:Mormonism) but a general definition of what constitutes a cult should be included as it is encyclopedic. Much of the Cults page is NPOV, as far as I can tell, only the listing of examples of a cult are questionable information dependant on opinion. -- Creol 06:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Rewrite both so NPOV. Both currently are not. Cult has a see also for Protestantism which is a little inflammatory and I'm not sure why chirstianity is added, but the main part of the article is NPOV. Having read both on en they could both be written with NPOV. Cults should only be named when there is general international consensus that they are cults, which is going to be very rare. Ksbrown 13:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Clean up both articles and remove POV content.--TBCΦtalk? 20:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Clean upThe article is notable but is not written with a NPOV. This unsigned comment was added by Sir James Paul (talk • contribs) 04:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC).
  • Delete Christian cluts. This page can only end up as a list of such organisations. Drawing the line between a Sect, a Cult, and an established religious group worth mentioning is very hard to do. Christianity started out as a Jewish sect, too. -- Eptalon 18:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Cleanup cult, and prevent it from becoming a listing of less-than-common (sectarian) movements of established religious groups. -- Eptalon 18:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ravicherla

Article about a small village in India (pop 1300) with nothing to show it is notable. No en:wiki, no notable google hits. -- Creol 04:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Weak Keep, and extend, if possible. There are about 5 pages of Google hits (SimpleWP is first of all those :) ). Can anyone check if there is an entry in the non-English-language-local-Indian-dialect WP on that subject? -- Eptalon 14:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak keep - I don't see any problem with the project eventually including a gazeteer of every town and village in the world... Blockinblox 14:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep We have other articles on wikipedia simple english about towns, cities, vilages, and some of them is just as short, or shorter than this. It would be unfair if we deleted this.--Sir James Paul 14:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete - 1,300 people isn't enough to warrant an article in my opinion, unless there is some sort of defining landmark in the down. PullToOpen Talk 22:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] See also