Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Archive 6

Was surprised we don't have a category for books. We have "literature", but that's not really ideal for many books (and it encompasses more than books). Any objections to creating it? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:58, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Would it be worth requesting an automatic process to insert a prominent warning on any AFD discussion page that hasn't yet been placed on any deletion sorting list? I'm thinking something like the red message that comes up when a cite error is introduced, as can be seen on any mainspace page under Category:Pages with reference errors.

Most AFDs do get deletion-sorted, but in in the great majority of cases it's not done by the nominator but by a handful of dedicated people. If these people are not around, deletion sorting may be missed, as in 8 cases on the November 26 log, or may not be done until days later as with this one or this one. If we can encourage nominators and others to ensure that all AFDs go on deletion sorting lists promptly, it should make for greater participation and input from those with an interest in the topic area: Noyster (talk), 12:15, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Is there a place where the definitions of each category are established? I am not sure there should be, but I would like to make a request. Recently I have put the majority of my efforts towards improving articles nominated for discussion with an eye towards establishing their suitability for the encyclopedia. My interest and focus has been on biography of historic people. In my mind, most people active more than 20 years ago may be considered historic. Thus, I focus on Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/History and Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Military. Sometimes I look through Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People to see if any are missed. I rarely find any, but I wanted to mention three types of articles I frequently see not categorized as history that I wish were: sportspeople, artists and actors, and small-town politicians. I don't mean to ask for more work, but I wouldn't mind if editors were a little more liberal in categorizing biographies in those groups as historic. I don't know if there has been a discussion on this, and am happy to hear the thoughts of others. In the meantime, thank you all so much for your work. There are a number of editors (of various different philosophies on article retention/deletion) who rely on it heavily and we all really value this project. Smmurphy^(Talk) 18:27, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

I have been delsorting for a few months now and have noticed a lack of Financial or otherwise related categories, so I made

It needs to be added to the tool, which is not an automatic process; @Enterprisey:. --Izno (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

As for the bots, I do not know. Need to ping the bot op for that. --Izno (talk) 20:44, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I've added the list to the tool. Enterprisey (talk!) 23:17, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks!

New Page Patroller! (distænt write)

02:25, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Once discussions are closed on the "bands and musicians" deletion sorting list, they should be archived at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians/archive 2. However, nothing seems to have been archived to this page since January 1st. Where are the closed discussions going – has an "archive 3" page been opened without anyone knowing about it? Richard3120 (talk) 00:36, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

The archiving edit summaries link to archive 3. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@JJMC89: thank you for answering – the box on Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians (below the introduction to the page, and above the list of current open discussions) needs to be updated then, to say that recent discussions are being archived to archive 3, and that older discussions can be found at archives 1 & 2... I can't see a direct link to archive 3 on the page at the moment. Richard3120 (talk) 01:52, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Richard3120: I've updated the archive links in {{deletionlist}}, so the archive 3 link should now be visible. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:21, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

That's sorted it - thank you so much. Richard3120 (talk) 15:27, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I tried to add a couple tags to William Lanzaro and the XfD is not appearing on either of the deletion lists. Can someone help? Thanks --Enos733 (talk) 18:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Those are just notices. You need to actually add them to the lists. See the instructions at the top of each list. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:31, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

The page exists and has been used in the past but it isn't listed at Deletion sorting/compact and if you try delsort tab at the top of an afd, Qatar isn't listed. What is going on?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:44, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi I thought I'd just let you know there is a a discussion going on about edit warring at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United States of America and maybe it would be good to have some input from project members as to this subject because the actions of the editor that has been reported is in the scope of this project. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:WilliamJE_reported_by_User:Hhkohh_(Result:_) Dom from Paris (talk) 16:59, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Why does this page have empty sections and subsections for some sports, like boxing? Various other sports and groups of sports (cue sports, etc.) don't. It seems weird, and unhelpfully gunks up the ToC, to preserve empty sections.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:51, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

@SMcCandlish: Boxing section emptied because no AfD sorted into Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Boxing currently Hhkohh (talk) 13:20, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I understand that. I mean, why is there a Boxing section at all when it is not needed? There are 1000+ sports; we don't need empty sections for them (much less subsections and subsubsections!). If someone lists a curling (or whatever) article for deletion, we can just create a section for curling at the /Sports page, and remove it after the discussion ends. The ToC is a wreck, and implies that there's all kinds of stuff going on. It should only have entries for when there is stuff going on.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:34, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Unnecessary, for other sports, if article is about sportspeople, it should list in sportspeople, others lists in Sports Hhkohh (talk) 05:56, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

That doesn't appear to address what I'm talking about, Hhkohh.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  14:25, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Let other people reply to you, dear Hhkohh (talk) 15:28, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

I had a look at the Project page and nowhere does it mention what's the criteria to be able to sort into the country sorting. I thought that any pages related to the country e.g. albums released there, people born there, etc, are sorted into the country relevant country category. For example, if a singer is born in California but is famous in Australia, they are sorted into the California category and Australia category. Same goes for albums release in country Malaysia, Thailand, and China. The album are sorted into those country category. Please correct me if I'm wrong. --

I can't find any criteria over when a page is sorted into a category and when it's not sorted into the category. I thought it's sorted into all relevant categories. For example, I think a music album is sorted into the album category as well as the music category and into the categories of the countries the album is published in. --

