This article does not cite any sources since it was created. I checked the history log and found nothing. The last update was in 2023. Please review. Thank you. [[User:Aona1212|Aona1212]] ([[User talk:Aona1212|talk]]) 07:56, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
This article does not cite any sources since it was created. I checked the history log and found nothing. The last update was in 2023. Please review. Thank you. [[User:Aona1212|Aona1212]] ([[User talk:Aona1212|talk]]) 07:56, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
:{{Not done}}. {{u|Aona1212}}, you are [[WP:AUTOCONFIRM]]ed and can start an AFD yourself; see [[WP:AFD]] for more information. I’d suggest using [[WP:TW|Twinkle]], as it makes the process much easier. However, I’d recommend you flesh out your rationale a bit. The date of the last edit to the article is wholly irrelevant and has no bearing on whether or not it should be deleted. Lack of sources are a problem, but if they can be found, it may be worth it to keep and improve the article. That being said, I think this one is probably irredemably bad; we have policies like [[WP:OR]], and even essays like [[WP:TNT]] to point to that would help argue your case more than simply “the article has no sources and hasn’t been edited recently”. –[[User:Deacon Vorbis|Deacon Vorbis]] ([[User Talk:Deacon Vorbis|carbon]] • [[Special:Contributions/Deacon Vorbis|videos]]) 08:07, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
|
Frequently asked questions
Q1: I don’t like this page’s name. I want to rename it to Articles for discussion or something else. A1: Please see Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Rename AFD. Note that all of the “for discussion” pages handle not only deletion, but also proposed mergers, proposed moves, and other similar processes. AFD is “for deletion” because the volume of discussion has made it necessary to sub-divide the work by the type of change.
Q3: How many articles get nominated at AfD? A3: Per the Oracle of Deletion, there were about 470,000 AfDs between 2005 (when the process was first created) and 2022. This comes out to about 26,000 per year (2,176 per month / 72 per day). In 2022, there were 20,008 AfDs (1,667 per month / 55 per day).
Q4: How many articles get deleted? A4: Between 2005 and 2020, around 60% of AfDs were closed as “delete” or “speedy delete”. This is about 270,000. More detailed statistics (including year-by-year graphs) can be found at Wikipedia:Oracle/All and Wikipedia:Wikipedia records#Deletion.
Q5: Is the timeline strict, with exactly 168 hours and zero minutes allowed? Should I remove late comments? A5: No. We’re trying to get the right outcome, not follow some ceremonial process. If the discussion hasn’t been closed, it’s okay for people to continue discussing it. Q6: How many people participate in AFD? A6: As of October 2023, of the 13.9 million registered editors who have ever made 1+ edit anywhere, about 162,000 of them (1 in 85 editors) have also made 1+ edit to an AFD page. Most of the participants are experienced editors, but newcomers and unregistered editors also participate. Most individual AFD pages get comments from just a few editors, but the numbers add up over time.
|
 |
||||||
|
||||||
|
About deleted articles
There are three processes under which mainspace articles are deleted: 1) speedy deletion; 2) proposed deletion (prod) and 3) Articles for deletion (AfD). For more information, see WP:Why was my page deleted? To find out why the particular article you posted was deleted, go to the deletion log and type into the search field marked “title,” the exact name of the article, mindful of the original capitalization, spelling and spacing. The deletion log entry will show when the article was deleted, by which administrator, and typically contain a deletion summary listing the reason for deletion. If you wish to contest this deletion, please contact the administrator first on their talk page and, depending on the circumstances, politely explain why you think the article should be restored, or why a copy should be provided to you so you can address the reason for deletion before reposting the article. If this is not fruitful, you have the option of listing the article at WP:Deletion review, but it will probably only be restored if the deletion was clearly improper.
