Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut
Purge page cache if page isn't updating.
< May 05 May 07 >

Purge server cache

Alexandru Sorin Biris[edit]

Alexandru Sorin Biris (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Given the multiple tags, probably worth a full discussion here. Biruitorul Talk 18:58, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Science, Technology, Romania, and Arkansas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I at least note an overwhelming amount of primary references written by the subject himself. Geschichte (talk) 20:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. There is a GoogleScholar profile for one Alexandru Biris, a student at Politehnica Timișoara, who almost 100% surely piggy-backs on Alexandru Sorin Biris's publication record (all top articles are by AS Biris, and involve nanotechnology and such). If we accept this hypothesis, then the citation record is quite impressive (almost 20K since 2007, with h-index 66 and i10-index 300), though perhaps not that unusual in this field? The most highly cited papers on the GS list have appeared in ACS Nano, which has an impact factor of 17.1. At any rate, one needs to weigh all this against the overbearing self-promotion in the article, and also those "plagiarism and massive data fabrication" issues mentioned there, plus the structural issues regarding the way the article is (very poorly) written and sourced. Turgidson (talk) 01:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, most of the papers in the GS profile appear to belong to the subject of the article here, or at least to someone of the same name at the same university. The highly-cited papers are mostly highly coauthored, but the subject is the last author on two of them (in a field where that matters). It might be weakly enough for WP:NPROF, even in what I believe to be a higher citation field. I am balancing that with WP:TNT. If kept, the article should be stubified. Kannarpady, the WP:BLP policy applies here, and the alleged research misconduct discussed in the article must either be removed or supported by coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 10:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ...and one of the highly-cited last author papers was retracted by the journal. [1][2] Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:33, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Some of these publications are joint with his father (or maybe GS groups them together in that profile?). Incidentally, this IEEE profile only mentions 30 publications and 203 citations — a rather large discrepancy with the GS profile. A social network analysis where both authors are mentioned can be found in this MS thesis. Turgidson (talk) 13:11, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a Romanian, you must be proud of Alexandru Biris. That is why you try all efforts to cover for him. If this is not the reason you nominated this article for deletion, please explain. Kannarpady (talk) 03:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please let's keep the discussion focused on the article and not the nominator; there's enough to unpack w/o looking at motives. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 19:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep -- the citation counts (in a high citation discipline) and one independent coverage of notability seem barely enough to keep the article. Yes, it has too many dependent sources and isn't our best article (though it is salvagable). The high citations of articles where he is last author (institution director) take away a tiny bit from his notability as a researcher but puts it exactly in notability as a director/leader in higher education research. I could, however, be persuaded to go to either a full keep or weak delete with more evidence. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 20:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This Kannarpady who created this article seems to work for this person: https://ualr.edu/nanotechnology/about-us/researchers-and-staff/dr-ganesh-kannarpady/
    Seems like personal beef. I would delete this article SleeplessSeatle (talk) 18:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete. I see some highly cited papers, even in a higher citation field, but middle author (in a field where that matters) on a highly coauthored paper doesn't convince me of so much. There are a couple of highly cited papers where Biris is last author, but one has been retracted for research misconduct. I did some work on trimming this down into shape (as did Turgidson), and it is no longer in WP:TNT territory, but the mess leaves me unconvinced of NPROF. There is definitely room for disagreement on this one, and I can also see policy-based arguments for keeping. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 18:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Kashmir (1814)[edit]

Battle of Kashmir (1814) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The page is littered with unreliable sources and relies heavily on WP:Raj sources to promote ethnic heroism and the events do not indicate a victory for the Afghans. This page requires deletion.

Keep: Three of the sources are WP:RAJ which can be removed as they are only passing by sources attributed by other secondary sources. Not sure what you're referring to as unreliable sources here, would be nice for you to identify, because historians like Hari Ram Gupta are more then WP:RS. Also pages 124-126 clearly show the expedition was a failure and an Afghan victory: [3]. Noorullah (talk) 01:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further adding from the source: "It took Ranjit Singh four years to overcome his defeat and disgrace suffered in the Kashmir expedition of 1814."[4] (page 128) Noorullah (talk) 01:35, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Hasan Abdal (1813)[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Battle of Hasan Abdal (1813) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The page is littered with unreliable sources to promote ethnic heroism and its statements are not fully cited and there is no contemporary proof of the occurrence of this battle and the page requires deletion.

Philip Kirsh[edit]

Philip Kirsh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks significant independent coverage. The New York Times wedding announcement is not independent -- these are user-submitted [5] (and in terms of selection versus decline, this was obviously accepted due to his father being a billionaire, not any notability of the young people); besides being non-independent the announcement contains only two substantive sentences about Philip. The condo-purchase (with sibling) report in NYC real-estate magazine The Real Deal has only half a sentence of encyclopedically noteworthy substantive info about Philip. The Swazi Observer citation (PressReader.com) added by an IP ([6]) is permanently dead, and I can find no coverage relevant to the claim except one passing mention. The Bloomberg stock profile link is permanently dead, and Ki Corporation is his father's holding company.

