Miscellany for deletion (MfD) is a place whereWikipedians decide what should be done with problematic pages in the namespaces which aren't covered by other specializeddeletion discussion areas. Items sent here are usually discussed for seven days; then they are either deleted by anadministrator or kept, based on communityconsensus as evident from the discussion, consistent withpolicy, and with careful judgment of therough consensus if required.
Pages not covered by otherXFD venues, including pages in thesenamespaces:Draft:,Help:,Portal:,MediaWiki:,Wikipedia: (including WikiProjects),User:,TimedText:,MOS:,[a]Event: and the variousTalk: namespaces
File description pageswhen the file itself is hosted on Commons
Any other page, that is not in article space, where there is dispute as to the correct XFD venue.
Requests to undelete pages deleted after discussion here, and debate whether discussions here have been properly closed, both take place atWikipedia:Deletion review, in accordance with Wikipedia'sundeletion policy.
Notes
^The vast majority of pages in the MOS: namespace are redirects, which should be discussed atRfD. MfD is only applicable for the handful of its non-redirect pages.
Before nominating a page for deletion, please consider these guidelines:
Deleting pages in your own userspace
If you want to have your own userpage or a draft you created deleted, there is no need to list it here; simply tag it with{{db-userreq}} or{{db-u1}} if it is a userpage, or{{db-author}} or{{db-g7}} if it is a draft. If you wish to clear your user talk page or sandbox, just blank it.
Deletions in draftspace
Unlike articles, drafts are generally not deleted solely due to lack of demonstrated notability or context.
Drafts that have not been edited in six months may be deleted under criterion for speedy deletionG13 and do not need nomination here.
Duplications in draftspace are usually satisfactorily fixed by redirection. If the material is in mainspace, redirect the draft to the article, or a section of the article. If multiple draft pages on the same topic have been created, tag them for merging. SeeWP:SRE.
For further information on draft deletion, including when nomination here is appropriate, seeWP:NMFD
Deleting pages in other people's userspace
Consider explaining your concerns on the user's talk page with a personal note or by adding{{subst:Uw-userpage}} ~~~~ to their talk page. This step assumes good faith and civility; often the user is simply unaware of the guidelines, and the page can either be fixed or speedily deleted using{{db-userreq}}.
Problematic userspace material is often addressed by theUser pages guidelines including in some cases removal by any user or tagging to clarify the content or to prevent external search engine indexing.(Examples include copies of old, deleted, or disputed material, problematic drafts, promotional material, offensive material, inappropriate links, 'spoofing' of the MediaWiki interface, disruptive HTML, invitations or advocacy of disruption, certain kinds of images and image galleries, etc) If your concern relates to these areas consider these approaches as well, or instead of, deletion.
User pages about Wikipedia-related matters by established users usually do not qualify for deletion.
Articles that were recently deleted atAfD and then moved to userspace are generallynot deleted unless they have lingered in userspace for an extended period of time without improvement to address the concerns that resulted in their deletion at AfD, or their content otherwise violates a global content policy such as our policies onBiographies of living persons that applies to any namespace.
Policies, guidelines and process pages
Established pages and their sub-pages should not be nominated, as such nominations will probably be considereddisruptive, and the ensuing discussionsclosed early. This is not a forum for modifying or revoking policy. Instead consider tagging the page as{{historical}} and/or moving it into thehistorical archive, or redirecting it somewhere.
Proposals still under discussion generally should not be nominated. If you oppose a proposal,discuss it on the policy page's discussion page. Considerbeing bold and improving the proposal. Modify the proposal so that it gains consensus. Also note that even if a policy fails to gain consensus, it is often useful toretain it as a historical record, for the benefit of future editors.
WikiProjects and their subpages
It is generally preferable thatinactive WikiProjects not be deleted, but instead be marked as{{WikiProject status|inactive}}, redirected to a relevant WikiProject, or changed to a task force of a parent WikiProject, unless the WikiProject was incompletely created or is entirely undesirable.
WikiProjects that were never very active and which do not have substantial historical discussions (meaning multiple discussions over an extended period of time) on the project talk page shouldnot be tagged as{{historical}}; reserve this tag for historically active projects that have, over time, been replaced by other processes or that contain substantial discussion (as defined above) of the organization of a significant area of Wikipedia. Before deletion of an inactive project with a founder or other formerly active members who are active elsewhere on Wikipedia, consider moving it into thehistorical archive, oruserfication.
Notify the main WikiProject talk page when nominating any WikiProject subpage, in addition to standard notification of the page creator.
Alternatives to deletion
Normal editing that doesn't require the use of any administrator tools, such asmerging the page into another page orrenaming it, can often resolve problems.
