Request VWF bot to slow down

@Vanderwaalforces: it looks like VWF bot is taking 1 minute or less to remove a page log from the main RfD page once the last open discussion is closed. This could put undue pressure on closers, and leads to errors such as the May 8 page. Tavix closed the last RfD of the May 8th page, and decided to revert the close 3 minutes later. But by then VWF bot had removed it from the main page, and we lost track of it, until Tavix added it back today. What is the benefit we get by the minute precision implemented by VWF bot? It adds a page log a day. For removing too, can it do that once a day, or at the most twice a day, instead of not allowing for human flexibility? Jay 💬 09:48, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

@Jay I have been informed of this already as you can see on my talk page, but thank you for bringing it to my attention (again), anyway. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:04, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I hadn't seen that. Have you thought of an interval? I see that the May 27 page entry was removed today within 6 minutes of its closing. Jay 11:31, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

I try finalising before the weekend ends (I hope so). Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:06, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

@Jay: Actually, I added it back today, but ... yeah ... Steel1943 (talk) 11:04, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Discussion about adjusting {{Redirect for discussion}} template after a relist

I recently opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Deletion process#Discussion for change to WP:RFD/AI regarding relisting discussions, specifically for how {{Redirect for discussion}} functions and how we may be getting to a point where the functionalities of the "month=" and "day=" parameters may need to be separated into to different sets of parameters (explanation in the discussion). Participants in RfD may be interested in participating in the discussion. Thanks. Steel1943 (talk) 12:21, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Script to help evaluate RfD nominations

User:Rusalkii/RfDInfo is a script I made which provides a button next to the redirect for most of the information I find useful when evaluating RfD noms, including a link to any significant history, backlinks, previous AfDs, number of monthly hits, and whether the redirect is mentioned in the target. It's not perfect, but I've finally ironed out enough bugs that I'm comfortable posting it here in case it is of interest to others. Rusalkii (talk) 21:58, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Watching RfD discussions

Is there a way to watchlist one specific discussion at RfD, rather than being alerted to every post on any discussion on that day's listing?

If I'm interested in a thread on a talk page, I can "subscribe" to it. If I'm interested in an AfD discussion, it's on its own page. But RfD discussions...

If there isn't currently a way to watchlist an individual discussion, where would be the best place to suggest/request this as an enhancement? (Wait for the next community wishlist exercise, if there ever is one now that the responding team has been disbanded?) Ideas? PamD 20:12, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion/Archive 17#Subscribable sections for a previous discussion on this topic. - Eureka Lott 20:45, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. It's disappointing that despite requests from working editors over the years this hasn't yet been made possible, but I've subscribed to phab:T275943 to see what progress, if any, is being made. I guess it hasn't got the crowd-appeal of rotating carousels of images on mobile view: just something which would make life easier for gnomish editors who care about redirects. Ah well. PamD 21:10, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

RfD nomination edit conflict bug(s)?

I believe there is an edit conflict bug when editing an RfD nomination by the [edit source] button next to each section heading where that edit's comments will either be added to a different section, create a duplicate of that comment and/or delete the previous edit. All of these edits happened within minutes of another edit(s). I've never had the edit conflict prompt personally come up though per the Alice example given at Help:Edit conflict.

• This edit by @Thryduulf is a !vote presumably for the section below.
• This edit by @BD2412 is a !vote presumably for the section two sections below.
• My edit editing my own nomination got rid of another nomination "Template:Cleanup-quality" and made a duplicate nomination for "Ordinary Wizarding Level". Fork99 (talk) 02:14, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
  • It's actually a notorious problem. The section is tied to a number rather than it's actual title, so if the page is open and you take a minute before clicking [edit], and in that minute someone adds a new section to the top, then your click has you editing the wrong numerical section. In my case, I didn't even notice due to the identical nomination statements in the different sections. BD2412 T 02:36, 25 August 2026 (UTC)