Hi @Tyw7:, non-expert view here. I think as long as the categories are not ridiculously unconnected or you've added 20 to a single AfD then you're okay. The point of them is to get comments. If there are 2 or 3 categories already attached then I would only add more if I thought an obvious one was being missed or if the categories attached already were a form of quasi-canvassing. Otherwise I would wait a few days and see how many were commenting to see if any more needed adding. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 05:38, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

The British tend to use the word topical as (of a subject) of immediate relevance, interest, or importance owing to its relation to current events. a popular topical affairs programme The Oxford English Dictionary does also give the definition as Relating to a particular subject; classified according to subject. foreign or topical stamps but I don't think I've ever heard it used like that day-to-day. I was looking for "politics" in the toc on the compact list but couldn't see it. I thought "oh, it must be under culture". I didn't realise that there was a topical / general list at the top (it's a weird list btw, Conservativism but no Socialism). --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 06:56, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I created Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Nicaragua and added an AfD for a Canadian who was born in Nicaragua. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 21:09, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Added to the by-topic list and the delsort script. Enterprisey (talk!) 23:11, 29 July 2018 (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.

---

Moved from

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Artists

This page has far to many musicians on it. I know artists are sometimes called "musical artists", as are "makeup artists" and "sandwich artists". However we do not need deletion lists for makeup or sandwich artists owing to the low volume of AfDs for these groups, and musical artists already have the "musicians" deletions list. The artists list attracts a lot of high-quality and thoughtful contributors to art-related AfDs. I for one am a bit tired of weeding out the rappers and the makeup artists. Thoughts on narrowing the definition to something like "visual and media artists, fine artists and craftspeople"? Pinging @Vexations: and @Theredproject: for input to get things started.96.127.242.226 (talk) 00:00, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we have a convention, for example in categories, that "artists" means only "visual artists", which is all you really need to say. I think it is "recording artist" that mostly leads to these misunderstandings. Johnbod (talk) 00:14, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, this problem crops up in other areas as well. Musicians are added to lists of artists. That is because of the common language of referring to musicians as artists. But the distinction that we should want to be mindful of is the distinction (which generally applies) between visual artists and musicians, or singers. Bus stop (talk) 00:16, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I've changed this page with notes etc, but not moved it without a more formal !vote. If we go to "visual artists" we fall down the alphabetical listing, and are harder to find. Johnbod (talk) 00:21, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts to a redirect. [4] Does anyone know why? Vexations (talk

) 12:12, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@

WT:PERM Hhkohh (talk

) 12:22, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I agree, in so much as I only rarely contribute to the musicians, etc who show up here. I also agree that it creates unnecessary labor a) posting the musician articles here b) us having to mentally sort them out. I don't have the degree of expertise that I do w/ "visual and media artists, fine artists and craftspeople." I do think there are gray areas, like someone who does Sound art, which isn't visual, but certainly isn't a musician. --Theredproject (talk) 15:39, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that is art - possibly music too sometimes. Johnbod (talk) 15:43, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

The other thing we can do is make sure the people adding them are aware of the diffference. Just over the last few days User:Hhkohh and User:Tyw7 have both added pure musicians to this list. Please don't do this! Johnbod (talk) 15:46, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Johnbod: Sure, can you post to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting, thanks Hhkohh (talk) 15:50, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Ok, done that. Johnbod (talk) 15:57, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

My bad. I was using Delsort and was under the impression that musicians counted as artists. PS isn't make up artists visual artists? I don't think there's a seperate category for them. --

🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions

) 16:11, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above 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.

@Enterprisey: Can you add this notice to script, thanks? Hhkohh (talk) 16:20, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

"Visual artist" would also include such types of artists as "performance artists", "endurance artists", and "conceptual artists" of course. Bus stop (talk) 16:30, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

• Picking-up the query about make-up artists above, their category is a sub-cat of: Category:Cosmetics people, Category:Film artists, Category:Theatrical occupations, Category:Television people by occupation. If their mainly work on film (probably the most common), they should be sorted that way, otherwise for theatre, fashion etc. Johnbod (talk) 17:41, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • I was talking about deletion catagory. --
    🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions
    ) 17:52, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

My point is the deletion categories should follow the actual categories, as appropriate b- so they belong under the appropriate branch of showbiz/fashion. Johnbod (talk) 22:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

• What about changing the page name or definition to read "artists (visual artists, craftspeople or media artists)"?96.127.242.226 (talk) 20:18, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I think that's a little broad - a shoemaker or surfboard-maker is a craftsman, but not an artist, & "media artist" is rather vague. Johnbod (talk) 22:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I should have said "visual, craft and media artists", which fits fits a large amount of contemporary art production. Media artist is pretty established term for those working in video art and time-based media arts. It's vague to the same degree that visual artists is, which is perfectly appropriate, methinks. It's probably good to have craft artists in ther as well, since they show up often enough in art museums. 96.127.242.226 (talk) 04:08, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

The question concerns whether or not what the person does aspires to be art or not. Most of the time this is clear. Bus stop (talk) 01:33, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes. There are surfboards (and probably some shoes) explicitly created as works of art not utilitarian objects. True of many things. E.g., the world's most expensive

pool cue, the Celtic Prince, is an artwork, and you'd be insane to actually use it to play a game with your buddies.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢

 😼  02:36, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure that a surfboard and shoes and a pool cue aspire to be art. Bus stop (talk) 06:22, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Inanimate objects don't aspire to be anything, but their creators have specific intents, some of which are artistic, some of which are utilitarian. If you think a normally utilitarian thing cannot be art when shaped with artistic intent then you don't understand art and (more to the point) RS on art will all tell you otherwise.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:33, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