|
Cneoridium dumosum (Nuttall) Hooker F. Collected March 26, 1960, at an Elevation of about 1450 Meters on Cerro Quemazón, 15 Miles South of Bahía de Los Angeles, Baja California, México, Apparently for a Southeastward Range Extension of Some 140 Miles
It seems the tilie is too long. Ghren (talk) 16:38, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Pigsonthewing: Can you do me a favor? —Ghren (talk) 16:42, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- The page is fine and very well sourced, please think thrice (or more) about trying to delete this topic. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:44, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- I have thoroughly checked the source of the entry, and I do not believe it has sufficient citations. I believe the entry needs to be reviewed by AFD, but I am experiencing technical issues and cannot submit it. The entry title is too long; it is showing as an “invalidtitle” and I cannot submit it. Ghren (talk) 16:57, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- Thems the breaks. Ha. It is a classic article, and to be serious, I have no idea how to post the title on AfD. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:00, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- I have thoroughly checked the source of the entry, and I do not believe it has sufficient citations. I believe the entry needs to be reviewed by AFD, but I am experiencing technical issues and cannot submit it. The entry title is too long; it is showing as an “invalidtitle” and I cannot submit it. Ghren (talk) 16:57, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- The page is fine and very well sourced, please think thrice (or more) about trying to delete this topic. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:44, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- Ghren, if you abbreviate the name of the AfD subpage, it should work: try adding
{{subst:afd|Cneoridium dumosum (Nuttall) Hooker F. Collected March 26, 1960 etc.}}to the top of the article and then following the link from there to create the nomination. Titles this long (250 characters out of the maximum 256) are kind of a mess for AfDs, pagenotices, talk-page archives, etc. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:23, 6 November 2025 (UTC) - I’ve gone ahead and nominated this article (as best as I understand under the technical issues). Ghren and Pigsonthewing, please feel free to comment at the AFD discussion. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 05:08, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Thank for your kindly help. Ghren (talk) 05:57, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for not pinging me? Randy Kryn (talk) 06:04, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Given your horribly inappropriate behavior here and at User talk:Ghren#Prods, be thankful I didn’t drag you to ANI instead. A user was asking for technical help with nominating an article for deletion. If you don’t agree with it, fine. If you don’t even want to help, fine. But the mocking tone here was just really uncalled for, and it reeks of WP:GAMING the system in order to achieve your desired outcome. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 06:14, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- For a user who is proud of the fact that they club “baby seals for fun and profit” your judgement about horrible behavior may be in question. Get it? Humor, not gaming, nor inappropriate unless Ghren has no sense of humor or has the thinnest skin around (Monobook). And please read the prod discussion again where you claim my behavior was horribly inappropriate – my concern was that this long-term article with many sources was prodded by an inexperienced user and was just trying to explain why a prod wasn’t the way to go in this situation, which is when they brought it here for AfD assistance. Randy Kryn (talk) 06:43, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Ok but nothing you’ve written here is funny? ~2025-33108-20 (talk) 01:38, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- I thought referencing “Thems the breaks” was funny, an old time saying probably not familiar now. Other than that I don’t know what was being talked about above, those three words? The article itself is the kind of rare Wikipedia article that contains encyclopedic humor in an appropriate encyclopedic way, so I’m not going to hide that I enjoy it. The esteemed author of the 1962 paper meant for that to happen. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:56, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- Ok but nothing you’ve written here is funny? ~2025-33108-20 (talk) 01:38, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- For a user who is proud of the fact that they club “baby seals for fun and profit” your judgement about horrible behavior may be in question. Get it? Humor, not gaming, nor inappropriate unless Ghren has no sense of humor or has the thinnest skin around (Monobook). And please read the prod discussion again where you claim my behavior was horribly inappropriate – my concern was that this long-term article with many sources was prodded by an inexperienced user and was just trying to explain why a prod wasn’t the way to go in this situation, which is when they brought it here for AfD assistance. Randy Kryn (talk) 06:43, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Given your horribly inappropriate behavior here and at User talk:Ghren#Prods, be thankful I didn’t drag you to ANI instead. A user was asking for technical help with nominating an article for deletion. If you don’t agree with it, fine. If you don’t even want to help, fine. But the mocking tone here was just really uncalled for, and it reeks of WP:GAMING the system in order to achieve your desired outcome. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 06:14, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Zero reliable independent sources. See the source assessment table on Talk:Phạm Xuân Phương#Source assessment. The article was previously deleted so I cannot PROD it. ~2025-33667-75 (talk) 17:48, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you can take a look at the article List of Street Fighter Grand Slam champions. This article is very strange. It lists several tournaments and provides some sources to cite the tournaments themselves. However, none of the sources in the article mention the concept of a “Grand Slam.” I have also searched online extensively and could not find any reference to a so-called Street Fighter Grand Slam.
