Open main menu

Wikidata:Requests for deletions

(Redirected from Wikidata:RFD)

Requests for deletions
Items which do not meet Wikidata's notability policy can be deleted. Please nominate items for deletions on this page under the "Requests" section below. If it is obvious vandalism, just add the page here (gadget available), or ping an administrator to delete it. Contact can also be made with an administrator in #wikidata connect.

Before deleting items, check to ensure that they are not in use. This can be easily done with the "links" link below the header of each request.

Do not try to pre-emptively delete an item because its page is up for deletion on a Wikimedia project. The link will be removed by bots and reported here in the future if a deletion takes place.

Please use {{Q}} the first time you mention an item. Unless you use the gadget, please also ping the item's creator in your request (or ping the bot operator, when appropriate) if 1) the user is still active on Wikidata and 2) the user has contributed the majority of information in that item.

Please use Wikidata:Properties for deletion if you want to nominate a property for deletion.

This is not the place to request undeletion. Please use Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard instead. If help is needed with the merging of items, see the instructions at Help:Merge.

Add a new request

On this page, old requests are archived, if they are marked with {{Deleted}}. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at May 26.

Requests for deletions


69 open requests for deletions.


Pages tagged with {{Delete}}Edit

None at the moment

Click here to purge if this list is out of date.


Please add a new request at the bottom of this section, using {{subst:Rfd |1=PAGENAME |2=REASON FOR DELETION }}.

Example biographiesEdit


example biography (Q29962164): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

I would just delete it but there seems to be some external (mis)use. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:12, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 07:20, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
@Kjetil r: You should use Wikidata Sandbox (Q4115189), Second Wikidata sandbox (Q13406268) or for this purpose or take advantage of arbitrary access and create a real-world example. --Pasleim (talk) 13:02, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
I suppose Wikidata Sandbox (Q4115189) and/or Second Wikidata sandbox (Q13406268) could be used in some cases, but we also have a legitimate need for having a semi-stable dummy item that could be used for documentation purposes. I don't know very well, but is it really suitable for such use cases? For example, the birth date and death date of [1] do not appear in the infobox at [2]. Regards, Kjetil_r (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
This item doesn't seem to be used on anymore. @Kjetil_r: Can you confirm? --Pasleim (talk) 13:03, 10 January 2019 (UTC)


example biography 2 (Q30049473): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

I would just delete it but there seems to be some external (mis)use. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:12, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 07:20, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
It is being used for test, development, and documentation purposes on no.wikipedia. Isn't that within scope for what we can do? Regards, Kjetil_r (talk) 13:41, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

@Matěj Suchánek, Kjetil_r: I am not sure, but wouldn't Douglas Adams (Q42) (or something else) be better as an example? Bencemac (talk) 14:07, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

I need an example item where I can add or remove data at will when I work on making changes to infoboxes. I can't really do that to Douglas Adams (Q42). Regards, Kjetil_r (talk) 14:39, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Keep both. As Kjetil_r has demonstated, these serve sensible on-wiki software development and documentation purposes that actual biographies or Wikidata sandbox aren't sufficient for. Deryck Chan (talk) 13:19, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Not sure why we need to spend time on these, so I have no strong opinions on how we should do it. I do have a legitimate need for such items in the future, but I'll let others decide if we should keep these two, or if I can just create new ones when necessary. Regards, Kjetil_r (talk) 13:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

~410 Azerbaijani filmsEdit

(Those items are listed at User:Pasleim/Items for deletion/Page deleted/Archive/2017-2.)
There are ~410 items about Azerbaijani films whose only sitelinks were deleted by azwiki admin User:Vusal1981 in October/November 2017. There are no identifiers, links, or references on the items, and they have barely been touched in the past 14 months by editors (as it happens to most abandoned items). As I have no idea where I can lookup information about them, I’d like to ask the community whether anyone can rescue these items so that they meet the notability requirements, or whether they shall be deleted as non-notable items. —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:28, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

  • We used to have more of them. I don't think they were based on an online resource. I vaguely recall discussing them with a contributor to that wiki. I don't recall who that was though. Obviously, it would be good to keep them, but that would need a reference to confirm them. --- Jura 08:39, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Found it: User_talk:Sotiale/Archive_A#azwiki. --- Jura 09:10, 8 January 2019 (UTC)


Solenostoma paroicum (Q60617107): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Allready exists; see Q15348443 --Llywelyn2000 (talk) 18:21, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:30, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
@Llywelyn2000: For me it isn't clear that Solenostoma paroicum (Q60617107) and Jungermannia paroica (Q15348443) are identical. Can you elaborate? --Pasleim (talk) 09:12, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
As I understand, Solenostoma paroicum/shining flapwort is synonymic to Jungermannia paroica. --Wolverène (talk) 08:37, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Added the statement "Said to be the same as": [3], [4]. What do you think? --Wolverène (talk) 08:34, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Achim Raschka (talk)
Brya (talk)
Dan Koehl (talk)
Daniel Mietchen (talk)
FelixReimann (talk)
Infovarius (talk)
Jean-Marc Vanel
Joel Sachs
Josve05a (talk)
Klortho (talk)
Lymantria (talk)
Mellis (talk)
Michael Goodyear
Mr. Fulano (talk)
Nis Jørgensen
Peter Coxhead
Andy Mabbett (talk)
Prot D
Rod Page
Strobilomyces (talk)
Tommy Kronkvist (talk)
Tris T7 TT me
Andrawaag (talk)
Christian Ferrer (talk)
  Notified participants of WikiProject Taxonomy: can you provide some expertise, please …? Thanks, MisterSynergy (talk) 12:00, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

