Page semi-protected

وِکیٖپیٖڈیا:جلدی مِٹاوُن حِکمَتہِ عَملی

وِکیٖپیٖڈیا پؠٹھٕ، اَکھ آزاد اِنسایکلوپیٖڑیا
(وِکیٖپیٖڈیا:CSD پیٹھ رُجوع مُکرَر)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

جلدی مِٹاوُن حِکمَتہِ عَملی چھِ تِم حالات واضع کَران یِمَن مَنٛز اِنتِظامؠن چھُ اِجازَت آسان زِ یِم ہیکن کُنہٕ مَشور وَرٲے صَفہٕ مِٹٲوِتھ۔

مِٹاونہٕ آمِت صَفہٕ چھِ یِوان بَحال کَرنہٕ مَگر خٲلی اِنتِظٲمؠ ہیکن یِہ عَمل کٔرِتھ۔ جلدی مِٹاوُن چھُ وقت بَچاونہٕ خٲطرٕ استعمال یِوان کَرنہٕ۔

کانٛہہ تہِ صَفہٕ جلدی مِٹاوَنہٕ خٲطرٕ نامزَد کَرنہٕ برونٛہہ گژھہٕ گۄڈنیتھ وُچھِنہٕ یُن زِ یہِ صَفہٕ ما ییہِ بہتر بَناونہٕ یا اَتھ ما ییہِ بَدل صَفَس سٲتؠ مُیل کَرنہٕ یا یِہ ما ییہِ رُجوٗع مُکَرر بَناونہٕ۔ نامزَد کَرنہٕ خٲطرٕ گَژھہ وَضاحَت کَرنہٕ یین۔

اِنتِظٲمؠ گَژھَن صَفہٕ صِرِف حِکمَتہٕ عَملی مُطٲبِق مِٹاون. اگر صَفہٕ چھُ پرٛأنہِ مِٹاوُن بَحَث مَنٛز بَچاونہٕ آمُت سُہ صَفہٕ گژھِہ نہٕ جَلدی مِٹاونہٕ یِو.

Introduction to criteria

Abbreviations (G12, A3...) are often used to refer to these criteria, and are given in each section. For example, "CSD G12" refers to criterion 12 under general (copyright infringement) and "CSD U1" refers to criterion 1 under user (user request). These abbreviations can be confusing to new editors or anyone else unfamiliar with this page; in many situations a plain-English explanation of why a specific page was or should be deleted is preferable.

Immediately following each criterion below is a list of templates used to mark pages or media فَیِلs for speedy deletion under the criterion being used. In order to alert administrators to the nomination, place the relevant speedy deletion template at the top of the page or media فَیِل you are nominating (but see #Pages that need to be tagged in a special manner below). Please be sure to supply an edit summary that mentions that the page is being nominated for speedy deletion. All of the speedy deletion templates are named as Db-X with Db standing for 'delete because'. A list of the Db-X templates can be found at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Deletion templates.

If a page falls under more than one of the criteria, instead of adding multiple tags it is possible to add a single {{Db-multiple}} tag to cover them all. For example, if an article seems both to be blatantly promotional (G11) and also to fail to indicate significance of its subject (A7) then the tag {{Db-multiple|G11|A7}} can be used to indicate both of these concerns. The article can then be speedily deleted if an administrator assesses it and decides that either or both of the criteria apply.

There is strong consensus that the creators and major contributors of pages and media فَیِلs should be warned of a speedy deletion nomination (or of the deletion if not informed before). All speedy deletion templates (using criteria other than U1, G5, G6, G7, and G8) thus contain in their body a pre-formatted, suggested warning template to notify the relevant party or parties of the nomination for speedy deletion under the criterion used. You can copy and paste such warnings to the talk pages of the creators and major contributors, choose from others listed at Category:CSD warning templates, or place the unified warning template, {{subst:CSD-warn|csd|Page name}}, which allows you to tailor your warning under any particular criterion by replacing csd with the associated criterion abbreviation (e.g. g4, a7).

Use common sense when applying a speedy deletion request to a page: review the page history to make sure that all earlier revisions of the page meet the speedy deletion criterion, because a single editor can replace an article with material that appears to cause the page to meet one or more of the criteria.