Pages in the wrong namespace (e.g. an article in Wikipedia namespace), can simply bemoved and then tag the redirect for speedy deletion using {{db-g6|rationale= it's a redirect left after a cross-namespace move}}. Notify the author of the original article of the cross-namespace move.
Alternatives to MfD
Speedy deletion If the page clearly satisfies a "general" or "user"speedy deletion criterion, tag it with the appropriate template. Be sure to read the entire criterion, as some do not apply in the user space.
Please familiarize yourself with the following policies
Please check the aforementioned list of deletion discussion areas to check thatyou are in the right area. Then follow these instructions:
Instructions on listing pages for deletion:
To list a page for deletion, follow this three-step process:(replacePageName with the name of the page, including its namespace, to be deleted)
Note: Users must be logged in to complete step II. An unregistered user who wishes to nominate a page for deletion should complete step I and post their reasoning onWikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion with a notification to a registered user to complete the process.
I.
EditPageName:
Enter the following text at thetop of the page you are listing for deletion:
{{mfd|1={{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}}} for a second or subsequent nomination use{{mfdx|2nd}}
or
{{mfd|GroupName}} if nominating several similar related pages in an umbrella nomination. Choose a suitable name asGroupName and use it on each page.
If the nomination is for a userbox or similarlytranscluded page, use{{subst:mfd-inline}} so as to not mess up the formatting for the userbox.
Use{{subst:mfd-inline|GroupName}} for a group nomination of several related userboxes or similarly transcluded pages.
Please include in the edit summary the phrase Added MfD nomination at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]] replacePageName with the name of the page that is up for deletion.
Please don't mark your edit summary as a minor edit.
Check the "Watch this page" box if you would like to follow the page in your watchlist. This may help you to notice if your MfD tag is removed by someone.
Save the page
II.
Create its MfD subpage.
The resulting MfD box at the top of the page should contain the link "this page's entry"
Click that link to open the page's deletion discussion page.
Insert this text:
{{subst:mfd2| pg={{subst:#titleparts:{{subst:PAGENAME}}||2}}| text=Reason why the page should be deleted}} ~~~~ replacingReason... with your reasons why the page should be deleted and sign the page. Donot substitute the pagename, as this will occur automatically.
Consider checking "Watch this page" to follow the progress of the debate.
Please use an edit summary such as Creating deletion discussion page for [[PageName]] replacingPageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion.
If appropriate, inform members of the most relevantWikiProjects through one or more"deletion sorting lists". Then add a{{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
Save the page.
III.
Add a line to MfD.
Follow this edit link and at thetop of the list add a line:
{{subst:mfd3| pg=PageName}} Put the page's name in place of "PageName".
Include the discussion page's name in your edit summary like Added [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]] replacingPageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion.
Save the page.
If nominating a page that has been nominated before, use the page's name in place of "PageName" and add
{{priorxfd|PageName}} in the nominated page deletion discussion area to link to the previous discussions and then save the page using an edit summary such as Added [[Template:priorxfd]] to link to prior discussions.
If nominating a page from someone else's userspace,notify them on their main talk page. For other pages, while not required, it is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the miscellany that you are nominating. To find the main contributors, look in thepage history ortalk page of the page and/or useTDS' Article Contribution Counter orWikipedia Page History Statistics. For your convenience, you may add
{{subst:mfd notice|PageName}} ~~~~
to their talk page in the "edit source" section, replacingPageName with the pagename. Please use an edit summary such as
Notice of deletion discussion at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]]
replacingPageName with the name of the nomination page you are proposing for deletion.
If the user has not edited in a while, consider sending the user an email to notify them about the MfD if the MfD concerns their user pages.
If you are nominating a WikiProject, please post a notice atWikipedia talk:WikiProject Council, in addition to the project's talk page and the talk pages of the founder and active members.
Pages currently being considered for deletion are indexed by the day on which they were first listed. Please place new listings at the top of the section for the current day. If no section for the current day is present, please start a new section.