In an attempt to improve the article, I googled the subject's name in various ways and with various keywords, and found only passing mentions regarding two failed restaurants he co-owned which lasted barely a year. Persingo (talk) 23:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Further information: After coming across a Wikipedia mirror of his father's wiki article that said Philip was formerly married to Rona Gluck, I looked into this further. I found that Philip's first wife Rona has been remarried to Fred Davis since at least early 2013: [7], and since 2014/2015 Kirsh has been remarried to Monette de Botton [8] [9] [10]. So the information on the wedding officiant and location is irrelevant/outdated, and the infobox is incorrect. Persingo (talk) 23:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, South Africa, England, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:07, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 04:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patrik Kincl[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Patrik Kincl (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am renominating this article for a better debate, as I think the 1st nomination was not discussed thoroughly enough. The subject is not meeting requirements of English WP notability for MMA fighters (WP:NMMA).

The sources on the article mainly consist of database entries, interviews, subject's personal website and routine fight results. No indication of independent fact checking. An article about signing his autobiography at a book store. Biography in a Czech sports site, which doesn't appear to be very neutral based on the section titled "Patrik Kincl - the birth of an MMA god”.

In addition, the use of the subject personal website biography twice and the tone used shows potential WP:PROMO.
 Others sources found after good faith search (see first nomination) do not appear to be reliable and independent sources. 

No indication that we have the type of coverage required to meet WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO.



As user Papaursa mentioned in the first nomination, all coverage is very typical sports reporting that can be found for any fighters, which is nothing that shows particular notability.
 Lekkha Moun (talk) 18:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, and Czech Republic. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No additional sources have been found to change my analysis from the previous discussion. Clearly fails WP:NMMA and I don't believe the coverage presented in either the article or previous AfD is sufficient to meet WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, or any other WP notability criteria as it is generally routine, database, not independent and/or unreliably sourced. Papaursa (talk) 15:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the same reasons as when I first nominated it. Doesn't meet notability. Nswix (talk) 04:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Malik Siraj Akbar[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Malik Siraj Akbar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This BLP, created by a SPA Jarisful (talk · contribs), appears to have been authored by the subject themselves, as he's an experienced editor. This BLP is very promotional in nature, citing unreliable and even unacceptable sources, such as opinion pieces penned by the subject themselves and such pieces are generally not admissible as references. While the subject has garnered some press coverage, but it's too common for journalists to get some sort of press attention on every one of them. To me, this one doesn't appear to meet the criteria outlined in WP:JOURNALIST as well WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • KEEP but the article needs to be improved by removing unsourced and primary sources. --Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But as I said the subject doesn't satisfy WP:GNG or even WP:JOURNALIST so what's the point of cleaning up BLP ? --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - subject passes WP:JOURNALIST as he is widely cited and interviewed by International and Pakistani media. --Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:58, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Why are you voting twice? While it's clear he's a journalist and may be frequently cited or even invited on TV talk shows, but having a WP BLP requires meeting WP:GNG criteria. Whether he meets that is unclear to me, so if you think he does, you'll need to provide evidence of coverage right here. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 17:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am pinging @Mar4d: as they stood with strong sourcing in first AfD. --Twinkle1990 (talk) 17:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is it ethical to invite those who previously voted "keep"? It could be considered canvassing. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 17:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not unethical as they earlier hammered by strong sourcing. You too can invite, it's no wrong man. Twinkle1990 (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The sources provided by Mar4d weren't particularly robust. Mar4d presented 04 references. Let's assess each of them. The Diplomat and [DW sources consist of interviews but they don't directly discuss the subject. While Al Jazeera only mentions him in passing. Only the BBC story offers some coverage of the subject, but it alone isn't sufficient to establish WP:N because it lacks significant depth.
    And no, I don't feel the need to invite anyone here because I generally try to steer clear of such actions. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 17:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. This discussion needs more participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Metal-Head[edit]

Metal-Head (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reliant on primary sources and a non-notable fictional character. More appropriate as a redirect to List_of_Cobra_characters#Metal-Head. Adam Black talk • contributions 23:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atlas Copco[edit]