Pages that need to be tagged in a special manner

Some pages either cannot or should not be tagged for speedy deletion in the normal manner:

  • Pages that you cannot edit (e.g., due to protection), or JSON pages: place the template on the corresponding Talk page instead, along with an explanation of which page to delete.
  • Template: pages: place the template within a noinclude tag, like this: ‎<noinclude>{{Db-x}}‎</noinclude>
  • Module: pages (except for /doc pages): place the template with Module:Module wikitext, like this: require('Module:Module wikitext')._addText('{{Db-x}}')
  • CSS (including sanitized CSS) or JavaScript pages: place the template in a comment, like this: /* {{Db-x}} */

Pages that have survived deletion discussions

When applicable, the following criteria may be used to delete pages that have survived their most recent deletion discussions:

  • G5, creation by banned or blocked users, subject to the strict condition that the XfD participants were unaware that the article would have met the criterion and/or that the article creator's blocked or banned status was not known to the participants of the XfD discussion.
  • G6, technical deletions
  • G8, pages dependent on nonexistent pages
  • G9, office actions
  • G12, unambiguous copyright violations
  • G13, stale drafts, if 6 months have passed since the deletion discussion and any subsequent human edits
  • A2, foreign language articles on other Wikimedia projects
  • A5, transwikied pages
  • F8, images on Commons
  • F9, unambiguous copyright infringement
  • U1, user requests deletion within their own userspace

These criteria may only be used in such cases when no controversy exists; in the event of a dispute, start a new deletion discussion. However, newly discovered copyright violations should be tagged for G12 if the violation existed in all previous revisions of the article. G5 may be also used at discretion, subject to meeting the criterion outlined above.

List of criteria


These apply to every type of page with exclusions listed for specific criteria, and so apply to articles, redirects, user pages, talk pages, فَیِلs, etc. Read the specifics for each criterion to see where and how they apply.

ج۱. فضوٗل

This applies to pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history. It does not cover poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, implausible theories, vandalism or hoaxes, fictional material, coherent non-English material, or poorly translated material. Nor does it apply to user sandboxes or other pages in the user namespace. In short, if it is understandable, G1 does not apply.

ج۲. ٹٮ۪سٹہٕ صَفہٕ

یہ چھُ ٹٮ۪سٹہٕ صَفہٕ پیٹھ لاگوٗو گَژھن.یہ چھُ نہٕ سٮ۪کھیی ڈَبن پیٹھ لاگوٗو گَژھن تہِ نہٕ چھُ دُکُن ناوجاے لاگوٗو گَژھن. یہِ چھُ نہٕ تِمن صَفَن پؠٹھ لاگوٗو گَژھن یِم صَفہٕ ٹھیٖک آسان مگر کامہِ مَنٛز آسین نہٕ وُنہٕ کینٛہہ. {{Db-g2}}, {{Db-test}}

ج۳. غلط مَعلوٗمات

This applies to pages that are blatant and obvious misinformation, blatant hoaxes (including فَیِلs intended to misinform), and redirects created by cleanup from page-move vandalism. Articles about notable hoaxes are acceptable if it is clear that they are describing a hoax.

ج۴. مِٹاوُمُت صَفہٕ بییہ تَخلیٖق کَرُن

This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion.[1] It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies, and content that has been moved to user space or converted to a draft for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy). This criterion also does not cover content undeleted via a deletion review, or that was only deleted via proposed deletion (including deletion discussions closed as "soft delete") or speedy deletion.

ج۵. بُلاک یا بٲن رُکُنن تَخلیٖق

This applies to pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and that have no substantial edits by others. G5 should not be applied to transcluded templates or to categories that may be useful or suitable for merging.

  • To qualify, the edit or page must have been made while the user was actually banned or blocked. A page created before the ban or block was imposed or after it was lifted will not qualify under this criterion.
  • For topic-banned editors, the page must be a violation of the user's specific ban, and does not include contributions legitimately about some other topic.
  • When a blocked or banned person uses an alternate account (sock-puppet) to avoid a restriction, any pages created via the sock account after the earliest block or ban of any of that person's accounts qualify for G5 (if not substantially edited by others); this is the most common case for applying G5.


ج۶. تَکنیٖکی مِٹاوُن

This is for uncontroversial maintenance, including:

  • Deleting empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past
  • Deleting redirects or other pages blocking page moves. Administrators should be aware of the proper procedures where a redirect or page holding up a page move has a non-trivial page history. An administrator who deletes a page that is blocking a move should ensure that the move is completed after deleting it.
  • Deleting pages unambiguously created in error or in the incorrect namespace.
  • Deleting templates orphaned as the result of a consensus at WP:TfD.


