Meta:Requests for deletion

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

Unused template from 2005. Not to be confused with {{Lang name}}. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 22:36, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as a possible term to be used. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 12:22, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per DENY. I initially tagged it for speedy deletion, but that was rejected, hence this RfD. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 05:37, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as historical archive. – Phương Linh (T · C · CA · L · B) 03:13, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hide on Rosé: What is there to be archived? Who would find it useful? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 03:17, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It still has a closing comment by @Count Count, so we need some input from them. – Phương Linh (T · C · CA · L · B) 03:20, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have no qualms with the page being deleted. On the other hand as @Leaderboard wrote, deletion is not necessary and this RfD itself causes more attention and volunteer work than the page just sitting around. Count Count (talk) 09:11, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Created in error at MediaWiki:Globalblocking-block-reason-dropdown. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 03:22, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete once MediaWiki:Globalblocking-block-reason-dropdown is fixed. There are several more instances of this typo, which I'll fix as well. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 03:37, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  There are "only" 2043 block summaries that need fixing. As @Johannnes89 was the one who introduced the typo, I propose that he carry out the task of fixing them. I'll deliver him a trout too. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 04:16, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for noticing. Not sure if it's worth the effort changing all those block summaries, how about just leaving this page as a redirect for ~1 year and delete it once most of the blocks are expired? Johannnes89 (talk) 10:15, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Agreed. It's not really worth fixing that. It'd be a rather pointless work to do. Leave a redirect for some time and have it deleted later. -Barras talk 10:25, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That does sound like a better choice. Delayed delete per above. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 10:52, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Fine with me. Just curious, when will the last gblock expire? --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 10:53, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Minorax: According to this new query, there are 9 indefinite blocks. Another 400+ will expire in 2030, and there are plenty of 2028s. Only to be expected, since these are for open proxies. I guess they still need to be fixed after all. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:07, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hmm I had hoped for most blocks to expire after 1-2 years. Fixed the indefinite blocks and some more, but unless we want to keep the page as a redirect for five years I guess I need to fix at least the 400+ expiring 2030. Johannnes89 (talk) 12:28, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Johannnes89: The numbers for each year are: 87 (2025; 33 expired, 17 expiring this month), 329 (2026), 250 (2027), 957 (2028) and 411 (2030) We might as well fix all of them. Can other stewards help? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 05:40, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to c:Category:Joel Encinas. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 07:50, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 09:00, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete --𝓰𝓲𝓷𝓪𝓪𝓷기나ㅏㄴ(T/C) 04:26, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Useless, newly created redirect to a page that has been migrated. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 03:08, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete useless redirect. 𝓰𝓲𝓷𝓪𝓪𝓷기나ㅏㄴ(T/C) 04:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is also a Help:Parser function/pt page, so why are you only deleting this page? Whatback11 (talk) 21:14, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was a translation prior to being migrated. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 02:55, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Submit your undeletion request at the bottom of this section.

Hello, User:Hide on Rosé notified me on my talk page that the file File:WikiMedia-Servers-IP.dia has been nominated for deletion and has since been deleted. The file is the source code for File:WikiMedia-Servers-IP.png, it shows a proposal I have made in the early day of Wikipedia using en:Dia_(software). I believe we should keep the source used to generate the image.

Thanks! 8-)

Antoine "hashar" Musso (talk) 16:05, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hashar: This is present as the same file at File:WikiMedia-Servers-IP.png. EggRoll97 (talk) 03:14, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also Meta:Requests_for_deletion/Archives/2025#File:WikiMedia-Servers-IP.dia. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:16, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hashar any reason this needs to be local? (As opposed to you publishing it to commons under a compatible license)? — xaosflux ^Talk 12:46, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

.dia files can no longer be uploaded anywhere, so this literally can't be moved to Commons without sysadmin intervention. Weak oppose undeleting per my general principle of objecting to grandfather clauses and restoring a state that would now be verboten. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 21:20, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I would   Support the undeletion. There is no workaround. Leaderboard (talk) 10:42, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]