Atlas Copco (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable company, Fails NCORP and GNG –Davey2010Talk 22:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Major international corporation. At least 45,000 employees (according to the Swedish version of the article). Component of the OMX Stockholm 30, so one of the 30 largest companies in Sweden. Sure, the article could stand some improvement but there is a notable topic here. (I did some cleanup on it back in 2017 when it was in a far worse state and it has been lurking, unloved, on my Watchlist since then.) Main problem is still that so much of the content is referenced to the company's own publications. There are plenty of Google News hits, including articles in high quality sources like the Financial Times. Most are routine stuff but there is definitely some more substantial stuff in there too (e.g. [11]). There is a whole book about them which I think is independently published by Studentlitteratur. There are a lot of hits in Google Scholar, admittedly of varying relevance and quality. If I'm finding this much and I don't speak Swedish then I think there is plenty out there. I'm sure that the main claims about the company's history can be referenced from independent sources, particularly if a Swedish speaker wants to have a go. Anything that can't can be removed. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "If I'm finding this much" - Respectfully other than a FT cite, a book and a mention of Google Scholar you've not found much if anything,
    "I'm sure that the main claims about the company's history can be referenced from independent sources" - What independent sources ?, I've obviously performed a WP:BEFORE search and nothing came back that establishes notability and or one can build an article out of. Thanks –Davey2010Talk 10:24, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's inconcievable that BEFORE was observed. 200 000 hits in the Swedish newspaper archives. Draken Bowser (talk) 11:27, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 23:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 23:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep: one of Swedens largest companies in terms of employees, with a market capitalization above 80 billion USD.
  • Fantastic for a promotional advert, meaningless for an Encyclopedia. –Davey2010Talk 10:25, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I removed some blatant promotional and trivial content way back. If there is more then that can be removed too. That is not an argument for complete deletion. DanielRigal (talk) 11:39, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of National Weather Service Weather forecast offices[edit]

List of National Weather Service Weather forecast offices (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wikipedia is WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Let'srun (talk) 17:24, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - A nice referenced list to have. However, how is it kept up to date? — Maile (talk) 18:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – While I have my thoughts on this which I will try to add later, this article isn't very watched (fewer than 30 watchers), so recommend including discussion links elsewhere to encourage discussion. Master of Time (talk) 14:14, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:LISTCRITERIA. Christian75 (talk) 11:42, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bruno Felix[edit]

Bruno Felix (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

In CAT:NN for 14 years. Some coverage, but not enough coverage or significance to meet WP:BIO / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 17:30, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Bin Salman mosque bombing[edit]

2008 Bin Salman mosque bombing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The 2 sources provided are from the time of event. No lasting coverage or impact to meet WP:EVENT. LibStar (talk) 07:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Terrorism in Yemen under its own section. The coverage above does not convince me of long term notability; there was some commentary immediately after it occured, but not a lot. Most notable as part of the overall terrorism situation (which merging it to the article preserves) It's possible of course that long term coverage exists in another language and if evidence of that is ever provided I would not argue against its recreation, but I doubt it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 21:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Hoshiarpur (1711)[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Battle of Hoshiarpur (1711) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The battle is not historically accurate and when and where the battle took place does not appear in any historical work, printed, or in manuscript and thus it is required for the deletion of this page

KSCZ-LD[edit]

KSCZ-LD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 22:25, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: The various subchannels collectively represent most of the local Vietnamese-langauge media landscape in one of the largest Vietnamese American markets. They would be more notable than the station itself, sort of like anchor stores being more notable than their strip mall. These subchannels previously broadcast on KAXT-CD, which was notable in its own right for technical innovations during the 2010s. But after KAXT changed ownership and the Vietnamese stations fled to KSCZ, I haven't found a good way to write about them. Maybe I can find some angle for it in Media in the San Francisco Bay Area, minus all the technical details in this article. Minh Nguyễn 💬 01:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Mxn, this is interesting to hear. Is there any SIGCOV of the individual channels? At that point, they might be the ones with articles. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 08:03, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Sammi Brie: Yes. Most of the subchannels originate in Los Angeles or Houston; some are mom-and-pop operations, with programming similar to what you'd see on a YouTube channel or FAST, but others like LSTV have SIGCOV in English-language press. One of them, Quê Hương, originates locally and is the granddaddy of all Vietnamese American broadcast media, but all they have now is a WP:COATRACK at KZSJ despite also running a weekly newspaper at one point. Unfortunately, the main reliable source about the local Vietnamese media scene historically would've been Viet Mercury, which isn't archived anywhere online as far as I know. The San Jose Mercury News archives only include the relatively few articles that were translated into English. Minh Nguyễn 💬 11:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to state list The problem is that this station has had a journeyman history that rivals some early radio stations. When it was assigned, its COL was Buellton/Solvang. Indeed, it was a TBN station, on channel 53. It later turned up near Coalinga. The transmitter now is 372 kilometres (231 mi) from where it started. The second problem is that the SIGCOV won't be there for this LPTV, not in Santa Barbara, not in Coalinga, and not in San Jose. If the individual program services are notable, then so be it, but a bunch of famous people staying in one hotel doesn't make the hotel notable. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 08:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's an extended stay hotel. I think it's just too awkward to talk about any of these subchannels in the same article as the one about the station's pre-Venture history. I wouldn't be able to make the prose fit even if we had the SIGCOV. Minh Nguyễn 💬 11:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please provide a link to a specific Merge or Redirect target article if that is the outcome you are seeking.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Youlin Magazine[edit]