  • {{Db-g6|rationale=reason}} – If none of the special tags below applies, this tag should be used with a reason specified in the |rationale= parameter.
  • {{Db-copypaste|page to be moved}} – for cut-and-paste page moves that need to be temporarily deleted to make room for a clean page move.
  • {{Db-move|page to be moved|reason}} – for pages that are currently holding up a non-controversial or consensual page move.
  • {{Db-moved}} – for pages that were holding up a page move, until they were moved out of the way by a page mover.
  • {{Db-xfd|fullvotepage=link to closed deletion discussion}} – for pages where a consensus to delete has been previously reached via deletion discussion, but which were not deleted.
  • {{Db-error}} – for pages obviously created in error.

ج۷. مُصَنِف سٕنٛز دَرخاست

If requested in good faith and provided that the only substantial content of the page was added by its author. For redirects created as a result of a page move, the mover must also have been the only substantive contributor to the pages before the move.[2] If the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page, a category page, or any type of talk page, this can be taken as a deletion request.

ج۸. صَفہٕ یم مِٹاوُمِتین صَفَن ماتٕحَت آسین


  • تِم بَحَث صَفہٕ یُوہُند اَہَم جاے ہُند صَفہٕ مِٹاونہٕ آمُت چھُ
  • Subpages with no parent page
  • فَیِل صَفہٕ یِمَن مَنٛز نہٕ کانٛہہ فَیِل آسہِ
  • تِم رُجوٗع مُکرَر یِم مِٹاونہٕ آمتِس صَفہٕ کُن اِشارٕ آسان کَرن یا تَتھ صَفَس کُن یُس نہٕ وُنؠ موجود آسہِ
  • زٲژ یِمَن مَنٛز نہٕ کانٛہہ صَفہٕ موجود آسہِ تہٕ یِم بیٚیِس جاے موجود آسِن

This criterion excludes any page that is useful to Wikipedia, and in particular:

  • Deletion discussions that are not logged elsewhere
  • User talk pages
  • Talk page archives (except article talk page archives where the corresponding article and main talk page have been deleted and the page is not otherwise useful to Wikipedia – check for page-moves and merges before using G8 on article-talk-page-archives; the parent article might still exist under a different name)
  • Redirects that were broken as a result of a page move (these should instead be retargeted to their target's new name), except where R2 speedy deletion would then immediately apply
  • Plausible redirects that can be changed to valid targets
  • User subpages when the user has not created a user page
  • Talk pages for فَیِلs that exist on Wikimedia Commons
  • Pages that should be moved to a different location[3]

Exceptions may be sign-posted with the template {{G8-exempt}}.

  • {{Db-g8}} – for cases not covered by any of the special tags below
  • {{Db-imagepage}} – for فَیِل description pages with no corresponding فَیِل
  • {{Db-redirnone}} – for pages that redirect to nonexistent/deleted pages, or pages currently flagged for speedy deletion
  • {{Db-subpage}} – for subpages of nonexistent/deleted pages, or pages currently flagged for speedy deletion
  • {{Db-talk}} – for talk pages of nonexistent/deleted pages, or pages currently flagged for speedy deletion
  • {{Db-templatecat}} – for categories populated by a deleted or retargeted template

ج۹. دَفتَرٕچ عَمل

In exceptional circumstances, the Wikimedia Foundation office reserves the right to speedy-delete a page. Deletions of this type must not be reversed without permission from the Foundation.

G10. Pages that disparage, threaten, intimidate, or harass their subject or some other entity, and serve no other purpose

Examples of "attack pages" may include libel, legal threats, material intended purely to harass or intimidate a person or biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced. These pages should be speedily deleted when there is no neutral version in the page history to revert to. Both the page title and page content may be taken into account in assessing an attack. Articles about living people deleted under this criterion should not be restored or recreated by any editor until the biographical article standards are met. Other pages violating the Biographies of living persons policy might be eligible for deletion under the conditions stipulated at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Summary deletion, creation prevention, and courtesy blanking, although in most cases a deletion discussion should be initiated instead.

Redirects from plausible search terms are not eligible under this criterion. For example, a term used on the target page to refer to its subject is often a plausible redirect – see Wikipedia:RNEUTRAL.

ج۱۱. اِشتِہار کرنُک ذٔریعہ

This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopedia articles, rather than advertisements. If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. Note: Any article that describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. However, "promotion" does not necessarily mean commercial promotion: anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc.