These are two different names, that is, two different formal entities. If there was more information a "taxon synonym" / "is a synonym of ..." statement could be added, but this information is not present. We really do need a "this name is homotypic with" property. - Brya (talk) 18:22, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
I am not an expert in Bryophytes, but the two taxa do have the same basionym: Nardia paroica Schiffn. Lotos 58: 320. 1910. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk) 22:29, 27 January 2019 (UTC), 22:29, 27 January 2019 (UTC).
Yes, that is what I said: they are homotypic. - Brya (talk) 12:25, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Yes. Also – for what it's worth – ITIS lists Solenostoma paroicum (Schiffn.) Schust. as a synonym of Jungermannia fossombronioides Aust. (Q17290457), but doesn't list Jungermannia paroica at all. Then again I guess ITIS is fairly often not very well updated these days. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC).
Yes. And Tropicos says that Jungermannia fossombronioides is treated as a synonym of Solenostoma fossombronioides by Stotler, R. E. & B. J. Crandall-Stotler. 2017. A synopsis of the liverwort flora of North America north of Mexico. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 102(4): 574–709. A synopsis of the liverwort flora of North America north of Mexico. Information on bryophytes is fairly scarce. - Brya (talk) 17:51, 28 January 2019 (UTC)


Área de Proteção Contígua--Rio Vermelho (Q57823196): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs | discussion)

Português: cultural district (Q3710552) inventado por Prburley (talkcontribslogs). Quando foi questionado em Talk:Q57823196#Fonte, não apresentou fontes para confirmar a existência disso retratado no item. As fontes apresentadas tratam de outro assunto (uma antiga fábrica localizada em outra região de Salvador).

--Luan (talk) 01:15, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 01:20, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
The reference is under the instance (P31) statement, page 14 of PDF, published by the Secretaria Municipal de Desenvolvimento Urbano, Habitação e Meio Ambiente (Sedham) of Salvador in 2007. If a government document is insufficient to support an item, please delete it. Prburley (talk)
  • @Luan: is a mixup or not? --- Jura 07:13, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
    @Jura1: Ainda mantenho minha proposição de eliminação. Em resumo, mesmo alterando a denominação para algo que está previsto em lei, ainda é somente algo previsto em lei, sem a efetivação de uma regulamentação que delimitaria de forma mais precisa o território (o que está e o que não está situado nele). Explicando mais detalhadamente, na página 14 do PDF encontra-se a inciso XIII, art. 230, da Lei n.° 7.400/2008 (PDDU) de 27 de fevereiro de 2007 (que dispõe sobre o General plan (Q837215) de Salvador (Q36947)). Lá trata da "APCP do Rio Vermelho", ou seja, da Área de Proteção Cultural e Paisagística (APCP) do Rio Vermelho. Não há nada sobre "Área de Proteção Contígua--Rio Vermelho" ou "APC--Rio Vermelho". Vale dizer que a Lei n.° 7.400/2008 foi revogada pela Lei n.º 9.069/2016 (vide art.411), encerrando uma série de contestações judiciais, mas os termos sobre a APCP do Rio Vermelho foram mantidos/copiados (vide art. 269, inciso XIII). Além disso, não existe ainda regulamentação da APCP do Rio Vermelho pelo poder legislativo municipal. A regulamentação em legislação específica é importante para identificar, dentre outras coisas, a delimitação em escalas adequadas para cada APCP e é requerida pela Lei n.º 9.069/2016 para a devida institucionalização como APCP. Por exemplo, existe regulamentação para a "APCP da Ladeira da Barra/Santo Antônio da Barra" e outras 8 APCP (vide Lei n.º 8165/2012). --Luan (talk) 23:23, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
    @Luan: & @Jura1:Uma mensagem do: Instituto do Patrimônio Artístico e Cultural da Bahia, Secretaria de Cultura do Estado da Bahia (IPAC), 11/2/2019 (hoje.) "[...] no bairro do Rio Vermelho tem uma poligonal de tombamento. Vale ressaltar que no entorno da poligonal alguns imóveis são tombados individualmente. [...] O nome é o Poligonal do Rio Vermelho."Prburley (talk)
    Should the item "Área de Proteção Contígua--Rio Vermelho" be "Poligonal do Rio Vermelho"? Thanks, Paul Prburley (talk)
    Onde isso foi dito? Nessa imagem no Facebook? Independentemente de onde foi dito, vale salientar que toda a legislação anteriormente citada e a Sedham são da esfera municipal (municipal prefecture of Salvador (Q53930901)). Já o Instituto do Património Artístico e Cultural da Bahia (Q10302963) pertence à esfera estadual (Q61641530). Logo, não tem nada a ver uma coisa com a outra, pois as esferas de governo são autônomas em suas classificações de patrimônio. Em listagem de 2017, também não há nada na esfera federal (National Historic and Artistic Heritage Institute (Q391537)) como "Conjunto Urbano" ou na coluna de dados do tombamento "paisagístico" relativo ao Rio Vermelho. Essa tal poligonal também não consta na lista do IPAC para bens em Salvador. Só uma frase postada em Facebook não prova nada, na ausência de uma lei, de uma delimitação, de um processo de tombamento. Esse item deve ser eliminado. --Luan (talk) 00:29, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
    Onde isso foi dito? Na minha correspondência com o Instituto do Património Artístico e Cultural da Bahia (Q10302963), um órgão governamental do Estado da Bahia. Leia a mensagem acima. Prburley (talk)
    @Prburley: eu li. Você disse quem, não disse a fonte da informação. Independentemente, você começou dizendo que era um tombamento municipal (apontou legislação municipal). Provei que não existia. Agora tenta dizer que há um tombamento estadual (apontou uma aparente fala do IPAC). Provei também que não existe o tombamento nessa esfera. Me adiantei e mostrei também que não há tombamento federal. Não há mais porque manter esse item. @Jura1: can you delete this item? --Luan (talk) 01:07, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
    @Jura1: As a librarian I believe government documents and communication with the relevant government entities point to establishing some entity--and working towards its proper name, not a deletion. This is well covered in Wikidata: Notability. Prburley (talk)
    @Luan: Please review the guidelines at: Presumir a boa-fé. Language like "inventado" assumes that an editor randomly "invents" things rather than editing in good faith using given sources. Thanks! Prburley (talk)
    @Prburley: você pula de uma esfera governamental para outra tentando provar sem sucesso que o item que criou tem base na realidade para além do teu solitário entendimento. As esferas são autônomas, uma não pode intervir no que for estabelecido pela outra. Logo, o IPAC não normatiza sobre Sedham ou sobre o PDDU, pois estes são municipais, e vice-versa. "Área de Proteção Contígua--Rio Vermelho" não existe, em nenhuma esfera de governo. "Área de Proteção Cultural e Paisagística (APCP) do Rio Vermelho" foi prevista em lei de Salvador, mas nunca foi criada, delimitada. Sem isso, não é possível identificar o que está dentro dela ou não; não é possível identificar qual imóvel é abrigado nessa área territorial; não é possível determinar o tamanho dessa área; não há data, características ou condições de proteção. "Poligonal do Rio Vermelho" não teve a fonte/referência que confirme sua existência, a não ser a imagem publicada no Facebook que apontei. Mas novamente, não há informações sobre essa possível área, tamanho características, imóveis incluídos, etc. O fato de ser bibliotecário não parece te ajudar no processo de busca por fontes que confirmem a existência detalhada do item que quer tanto manter. A boa-fé não permanece diante de uma situação como essa, lembrando que isso começou na página de discussão do item na qual você me ignorou e apontou fontes sem relação com o item, ao que se soma as mensagens alternantes aqui entre as esferas de governo no Brasil, mostrando desconhecimento e insistência infundada. Esse item poderia muito bem figurar em Wikipedia:Silly Things (Q4995845) ou Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia (Q14629005). --Luan (talk) 16:06, 15 February 2019 (UTC)


