Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion
The criteria for speedy deletion (CSD) specify the only cases in which administrators have broad consensus to bypass deletion discussion, at their discretion, and immediately delete Wikipedia pages or media.
Deletion is reversible, but only by administrators, so other deletions occur only after discussion, unless they are proposed deletions. Speedy deletion is intended to reduce the time spent on deletion discussions for pages or media with no practical chance of surviving discussion.
Administrators should take care not to speedily delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases. If a page has survived its most recent deletion discussion, it should not be speedily deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations and pages that meet specific uncontroversial criteria; these criteria are noted below. Contributors sometimes create pages over several edits, so administrators should avoid deleting a page that appears incomplete too soon after its creation.
Anyone can request speedy deletion by adding one of the speedy deletion templates. Before nominating a page for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved, reduced to a stub, merged or redirected elsewhere, reverted to a better previous revision, or handled in some other way (see ). A page is eligible for speedy deletion only if all of its revisions are also eligible. Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criterion/criteria the page meets, and should notify the page creator and any major contributors. If a page needs to be removed from Wikipedia for privacy reasons (e.g. non-public personal information, a child disclosing the child's age, possible libel), request oversight instead.
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 deleted is preferable.
Immediately following each criterion below is a list of templates used to mark pages or media files 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 file 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 .
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.
Some pages either cannot or should not be tagged for speedy deletion in the normal manner:
When applicable, the following criteria may be used to delete pages that have survived their most recent deletion discussions:
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.
These apply to every type of page with exclusions listed for specific criteria, and so apply to articles, redirects, user pages, talk pages, files, etc. Read the specifics for each criterion to see where and how they apply.
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.
This applies to pages created to test editing or other Wikipedia functions. It applies to subpages of the Wikipedia Sandbox created as tests, but does not apply to the Sandbox itself. It does not apply to pages in the user namespace. It does not apply to valid but unused or duplicate templates (although criterion T3 may apply).
This applies to pages that are blatant and obvious misinformation, blatant hoaxes (including files 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.
This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion. 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.
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.
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. 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.
This criterion excludes any page that is useful to Wikipedia, and in particular:
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 , 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.
This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopaedia 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.
Any pages that have not been edited by a human in six months found in:
This applies to disambiguation pages which either (1) have titles ending in "(disambiguation)" but disambiguate only one extant Wikipedia page; or (2) regardless of title, disambiguate zero extant Wikipedia pages. If a disambiguation page links to only one article and does not end in (disambiguation), it should be changed to a redirect. G14 also applies to orphaned "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or 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.
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. 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.
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, or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions. 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.
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.
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.
This deletion rationale should only be used rarely. In the vast majority of duplicate articles, the title used is a plausible misspelling or alternative name for the main article, and a redirect should be created instead. This criterion should be used only if its title could be speedily deleted as a redirect.
This applies to any article that plainly indicates that the subject was , 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).
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.
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).
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, 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, or to redirects ending with "(disambiguation)" that point to a disambiguation page.R4. File namespace redirects with names that match Wikimedia Commons pages
This applies to redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons, provided the redirect on Wikipedia has no file links (unless the links are obviously intended for the file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons).
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.
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 file namespace was formerly known as the image namespace.
This applies to unused duplicates or lower-quality/resolution copies of another Wikipedia file having the same file format. This excludes images in the Wikimedia Commons; for these, see criterion F8.
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. Files licensed under versions of the GFDL earlier than 1.3, without allowing for later versions or other licenses, may be deleted.
This applies to media files lacking the necessary licensing information to verify copyright status after being identified as such for seven days. Administrators should check the upload summary, file information page, and the image itself for a source before deleting under this criterion.
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.
This applies to non-free files 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.
This criterion is meant for files that are neither image, sound, nor video files; are not used in any article; and have no foreseeable placement in an article. Note that the following files are rarely sound, image, or video: .doc, .pdf, .ps, .html, .rtf, .txt, .xls, and .zip files. Examples of image, sound, and video files are: .jpg, .gif, .png, .svg, .mpg, .ogg, and .wav. This is not a comprehensive list of files that can be deleted, nor is an extension alone enough reason to delete; this criterion is based on file content.
For any category pages that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.
Assorted sub-criteria that are used only at WP:CFDS; please see that page for details and instructions.
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.
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.
Galleries in the userspace that consist mostly or entirely of "fair use" or non-free images. Wikipedia's non-free content policy prohibits the use of non-free content in userspace, even content that the user has uploaded; use of content in the public domain or under a free license is acceptable.
Pages in userspace consisting of , where the owner has made few or no edits outside of user pages, with the exception of plausible drafts and pages adhering to . It applies regardless of the age of the page in question.
Before placing this template or deleting a page under this criterion, read and Wikipedia:User pages#Deletion of user pages.
Speedy deletion templates pertaining to templates should be placed inside
Templates that are substantial duplications of another template, or hardcoded instances of another template where the same functionality could be provided by that other template, may be deleted after being tagged for seven days.
Any portal that would fail any of the active criteria for speedy deletion of articles is valid under this criterion. When deleting or nominating a portal page under this criterion, remember to indicate which article CSD criterion applies to it.
Any portal based on a topic for which there is only a stub header article or fewer than three non-stub articles detailing subject matter that would be appropriate to present under the title of that portal.
On several occasions, temporary criteria starting with X have been used, to assist in large scale cleanups of problematic pages that would otherwise overwhelm the normal deletion processes.
Temporary criteria have been repealed when no longer needed, and all former X criteria are listed below under obsolete criteria.
The following proposals for new speedy deletion criteria are frequently raised, but have repeatedly failed to gain consensus:
A7 does not apply to any other subject that does not indicate importance. Expanding the scope of A7 to different subjects (such as products, software, books, schools, etc.) has been proposed several times in the past and failed to gain consensus. Amongst the reasons for those rejections were that such subjects are not created often enough to require speedy deletion (such articles can be handled by proposed deletion or by listing the article at articles for deletion), that such subjects cannot be objectively covered in A7's wording and that admins are not able to assess claims of importance for certain subjects. Before proposing a change to A7 to expand its scope, please check whether your proposal has not already been discussed on the talk page (archives).
The following are not by themselves sufficient to justify speedy deletion.
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.
These criteria were used in the past but are no longer valid criteria. They are kept here for historical reference and to preserve numbering. Five have been entirely repealed; of those, two did not have consensus before being enacted, and two were meant to be temporary. The remainder are merged into broader criteria.