In the case of surfboards and shoes and pool cues the "specific intent" is the fetishization of utilitarian objects. Reliable sources will refer to many things as art and to an extent we are compelled to follow those sources. And there is no great harm in addressing even non-art entities in a collection of articles on items being considered for deletion. I think the main distinction this discussion is about is the distinction between musical artists and visual artists. But a question was raised about "crafts" and "media artists", which in turn led to your mention of a particular grade of surfboard, shoes, and pool cue. These are borderline cases. A big first step would be if we could just keep "recording artists", musicians, out of the list of visual arts-related articles being considered for deletion. Bus stop (talk) 08:20, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Are we not already tracking musicians/groups/composers elsewhere? It would seem redundant to list them here (and might drown out everything else due to the "I'm gonna do an article on my garage band" effect). Also "off" to list the average carpenter or whatever. But someone RS describe as an artist and who we're categorizing as one shouldn't be excluded because their art consists of repurposed utilitarian objects, or artistic approaches to something normally utilitarian; that was what I was getting at.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we are tracking musicians/groups/composers elsewhere but phrases like "recording artist" or simply "artist" in relation to a musician causes some musicians to be placed in lists of visual artists. You are right that "someone RS describe as an artist and who we're categorizing as one shouldn't be excluded because their art consists of repurposed utilitarian objects". You are making a valid point. Bus stop (talk) 11:34, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Do keep up, SMcCandlish! That is the point of this thread. Johnbod (talk) 13:50, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

My coffee IV ran dry.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  14:24, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

So, just to clarify, the notice in the delsort script whenever someone tries to use this list should be: Note that this page is only for

visual artists; musician-related discussions go on the "Bands and musicians" page.? Enterprisey (talk!

) 03:06, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Ping Johnbod and Hhkohh for some opinions. Enterprisey (talk!) 06:17, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes. Johnbod (talk) 12:47, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

I see that we have a Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Mythology. Might I request a Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Folklore? Myth is one of many genres of folklore, and a rather narrowly defined one, at that. :bloodofox: (talk) 23:46, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Might be more practical to move the former to the later and just widen its scope a little. I don't think we need to have separate pages for these.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  03:41, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

I wonder if an idea for Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Trump ever came up, and if anybody would be interested in setting it up (provided that's a good idea)? --K.e.coffman (talk) 10:23, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Sounds like a topic people would definitely be interested in; AfDs in that subject area certainly get enough participation. Enterprisey (talk!) 06:24, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

In addition to the history list, would it be possible have lists of some kind for 'non-contemporary' topics? I keep seeing, for example, articles about people who died a long time ago on various lists, but not on the history list. Since we have a severe recentism problem, and since these nominations are usually badly wrong, it might be helpful to have a way of identifying them quickly. At the moment, one would have to look at a very large number of lists to find them. James500 (talk) 08:46, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@James500: perhaps the nominators could be encouraged to add these types of nominations to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/History. If a topic is "historic" in nature, then I think this would be an appropriate list. --K.e.coffman (talk) 10:25, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Non-contemporary topics do not seem to usually be listed there. The problem with DSH is that "history" (on some definitions) includes contemporary history, and everything that has ever happened including things that happened five minutes ago. It is not a very helpful list if you are looking for pre-1946 or pre-1919 or pre-1900 or pre-whatever topics. These sort of things tend to end up on a geographic list or a list related to people's occupations or activities. They can be very difficult to find because of the number of lists they are spread over. James500 (talk) 05:50, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good. Which year do you think should be chosen as the dividing line, if any? (I'd suggest 1932, per

WP:AP2, as a default.) Or we could just have "History" and "Recent history". Enterprisey (talk!

) 06:03, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

If I knew what the exact cut-off point should be, I would not have asked. The end of the Second World War in 1945 is normally taken as the beginning of contemporary history. I suppose that pre-1932 would probably serve just as well. I don't think that division into "history" and "recent history" would fix the problem. James500 (talk) 23:52, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Apologies to anyone who tried to use my delsort script during a brief period just now - I broke the script accidentally. Should all be fixed now. Enterprisey (talk!) 00:31, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Comments please, on Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)/Archive 26#Semi-automate DELSORT based on Project tags. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 14:06, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

There does not appear to be a category for

How would I go about suggesting a new deletion section, for Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Cue sports. Cue sports covers an awful lot of articles, including billiards, pool, snooker and quite a few video games.

Is this scope wide enough for a deletion sorting, and am I asking in the correct place? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:14, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

I created some new lists in DELSORT-

Can someone more knowledgeable than me please put the covering info back at the top of the "deletion sorting: United Kingdom" page? It is not there currently because, stupidly, I simply deleted the vandalism on the page rather than do a full "undo" which would have restored it exactly as it was. RobinCarmody (talk) 20:42, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:43, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. RobinCarmody (talk) 01:45, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

So why is there no Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Men deletion sorting page? Sure, women have received maltreatment throughout history, which is my assumption for why this page exists (e.g. unfair coverage in media, lessened media coverage compared to men, gender-based bias in journalistic coverage, etc.), but so have some men. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:14, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

5 out of every 6 biographies on Wikipedia are men. It would be about as useful as

WP:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Biographies. --Izno (talk

) 13:54, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

@

WP:WOMEN) would like to track AfD discussions regarding women. If you would like to track deletion discussions involving men you are free to create Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Men, but I doubt it would be as widely used. feminist (talk

) 01:09, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

@Feminist: I actually don't see myself creating one for men; mostly just an observation. A new delsort page that would be functional is LGBT or LGBTQ, though. Presently, all such topical discussions are placed generically in the Sexuality and gender delsort page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:13, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

It seems that AfDs are getting sorted into more lists of deletion discussions than they used to be. For example, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erika Tham is currently sorted into 16 different lists. Is this actually helpful, or should we seek to limit the number of lists that an AfD gets sorted into? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

I noticed that exact same AfD, and have commented on the general issue before. Erika Tham is a Canadian TV actress, so the AfD should be sorted to discussions about Actors/Actresses, Canada, and Television. Her article mentions, in a purely promotional act of puffery, that she has lived in multiple countries and also likes to sing and dance. The users Tyw7 and Captain Raju turned that into 16 delsorts, which I find preposterous and bordering on useless.