Cebus sp. (Q40985505): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Ambiguous, not a valid taxon, and unlinked. Tommy Kronkvist (talk) 08:23, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@Tommy Kronkvist: it has a valid identifier, thus I tend to keep it. If some of the statements are not correct, please use deprecated rank to remove this item from query results. Is that possible? --MisterSynergy (talk) 06:44, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: Perhaps, but I don't think so. As far as I understand it, the NCBI Taxonomy identifier regards a species of virus named Cebine betaherpesvirus 1 (Q24808723). It has been found in two host species: humans, and in an unspecified specimen belonging to the Gracile capuchin monkey genus Cebus (Q8447051). The Virus-Host DB page can be found here: I'm only guessing here, but it seems the scientists studying this particular strain of virus didn't bother to identify which of the fifteen or so species of the Cebus genus that particular monkey belonged to. The reason for this is of course that they were not really studying the monkey at all, but the virus using it as host.
Normally within the field of taxonomy the term "species" or the abbreviation "sp." is only used when failing to pinpoint a particular species within a recognized genus. More or less, "sp." is only a placeholder for a taxon name until the specimen has been properly identified as being a member of a valid species, or described as a new species. In this case however, no one ever tried to do this. In fact, instead of (sort of...) specifying the object as "Cebus sp." they might just as well simply have called it "monkey". In this particular case "Cebus sp." doesn't really relate to any specific taxon at all – hence, it can never be a "deprecated" taxon either.
Lastly, perhaps @Pigsonthewing have an opinion about all this? He's familiar with most things about taxonomy, and on top of that also knows more about the Wikidata tech details than me. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:12, 18 April 2019 (UTC).
Thanks for asking. I have no definitve answer. On the one hand, MisterSynergy is correct in regard the identifier making it notable. On the other, if it is valid, why not the same for every other (non-monotypic) genus? Perhaps we should keep it, but with a different value for P31? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:02, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, "keep it, but with a different value for P31" is what I had in mind; I am just not qualified to select another value item :-)
The item was created by User:Magnus Manske, apparently as an import from Taxonomy database of the U.S. National Center for Biotechnology Information (Q13711410). If we kept the item, we would avoid that someone would re-create a new item for that database entry in the future. —MisterSynergy (talk) 07:33, 19 April 2019 (UTC)


clarification (Q55687191): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Referent unclear Swpb (talk) 15:58, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

  • See the Polish description. Delete because it's unused and because Wikidata is not a terminology dictionary. --Wolverène (talk) 16:03, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
    • Avaiable in Ross Brawn and Adam Parr Total Competition: Lessons in strategy from Formula One. Simply saying it's process in Formula One. Should be keeped same as Q10747721. Eurohunter (talk) 16:47, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
      • With lack of references in statements it's still not notable. --Wolverène (talk) 21:53, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
      • @Eurohunter: can we merge into homologation (Q10747721), so that "klaryfikacja" remains as alias for that item? The term might occur in the source you provide, but it seems rarely used otherwise, right? --MisterSynergy (talk) 06:52, 18 April 2019 (UTC)