Declined six times and rejected twice, the draft has not noticeably improved since it was first submitted in August 2025. The subject does not meet notability, the tone is promotional, and reviewing the draft over and over again is a waste of time. (The only change made before the draft was most recently resubmitted was to add a 152-page PDF that listed the names of participants in a European Commission project.)JSFarman (talk)07:14, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to resubmission after rejection and togaming of the system by the originator. The original version of this draft contained copyrighted material. It was declined 5 times, and was then rejected byUser:NeoGaze, who tagged it for the redaction of copyvio. After redaction of copyvio, the originator removed the record of the declines and the rejection (which say not to remove them) and resubmitted the draft, which was declined again, and then rejected and nominated for deletion. A draft that has been rejected once can be left alone and will delete itself after six months if left alone, but we can see that the unregistered editors who are pushing this draft are not leaving it alone. If editing and resubmission of this draft continues, the resubmitting editors should be range-blocked.Robert McClenon (talk)15:42, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah yeah I know this an insanely old userpage. I think, however, that considering the fact that the user hasn't made any edits outside of the user space, and also considering that this seems to be a pretty disruptive user page, it probably has gotta go.Gaismagorm(talk)14:49, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: putting the obvious enbyphobic content in the user page aside, the user has literally done nothing but create this page since 2018.May be eligible forWP:U6 orWP:U7.This part of reasoning struck, see replies below.TheTechie[she/they] |talk?15:52, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: is this actual reasoning to delete this page? Sure, the content is "bad", but is that...it? We can just delete things because it's an old page, user hasn't made any mainspace edits, etc? I genuinely am curious. 🫀Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? )19:04, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
No I was not. Nor was I notified on my Talk page - thank you for mentioning me, as that ping is the only notification I had of this.
I get it, people seem to think that Peter was less notable than a Pokémon or a porn star. But he wrote a standard text on pastel technique which is still in print, exhibited at Libertys, painted several book covers and Medici Gallery gift cards, and was discussed multiple times by the BBC and other outlets covering his model cricket ground, including being featured on Test Match Special.
I understand that the article was nuked byWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Coombs, I was not around at the time. There are sources over more than a decade in mainstream newspapers, but most of the material about him pre-dates digital news, and I haven't had time to visit the archives of the Herts Advertiser and other papers where he used to appear.
I have some of his paintings, including one that is currently illustrating a Wikipedia article (work for hire, copyright owned by my father and left to me in his will). The earliest auction of a painting of his was in 1992, and I own that now. He's not David Shepherd, but he's not nobody.Guy(help! -typo?)18:50, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This is a draft in user space by a current editor. This is not the same asPeter Coombs, and if submitted for review, would need to be disambiguated, or if moved into article space, would need to be disambiguated. Why is the nominatorrag picking in the user space of a current user?Robert McClenon (talk)05:52, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Non-contributor using this and a number of other sandbox pages as repositories for API documentation. I did manual reverts perWP:NOTWEBHOST and informed the user. They chose to undo my reverts and not communicate.Drm310🍁 (talk)10:41, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Non-contributor using this and a number of other sandbox pages as repositories for API documentation. I did manual reverts perWP:NOTWEBHOST and informed the user. They chose to undo my reverts and not communicate.Drm310🍁 (talk)10:41, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Non-contributor using this and a number of other sandbox pages as repositories for API documentation. I did manual reverts perWP:NOTWEBHOST and informed the user. They chose to undo my reverts and not communicate.Drm310🍁 (talk)10:40, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Non-contributor using this and a number of other sandbox pages as repositories for API documentation. I did manual reverts perWP:NOTWEBHOST and informed the user. They chose to undo my reverts and not communicate.Drm310🍁 (talk)10:40, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Non-contributor using this and a number of other sandbox pages as repositories for API documentation. I did manual reverts perWP:NOTWEBHOST and informed the user. They chose to undo my reverts and not communicate.Drm310🍁 (talk)10:39, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Non-contributor using this and a number of other sandbox pages as repositories for API documentation. I did manual reverts perWP:NOTWEBHOST and informed the user. They chose to undo my reverts and not communicate.Drm310🍁 (talk)10:39, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Non-contributor using this and a number of other sandbox pages as repositories for API documentation. I did manual reverts perWP:NOTWEBHOST and informed the user. They chose to undo my reverts and not communicate.Drm310🍁 (talk)10:38, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Non-contributor using this and a number of other sandbox pages as repositories for API documentation. I did manual reverts perWP:NOTWEBHOST and informed the user. They chose to undo my reverts and not communicate.Drm310🍁 (talk)10:38, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
User has made many constructive edits so does not qualify for U6 or U7. Page literally says "I'm just having fun in my sandbox, don't take this serious" and "Here is the place where i make my alternate history stuff lolz.." so does not qualify forWP:G3 in my opinion. Still, alt history does not belong perWP:UP#GOALS andWP:FAKEARTICLE Bait30 Talk 2 me pls?03:21, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Sandboxes are not "fake articles", they're sandboxes. They're where people experiment and do silly things, and it is specificallymeant as a place for people to experiment and do silly things, so that when they edit articles they do so correctly. I'm all for deleting alternate history stuff when people areWP:NOTHERE, but I see no indication. Just stop policing other people's userspace -- nobody will see it who isn't looking for work to do. —Rhododendritestalk \\23:29, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Meh weak keep. This is a near-10-year-untouched (except for bureaucratic edits by others) user sandbox, the user having made encyclopedic edits elsewhere until 3 years ago. The bar is pretty high for this to be worth discussing for deletion. Nominator says it doesn't warrant a speedy. Based on a quick glance it is confused rather than objectionable, in particular unlikely to be mistaken for an article. So let's not spend time on it. If someone finds it concerning, no objection to editing the concerning bits away or blanking it. I would not be against a policy which would auto-delete sandboxes after being untouched for some months, just like abandoned drafts. But absent such a policy, harmless cruft can stay.Martinp (talk)14:46, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The page name gives the impression that it could lead to the user's sandbox, which isn't the case. Given that redirects to special pages don't work, and therefore a redirect toSpecial:MyPage/sandbox isn't possible, deletion is probably the best course to avoid confusion.Umby 🌕🐶(talk)01:28, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Replying to both of you since this issue has come up. I was unaware of the prohibited content violation regarding 'alt history/imaginary election' content that I was undertaking in my sandbox. I apologize for the issue, but would like to protest the proposal for deletion. I have not sought to nor have vandalized any pages with misleading information or 'false claims', Nor have I only used wikipedia as a means of editing the 'sandbox' given my edits in the mainspace. I am fully willing to slim down/ clean up the sandbox in terms of extraneous stuff not relevant to Wikipedia. I only dispute the deletion aspect of it.