  • {{Db-g11}}, {{Db-promo}}, {{Db-spam}}
  • {{Db-spamuser}} – for userpages used only for publicity and promotion, with a username that promotes or implies affiliation with the entity being promoted

G12. Unambiguous copyright infringement

This applies to text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a compatible free license, where there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. For equivocal cases that do not meet speedy deletion criteria (such as where there is a dubious assertion of permission, where free-content edits overlie the infringement, or where there is only partial infringement or close paraphrasing), the article or the appropriate section should be blanked with {{subst:Copyvio|url=insert URL here}}, and the page should be listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Please consult Wikipedia:Copyright violations for other instructions. Public-domain and other free content, such as a Wikipedia mirror, do not fall under this criterion, nor is mere lack of attribution of such works a reason for speedy deletion. For images and media, see the equivalent criterion in the "فَیِلs" section here, which has more specific instructions.

Note: If other criteria apply in addition to G12, the template {{Db-multiple}} should be used instead, so we don't waste time seeking copyright permission after deleting the page.

G14. Unnecessary disambiguation pages

This applies to the following disambiguation pages:

  • Disambiguation pages that have titles ending in "(disambiguation)" but disambiguate only one extant Wikipedia page.
  • Regardless of title, disambiguation pages that disambiguate zero extant Wikipedia pages.
  • A redirect that ends in "(disambiguation)" but does not redirect to a disambiguation page or a page that performs a disambiguation-like function.

If a disambiguation page links to only one article and does not end in (disambiguation), it should be changed to a redirect, unless it is more appropriate to move the linked page to the title currently used for the disambiguation page. G14 also applies to pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).


These criteria apply only to pages in the article (main) namespace. They do not apply to redirects. For any articles that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Articles for deletion or Wikipedia:Proposed deletion.

Not all numbers are used, as some criteria have been repealed.

عِبارت بَغٲر

This applies to articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article.[4] Example: "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh." It applies only to very short articles. Note that context is different from content, treated in A3. This excludes coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material. If any information in the title or on the page, including links, allows an editor, possibly with the aid of a web search, to find further information on the subject in an attempt to expand or edit it, A1 is not appropriate. Don't tag under this criterion in the first few minutes after a new article is created.[5]

وۄپَر زبانِ منٛز مضمون

This applies to articles not written in English that have essentially the same content as an article on another Wikimedia project. If the article is not the same as an article on another project, use the template {{Not Kashmiri}} instead, and list the page at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English for review and possible translation.

بَغٲرِ مَواد مَضموٗن

This applies to articles consisting only of external links, category tags or "See also" sections, a rephrasing of the title, attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title, questions that should have been asked at a noticeboard, chat-like comments, template tags, or images. This may also apply to articles consisting entirely of the framework of the Article wizard with no additional content, or no content at all. However, a very short article may be a valid stub if it has context, in which case it is not eligible for deletion under this criterion. Similarly, this criterion does not cover a page having only an infobox, unless its contents also meet another speedy deletion criterion. This criterion excludes poor writing, coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material. Don't tag under this criterion in the first few minutes after a new article is created.[5]

A5. Transwikied articles

This applies to any article that consists only of a dictionary definition that has already been transwikied (e.g. to Wiktionary), a primary source that has already been transwikied (e.g., to Wikisource), or an article on any subject that has been discussed at articles for deletion with an outcome to move it to another wiki, after it has been properly moved and the author information recorded.

A7. No indication of importance (people, animals, organizations, web content, events)

This applies to any article about a real person, individual animal, commercial or non-commercial organization, web content,[6] or organized event[7] that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions.[8] This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion applies only to articles about the listed subjects; in particular, it does not apply to articles about products, books, films, TV programmes, albums (these may be covered by CSD A9), software, or other creative works, nor to entire species of animals. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible, and any article with a blatantly false claim may be submitted for speedy deletion as a hoax instead. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.

The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

A9. No indication of importance (musical recordings)

This applies to any article about a musical recording or list of musical recordings where none of the contributing recording artists has an article and that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant (both conditions must be met). This is distinct from questions of verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion does not apply to other forms of creative media, products, or any other types of articles.

The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

A10. Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic

This applies to any recently created article with no relevant page history that duplicates an existing English Wikipedia topic, and that does not expand upon, detail or improve information within any existing article(s) on the subject, and where the title is not a plausible redirect. This does not include split pages or any article that expands or reorganizes an existing one or that contains referenced, mergeable material. It also does not include disambiguation pages.

  • {{Db-a10|article=Existing article title}}, {{Db-same|article=Existing article title}}

The title chosen for the vast majority of duplicate articles will be a plausible misspelling of, or alternative name for, the existing article, and a redirect should be created instead of deletion. This criterion should, accordingly, only be used rarely, and only for pages where the title could be speedily deleted as a redirect.