This is not what the delsort process is supposed to accomplish. For example, I am active at the Bands and Musicians AfD page because I am knowledgeable on that topic area. While on that page I do not need to be alerted about AfDs on other things, which clutters up the page and leads to wasted effort. Meanwhile, there may be a community of volunteers who are devoted to improving articles about Singapore. So why do they have to be distracted at their AfD sorting page by Erika Tham, a Canadian actress in a kids' show? This severely perverts the once-convenient delsort process. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:16, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Doomsdayer520, erm I sorted it into 4. User:CAPTAIN_RAJU added the other ones.

I don't know. On one hand, perhaps users in the other specialty might know more about the actress. I kinda agree with the major sorting but I sometimes disagree with what counts as major sortings.

I think maybe sort into places she was born and maybe where she work mainly. I sorted Erika into musician and woman sorting as well. --

ping me

) 15:52, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

"Singer" is in the article's text, but she has done no work in music. Therefore she is not a musician and does not need to be at that sort page. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:56, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

ping me

) 15:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

""Singer" is in the article's text, but she has done no work in music. Therefore she is not a musician ", doomsdayer520, your view, some editors might suggest that a singer's voice is an instrument therefore they are a musician. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I did not say that singers aren't musicians. I said that this woman is not a professional singer. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 12:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I will add another preposterous example, and this one is on Captain Raju if he joins the discussion. The Erika Tham article cites a Twitter post to announce the fact that she is approximately one-eighth Ukrainian. That tidbit of information is not even notable enough for Wikipedia in the first place. Please advise on how this makes the Erika Tham AfD worthy of being forwarded to a community of volunteers who are committed to improving articles about Ukraine. The same goes for all other countries except Canada. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 16:22, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

• Not really. AFD is way to close to being an echo chamber, the more eyes we get on a nomination the better. I for one have watch listed the Finance-related page, if someone delsorted a page say 4 or 5 times and decided not to put it on the finance list then I wouldn't see that nomination.^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 18:42, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Good point, but the Finance sort page could (arguably) become less useful if it is cluttered with AfD listings that are not even about finance. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 19:05, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

• ping me

  ) 19:11, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

  Relevance is more important that remoteness. E.G for a BLP: Timmy is an American investor. He is best known for purchasing a British auto company from bankruptcy, here is details. Timmy also has invented 3 cryptocurrencies, here is details. Timmy went to university in China and Denmark. While that is a very abbreviated example, the relevant DelSort categories would be USA, businesspeople, UK, transport, and finance. China and Denmark don't need to be added as it was very brief, and not what he was known for, neither does Education. An ]AfD I just saw has 7 DS categories, but I find them to be within reason and helpful. The category Women doesn't need to be added though. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 00:50, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

  ping me

  ) 00:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

That wasn't directed to me, but the key word in that question is "remotely". Some of the delsorts in the AfD that started this discussion are remote to the point of sheer nonsense. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 23:34, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

• Generally no. The more eyes the better on AfDs, especially for editors who follow deletion lists. However, I do sympathize with this example AfD, where if a person resided in a geographic location for a short period of time and is not generally identified with that geographic location, then adding additional categories doesn't make much sense. --Enos733 (talk) 19:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
• Editors who add afds to delsort lists are to be applauded (says coola who regularly does it:)), in this case of someone who has resided briefly in numerous countries, how do editors know that there are not non-english sources discussing the person in any of those countries? alerting editors who have an interest/expertise in a country and/or its language may reveal such sources, or the lack of them, the same can be said about any article up for afd, not just about people, that has apparently a throw away line about something for which there is a delsort list, it may (or not) turn up sources. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
• I came here to say basically the same thing. it has always been my understanding that delsort is intended to sort by the primary topic or topics of the article under discussion, not to categorize the discussion in every possible way by every possible interpretation. I just closed
  talk
  ) 19:24, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Is there a reason why MFD isn't mentioned in the deletion sorting thing? Like...

The only trouble is that the scripts don't support delsorting of MfDs, so that for now, these would need to be done manually. I think including MFDs in here would be quite useful in drawing attention of the subject experts to drafts/portals being considered for deletion. Perhaps Enterprisey is willing to tweak his script to handle MFDs as well? SD0001 (talk) 13:30, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

I have a

Pinging

ping me

) 16:01, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

The proposal ended up gaining consensus for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United States of America page to be updated. The following listed below was then added to the main page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:04, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

This United States of America deletion sorting page may be used for the following types of articles:

• Topics and subjects that are U.S.-based, whereby the article does not provide a specific state of origin or where activity occurs.
• Media such as films, television shows and books that have national distribution in the United States.
• Products that have national distribution and a significant presence in the United States.
• Multinational companies that have a significant presence in the United States, whereby the article does not provide specific state(s) of location.