Youlin Magazine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There's nothing sig/in-depth as required by WP:GNG. It's more of a promotional article relying on press releases styled coverage. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 22:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vincent Graves Greene Philatelic Research Foundation[edit]

Vincent Graves Greene Philatelic Research Foundation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is completely unsourced and subject does not seem to be notable. Quick Google News skim shows only two vague news articles about this Foundation [13] [14]. GoldRomean (talk) 22:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of battles in Croatia[edit]

List of battles in Croatia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:UNSOURCED. Follow-up to List of battles in Belgium (deleted recently). NLeeuw (talk) 22:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of battles in Algeria[edit]

List of battles in Algeria (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:UNSOURCED. Follow-up to List of battles in Belgium (deleted recently). NLeeuw (talk) 22:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of battles in Albania[edit]

List of battles in Albania (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:UNSOURCED. Follow-up to List of battles in Belgium (deleted recently). NLeeuw (talk) 22:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alley of the Dolls (band)[edit]

Alley of the Dolls (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Newly created article, PROD declined. Sourcing does not establish WP:GNG being met. WP:BEFORE brings up only a couple of brief reviews of their EP. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to add additional citations to the EP as many exist MusicForeverYours (talk) 01:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dubee[edit]

Dubee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (music)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Workday Adaptive Planning[edit]

Workday Adaptive Planning (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:CORP, at least in my opinion. There is no significant coverage from a reliable source, the Fortune article cited is simply a serialized list. A cursory Google search for alternative sources didn't turn up much, as they were acquired by Workday. TJS808 (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Workday, Inc. All independent available coverage that I can find is in the vein of acquisitions and thus not qualifying under WP:ORGCRIT ([15], [16], [17]). Other available coverage appears to be sponcon or otherwise not independent. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would also second Dclemens1971's opinion to merge for the same reason. Annika59 (talk) 00:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miller Trunk Corridor[edit]

Miller Trunk Corridor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This retail corridor in Duluth, Minnesota, certainly exists. However, most coverage of the area is about traffic on the state highway, not the built-up commercial area, a collection of strip malls plus one enclosed shopping center. This is a bunch of original research and a long listing of stores, neither of which justify an article. Some of the stores listed at the time of this AfD are no longer extant (Gander Mountain! Pier 1 Imports!). Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 21:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mackenzie Bent[edit]

Mackenzie Bent (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 23:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd, Soft deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Garrett MacKeen[edit]

Garrett MacKeen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 23:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd, Soft deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muscovite–Ukrainian War (1674–1676)[edit]

Muscovite–Ukrainian War (1674–1676) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Case similar to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muscovite–Ukrainian War (1658–1659). Cossack-Russian fighting was part of the Russo-Turkish War (1676–1681) and partially Polish–Ottoman War (1672–1676). Doroshenko was an Ottoman vassal during that time. Russia was trying to conquer entire Ukraine using the fact that the Ottoman Empire was engaged in the war with Poland. They besieged Doroshenko in Chigirin, but he was saved by a Turkish army in 1675. A year later another Russian campaign caused Doroshenko to switch alliances and join Russians.

Of course the name itself is problematic. Doroshenko was only one of the few Cossack hetmans at that time, and he was ruling only part of the Right-bank Ukraine as an Ottoman vassal. There was also supported by Poland Ostap Hohol, and supported by Russia Ivan Samoylovych. Marcelus (talk) 21:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Russia, and Ukraine. Marcelus (talk) 21:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Nearly all of this is unsourced so it is not possible to merge. As in the aforementioned AfD, there is very little that supports the idea of a separate war between "Ukraine" and "Moscow";[18] this was part of a larger war and pushes a certain narrative. Much of this looks like OR presumably based on two sources not reliable for history. Mellk (talk) 21:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Florian G. Kaiser[edit]

Florian G. Kaiser (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

89.5% of this article's content was written by FgkaiseR5131, who has seemingly admitted to being the subject of this article. I will skip reporting this to WP:COIN since this user has stopped editing after Liz warned them of the COI policy on their talk page in December 2023. Google and Google Scholar searches do not return significant external coverage and all three of the article's references not written by Kaiser only discuss the Campbell paradigm, rather than supporting the idea that Kaiser has been significantly impactful in this area of social psychology. While this subject could be considered prominent with an h-index of 59, there is no external coverage to support this and the other notability criteria for academics do not apply (e.g., prestigious awards, fellowships, professorships, etc.). BluePenguin18 🐧 ( 💬 ) 21:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cooperative web[edit]

Cooperative web (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I found technical papers using the term "cooperative web" in a few different ways (e.g. as an extension to the semantic web), but this article refers to one or more attempts to create a collaborative real-time editor, particularly IBM's Blue Spruce project and its obscure successor OpenCoWeb. It might be possible to create an article about Blue Spruce, but this article's title and content are not appropriate for such an article. There's also the older, wiki-inspired collaborative service CoWeb, which stands for "Collaborative website", but this service is unrelated to IBM's project. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 20:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ashkan Karbasfrooshan[edit]

