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.
Q2: You mean I'm not supposed to use AFD to propose a merger or a page move?
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.
This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Deletion, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.DeletionWikipedia:WikiProject DeletionTemplate:WikiProject DeletionDeletion articles
For discussions that have not been well-archived (before 2004), the page history of the Articles for deletion page has to be used as a contingency archive. One can look in the Deletion log to obtain date and time of a deletion, then look in the page history of VfD near that time to see which edit regards the unlisting of the page, then view the previous version.
This page has archives. Sections older than 25 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
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.
Latest comment: 17 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Non-notable record label, complete lack of sources and very little news coverage. Only two of the artists mentioned in the article mention V/Vm Test Records on their page, one of these artists is V/Vm himself. Violates WP:GNG. 74.108.22.119 (talk) 12:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 days ago5 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, new user trying to nominate an AFD for R. Scott Bakker.
I used the Twinkle tool to nominate, but I'm not seeing the article show up in the AFD log. I'm not sure if Twinkle only completes step I described here, or if it completed step II/III as well? Does it usually take some time or do I need to do the other steps manually? Just afraid of spamming the pages. Mintopop(talk) 16:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
There are a couple different deletion processes. What you've created on that page is not an AFD (Article For Deletion) but a WP:PROD... a proposed deletion, which means if no one objects to the deletion for a week, it gets deleted, no further discussion needed. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
@NatGertler Oops, that was not my intention. I assumed this deletion proposal might be somewhat controversial given it is a biography, so I wanted to open up for AFD. It sounds like it's an either/or thing with AFD and PROD. I guess at this point I just wait to see if the PROD goes through and then take next steps from there if someone objects? Mintopop(talk) 20:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
That is a normal way of doing things. However, if you do personally feel this is too controversial to take that route, you are free to delete the PROD tag and refile as an AfD now... however, given the lack of substantive additions to the article in years, I suspect you'll just save other editors time by letting the PROD run. (A new AfD is always an option, but once an AfD has been run and the article has survived, PROD is no longer an option.) -- Nat Gertler (talk) 20:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 10 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The subject of this article does not meet notability guidelines in WP:BIO. The entire article lacks sources to support Dawson's notibility. Many of the links provided show events Dawson has been part of but fail to establish that Dawson himself is of note. None of those sources are significant coverage of Dawson; he merely plays a minor part (such as moderating a conference or event) in those events. The only source that actually provide coverage of Dawson is the PRWeek article, however, as it is a one-to-one interview of Dawson himself, the source is a primary source and therefore does not support notability of the subject itself, per WP:BASIC. 218.189.35.59 (talk) 23:14, 21 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