A11. Obviously invented

This applies to any article that plainly indicates that the subject was invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone the creator personally knows, and does not credibly indicate why its subject is important or significant. The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify under Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Note: This is not intended for hoaxes (see CSD G3).[9]

رُجوع مُکرَر

These criteria apply to redirects in any namespace, with exclusions listed for specific criteria. For any redirects that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion.

Not all numbers are used, as some criteria have been repealed.

ر۲. بَدل ناوجاے رُجوع مُکرَر

This applies to redirects (apart from shortcuts) from the main namespace to any other namespace except the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces, and to broken redirects that would qualify for this criterion if they were fixed (e.g., redirects to articles that have been draftified).

See also Wikipedia:Cross-namespace redirects, Category:Cross-namespace redirects, and MOS:LINKSTYLE.

ر۳. غلط رُجوع مُکرَر

This applies to recently created redirects from implausible typos or misnomers. However, redirects from common misspellings or misnomers are generally useful, as are sometimes redirects in other languages. This criterion does not apply to redirects created as a result of a page move,[2] unless the moved page was also recently created. It also does not apply to articles and stubs that have been converted into redirects, including redirects created by merges,[10] or to redirects ending with "(disambiguation)" that point to a disambiguation page.

R4. فَیِل namespace redirects with names that match Wikimedia Commons pages

This applies to redirects in the "فَیِل:" namespace with the same name as a فَیِل or redirect at Wikimedia Commons, provided the redirect on Wikipedia has no فَیِل links (unless the links are obviously intended for the فَیِل or redirect at Wikimedia Commons).

رُجوع مُکرَرن مَنٛز باقٕے مَسلہٕ

For any redirects, including soft redirects, that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. Redirect pages that have useful page history should never be speedily deleted. In some cases it may be possible to make a useful redirect by changing the target instead of deleting it. Redirects that do not work because of software limitations, such as redirects to special pages or to pages on other wikis, may be converted to soft redirects if they have a non-trivial history or other valid uses.

For reversal of redirects, use {{Db-move}}, a special case of {{Db-g6}}.


Note: These criteria formerly began with I (e.g. I1, I6, I9) but have since been replaced with F, without the actual criteria being changed. This was because the فَیِل namespace was formerly known as the image namespace.

For any images and other media that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Proposed deletion or Wikipedia:فَیِلs for discussion.

Not all numbers are used, as some criteria have been repealed.

F1. Redundant

This applies to unused duplicates or lower-quality/resolution copies of another Wikipedia فَیِل having the same فَیِل format. This excludes images in the Wikimedia Commons; for these, see criterion F8.[11]

F2. Corrupt, missing or empty فَیِل

This applies to فَیِلs that are corrupt, missing, empty, or that contain superfluous and blatant non-metadata information.[12] This also includes فَیِل description pages for Commons فَیِلs that don't include information that is specific to English Wikipedia (like {{FeaturedPicture}}).[13]

F3. Improper license

This criterion is used to flag media licensed as "for non-commercial use only" (including non-commercial Creative Commons licenses), "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only" or "used with permission". These may be deleted, unless they comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. فَیِلs licensed under versions of the GFDL earlier than 1.3, without allowing for later versions or other licenses, may be deleted.

F4. Lack of licensing information

This applies to media فَیِلs lacking the necessary licensing information to verify copyright status after being identified as such for seven days. Administrators should check the upload summary, فَیِل information page, and the image itself for a source before deleting under this criterion.

F5. Orphaned non-free use images

This applies to images and other media that are not under a free license or in the public domain and that are not used in any article. These may be deleted after being identified as such for more than seven days or immediately if the image's only use was on a deleted article and it is very unlikely to have any use on any other valid article. This includes previous revisions of the image. Reasonable exceptions may be made for images uploaded for an upcoming article.

F6. Missing non-free use rationale

This applies to non-free فَیِلs claiming fair use but without a use rationale. These may be deleted after being identified as such for seven days. The boilerplate copyright tags setting out fair use criteria do not constitute a rationale. This criterion does not apply to situations where a use rationale is provided but is disputed.

F7. Invalid fair-use claim

  1. Non-free images or media from a commercial source (e.g., Associated Press, Getty), where the فَیِل itself is not the subject of sourced commentary, are considered an invalid claim of fair use and fail the strict requirements of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria; and may be deleted immediately.
  2. Non-free images or media that have been identified as being replaceable by a free image and tagged with {{subst:Rfu}} may be deleted after two days, if no justification is given for the claim of irreplaceability. If the replaceability is disputed, the nominator should not be the one deleting the image.
  3. Invalid fair-use claims tagged with {{subst:Dfu}} may be deleted seven days after they are tagged, if a full and valid fair-use use rationale is not added.