Ashkan Karbasfrooshan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of an internet entrepreneur, not reliably sourced as passing inclusion criteria for businesspeople. As always, CEOs are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on their third-party coverage in reliable sources (media, books) independent of themselves -- but this is referenced almost entirely to primary sources that are not support for notability, such as YouTube videos and press releases and Amazon sales pages for his books and "staff" profiles on the self-published websites of organizations or companies he's been directly affiliated with -- and the only acceptably reliable sources, Deadline Hollywood and the Montreal Gazette, both just feature him as a provider of soundbite, but not as the subject of the coverage, which means they aren't enough to get him over GNG all by themselves if all the rest of the sourcing is junk.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have better referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 20:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, well, well - this is article about a guy living in Montreal who is the head of a company based in Montreal written by a user with an IP from Montreal, and who, curiously, has made no other contributions to Wikipedia whatsoever. What a coincidence. That aside, sourcing is poor and none of the handful reliable sources provide in-depth of Karbasfrooshan - they all focus on WatchMojo. Delete and redirect to WatchMojo, as was originally the case. Cortador (talk) 20:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect As somebody who worked on the WatchMojo article, I can say I think that most, if not all, information about Karbasfrooshan which can be sourced to secondary RS is already on that page. I initially created this page as a redirect to WatchMojo before it was converted into an article. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 22:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martín Gaitán[edit]

Martín Gaitán (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All citations are profiles. No news coverage can be found. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina (talk) 20:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I Hate Sex[edit]

I Hate Sex (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Band which appears to fail WP:NBAND. They were only active from 2015–2018, so it's unlikely they'll receive further WP:SIGCOV. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CITYpeek[edit]

AfDs for this article:
CITYpeek (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails the notability guideline for companies. Passing mentions in local sources only. – Teratix ₵ 16:24, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gonçalo Foro[edit]

Gonçalo Foro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina (talk) 19:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Silviu Florea[edit]

Silviu Florea (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina (talk) 19:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolás Fernández Miranda[edit]

Nicolás Fernández Miranda (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina (talk) 19:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lotu Filipine[edit]

Lotu Filipine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Only one brief article exists [here https://www.looptonga.com/business/lotu-filipine-wins-500-cash-digicel-tonga-easter-promotion-91903], which is not enough. Shinadamina (talk) 19:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the article I linked to, is not even about his career and may not be him. Shinadamina (talk) 19:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Duarte Figueiredo[edit]

Duarte Figueiredo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nico Esterhuyse[edit]

Nico Esterhuyse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina (talk) 19:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Otar Eloshvili[edit]

Otar Eloshvili (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina (talk) 19:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Giorgi Elizbarashvili[edit]

Giorgi Elizbarashvili (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina (talk) 19:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enele Taufa[edit]

Enele Taufa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Citations are profiles. Does not meet requirements of WP:NSPORT. Not other news can be found about them. Shinadamina (talk) 19:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khatti Meethi Zindagi[edit]

Khatti Meethi Zindagi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Page is unreferenced and I cannot locate anything in a WP:BEFORE to establish notability. Show only ran for about 2 months so unlikely notable. CNMall41 (talk) 18:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strathmeade Springs, Virginia[edit]

Strathmeade Springs, Virginia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Insignificant neighborhood within Woodburn, Fairfax County, Virginia. WP:BEFORE yields nothing useful. Waddles 🗩 🖉 18:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emi Khan[edit]

Emi Khan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

So, we've got a singer, film director, producer and actor on our hands so I'm scratching my head over which policy to apply here. But whichever one we go with - I'm pretty darn sure they won't make the cut. Not even the basic WP:GNG, —Saqib (talk | contribs) 18:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. There is no chance at all that this gets deleted. Wikipedia:AFD is not cleanup. (non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte (talk) 08:08, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cliza (town)[edit]

Cliza (town) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Whole article is a promotion, has WP:OR, and "History", "Education", and "Notable people" sections have no sources CosXZ (talk) 18:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

List of Al-Arabi SC (Kuwait) players[edit]

List of Al-Arabi SC (Kuwait) players (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an indiscriminate list of mostly non-notable people which does not meet the WP:LISTN. Let'srun (talk) 17:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Samuel, 5th Viscount Samuel[edit]

Jonathan Samuel, 5th Viscount Samuel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Relatively new British nobleman who never sat in the House of Lords, fails WP:BIO. There's not much outside of wiki-clones when looking this person up on Google News or Google Books: all we get as far as printed material goes are the usual suspects, Burke's Peerage (tertiary, not in-depth), Debrett's (idem), and I suppose Who's Who (autobiographical, not independent, generally unreliable at WP:RSP). Pilaz (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hashtag Pop[edit]