It sort of depends. For example, if an actor has lived in 15 different states, or something like that, the status quo has been to include in the US Delsort page, and include sorting in the state or states where they've lived at or worked at for a long time, if available. It's subjective and relative to each article. Perhaps a more precise method can be discussed here for moving forward. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:00, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

How about

ping me

) 16:12, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Personally, I'd include both the Minnesota and US Deletion sorting. The article only states that the subject was born in MN, whereas they are described as "an American singer-songwriter". It would likely be incomplete to only include Minnesota. However, others may disagree. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:17, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Ditto. Will is back to policing the catagory as before. I will re-add the US Delsort. --

ping me

) 17:29, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Can you read? "This United States of America deletion sorting page may be used for the following types of articles:

Topics and subjects that are U.S.-based, whereby the article does not provide a specific state of origin or where activity occurs.

Does not is pretty clear language. If the article is in a state deletion sorting because that is where it originating, then it don't go in United States....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:31, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes I can read. Also

ping me

) 12:49, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

The latest update to Twinkle has the new feature (written by User:SD0001) to allow the nominator to place the page in deletion sorting categories upon nomination. I've added it to the front page options here, but figured the team would want to know! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:08, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Why is this annoucement a bit skewed on the page? --

ping me

) 17:36, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

There was an unclosed <blockquote> in the section above, I've fixed it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:01, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Please create a deletion sorting scheme for Men, as per the way Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women is set up. -- Netoholic @ 22:28, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Added a AfD, and it was removed by WilliamJE (talk · contribs). When was consensus created that WilliamJE would be the curator of this sorting list? If items are being removed, is the editor making the removal moving it to a state level deletion sorting list? If a state-level deletion sorting list is not applicable, does it remain here?
-Concerned- --RightCowLeftCoast (Moo) 23:34, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

If the nitwit above would just read what it says at the top of the page- 'Whenever possible, it is recommended for deletion discussions to be added to more specific categories, such as a state and/or relevant subject area or what it says further down- "This United States of America deletion sorting page may be used for the following types of articles: Topics and subjects that are U.S.-based, whereby the article does not provide a specific state of origin or where activity occurs. He'd know better than to shoot his stupid mouth off especially when the article in question says the subject is from Arizona and Iowa. The last time I looked those are both United States....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 01:07, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

"Nitwit"?

Do avoid personal attacks please. --Izno (talk

) 14:55, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

There is no consensus as Wikipedia does not require structured leadership. William has been eyeballing the lists to prevent confusion and bloating on main pages for as long as I have been DSing. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 15:10, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

 

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Dance-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:56, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:56, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:56, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:57, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:57, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:57, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:58, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
— Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fanny Neguesha

There has to be a better way to do this. It is making it hard to see whether a discussion actually has any participation. Uncle G (talk) 16:45, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Uncle G, hat really long ones? – Levivich 02:15, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

• Sally Dworsky had 9, including "religion-related", presumably as her family is Jewish! Johnbod (talk) 02:44, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Suggest sorters use {{
    WP:OVERBANNER since being kept is a possible outcome. UnitedStatesian (talk
    ) 05:10, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Originally posted at WT:Articles_for_deletion

Are there stats anywhere for the number of established articles deleted each day (i.e. not via

@Miraclepine: Have you asked CAPTAIN RAJU (talk · contribs) and Tyw7 (talk · contribs) why they did it? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:00, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Ah. Whoops. Probably mis sorted--

ping me

) 19:19, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

I've removed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brad Fraser from Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements. ミラP 22:08, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

This is an invitation. It would be good if Wikipedians who are not from Slovenia read Pozareport.si and decide whether to delete or keep it. It is a politically sensitive media outlet and local users may be biased. nomos2019 (talk) 14:57, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Kate Marie Byrnes (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion

U.S. Ambassador to

@7&6=thirteen: what are you asking here? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:43, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

It is for attention of those to whom it may concern. I have no request or direction to give. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:35, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Not sure if WikiProject Organized Labour has a separate deletion sort here...I searched but could not find. Is the protocol that one asks for it to be created? Or just go ahead and create it myself? Thank you.--Goldsztajn (talk) 21:41, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Deletion sorting is not done on a one-to-one wikiproject/delsort basis. The current list of delsort categories is at

WP:DSL. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk

) 21:46, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

@Redrose64: thanks. What are the criteria for the creation of these categories?--Goldsztajn (talk) 00:05, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Forgot to Assign Category

I forgot to select a category when tagging an article for deletion with Twinkle. Are there any next steps that I should follow to help out, either to correct for my mistake or to facilitate the deletion process in general? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

The deletion category is not, as far as I know, connected to this wikiproject, but you can correct the mistake by editing the line {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}} (B is the category, see Template:AfD_categories for others). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 02:40, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I think what you are looking for is User:Enterprisey/delsort. --Izno (talk) 02:42, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Deletion Sorting

Can an editor who isn't sure if they want to volunteer for Deletion Sorting in general to make an occasional contribution and be more helpful than annoying? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

You don't have to be signed up/participate in this project to use the deletion sorting categories. I've found it really easy to just install the script which makes it so you just go to an AfD, click the delsort category, and it tags it/adds to the category. It's a helpful thing that IMO everyone involved at AfD should be doing. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 02:40, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I installed the script, and nothing happened, except that I saw from the illustration that it works with the Vector skin, so that I changed the skin preference to Vector, and now it works. Does it only work with the Vector skin? Anyway, thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:48, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