F8. Images available as identical copies on Wikimedia Commons

Provided the following conditions are met:

  • The Commons version is in the same فَیِل format and is of the same or higher quality/resolution.
  • The image's license and source status is beyond reasonable doubt, and the license is undoubtedly accepted at Commons. To avoid deletion at Commons, please ensure the Commons page description has all of the following:
    • Name and date of death of the creator of the artistic work represented by the فَیِل, or else clear evidence that a free license was given. If anonymous, ensure the page description provides evidence that establishes the anonymous status.
    • Country where the artistic work represented by the فَیِل was situated, or where it was first published.
    • Date when the artistic work represented by the فَیِل was created or first published, depending on the copyright law of the origin country.
    • All image revisions that meet the first condition have been transferred to Commons as revisions of the Commons copy and properly marked as such.
  • The image is not marked as {{Do not move to Commons}} or as {{Keep local}}.
  • All information on the image description page is present on the Commons image description page, including the complete upload history with links to the uploader's local user pages (the upload history is not necessary if the فَیِل's license does not require it, although it is still recommended).
    • If there is any information not relevant to any other project on the image description page (like {{FeaturedPicture}}), the image description page must be undeleted after the فَیِل deletion.
  • If the image is available on Commons under a different name than locally, all local references to the image must be updated to point to the title used at Commons.
  • The image is not protected. Do not delete protected images, even if there is an identical copy on Commons, unless the image is no longer in use (check what links here). They are usually locally uploaded and protected here since they are used in the interface or in some widely used high-risk template. Deleting the local copy of an image used in the interface does break things. More about high-risk images.
  • {{C-uploaded}} images may be speedily deleted as soon as they are off the Main Page.

{{Db-f8}}, {{Now Commons}}, {{Now Commons|فَیِل:name of فَیِل on Commons.ext}}

F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement

This applies to obviously non-free images (or other media فَیِلs) that are not claimed by the uploader to be fair use. A URL or other indication of where the image originated should be mentioned. This does not include images with a credible claim that the owner has released them under a Wikipedia-compatible free license. Most images from stock photo libraries such as Getty Images will not be released under such a license. Blatant infringements should be tagged with the {{Db-فَیِلcopyvio}} template. Non-blatant copyright infringements should be discussed at Wikipedia:فَیِلs for discussion.

F10. Useless non-media فَیِلs

This criterion is meant for فَیِلs that are neither image, sound, nor video فَیِلs; are not used in any article; and have no foreseeable placement in an article. Note that the following فَیِلs are rarely sound, image, or video: .doc, .pdf, .ps, .html, .rtf, .txt, .xls, and .zip فَیِلs. Examples of image, sound, and video فَیِلs are: .jpg, .gif, .png, .svg, .mpg, .ogg, and .wav. This is not a comprehensive list of فَیِلs that can be deleted, nor is an extension alone enough reason to delete; this criterion is based on فَیِل content.

F11. No evidence of permission

If an uploader has specified a license and has named a third party as the source/copyright holder without providing evidence that this third party has in fact agreed, the item may be deleted seven days after notification of the uploader. Acceptable evidence of licensing normally consists of either a link to the source website where the license is stated, or a statement by the copyright holder e-mailed or forwarded to Such a confirmation is also required if the source is an organization that the uploader claims to represent, or a web publication that the uploader claims to be their own. Instances of obvious copyright violations where the uploader would have no reasonable expectation of obtaining permission (e.g. major studio movie posters, television images, album covers, logos that are not simple enough to be public domain, etc.) should be speedily deleted per reason F9 (unambiguous copyright infringement), unless fair-use can be claimed. فَیِلs tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days may also be speedily deleted under this criterion. (Please note that the backlog for messages sent to the permissions-en queue is currently 47 days. You may wish to wait at least this amount of time before tagging OTRS pending images for deletion.) Images tagged {{OTRS received}} whose permissions have not been confirmed after 30 days may be deleted immediately under this criterion, without waiting an additional seven days, provided a check of the ticket is performed by an OTRS agent to confirm that no further interaction is ongoing.


For any category pages that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.

Not all numbers are used, as some criteria have been repealed.

C1. Unpopulated categories

This criterion applies to categories that have been unpopulated for at least seven days. This does not apply to disambiguation categories, category redirects, featured topics categories, categories under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion (or other such discussions), or project categories that by their nature may become empty on occasion (e.g. Category:Wikipedians looking for help). Place {{Possibly empty category}} at the top of the page to prevent such categories from being deleted.