Q61446814: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

It seems to be this series has no seasons:ů_seriálu_Děrevnja_durakov Queryzo (talk) 06:12, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 06:20, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Derevnya durakov (The Fool's Village) was a part of sketch TV show en:Calambur. Calambur had 6 seasons. I'm not sure if Derevnya durakov divided by seasons itself. Anyway, it's not our problem for now, request the deletion of the Czech article in their project first. --Wolverène (talk) 08:58, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

... so you did it wrong. --Wolverène (talk) 09:05, 19 February 2019 (UTC)


Berlin Jungfernheide station (Q22284875): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Incomplete and erroneous duplicate of Q567079 --Iulle (talk) 20:24, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 4 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:30, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
It look like Berlin Jungfernheide station (Q567079) is about all the station including Fernbahnhof and S-bahn rail. and Berlin Jungfernheide station (Q22284875) is only about s-bahn. but I don't know if it is right or not. - yona b (talk) 11:03, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
That's correct. That's why Q22284875 has a Property:P361 pointing to Q567079. One cannot merge these items without removing that property first. - cycŋ - (talkcontribslogs) 06:14, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
I started to clean up the three items. But it is a bit difficult Berlin Jungfernheide station (Q567079) Berlin Jungfernheide station (Q22284875) Jungfernheide metro station (Q19951075) --GPSLeo (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

There have been some changes in the items recently. @Srittau, MB-one, GodeNehler, GPSLeo: can you please have a look, particularly at the item histories [5][6][7]? I have no idea how we usually model railway stations. —MisterSynergy (talk) 07:52, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

The content of Berlin Jungfernheide station (Q22284875) should definitely not get removed until the deletion request is decided. But we have to decide if a station with a part for the S-Bahn (Q95723) and a part for the regular railway should have two separate items or not. --GPSLeo (talk) 08:09, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
I would propose to stay only with item Berlin Jungfernheide station (Q567079) and to remove item Berlin Jungfernheide station (Q22284875) as the Berlin S-Bahn (Q99654) of Berlin has only combined items with S-Bahn and Train. There are only separate item for Berlin U-Bahn (Q68646), see also item Berlin Alexanderplatz station (Q698497), Berlin-Friedrichstraße railway station (Q702402) or Berlin Hauptbahnhof (Q1097). --GodeNehler (talk) 08:51, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't know if this is the case here, but S-Bahn stations are quite often treated as separate stations from the main line stations, they share the name with, if they don't share any track infrastructure (which is the case here). So, I guess, we should keep separate items for all three stations (main line (Q3238851), S-Bahn (Q95723) and rapid transit (Q5503)). --MB-one (talk) 09:41, 19 April 2019 (UTC)


according to some sources (Q59783740): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

No sitelinks, little data, vague statement.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  21:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

I guess it is supposed to be a qualifyer and is used as such.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:06, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
  On hold This item is linked from 3 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 21:10, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Mr. Guye, this value is for Property:P1480, the English label has already been set.--Arbnos (talk) 16:35, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
@Arbnos: sourcing circumstances (P1480) is where I discovered this item. Just to clarify, Q59783740 didn't have an English label until Arbnos added one. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  02:06, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


Aptychi (Q55110029): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

A cephalopod subclass called “Aptychi” does not exist, BioLib entry 133763 is wrong. “Aptychi” is simply the (latin) plural of aptychus, which refers to particular fossil body parts (i.e. the assumed lower jaws) of Ammonites. Aptychi itself is not even considered a parataxon but the aptychi are subdivided into several paragenera (which is rendered correctly by BioLib). Since there is already a Wikidata item on “Aptychi” (i.e. Q352138), item Q55110029 may be deleted. --Gretarsson (talk) 22:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

What exactly is wrong? The item isn’t linked with anything (anymore), and no one has any objections. The deletion request is running for more than two months. Can this item please be deleted? --Gretarsson (talk) 20:54, 12 May 2019 (UTC)


Tsar of All Russia (Q60497063): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

No such title Infovarius (talk) 21:33, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 21:40, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
  Comment @Infovarius: what about en:Tsar of Russia? @Ghuron: who used it on several items (maybe incorrectly, to be checked). And pinging the creator @Милан_Јелисавчић:. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 22:52, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
During the Tsardom, there was no Russia in the modern sense. First there was Grand Duchy of Moscow, then Tsardom of Moscow (although in the enwp it's calling "Tsardom of Russia"), then Russian Empire, and so on.
The true name of the title was "Царь всея Руси" (Tsar of All the Russias/Tsar Of All Rus'), or "Государь всея Руси" (Ruler of All the Russias/Of All Rus'). --Wolverène (talk) 23:53, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Reverted my edits. @Infovarius: who was Peter The Great before becoming emperor? --Ghuron (talk) 11:03, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Царём он был (Tsar of All Rus'). Infovarius (talk) 14:42, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Q62017979. --Wolverène (talk) 20:47, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


Complementarity and ontology : Niels Bohr and the problem of scientific realism in quantum physics (Q62097109): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Self promotion? same as at Don A. Howard (Q62096486) Jasc PL (talk) 01:27, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Tend to   Keep as theses from other repositories have been imported into Wikidata. I wonder if anyone will do PhilPapers next. Mahir256 (talk) 06:28, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
OK, it's not a malicious edition but first trying of new user having good will and needing some help to improve it. --Jasc PL (talk) 13:57, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


Deconinck (Q52225598): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Useless: This is nothing: no article (There are several Belgian people with that family name; they have their own articles) and no disambiguation (that's already Q28019428) Erik Wannee (talk) 18:06, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Keep. This is the person whose archives are described at [8]. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:31, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