Delete - The originator has blanked the sandbox, but, as long as we are here, we might as well delete the history, which violates various policies and guidelines. It hasBLP violations, such as using the image ofBarack Obama with the name of a different politician, and thecrystal ball violation of a 2077 election. This is non-encyclopedic, and we don't need it in the history.Robert McClenon (talk)18:38, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I frankly disagree. I have not infused my work with the mainspace and have no plans of doing so. I see no basis for your assault on what is ultimately a hobby's work.ManOfDirt (talk)21:32, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My page doesnot claim John Edwards held the presidency. Nowhere does it affirm the factuality of infoboxes. This is frankly nonsensical and I implore you cease and desist.ManOfDirt (talk)21:54, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@ManOfDirt, It's not written in prose that "John Edwards was President of the United States of America", but the fact is that in your sandbox is an infobox titled "Presidency of John Edwards" with dates of January 20, 2005 – November 29, 2008. This is false, and the fact that he's still alive makes it a violation of ourpolicy on biographies of living persons. I do not see what is nonsensical about my argument.Chess enjoyer (talk)22:15, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I feel it's clear as:
This is within a sandbox, not an authoritative article.
Users are not expected to assume the accuracy of a custom page.
The nonsense of your argument stems from the absolute nonimpactmy personal sandbox has on the biography of Mr. Edwards.
DeleteWP:BLP applies to any space on Wikipedia regardless of whether it is in mainspace or deep in somewhere like userspace. Unrelated works of fiction don't really belong in userspace either. Please find somewhere else to create and host your alt-history, such as Google DocsTruenoCity (talk)05:57, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There are a general problem and a specific problem. The general problem is that most of this page is contrary to fact. It presents the names of historical people with the images of other historical people. That isweb hosting for a non-encyclopedic purpose. The specific problem is that a few of these associations areBLP violations, such as presenting an image ofAl Gore labeled asAl Sharpton. ALso, the originator iswikilawyering.Robert McClenon (talk)18:29, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as information presented as accurate, but false. There is no place for presentation-formatted false information anywhere on Wikipedia. If intended with good faith, warn the user that competence is required. Even in a user sandbox, it is not ok to present alternate histories or any other false information that might mislead.SmokeyJoe (talk)12:43, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This page is not a Wikipedia policy page and could be more useful in the user's userspace. This is not a policy page, nor a set of guidelines, and has only been edited by a single person. Some of the images on the page are also nominated for deletion due to copyright concerns. If appropriate, someone can move this page to اربابی دوم's userspace.TheVectoriser16:35, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy, in accordance with the nominator's statement that this pagecould be more useful in the user's userspace. Project space is not limited to policy pages, but this is really a user subpage.Robert McClenon (talk)18:07, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I just posted that this might be an idea, then realised it's a deliberate misspelling to get around the salting... Did you mean we should unsalt the original name/draft, or allow one of the others to remain?Blue Sonnet (talk)04:20, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Although it may be worth leaving one as per guninvalid? It'd also be an easy spot for future SPI's, but several drafts were in sandboxes & we've got all the renames so it might not help that much.Blue Sonnet (talk)04:17, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Everything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began12:10,7 February 2026 (UTC) ended today on14 February 2026. Editors may continue to add comments until the discussion is closed but they should keep in mind that the discussion below this marker may be closed at any time without further notice. Discussions that have already been closed will be removed from the page automatically byLegobot and need no further action.