The class/ID it uses in the skin is not present in Timeless, so I can guarantee it doesn't work there. I have bugged the maintainer to change the CSS hook of interest but haven't heard anything from him. --Izno (talk) 16:37, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: what skin do you use? I use one for monobook (which I've learned makes me a crusty oldtimer or something :) ). I adapted it from someone else's a while back to include a very long list of possibilities: User:Rhododendrites/scripts/delsort-monobook-all.js — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:42, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

User:Rhododendrites - I was using Monobook. I will see if I can get Deletion Sorting to work with Monobook, but I tried it briefly and couldn't figure out how to get it to work. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:15, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Oh. I see. A different script for a different skin. I will try switching back to Monobook and see what happens. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

thanks for this interesting page. --Sm8900 (talk) 15:31, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

I don't see Algeria listed in the list of country-related deletion lists, under either Africa or Middle East. Is it listed somewhere else, or am I missing it, or is it not being listed? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

There is something wrong with this AFD. I can't get it out of displaying as unsorted, even by tagging it as Media and Music. Will someone please look at it? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:41, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

 Fixed — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:51, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Jessie Grundy is not a woman so shouldn't be on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Article alerts or Wikipedia:WikiProject Women/Article alerts. Could someone remove him to save other people wasting time? (Mostly in trying to work out why he's on the list, how he got there, how to remove him...) Thanks. PamD 15:20, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

I've removed it from Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:12, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

I have just listed 4 AFDs in

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Motorsports but this isn't something I can really do myself all of the time, and would of course be much better done by those who are sorting AFDs all of the time (since I would imagine the whole point of having these categories is to avoid having to sift through to find what you're looking for). Is it some issue with the automatic tools that causes this category to be overlooked? I note that on the /Motorsports page, it says near the top: "This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Sports.", but I don't see a motorsports section on Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sports. I am pinging the users who sorted the articles in question @Lightburst:, @Unnamelessness:, @Robert McClenon:, @Donaldd23:, as well as the creator of the /Motorsports page, @WilliamJE: since I'm not sure who to ask, what the technicalities are, or why this particular category is overlooked. Thanks. A7V2 (talk

) 01:12, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

User:A7V2, User:WilliamJE - You asked if it isn't visible enough. It isn't visible enough. I use the Deletion Sorting gadget, and Motorsports are not one of the entries under Sports. Please tweak the tool. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:29, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply Robert (do I just call you Robert or should it be Robert McClenon...). I have no idea how any of these scripts/tools/etc work, and if changing it would require changing the script itself or just adding a category to

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Motorsports, or maybe changing Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sports. A7V2 (talk

) 02:16, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

I've added /Motorsports to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sports, but I don't know if that will change the tools or not. I also removed Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Rugby league since it doesn't seem to exist anyway. A7V2 (talk) 02:31, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Please comment at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AnomieBOT 79. Anomie⚔ 19:41, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Artists points to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Artists/archive for the "Archived discussions (starting from September 2007)" but that archive only goes back to 9 April 2016. There are 1553 entries, so it isn't clearly the first 1000. Where do the rest of them live? I tried adding 1 or 2 to the end of the filename, but that didn't work. Thanks in advance. Theredproject (talk) 01:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

/Artists did not exist until April 2016. September 2007 is the default date in {{deletionlist}}. I added |archivedate=April 2016 to correct it. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:51, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks JJMC89. Prior to 2016 where did those articles sort to? Arts and/or Visual Arts right? More likely one vs the other, or unclear? Theredproject (talk) 15:41, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't know. IntoThinAir might know since they created it. — JJMC89 (T·C) 16:01, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

I guess it depends on the article (and specifically which categories it was sorted under, if any at all), but the Delsort archives for Arts and/or Visual Arts seems like a logical place to look. Maybe just looking under People would be the best option if you want to find as many artist AFDs as possible (though obviously there they'll be buried among tons of other ones). The Artists delsort archive does appear to contain every AFD sorted under there since I created it in April 2016. IntoThinAir (talk) 16:35, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

As another editor has noted at

Check out the new Delsort category/page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Products. Take a look, and note the criteria for posting there, listed atop the page in a box. Thanks for your work to manage Wikipedia! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:49, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

It's struck me as odd for a while that we have a cat for, say,

Hello, there is an article at AfD that needs input: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harvey Tolibao (2nd nomination). It's been open since July 24, due to a lack of participation/consensus. Anyone interested is welcome to join the discussion.   // Timothy :: talk  17:28, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this is a common enough occurrence, or just a temporary bump due to someone looking closely at these, but currently, 19 of the 36 list-related articles are sports-related (and most of those are for individual seasons). Would it be worth it to keep a separate delsort category for sports lists like we already have for lists of people? –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 00:25, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

The AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Hanrahan has proved difficult to categorise as there doesn't appear to be a way to sort rugby league deletions yet. Please could either a 'rugby league' deletion sorting be created or 'rugby union' be changed to simply 'rugby' to incorporate both? Spiderone 19:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I think it would be best to create a Rugby League category as they are different games. noq (talk) 20:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2021 NRL season just added to Rugby union which is clearly inappropriate. I am seeing most AFDs that get categorised as union should be Rugby league. There is an appropriate Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby league that would it would be better to notify rather that the union one.noq (talk) 14:22, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elevation Capital now includes SAIF Partners as a 2-article AFD.