Q55363092: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Duplikat Gabriel Kielland (talk) 11:59, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 12:01, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
@Gabriel Kielland: What does it duplicate? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:33, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
No answer, so keep. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
I would say it is a duplicate of Q1542521, but correct me if I'm wrong. Q.Zanden questions? 16:07, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
keep not the same, the first one is a list of people holding a position, and the second one the position itself. Sitelinks could be relocated ...or not. See is a list of (P360) and has list (P2354). strakhov (talk) 21:57, 8 May 2019 (UTC)


Aladim (Q61450573): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

It was duplicate of Q61430543 Stegop (talk) 22:06, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 5 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 22:10, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
So why didn't you merge them, @Stegop:? - сyсn - (talkcontribslogs) 05:46, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
@Cycn: beacause I couldn't, don't ask me why, so I moved the only item it had. --Stegop (talk) 18:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I see; Q61430543 has a Property:P460 linking it to Q61450573, that blocks any merging. It also suggest the items are similar, but not the same: The spellings are different, so by default thesee Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) items should stay separate, like the other spellings. I've undone the manual merge for now, but I see your intent: the ptwiki doesn't have interwikis on it without this merger and the other pages don't have a link to the ptwiki dp. - сyсn - (talkcontribslogs) 08:12, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
The page it was duplicate of has been merged so I suggest it is done? Q.Zanden questions? 16:08, 3 May 2019 (UTC)


Chelation (Q19377787): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Merge with Chelation (Q319827) -- 11:22, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

  Keep doesn't seem to be the same thing, and even if it is the same thing, then merge and not delete. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 13:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)


Bertrand Latour (Q2899600): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs | discussion)

Per ticket:2019040410007121; “personal information which is incorrect (erroneous date and place of birth, false occupation, etc.) and violates my privacy and my "right to be forgotten"”. Please ping me when you are closing the request, so I can inform the subject. Bencemac (talk) 08:00, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

  •   Keep Clearly notable subject. Content issues should be resolved without taking the "nuclear" step of deletion. As for "false occupation", we use writer (Q36180), which is what both reliable sources and his own website: [9] say. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:23, 13 April 2019 (UTC)


Alexia Gaudeul (Q61043828): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Per ticket:2019032610005012; “as the process of revision of this article has generated harmful statements about my alleged previous gender, without referring to reliable sources and without my agreement”. Please ping me when you are closing the request, so I can inform the subject. Bencemac (talk) 08:13, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

  •   Keep Clearly notable subject (and one who self-publishes [10], [11] much of what we say about them). Content issues should be resolved without taking the "nuclear" step of deletion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:22, 13 April 2019 (UTC)


Sem Título (Q56878736): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

No reference. Google does not help find any information about. --Hermógenes Teixeira Pinto Filho (talk) 18:40, 15 April 2019 (UTC) --Hermógenes Teixeira Pinto Filho (talk) 18:40, 15 April 2019 (UTC)


Q63188658: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty DiMon2711 07:49, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

There is a couple more of these letters. Notability seems not to be there? Lymantria (talk) 10:02, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 09:30, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
Maybe with a reference it could be relevant? Q.Zanden questions? 13:59, 5 May 2019 (UTC)


Q23009452: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Purpose unclear Swpb (talk) 13:28, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 13:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Probably same with Q28942359. --Wolverène (talk) 16:32, 18 April 2019 (UTC)


Sacramento, California (Q22939943): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not really identifiable, not in the MoMA online catalogue, probably only was shown in an exhibition? But we will never find out more about this exactly, so better delete it.--Carl Ha (talk) 22:14, 18 April 2019 (UTC) --Carl Ha (talk) 22:14, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

There was an identifier; it probably exists but not online. There's a "Sacramento, California" from 1951 in the list at (page 6); has an image, which is also at but not identified. Peter James (talk) 22:44, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


Ernesto Fernández (Q28552958): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Unusable and unidentifiable, non relevant Triplecaña (talk) 15:57, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 16:00, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Shimamura Q7496821Edit

Shimamura (Q7496821): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Is it possible to merge the english article on the one side and the german, french, japanese article one the other side in the "In other languages" linkbox ? :-) --Philipp1977 (talk) 16:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 16:50, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
If you mean English Wikipedia, it only has a surname article, not a disambiguation page. Peter James (talk) 22:05, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  Not done - Taketa (talk) 01:58, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


Q11773980: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Non-sensical item, formerly included a sitelink to a redirect Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 13:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
It's an instance of microregion (Q11781066); the site link was for an article redirected to Q12037085, which is a list of microregions in Zlín Region (Q192536). The notability guidelines for Wikidata and the various Wikipedias are not all identical, so it could still be notable. Peter James (talk) 21:57, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


Q63295873: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

A non-notable slang/neologism for something along the lines of 'the privileged', used in recent Japanese politics. No site links. I might (re-)classify it into a lexicographical item if I had to, but I doubt if it could be attestable by Wiktionary's standard anytime soon. It's slang-ish, and I fail to come up with a clear definition based on stable sources. --whym (talk) 08:26, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@四葉亭四迷: Any thought? --Okkn (talk) 09:40, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
sources [12][13][14][15]--四葉亭四迷 (talk) 10:18, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Do you want to make it a lexeme or entity? If entity, you would need to have at least one sitelink. (I don't think other conditions in WD:N will meet either.) If lexeme, it has to be attested and idiomatic. whym (talk) 11:52, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