Hashtag Pop (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG. Has had a {{notability}} tag for eight months with no improvements. References are either company listings, articles hosted by Hashtag Pop itself, or other news sources re-reporting their stories. A WP:BEFORE search in Portuguese doesn't yield any reliable sources with significant coverage. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 16:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 17:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dayytona Fox[edit]

Dayytona Fox (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of a musician, not properly sourced as passing WP:NMUSIC. The strongest notability claim here is a guest appearance on one album track from another musician's album, which is not an automatic notability clinch in and of itself -- and the article further states that it hasn't proven possible to verify that he's even signed to a record label at all, so the number of titles in the discography section does not fulfill NMUSIC #5 if the music's only verifiable release was on SoundCloud.
But except for one article in The Fader which is too short to get him over WP:GNG all by itself if it's all he has, this is otherwise referenced entirely to primary sources that are not support for notability at all, such as directory entries and Reddit discussion threads and a podcast interview in which he's talking about himself in the first person -- and even on a WP:BEFORE search for other sources, I just get glancing namechecks of his existence rather than GNG-building reliable source coverage about him.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation if and when he attains a stronger notability claim that has better referencing for it, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to already qualify him for an article now. Bearcat (talk) 17:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 17:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Non-notable musician, almost zero SIGCOV of him or any of his works, apart from the brief The Fader article, which covers his feature on Takeoff's "Infatuation". Being an "associated performer" on one song is not sufficient enough to fulfill WP:NMUSICIAN. Mooonswimmer 19:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: The Fader link is a brief but useful bio. The rest are about what I find and don't help notability. Delete for not meeting MUSIC or GNG. Perhaps TOOSOON. Oaktree b (talk) 19:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Garrity[edit]

John Garrity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't find enough to show he meets WP:N. Boleyn (talk) 17:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 17:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: one of the sources is by, not about the subject. another source quotes, but is not about the subject. there simply isn't significant coverage. -- D'n'B-t -- 17:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non-notable soldier/public servant. No SIGCOV of the subject, just brief mentions. Mooonswimmer 19:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Single viable ref is a passing mention. Nothing else of significance. scope_creepTalk 09:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sara Lucafò[edit]

Sara Lucafò (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This Italian women's footballer has not yet received enough coverage to meet WP:GNG -- this is a case of WP:TOOSOON. All I found on the subject were a pair of interviews (1, 2). JTtheOG (talk) 17:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC) I support draftification as an ATD. JTtheOG (talk) 00:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Riccardo Raffaele[edit]

Riccardo Raffaele (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an Italian rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found was this transactional announcement, but no in-depth or sustained coverage. JTtheOG (talk) 17:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of AD Bairro players[edit]

List of AD Bairro players (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a indiscriminate list of mostly non-notable players. Let'srun (talk) 17:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warrick Venter[edit]

Warrick Venter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found were trivial mentions. JTtheOG (talk) 17:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Radebe[edit]

Charles Radebe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found were trivial mentions. JTtheOG (talk) 17:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Janu Botha[edit]

Janu Botha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. I found this interview and not much else. JTtheOG (talk) 16:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Snyman[edit]

Mark Snyman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

South African rugby player who fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found were trivial mentions. JTtheOG (talk) 16:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jamie Draven[edit]

Jamie Draven (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant in-depth coverage. All I could find were passing mentions (more or less like these 1, 2, 3, 4) and Wiki mirrors. Moreover, the article is unreferenced. X (talk) 10:20, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Buddy Story[edit]

A Buddy Story (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Found zero evidence of notability myself. Mushy Yank added a Variety article which mentions the film, but only very briefly, so I don't take it for much. And even then, if that's all there is then I don't see why this should've been dePRODded in the first place. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 13:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete doesn't seem to meet WP:NF. It was missing from two of the cast's filmography tables so I added it in, noticed that Elizabeth Moss and Torah Feldshuh have both made more recent films that don't have articles so unless anyone can find better independent sources I don't think this needs an entry. Orange sticker (talk) 15:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Slash Film and MTV are RS, but they only briefly talk about the film's trailer, which I don't think help meet film notability. Those are about all I can find as well, I don't think we have enough for film notability. Oaktree b (talk) 19:39, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IC 21[edit]

IC 21 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The galaxy has only been featured in databases and large scale surveys which don't provide significant commentary on the object, thus fails WP:NASTCRIT C messier (talk) 15:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Kpgjhpjm 16:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: at that distance I suspect it's probably not going to get a serious study unless it is unusual in some way, and sure enough there are no significant studies on the object, although there are a few web sites. Being an active Seyfert 2 galaxy isn't enough to make it notable. I don't see a list page where it could be redirected. Praemonitus (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The IC is a supplement of the New General Catalogue, and is therefore of similar historical importance. Ships & Space(Edits) 20:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't enough to establish notability. Not all NGC objects are notable, let alone IC objects. C messier (talk) 11:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2022 Russian Aerospace Forces Antonov An-26 crash[edit]