It needs to be sorted in the categories relevant for financial companies that do business in China. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 01:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Compact needs to be updated to include newly created lists like Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/COVID-19. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:41, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Awards will also need adding Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:23, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh wait, never mind, it got added! Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:23, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Is there no deletion list for books? VR _talk 22:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Vice regent - 'literature' is probably the closest sorting cat Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:37, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi all, would anyone object to me creating a 'tennis' deletion sorting topic? There are almost always at least 1 or 2 active tennis deletion discussions at any one time. In my view, it would be much more frequently used than softball, horse racing and handball. Thanks. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:10, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Since no objections were raised, I have created Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Tennis and populated it with the discussions already taking place. Please let me know if there are any issues. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:55, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

How does one create a new delsort? I see that there is none for Nunavut, Saskatchewan, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland Newfoundland and Labrador, and New Brunswick. Is there a page with criteria for creating a delsort?--- Possibly (talk) 22:57, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03: created one for 'awards' recently so may have knowledge of this. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

@Spiderone: Create an Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Xyz with the following code, replacing "Xyz" with the subject area in question:

<noinclude>
{{shortcut|WP:DELSORT/XYZ}} (optional)
{{topic|Xyz}}
{{deletionlist|Xyz}}

==
</noinclude>

For

@Possibly: see above. I personally would be happy with more Canada delsorts. They wouldn't be used as often as Ontario and Quebec but would still be immensely useful. There are several US states that are only occasionally used so I see no problem with having one for Nunavut etc. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

@

Nunavut which look OK, but the shortcuts are still red linked. Does it take time for the pages to be indexed for the shortcut? I don't see it available either when I use Enterprisey/delsort.--- Possibly (talk

) 03:52, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@Possibly: you have to create the redirects manually, I think. I've attempted to do that now. Let me know if it works or not. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:08, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

You forgot to add the Saskatchewan delsort at

WP:DELSORT/FLAT. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄

) 17:58, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Just to note: I've edited WP:DS to discretionary sanctions per this discussion. Maybe a bit bold, but we have WP:DELSORT - so I don't see the harm - but hey, if you folks don't like it - revert at will. — Ched (talk) 19:25, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I recently found this page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Scouting, but when it's added to the Article Alerts subscription, it's giving an error code of "[Warning] (06-13-2021 08-04-46) Subscription "WikiProject Scouting" specifies usage via delsort topic expected at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Scouting that is not part of delsort category". I don't know how to fix this, so I'd appreciate any help, thanks! Funandtrvl (talk) 20:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Most likely because it's not in the Category:Wikipedia deletion sorting. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 20:49, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

It looks like it's been fixed, thanks! Funandtrvl (talk) 22:44, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

There are a lot of AfDs relating to noble and royal families and members of them. Do people feel that a separate sorting category would be helpful? They currently tend to just get put in 'people' at the moment. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:36, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

I've decided to create it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Royalty and nobility which complements Wikipedia:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:14, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

My delsort script now reads from Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computer-readable.json. (A long-overdue change.) It's semi-protected. Enterprisey (talk!) 22:36, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! --- Possibly ☎ 02:07, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Enterprisey, Shellwood has just introduced me to your script. Would it be possible to add the subcategories of schools, i.e. "Universities and colleges" and "Other school or university articles" as currently everything goes into "Primary and secondary schools" and then may have to be moved manually. TSventon (talk) 02:24, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

TSventon, sounds like a sensible idea. Looking at the indices of deletion lists, it doesn't seem like there are any existing deletion lists for those two topics, so they would have to be created first; after that, the lists would have to be added to the indices and in particular to the computer-readable list, which will make them usable by the script. Despite making the script, I unfortunately don't know for certain the process for creating new deletion lists - looking at this talk page, it seems just announcing you're making them is enough. I guess we could wait a few days to see if anyone objects, and then create them? Enterprisey (talk!) 07:26, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

What's going on on Category:AfD debates (Science and technology)? There's a user page, a few log pages, and a few category pages that seem to have been incorrectly transcluded. PianoDan (talk) 23:11, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

There are a number of discussions going on right now after an FA was merged, then delisted with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewis (baseball) (2nd nomination) preceeding and making a fait accompli Wikipedia:Featured article review/Lewis (baseball)/archive1. I propose that a new DELSORT list be added to which GA/FA/FL/etc. content up for deletion can be added, and those with a particular interest in such topics can review and participate. Thoughts? Jclemens (talk) 18:55, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

(Came here from

WT:ATA.) An FA/GA DELSORT would be useful; I'd probably follow it. Given the extra effort that went into those, it makes sense to have a specific delsort for them. If for no other reason I'd be curious to see how often it happens that a GA/FA is nominated. (Maybe JPxG's Oracle already knows?) Levivich

13:25, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

As luck would have it, my software does store article assessments (although not for articles that are deleted). Incorporating it into the Oracle's list pages would require a bit of work, but would be possible. jp×g 14:33, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

So there's a possibility that this could be automated in some fashion, rather than just manually added by editors, like most other DELSORTs seem to be? Jclemens (talk) 17:33, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Well, either that, or have DELSORTS added automatically (since GA/FA are very easily machine-readable from an article and leave no room for ambiguity). I'd be fine with submitting a

BRFA for it if there's any interest. jp×g

02:56, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_December_5#Category:Doctoral_students_of_Emmy_Noether

Can anyone help me out?