Parisa Music Mixify (Q63347506): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Xwiki lta spam Praxidicae (talk) 11:41, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 11:50, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
The external identifiers are correct, there is an entry on IMDB, MusicBrainz, Viaf, etc. So the item seems to fit admissibility criteria. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 21:56, 27 April 2019 (UTC)


Q60700696: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

ShouldAttorney General of Mexico (Q1507504) --Jesuiseduardo (talk) 01:04, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 01:10, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
That doesn't seem to be the same: Attorney General of Mexico (Q1507504) relates to Procuraduría General de la República (Q50150345) like Q60700696 relates to Fiscal General de la República (Q60678925). - сyсn - (talkcontribslogs) 07:40, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


Q63413775: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Von Bot erstellter Eintrag auf eine BKL-Seite der Deutschen Wiki. Die einzelnen Member der BKL haben bereits Wikidaten Pechristener (talk) 16:59, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Jede Seite auf ein Wiki hat ein WDinput. Auch BKL-seiten haben ein eigene WD-input. Q.Zanden questions? 14:06, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Blank pagesEdit

The user Seav (talkcontribslogs) has emptied many pages.Please delete them.Thanks David (talk) 10:55, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

He cleared the talk pages of items. That is not needed to delete, afaik. Q.Zanden questions? 23:39, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't think deleting them is necessary. Sometimes pages can have meaningful history even if they are empty.--BRP ever 12:46, 20 May 2019 (UTC)


Lukáš Zábranský (Q62272277): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Cs page deleted per WP:NOTA — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:50, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

  •   Keep He might be irrelevant for the Czech Wikipedia but the item with such Identifiers as VIAF, GND, ISNI etc. are OK to be still kept here. --Wolverène (talk) 14:12, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Keep clearly notable enough for Wikidata. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 06:59, 3 May 2019 (UTC)


Trigger point (Q741032): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

It should be merged with Myofascial trigger point (Q1956673) as they refer to the same concept. --Nasch92 (talk) 11:31, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

They both have a zh.wp link, can someone native check if that is true they are the same? Q.Zanden questions? 23:37, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 14:50, 14 May 2019 (UTC)


Johannes (Q18812054): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This person does not exist, see it:Wikipedia:Pagine da cancellare/Johannes (arcivescovo). --Kolja21 (talk) 17:40, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

@Kolja21: The GND ID corresponds with John of Ford (Q6265751), so I removed that statement. However, the contained ISNI seems to be a close duplicate of the one already included in John of Ford (Q6265751). Any ideas? Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 20:58, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Most important is to delete the non existing person (Q18812054). This helps ISNI and VIAF. ISNI and VIAF are harvesting all kind of sources. They have many duplicates and mixed personalities. We can wait if they process the correction in Wikidata or send them a mail through their website ("click in this box to go to the contribution form"). --Kolja21 (talk) 01:32, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
I restored the version with the ID marked as "deprecated rank". --Kolja21 (talk) 01:37, 15 May 2019 (UTC)


Boston College Law Library Daniel R. Coquillette Rare Book Room (Q47490454): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

An item for a room in a library. Notable? Q.Zanden questions? 02:52, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

  Keep not 100% sure for this room, the item should be improved (I did some basics) but it seems notable enough for me. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 10:19, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Reuben (Q18325890): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Describes same topic as Ruben (Q18114894) --WikiHannibal (talk) 16:05, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 16:10, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  Keep @WikiHannibal: it is two different given names and there should be two different items. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 19:48, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
@VIGNERON: Not sure if this works like a discussion but the English article for Q18325890 is about Ruben as well as Reuben, and mentions variants in other languages. The same is true for Q18114894 where the Italian article, for example, mentions among others the English variant Reuben. The articles describe the same topic using different names for the article. WikiHannibal (talk) 22:03, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
@WikiHannibal: yes, we can discuss and yes the situation is a bit strange but contrary to Wikipedias, Wikidata can't mix two concepts even if they are very close, otherwise it would be very hard to correctly store the data. See Wikidata:WikiProject Names#Basic principles: « each string should have a distinct item: the most important property is therefore native label (P1705). Wassyl is not Василь is not Васіль is not Vasyl ». Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 06:21, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
@VIGNERON: I think I understand the underlying idea, but are we talking about concepts then (as you say above), or "spellings" of the "same" concept in different languages? Perhaps the issue lies elsewhere. My goal, from the point of wikipedia, is to link the contents of the article in "all" languages. How can I do that? If Reuben is not Ruben, then the English article RUBEN should link to Ruben (Q18114894) (and, for example, all Rubens from English Reuben moved there - that would me up to wikipedia editors to decide). But it seems I cannot link the English article RUBEN to Ruben (Q18114894). Thanks for your help. WikiHannibal (talk) 07:24, 6 May 2019 (UTC)


Terenas Menethil II (Q820051): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty Syrio posso aiutare? 18:13, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:20, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Keep, not empty and no reason to delete. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 19:36, 5 May 2019 (UTC)


Roger Fenwick (Q3438954): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

I've not been able to identify this fictional character Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 19:06, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