C2. Speedy renaming and merging

Assorted sub-criteria that are used only at WP:CFDS; please see that page for details and instructions.

User pages

These criteria apply only to pages in the User: and User talk: namespaces. For any user pages that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.

Not all numbers are used, as some criteria have been repealed.

U1. User request

Personal user pages and subpages (but not user talk pages) upon request by their user. This also includes editnotices for user pages. In some rare cases there may be administrative need to retain the page. User talk pages are not eligible for speedy deletion under this criterion. Pages which have previously been moved are only eligible if all previous titles were in the user's userspace. Note: The template does not display on certain pages (such as .css and .js pages), but its categorization will work.

U2. Nonexistent user

User pages of users that do not exist (check Special:Listusers), except user pages for IP users who have edited, redirects from misspellings of an established user's user page, and the previous name of a renamed user.

Before placing this template or deleting a page under this criterion, consider whether moving the page to another location, such as a sub-page of the user page of the primary contributor, is preferable to deletion.

U5. Blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a web host

Pages in userspace consisting of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals, where the owner has made few or no edits outside of user pages, with the exception of plausible drafts and pages adhering to Wikipedia:User pages#What may I have in my user pages?. It applies regardless of the age of the page in question.

Before placing this template or deleting a page under this criterion:


  1. REDIRECT Wikipedia بَحَژ:جلدی مِٹاوُن حِکمَتہِ عَملی/Common requests

The following are not by themselves sufficient to justify speedy deletion:

  1. Reasons based on Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not or essays. Wikipedia is not: "a dictionary", "an indiscriminate collection of information", "a crystal ball", "a how-to list"; or essays like Wikipedia:Listcruft, Wikipedia:Obscure topics, Wikipedia:Deny recognition,...; are not valid reasons for speedy deletion.
  2. Less-obvious hoaxes. If even remotely plausible, a suspected hoax article should be subjected to further scrutiny in a wider forum. Truth is often stranger than fiction. Note that "blatant and obvious hoaxes and misinformation" are subject to speedy deletion as vandalism.
  3. Original research. It is not always easy to tell whether an article consists of material that violates the policy against novel theories or interpretations or is simply unsourced.
  4. Notability. Articles that seem to have obviously non-notable subjects are eligible for speedy deletion only if the article does not give a credible indication of why the subject might be important or significant.
  5. Failure to assert importance but not an A7, A9 or A11 category. There is no consensus to speedily delete articles of types not specifically listed in A7, A9 or A11 under those criteria. Nor does it apply for neologisms that do not meet A11 because new specialized terms should have a wider hearing.
  6. Author deletion requests made in bad faith. Author deletion requests made in bad faith, out of frustration, after others have contributed substantially (because the work of others is involved) or in an attempt to revoke their freely-licensed contributions are not granted. However, anyone may request deletion of pages in their userspace.
  7. Very short articles. Short articles with sufficient content and context to qualify as stubs may not be speedily deleted under criteria A1 and A3; other criteria may still apply.
  8. Copies that are not copyright violations. If content appears both here and somewhere else (possibly in modified form), consider the possibility that Wikipedia's is the original version and the other site copied from us. Alternatively, the same author may have written both versions, or the original may be free content.
  9. PNG / GIF فَیِلs replaced by JPEG images. JPEG encoding discards information that may be important later. Do not delete the original PNG / GIF فَیِلs.
  10. Questionable material that is not vandalism. Earnest efforts are never vandalism, so to assume good faith, do not delete as vandalism unless reasonably certain.
  11. User and user talk pages of IP addresses. Although users are encouraged to create Wikipedia accounts, unregistered users are still allowed to edit Wikipedia, and are identified by their IP addresses. If an unregistered user has a static IP address, it may have a user page and/or user talk page associated with it, and even for non-static IP addresses, the history can contain important discussions or information that may be of interest.
  12. A فَیِل that isn't a sound, video, or image فَیِل. To be deleted under F10, a فَیِل must have no potential usefulness and not be used in any articles. فَیِلs that are in use or might be put to an appropriate use, even if not sound, video, or image, should not be deleted without wider discussion.
  13. An article written in a foreign language or script. An article should not be speedily deleted just because it is not written in English. Instead it should be tagged with {{Not English}} and listed at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English. It may be reconsidered after translation whether the article merits deletion, retention or improvement by means of a suitable tag. However, if it already exists on another Wikimedia project, it might be speedily deletable under criterion A2.
  14. Subject request. Sometimes somebody claiming to be the subject of a biographical article requests deletion of the article, or even blanks the article. Article subjects do not have an automatic right to have their articles deleted. Nor does such a criterion apply to namespaces other than article space: for example, pages in the Wikipedia namespace devoted to a discussion about a particular editor. See also: Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Deletion of biographies and BLPs
  15. Orphaned pages or redirects. A page cannot be deleted just because no other pages link to it. This includes redirects – even if 'What links here' returns nothing, a redirect may be a likely search phrase, or have links to it from outside Wikipedia.
  16. Redirects that are poorly targeted. A redirect should not be deleted just because its target is incorrect or confusing. Instead, change the redirect to a better target. If you're not sure where it should be targeted, open a discussion at Redirects for discussion.