Thanks Gilgamesh4 (talk) 15:10, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Mohan Shrivastava (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion

Indian polititican. Question of notability. Inherent language problems. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:30, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I've noticed that any delsort pages that include the {{PetScan}} template (little box of links that helps to search for deletion discussions within a category) have a problem with the way that unordered lists (a.k.a. bulleted lists) display on the rest of the page. Since it's very common for people to organize their !votes in deletion discussions using unordered lists (i.e. * '''Delete''' - rationale), this problem makes all of the transcluded deletion discussions display incorrectly. I found a way to fix this problem by using the {{Endplainlist}} template in the right place. For instance, see this edit. It looks like the number of delsort pages that use {{PetScan}} is in the minority, but there's still a decent number of pages.

I overly optimistically started going through all of the delsort pages to fix them, and quickly realized that it would take a long time to do manually on my own. I only got through A and B of the geographic delsort pages. Does anyone know of a quicker way to accomplish this fix? I don't think that it's quite big enough for a bot task, but maybe someone with AWB or something similar could find a way to accomplish this quickly? —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 22:09, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Nevermind, I downloaded AWB and figured out how to use it to fix the issue myself. I'll leave this thread here for posterity though, in case anyone plans on adding {{PetScan}} templates to other delsort pages, or creates a new delsort page with {{PetScan}} templates. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 23:48, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Scottywong: The problem isn't so much {{PetScan}} as it is the broken markup present on that page by the incorrect nesting of an "open" plainlist inside a list inside a {{plainlist}}. It's not at all clear to me how the "open" and "plain" options are supposed to work together, but what's there is certainly not right and the {{Endplainlist}} is just adding a little more brokenness to balance out some of the existing brokenness. Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Japan and Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Georgia (U.S. state) have examples that seem less broken. Anomie⚔ 02:43, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Anomie: Thanks for looking into it. I'm honestly still a bit confused about how these pages are structured, but the {{Endplainlist}} seemed to solve the problem so I went for it without taking the time to fully understand the problem. But you're right, it may not be the ideal solution. I still don't understand why all these pages have a bare |} in them. Seems like the whole thing is a mess, but I'm not sure if these pages are important enough or used frequently enough to justify the time it would take to re-create them in a cleaner way. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 05:42, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Scottywong: The bare |} balances the unclosed table from {{PetScan|type=open}}, as documented in that template. Anomie⚔ 12:20, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Ahh I see now. Still seems messy. I feel like it would be a lot cleaner and easier to understand if the PetScan template supported multiple entries, rather than requiring multiple templates followed by a confusing bare |}. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 16:12, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I'm really out of my element here but isn't Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Finance missing from the Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Flat list? JBchrch talk 02:17, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

No idea why it wasn't added. Dealt with now. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:28, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

-

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Behavioural science (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Psychology (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Behavioral science is a subfield of psychology. We don't need two separate delsorts for closely related topics. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:42, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

People keep adding musicians, perhaps understandably. I'd suggest "Artists (visual arts)". Johnbod (talk) 22:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

@Johnbod: While I'm neutral on the proposal, wouldn't "Visual artists" do the job in plainer English? • Gene93k (talk) 13:19, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

I think it's important to keep the initial "A" - non one will look for "Visual", and the term is not in normal use and may confuse some. Johnbod (talk) 15:24, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Something should be there to signal ambiguity. _signed, 511KeV ^(talk) 03:36, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

To add to my last point, people often add items that should be on "Visual art" to "Arts", eg both items there just now. Johnbod (talk) 04:18, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Lists&type=revision&diff=1091120204&oldid=1091118615&diffmode=source List of cosmic entities in Marvel Comics should obviously be on this sorting list. Dream Focus 23:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done. @MrsSnoozyTurtle: the marvel article is not a list, but a list is nominated with it, so it should be included. the DC article is classified as a list on the talk page, so seems appropriate, too. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

I wish to link

I'm attempting to figure out how best to establish a new delsort for the region of Kashmir. This is a disputed region divided among India, Pakistan, and China. My hunch is that all parts of the region should be treated together because of its disputed nature and sparse population, but the relevant WikiProjects cover only the specific regions of Kashmir, e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Jammu and Kashmir. What do you think? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03 Instead of dividing over state lines, it should have been done into 4-5 regional lines. Like North, S, E, W, NE India. These state DELSORT would have to be deleted and merged back to WP:INDIA DELSORT because of 0 participation. Venkat TL (talk) 17:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Software/archive?wprov=srpw1_15 2601:807:8700:A690:A894:D03C:4934:BF4D (talk) 15:09, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Where does one del sort a cancelled streaming series that never streamed? It is not exactly "television" or is it? Atsme 💬 📧 13:09, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

'Internet' is probably the closest cat Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Disney

This seems a little hyper-specific for a delsort category. I did a rough check, and I see there's been an average of about 2 noms per month listed here over its ~21 month life span. That's probably okay for broad categories that naturally just don't see a lot of noms, but for anything Disney related, stuff will naturally fit into other categories, be it films, TV, or just general corporation/organization stuff. I'd recommend closing this down. Thoughts? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:51, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Spotted this as incomplete and also orphaned from the computer-readable list, both of which I fixed. Should it be folded back into Christianity? And are there any other delsort pages that aren't in the JSON? Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:26, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Probably should be folded into DS Christianity, in my view. Regarding the last question, almost certainly. There are probably a couple hanging out in Category:Wikipedia deletion sorting, as its been a couple years since I gave that cat a scrub. For ones not in the cat, Special:Search might have some helpful parameters, but it'll be largely manual searching. Curbon7 (talk) 08:51, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

The Delete Sort tool in Twinkle seems to be broken, not sure if this is the right venue to report it. Netherzone (talk) 20:17, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

I hear it's fixed now. Not sure what the problem was. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:45, 23 June 2023 (UTC)