@Valentina.Anitnelav: I found it and added some information (based on the deleted fr.wp article), it seems notable enough for me. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 19:42, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. In this case I would withdraw my request for deletion. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 19:46, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 19:50, 5 May 2019 (UTC)


eater (Q20984678): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

@Thierry Caro, Sjoerddebruin: I don't think that "eater" is really an occupation, or that pointing to this item with subclass of (P279) or occupation (P106) is the proper way to model that something eats something else. I don't think this item serves any real purpose. Yair rand (talk) 03:28, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 03:30, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
  Keep. It's OK. Thierry Caro (talk) 04:48, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
  Comment @Yair rand: if this is not the proper way, how would you suggest to do it? In particular, I'm thinking about competitive eaters like Molly Schuyler (Q6896676) who do have for principal - and sometimes professional - occupation to be an eater. Until then I would lean towards   Keep. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
@VIGNERON: One's occupation can be participating in eating competitions, but one's occupation can't be "being an entity that eats". (I see that User:Thierry Caro has created competitive eater (Q63554580) for the actual occupation, which is more accurate.) man-eater (Q1365331) and Cookie Monster (Q1754267) are not modeled in a way that makes sense, though. We have main food source (P1034), though I'm not sure that would work here. --Yair rand (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2019 (UTC)


Q21933717: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not an Australian National Park, and nothing in the area of the geographic coordinates is called "National Park". The coordinates point to the middle of a large Australian regional town! This is an item created from an article created on ceb wiki that imported the error from the GeoNames database. The ceb wiki page also needs deleting but I don't speak "ceb" so have no idea how to propose deletion of the article. --Dhx1 (talk) 10:33, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

  • The Cebuano article proposed for deletion, I support the elimination of both. --Wolverène (talk) 10:46, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
  On hold awaiting deletion of the article. - сyсn - (talkcontribslogs) 06:26, 8 May 2019 (UTC)


Michael Moates (Q63245258): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet notability requirements, self promo --2600:6C56:6F08:1CF:0:464:3322:362B 03:00, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Keep Prominent journalist and politician. The Wrap Mother Jones DC Chronicle Heavy Daily Beast RyanForTrump (talk) 04:00, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment RyanForTrump is one of the user who was previously banned for vandalizing this page. Datamaster1 (talk) 03:29, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Keep Clearly notable, with significant media coverage. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:11, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Can anyone give me an explanation about why this item are protected? Trade (talk) 22:21, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Trade I believe I can. On 24 Feb, the property Q54849732 was deleted by Ymblanter for failing to meet the notability policy and someone recreated it on 21 April. On 10 May,, engaged in editing contrary to Wikidata:Living people and it was quickly reverted. On 11 May, engaged in reverting back to the page the vandalism and on 12 May the same thing happened under The 4 editors included the 3 IP's that reverted the vandalism and the individual edit warring with them. From what I can tell the individual who was reverting back to the unvandalized page left multiple notices of policy and warnings of vandal on those talk pages. Also, the account RyanForTrump was created to engage once the page was protected and that account is also engaged in photos on WikiCommons of the same individual. The first user who was reverting based on policy did so under the understanding that characterizations and labels shouldn't be on this property unless they can be verified by a reputable news outlet. Right now they have a website with a temporary domain and also multiple labels without references. A note was left on the admin board to deal with this problem and the admin protected the page and blocked all users that were involved in the edit war. Now the problem is there are many characterizations and labels on the page that are not based in fact and also do not have news sources to support them. Andy Mabbett said on the admin board "Someone needs to remove the "parody" Twitter account; the uncited far-right (Q204481) ideology; and the falsely-cited charge (P1595) values, from this item, ASAP." In reference to the stuff on the page that is not sourced or is using bad sourcing. Also, left a note on Jasper Deng 's talk page asking for clarity. Datamaster1 (talk) 03:19, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
  • *   Keep Clearly notable. Also I feel a lot better knowing that the defamatory statements were removed. Datamaster1 (talk) 09:16, 13 May 2019 (UTC)


Cho'gall (Q819369): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty Syrio posso aiutare? 16:05, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 16:10, 12 May 2019 (UTC)


Maiev Shadowsong (Q819748): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty Syrio posso aiutare? 21:26, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 21:30, 12 May 2019 (UTC)


Isidoro (Q1673952): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Refers to the same name as Q16868223. It is the Spanish translation of Isidore. --Jfbu (talk) 06:50, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 6 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 07:00, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
  Oppose different versions of names should not be merged but linked to eachother. - сyсn - (talkcontribslogs) 11:01, 15 May 2019 (UTC)


Metro Journal (Q28739429): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Per en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metro Journal, Metro Journal was considered non-notable. I nominated both the logo and the photo in Commons for deletion as out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 08:49, 13 May 2019 (UTC)


Pascale Canova (Q57904781): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Demande de la personne objet de la notice Alain Schneider (talk) 08:08, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 3 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:10, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Keep "Request of the person who is the subject of the notice" is not a valid reason for deletion; and is in any case stated without evidence. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)


Yevheniy (Q42728464): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Есть такой же элемент (talk) 09:19, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 5 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 09:20, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello Den1980-, I don't understand what is the problem. You say it is a duplicate ? frow what element ? :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 11:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Yevgeny (Q1688617): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)--Den1980- (talk) 14:26, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Q42728464 is for Ukrainians calling as Yevheniy, Q1688617 is for Russians with name Yevgeny. Two different names for Wikidata. However, the Ukrainian form of the male given name "Eugene" is most probably sounds as Yevhen, but it's out of our responsibility. --Wolverène (talk) 22:20, 21 May 2019 (UTC)


2018 protests (Q47011044): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty; duplicate Kaganer (talk) 19:56, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)


2017 protests (Q34455367): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty; duplicate Kaganer (talk) 19:56, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Category:2017 protests (Q28374331) is a category item, 2017 protests (Q34455367) isn't, so not a duplicate, They're also linking to eachother. - сyсn - (talkcontribslogs) 14:28, 16 May 2019 (UTC)


Q1365619: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Appears to be the same thing as Q160381, but has conflicting items SpanishSnake (talk) 20:30, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:40, 15 May 2019 (UTC)


