Meta:Requests for deletion

Submit your page deletion request at the bottom of this section.

The page "Access to nonpublic personal data policy-summary/" has moved to the Foundation website, and we have all these unattached translations that people still are editing, which is valueless. Probably time for a cleanout, unless someone can think of a reason not to do so. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:22, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

• Delete all * Pppery * _{it has begun} 04:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• +1, delete these useless pages --TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 06:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• Delete, I think that we should have a speedy criteria for stuff that has been moved to the Foundation site. Deleting the translation pages, only leaving the /en page as a soft redirect. --Minorax ^«¦talk¦» 13:07, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• Deleted the unused units. The page display titles are still used, though they can be deleted too if @Minorax's suggestion is implemented. (FTR, right now translation of the page is marked as "discouraged".) ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• Delete the unused units per 1234qwer1234qwer4. Hide on Rosé ^t 04:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• Hold on. I think there is a defect here, aren't the foundation wiki imports of the translation units defective, in that they have not maintained authorship attribution? — xaosflux ^Talk 12:04, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

They don't really apply directly to Wikimedia wikis based on MediaWiki. -> not in scope of Meta. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:38, 4 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

This page is outdated and is no longer relevant. We are moving all content which is under the WMF Research Team to MediaWiki (WMF Research) and leaving anything that is community-led here on Meta. --KGordon (WMF) (talk) 14:05, 8 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

• Delete * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Discussion open until at least 18 April 2024 (UTC)

• Joint Statement on Palestine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Beyond the fact that it is not the place of Wikimedians to take sides in armed conflicts, this open letter identifies with the Palestinian cause regarding matters within Israel. This partisanship is devisive slacktivism and should not be present within Wikimedia's servers. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:02, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Keep Keep There have been several open letters written by members of the Wikimedia Movement, pertaining to the Movement, hosted on Meta in the past. This statement does talk about specific actions that members of our Movement would like to see from the Foundation and is not trying to request or mandate things of organisations outside the Movement (for example, it is not asking any actions of any government or NGO). If the Foundation feels this matter is ultra vires for Meta, then they can take Office actions to remove the page and they can contact the editors there to discuss it further. I don't think this is a matter that needs to be addressed by the community on RfD — OwenBlacker (Talk; he/him) 18:13, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Keep Keep It's important to have space for open letters from members within the Wikimedia Movement. --Kiraface (talk) 18:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Keep Keep Deleting such a document goes against the democratic spirit of the Wikimedia community. Free knowledge is an agenda in the fight for democracy and it is even expected that organizations and movements with a social impact like ours take a stand on global issues like these. XenoF (talk) 19:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Keep Keep A request for deletion of a statement of this kind shouldn't take place in a democratic movement. If you disagree you can discuss the topic, but to just plainly ask that these words do not exist on our servers is against the spirit and values of this movement.Señoritaleona (talk) 20:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Keep Keep This open letter not only makes demands of our community and the Foundation, it serves as an opportunity for Wikimedians with shared values to connect and further strategize; it's unifying rather than divisive and is more aligned with the positive connotations of "slacktivism" than it is with the negative ones. Nyeboah (talk) 21:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Keep Keep the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikipedia in general has taken a position on the Russo-Ukrainian war in favor of Ukraine countless times. So, Wikimedians can take sides in armed conflicts. D.S. Lioness (talk) 01:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Submit your template deletion request at the bottom of this section.

• Template:Babel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Module:Babel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Appears superseded by {{#babel:}} (by the way could someone perhaps link me its documentation?) as this just produces redlinks. Perhaps we could convert to wrapper but I’m not sure how. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:50, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

Hmm, it seems like this used to be an (ugly) wrapper before User:NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh misguidedly broke it by importing from Wikipedia. There's also diff but the diff in the edit summary does not appear to exist. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:12, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

@Aaron Liu: I edited the template on June 22, 2022. All but one current user page transclusions of this template were introduced later to that (old usages were manually fixed ). The only exception is this one which transcludes {{Babel}} without providing any arguments. That this template produces nothing but red links is merely the result of it not being used correctly and should not be a basis for deletion. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 05:08, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

@NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh What is the correct use then? After you fixed them, new usages such as User:Rhyswynne have still popped up. The existence of this template is confusing and actively hurts those new to meta. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:14, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

Deleting the template will only create more red links. I don't see how that resolve the problem (if there is one). NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:39, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

I believe that reverting the template to a wrapper with a deprecation message is essentially the same as deletion. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:54, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

• Oppose Oppose For the same reason en:Module:Babel is still useful. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 05:11, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

  The English module is only useful because every language code is a template. On meta, most templates do not exist, and the magic word transcludes template when it can’t find the language code anyways. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:12, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

  Then those should be created instead. Or the module should be modified. There's no need for deletion. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:59, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

  Why do you need the module when you can quite easily wrap the template around the magic word? Why do you want to rely on the module? Aaron Liu (talk) 16:00, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

• Delete - redundant to the magic word. – Ajraddatz (talk) 18:35, 14 November 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

  Noting Billinghurst's comment, I have no objections to keeping the template with a note that it has been deprecated. – Ajraddatz (talk) 22:05, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

  Could you explain what they mean? How does the template or the module leverage the extension? Aaron Liu (talk) 22:31, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Keep: To preserve historical content. Could be reverted back to a revision that works like before. —— Eric Liu _{(Talk )} 09:09, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

@Ericliu1912 You mean the version that was basically a wrapper? Aaron Liu (talk) 12:44, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

Delete Per Ajraddatz, no need to keep redundant codes, such codes, if still need to keep, shall be happened at MediaWiki.org. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

How exactly is this related to mw.org? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:22, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Comment Comment The template and the updated module, both leverage the extension. If we delete the template and the module, then we need to go and edit all the pages that we've broken, which is pointless. May as well deprecate the use, and leave it as is. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

• Keep This is churn for the sake of churn, as Billinghurst points out. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 04:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• @Billinghurst Sorry for the late reply, it looked like it was for a separate section.I don't see how the template and the module leverage the Babel extension; there are no references to the parser function, the extension does not provide anything else, and the module seems to quite standard-ly transclude the template User langcode dash number; all of the latter for natural languages were deleted when the extension was introduced. Thus, most pages using the template look like this, a box of redlinks. If anything, deleting this and migrating to the extension would unbreak pages and reduce confusion. Aaron Liu (talk) 00:34, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• @Ajraddatz @Pppery Could one of you explain what @Billinghurst meant by "the module leverages the extension"? Aaron Liu (talk) 12:05, 8 March 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

  You'd need to ask him. Replacing the existing template sounds like a lot of work for little benefit, but if someone is willing to do it I have no big objections. – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:34, 8 March 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

  It'd be pretty easy with AutoWikiBrowser. Aaron Liu (talk) 16:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

• No consensus to delete, default to keep. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Submit your category deletion request at the bottom of this section.

Submit your image deletion request at the bottom of this section.

Submit your redirect deletion request at the bottom of this section.

Submit your undeletion request at the bottom of this section.

• Meta-Wiki requests
• Deletions
• Meta-Wiki maintenance