2022 Russian Aerospace Forces Antonov An-26 crash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG and EVENTCRIT. Per WP:NOTNEWS. No evidence of lasting effects. No recent news on the topic so fails both CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:SUSTAINED. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, and Russia. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep The crash catches my attention because it it doesn't sound like a "normal" accident. To me it sounds the plane was shot out of the sky or blown up either accidentally or on purpose. Anyway, both ways, that would make it plausible that Russia tries to cover it up. Due to the contoversies and because I think it would be a shame if this information would be lost, I vote Weak keep. 82.174.61.58 (talk) 08:44, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If the plane were shot down, then the accident doesn't exactly warrant an article as it has already been mentioned in: List of aircraft losses during the Russo-Ukrainian War and List of Russian military accidents.
    Even then, the fact that there hasn't been any news related to this accident since 2022 already fails, as I've said, WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:SUSTAINED.
    The event fails WP:INDEPTH and WP:DIVERSE as most sources were covered by russian media outlets and didn't receive significant or in-depth coverage to be considered notable. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And the argument on losing the information is pretty weak per WP:LOSE as this article already fails multiple guidelines. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In that case, instead of deleting: merge and redirect to List of aircraft losses during the Russo-Ukrainian War#Russian aircraft losses might be the best option. I would propose stating there (including removing the current "cashed" typo):

    Registration number RF-36074 crashed in Uryv-Pokrovka, Voronezh Oblast. The aircraft exploded in the air and fell between three villages. Fragments of the wreck scattered of over a large area.[1] According to the Ministry of Defense, the preliminary cause was equipment failure.[2] According to eyewitnesses the cause was possibly a shell hit.[3] All of the undisclosed number of occupants were killed, consisting of crew members and paratroopers.[3] Usually this type of aircraft has six crew members.[1]

    82.174.61.58 (talk) 13:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I feel like, judging from other entries in the article, that we should follow the same style therefore I would suggest keeping the entry as it is:

    Registration number RF-36074 cashed in Voronezh Oblast, killing an undisclosed number of occupants. Allegedly caused by a technical malfunction. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:19, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think a non-established style should never be regarded as more important than the quality of the prose or an inhibition of content. Note the current Russian state owned Tass source has an interest and might be unreliable. The sources I use are more journalistic and not one-sided. (And what I said, don’t keep the typo :) ) 82.174.61.58 (talk) 16:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The information is already there and it needs to be kept simple. I do agree with replacing the typo. I'm suggesting the following:

    Registration RF-36074 crashed in Voronezh Oblast, killing an undisclosed number of occupants. Preliminary reports indicate a technical malfunction.
    Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:53, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b "Транспортник прошел между селами" [Transporter passed between the villages]. Kommersant (in Russian). 2022-02-25. Archived from the original on 2022-12-18. Retrieved 2022-12-18.
  2. ^ "В Воронежской области потерпел крушение самолет Ан-26" [An-26 plane crashed in Voronezh region]. Mir 24 (in Russian). February 24, 2022. Archived from the original on 2022-12-18. Retrieved 2022-12-18.
  3. ^ a b "В Воронежской области упал самолет Су-25" [A Su-25 plane crashed in the Voronezh region]. vrntimes (in Russian). 25 February 2022. Retrieved 15 April 2024.
  • Comment I tried to improve the article with these edits. I expanded the article (among others witnesses reports, noted there were paratroopers onboard and the number of crew members) and added an extra source. However, this was reverted by Lachielmao (talk · contribs). 82.174.61.58 (talk) 13:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    To clarify I had no issue with the new content and sources added, but there was speculation used without a source as well as rewriting sections with worse grammar and writing prose. Lachielmao (talk) 00:00, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lachielmao: I don't understand why you say I added speculations without a source. See here the version after I expanded it. Everything was well referenced. (Bye the way, it sounds ambiguous when you're saying "I had no issue with the new content and sources added" because you removed it.) 82.174.61.58 (talk) 12:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It would be preferable if you discussed this on the talk page instead of this page as this is a discussion on whether to keep or delete the article, not to talk about whether or not these edits should be included. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge As per nom, this fails WP:SUSTAINED, and this crash doesn't seem to be any more notable than the many Russian aircraft crashes listed in the List of aircraft losses during the Russo-Ukrainian War that don't have their own article, so we should just merge the basic information about the crash there. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 19:10, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The sole keep !vote was blocked as a sock, leaving us with the nom as an implied delete and one merge !vote.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 00:59, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep‎. Withdrawn by nominator (non-admin closure) NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 20:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shatha Mousa Sadiq[edit]