Procedure for administrators

Make sure to specify the reason for deletion in the deletion summary. Also, in general the article's creator and major contributors should have been notified.

Before deleting a page, check the page history to assess whether it would instead be possible to revert and salvage a previous version, or there was actually a cut-and-paste move involved. Also:

  • The initial edit summary may have information about the source of or reason for the page.
  • The talk page may refer to previous deletion discussions or have ongoing discussion relevant to including the page.
  • The page log may have information about previous deletions that could warrant SALTing the page or keeping it on good reason.
  • What links here may show that the page is an oft-referred part of the encyclopedia, or may show other similar pages that warrant deletion. For pages that should not be re-created, incoming links in other pages (except in discussions, archives and tracking pages) should be removed.

Twinkle or CSDHelper can be used to process nominations more quickly and smoothly. When processing a nomination:

  • Twinkle can delete the page.
    • Twinkle can notify the page creator if the page is deleted.
  • CSDH can delete the page, convert the nomination into a PROD nomination, or decline the nomination.
    • CSDH can notify the nominator if the nomination is converted or declined.


  1. The result of the most recent deletion discussion controls. This means that if the most recent discussion was "keep" or a default to keep through no consensus, G4 does not apply. Likewise, an article that was deleted through its most recent discussion, but was kept in earlier discussions, is subject to the criterion and may be deleted. (Discussion.)
  2. 2٫0 2٫1 Page moves are excluded because of a history of improper deletions of these redirects. A move creates a redirect to ensure that any external links that point to Wikipedia remain valid; should such links exist, deleting these redirects will break them. Such redirects must be discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion before deletion. However, redirects that were obviously made in error can be deleted as G6, technical deletions.
  3. Note that new editors sometimes mistakenly start article drafts on talk pages that have no article. If you see this, move the draft to the draft space or to the user's userspace, making sure the new user is listed as author and not you.
  4. An Rfc containing relevant discussions on the A1 criterion
  5. 5٫0 5٫1 Consensus has developed that in most cases articles should not be tagged for deletion under this criterion moments after creation as the creator may be actively working on the content; though there is no set time requirement, a ten-minute delay before tagging under this criterion is suggested as good practice. Please do not mark the page as patrolled before that delay passes, to ensure the article is reviewed at a later time.
  6. Web-delivered content (like individual radio or television programs telecast on the web) – as opposed to web created content – may not necessarily qualify under A7; As per WP:Notability (media), "Generally, an individual radio or television program is likely to be notable if it airs on a network of radio or television stations (either national or regional in scope), or on a cable television network with a national audience."
  7. Routine coverage of unorganised events – for example, shooting incidents – may not necessarily qualify under A7; deletion discussions should be preferred in such cases.
  8. Past discussions leading to schools being exempt from A7.
  9. Unlike a hoax, subject to deletion as vandalism under CSD G3 as a bad faith attempt to deceive, CSD A11 is for topics that were or may have been actually created and are real, but have no notice or significance except among a small group of people, e.g. a newly invented drinking game or new word.
  10. See Wikipedia:Merge and delete for an explanation as to why redirects created by merges cannot be deleted in most cases.
  11. This does not apply to images duplicated on Wikimedia Commons, because of license issues; instead see "Images available as identical copies on the Wikimedia Commons".
  12. Before deleting this latter type of فَیِل/page, check whether the MediaWiki engine can read it by previewing a resized thumbnail of it. Even if it renders, if it contains significant superfluous information that cannot be accounted for as metadata directly relating to the media data, it may be deleted. It is always preferred to correct the problem by uploading a فَیِل that contains only the good data plus acceptable metadata.
  13. Content from فَیِل description pages that is relevant to the Commons should be copied over before deleting the local page. If necessary, copy the attribution history as well.

فرما:Wikipedia community