All the sources in the article only mention the tournaments listed in the article—they do not mention a Grand Slam at all. The article itself also does not explain how the “Street Fighter Grand Slam” was established or why these particular tournaments are considered part of it.
Most importantly, the prize differences among the four tournaments mentioned are huge: EVO and EVO Japan only have prize pools of around $30,000–$40,000, while Capcom Cup has over $1,000,000 in prize money. It is hard to believe that these tournaments would be grouped together as a “Grand Slam.” Moreover, for EVO alone, there is EVO, EVO Japan, EVO France, and EVO Singapore, making it difficult to understand why only EVO Japan is considered a Grand Slam while EVO France and EVO Singapore are not. Additionally, EVO is now linked with Capcom Cup and the Esports World Cup, where the champion can qualify for Capcom Cup and Esports World Cup, which makes EVO feel more like a qualifier for Capcom Cup and Esports World Cup rather than a tournament of the same level.
Since the article is clearly misleading, I think it could be considered for deletion or at least for revising its title and content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YuelinLee1959 (talk • contribs) 08:45, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
- @YuelinLee1959: Unless you are blocked from doing so for some reason, you should follow the directions that start at WP:BEFORE to create the AFD discussion. – UtherSRG (talk) 16:30, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
- I just don’t know how to do it. Can you just tell me how to apply article deletion YuelinLee1959 (talk) 18:05, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
- The easiest way is to install/enable WP:Twinkle. It has an XFD nomination button. Otherwise, please go to WP:BEFORE for the manual instructions. – UtherSRG (talk) 18:13, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
- I just don’t know how to do it. Can you just tell me how to apply article deletion YuelinLee1959 (talk) 18:05, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
Ex biker who’s written some books and consulted on some TV shows about being a biker.
Most of the sources are user generated sites like IMDB or sites linked directly to the subject. The independent sources that mention him are either passing mentions or promotional content.
I don’t think any of this gives him enough notability for a wiki page. ~2025-34124-40 (talk) 10:20, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Requesting an AfD. ~2025-35211-47 (talk) 01:30, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
WP:NOTNEWS – no indicaiton of sustained covereage in a whole load on manufactured outrage from both sides.
~2025-38159-71 (talk) 14:36, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
The redirect Wikipedia:AFDPURPOSE has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 December 10 § Wikipedia:AFDPURPOSE until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:44, 10 December 2025 (UTC)
This article does not cite any sources since it was created. I checked the history log and found nothing. The last update was in 2023. Please review. Thank you. Aona1212 (talk) 07:56, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
Not done. Aona1212, you are WP:AUTOCONFIRMed and can start an AFD yourself; see WP:AFD for more information. I’d suggest using Twinkle, as it makes the process much easier. However, I’d recommend you flesh out your rationale a bit. The date of the last edit to the article is wholly irrelevant and has no bearing on whether or not it should be deleted. Lack of sources are a problem, but if they can be found, it may be worth it to keep and improve the article. That being said, I think this one is probably irredemably bad; we have policies like WP:OR, and even essays like WP:TNT to point to that would help argue your case more than simply “the article has no sources and hasn’t been edited recently”. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 08:07, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
