Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2020/01/29

This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.

Deleted Wikimedia list articles

Sitelinks lead to deleted Wikimedia list articles. Shinnin (talk) 19:30, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Done by BRPever. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:27, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Q83886069

Gwyn Hervochon (Q83886069): librarian: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Duplicate --Eshook (talk) 23:14, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Done Redirect created by User:Kolja21, you can do it yourself next time. --DeltaBot (talk) 03:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Q83874092

Cafe Good Luck (Q83874092): building in India: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This item was created by me and is a duplicate of Q16256047 and is thus not needed --Dprzvhar (talk) 17:13, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Done Redirect created by User:Quakewoody, you can do it yourself next time. --DeltaBot (talk) 04:01, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Q83876101

Q83876101: book by Joseph Elzéar Morénas: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Doublon Ambre Troizat (talk) 17:42, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Done Redirect created by User:Quakewoody, you can do it yourself next time. --DeltaBot (talk) 04:01, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Q83186386

Q83186386: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Fake or spam (link to Instagram account "ITS SIHPER"). --Kolja21 (talk) 03:18, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Deleted by MisterSynergy (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 10:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Q5775074

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

Vandalism on talk page --Florentyna (talk) 08:30, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 5 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:40, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Done ‐‐1997kB (talk) 12:49, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Q29640788

Os Keyes (Q29640788): researcher: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

The item contains sensitive information that was unfortunately put in (by me, I believe). Either the history should be hidden or the item should be entirely deleted. I think the delete option would be best. It is better to be on the safe side concerning sensitive information. See also the discussion for Q57904781 where I made a similar argument. --Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 08:58, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

@Alain Schneider, Pigsonthewing, VIGNERON: You are the only ones discussing Q57904781. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 09:00, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Comment what the point of view of the person themself? Anyway, I'm more leaning toward Delete Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 10:06, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
- For information, I asked directly to them and they said "I would like it deleted." so definitely a Delete for me. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 16:02, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Keep. Any inappropriate additions should of course be revision-deleted (which requires admin tools), but the item is sourced to valid external identifiers, and so meets our notability requirements. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:01, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 09:10, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

I can do the appropriate revdels if someone can email me what revision numbers specifically to revdel and whether the summaries and the contributor names of those revisions should also be hidden. Mahir256 (talk) 04:10, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Keep - keep the item because it passes a structural need and etc. And unless WD has a policy (including BLP) regarding the name/gender changes, we should also keep [REDACTED] and male. If they are no longer valid, we depreciate them, not remove them. You can change the future, but you can't erase history, meaning its name at birth was [REDACTED]. That is a historical fact, it needs to be kept. And it didn't decide to be a "they" until recently, it was a male for quite some time, including a time which was prior to the invention of "they" as a term. You can't claim to be a "they" if "they" didn't exist. Quakewoody (talk) 10:34, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
@Fnielsen, Pigsonthewing, VIGNERON, MisterSynergy, Quakewoody: Two months later (sorry for the delay, Finn!), I've gone ahead and hidden all edits to the item (and, for good measure, an item which was merged into it) as well as edit summaries in both items which displayed sensitive information (those which to the best of my ability to judge did not display this were left alone). Mahir256 (talk) 08:33, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Mahir256: Maybe you could kindly make a similar redaction on this page? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:51, 13 December 2019 (UTC)