Kluke (Q3815882): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Fictional character that lacks notability. The article on has been replaced with a redirect.--Sakretsu (talk) 19:22, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 11:20, 18 May 2019 (UTC)


Manual of the families and genera of North American Diptera (Q51501819): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Duplicated entry with Q51501813 --Givet (talk) 06:07, 19 May 2019 (UTC)


Book of Judith (Q202129): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

The Spanish article Judit is not linked with the English name Judith. --Tokota (talk) 17:32, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 17:40, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello @Tokota: can you please clarify the reason. I don't think this item needs to be deleted. Thanks.--BRP ever 03:10, 20 May 2019 (UTC)


Activist (Q42889568): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable. Character from a television film, no article on any Wikipedia. Pichpich (talk) 20:37, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Keep: Notability in Wikidata is not equals than in Wikipedia. Escudero (talk) 06:59, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Keep, per WD:N#3. --Yair rand (talk) 01:52, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Cleopatra (disambiguation)Edit

Q60374066: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

It should be merged into Q20799297 but automatic merge fails. Maybe the same with: Q60371864(French) Q60372192(Greek) Q60372373(Cyrillic) Q60372801(Persian) Q60372959(Hebrew) Q60373103(Belarusian) Q60373294(Armenian) Q60373492(Japanese) Q60373639(Georgian) Q60373849(Chinese) --Puzzlet Chung (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

They can't be merged now because they're interlinked with Property:P460. - сyсn - (talkcontribslogs) 07:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)


My Tomorrow, Your Yesterday (Q52712911): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

I already merged this to Q24871937 except the Chinese Wikipedia page about the novel not about the film(Q24871937 is focused about film not about novel). --Meauk (talk) 03:51, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

So, they're not the same, why should Q52712911 be deleted or even merged (for which you don't need this Requests for deletions page), then, @Meauk:? - сyсn - (talkcontribslogs) 07:00, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Okay, what i did was wrong...but i dont know what to do and how to do anything on WikiData. I'm sorry --Meauk (talk) 09:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
So we can cancel the request? - сyсn - (talkcontribslogs) 05:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes.--Meauk (talk) 08:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


Foundation for Sustainable Development (Q5474485): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet the notability requirement. The enwiki page it used to link to has been deleted. It could refer to two organizations, but neither is particular notable: Foundation for Sustainable Development ( or Foundation for Sustainable Development of Spain ( The item mixes data about about both organizations (ISNI and the Library of Congress authority ID are for the spanish foundation, country is America though). --Bennofs (talk) 11:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)


Q31274785: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

There exists Q19597898 Estopedist1 (talk) 18:16, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 18:20, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Technically two different names, Q31274785 is a variant for the people who living in Estonia or Finland with the official Latin script, Q19597898 is for citizens of countries with the Cyrillic script as official. I'm not sure there's need on merging even if the names in fact direct equivalents of each other. --Wolverène (talk) 22:07, 21 May 2019 (UTC)


Q54234407: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

It has been been removed from Dadá Maravilha (Q517914) some days ago ad it was the only place it was used as far as I can see from a dump of surnames I have on my disk. Labels have been removed, it is not used anymore. Can't see any reason to keep it. Symac (talk) 03:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC) --Symac (talk) 03:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)


related product (Q41306131): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Unused and lacking definition or motivation --Ghouston (talk) 07:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 07:40, 22 May 2019 (UTC)


Q2548774: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Merge failed with d:Q17596370, so i did manually. Reason commons category. --Ldhank (talk) 10:10, 22 May 2019 (UTC)


Q11157524: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Blank entry --DavidMar86hdf (talk) 12:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

  Not done - It has an article link. That article seems very odd, so I have nominated it for speedy deletion. However until such time as it is deleted, we cannot delete the wikidata item. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 01:34, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


Manual for female detectives (Q63959595): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This item is related to nothing and should be deleted. --Pierre cb (talk) 03:32, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


Anti-Liberalism (Q48839653): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Missing information. Bingobingolotto (talk) 09:07, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep: itwp article + GND ID. --Wolverène (talk) 13:01, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


Q48934334: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty object. Bingobingolotto (talk) 09:07, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 09:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Duplicate of Q208701 ??? --Wolverène (talk) 10:11, 24 May 2019 (UTC)


COX3 (Q18974314): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Obsolete Magnus Manske (talk) 10:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 10:50, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


Pf_M76611 (Q61873305): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Obsolete, unused Magnus Manske (talk) 10:51, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 11:00, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


much (Q23008398): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs | discussion)

No real use Swpb (talk) 14:30, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 14:40, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


food (Q1422299): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

It is redundant as "food" already exists here: Q2095 --Steinerc1 (talk) 10:37, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 10:40, 24 May 2019 (UTC)


Q63981678: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Please delete this item. Do not redirect. ℇsquilo 11:30, 24 May 2019 (UTC)


Fariborz (Q1396652): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Wikipedia disambiguation page (or may be merged with Q64010247) --Aaghi (talk) 22:02, 24 May 2019 (UTC)


Geek Toys (Q64019332): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This page is duplicated: Q64019369. --2001:D08:1281:78A5:7D97:F4A3:27C0:CF71 12:38, 25 May 2019 (UTC)


Searchable (Q64011398): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Spam Jklamo (talk) 20:47, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:50, 25 May 2019 (UTC)


Rhys Davies (Q64011626): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Spam Jklamo (talk) 20:47, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

  On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 20:50, 25 May 2019 (UTC)


Q64020643: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Accidental creation. --Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 21:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)