Shatha Mousa Sadiq (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

PRODded with "The only reference is dead. There is nothing here about this person at all. WP:BEFORE turns up nothing. I cannot tell if that is because the name is mis-spelled/wrong or whether this is a hoax article. In any case there is simply no information, at all. " PROD has been contested on basis of presumed notability, but that does not take into account that searches literally show nothing at all (I discount a tiny handful of citogenesis hits on Google). I do not know if this is a WP:HOAX or an error in the name, but from my searches, this person does not seem to exist. The published existence of this page places wrong information in the public domain. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Iraq. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep a search in Arabic shows it is definitely not a hoax. She exists and there’s a video of a tv interview with her, and another clip confirms she was in the National Assembly, so she passes WP:NPOL. My iPad insists on using link shorteners that Wikipedia blocks so I’ll post the links from my desktop in a while. Mccapra (talk) 17:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I was just coming back here to say I think there is a person but the name is wrong. This New York Times article refers to her as Shatha al-Musawi.[19] She shows up in various books under that name. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw and request speedy close. The name of the subject in sources is Shatha al-Musawi. She is notable under that name as demonstrated by several secondary sources - books such as [20], [21] and [22] have some mention of her and all are reliable secondary sources. The New York Times has a mention too. Once closed I intend to bold move the page to the WP:COMMONNAME fromw where it can be developed. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Sudanese tuberculosis outbreak (2023−present)[edit]

Sudanese tuberculosis outbreak (2023−present) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unable to locate any sources to support that there was an outbreak of tuberculosis in Sudan in 2023.

This article as a whole seems to misrepresent the main source used.[23] The source does not support An ongoing outbreak of tuberculosis (TB), an infectious disease, was confirmed in Sudan in May 2023. The source does not support On 8 May 2023, the UN announced a significant outbreak of tuberculosis in Sudan and Ukraine The source does not support the bolded portion here: It confirmed at least 34,000 cases in Ukraine and a large but unspecified number in Sudan.

There was no "announcement". The source summarizes what "Dr. Lucica Ditiu, executive director of the Stop TB Partnership, said before a hearing Monday to prepare for a high-level meeting in late September during the annual gathering of world leaders at the UN General Assembly." The source is about worldwide TB challenges. All it says about Sudan is:

In Sudan, 18,000 people received treatment for tuberculosis in 2021, according to the Stop TB Partnership, which is managed by the UN Office for Project Services and aims to achieve a world free of tuberculosis. But Ditiu said the situation there for TB sufferers, because of the ongoing fighting and collapse of most of the health system, is "probably like a ticking bomb."

"Probably like a ticking bomb" does not justify the content in the article.

None of the other sources in the article are about a "Sudanese tuberculosis outbreak". One is a review of TB in Sudan between 2004-2014. Six are about TB, unrelated to Sudan. Five are about the war in Sudan, unrelated to TB. The topic of the article as indicated by the article title, is only addressed by the lead sentence and the very last paragraph (which, again, is not supported by the source).

I was looking for sources to update the content, since it's "2023–present". I found concerns about cholera, dengue fever, and measles,[24] but couldn't find anything talking about a TB outbreak in Sudan. Schazjmd (talk) 16:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Medicine, and Sudan. Schazjmd (talk) 16:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per comprehensive analysis by the nom. There are no reliable independent secondary sources claiming there is any such outbreak, and what there is has been distorted. This is not encyclopaedic - there is SYNTH and OR but no evidence of a primary subject. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Seems to be bits of information cobbled together, OR-ish. An uptick is diseases is an unfortunate side effect of any war when the healthcare system breaks down and basic sanitation goes away due to the situation. Could very well be an "outbreak" but it might not meet notability requirements here. This isn't the next Covid outbreak, to put it in perspective. Oaktree b (talk) 19:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We could perhaps put a few words about the various diseases (as mentioned in the comment above my !vote) in an article about "2023 conflict in the Sudan" or something similar, but I don't think we have quite enough to make an entire wiki article about it. Oaktree b (talk) 19:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Germany, Indiana[edit]

Germany, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another spot back-entered to the topos from that 1870s atlas; Baker is really the only source besides that, which hasn't proven good enough. I tried looking for this in Baird's history of the county, but there are over a thousand occurrences of the word, so that was hopeless. Mangoe (talk) 15:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

QuuxPlayer[edit]

AfDs for this article:
QuuxPlayer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable software. No WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS under either names. Linked reviews are unreliable download reposting websites (the PCWorld one is blatantly an ad, the CNET one is actually CNET Download which is unreliable) and searching finds nothing other than similar download reposting sites. Previously deleted in AfD but recreated. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 15:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Agree with the analysis by the nom. The Cnet link is a download link and the PC World link is now 404, so I can't tell how useful it is/was. I can only find download sites or reviews on non-RS. I don't see notability with what's given in the article or in my search. Oaktree b (talk) 19:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bomba calabrese[edit]

Bomba calabrese (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only a single source listed, I cannot find independent sources online. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Max Werenka[edit]

Max Werenka (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP1E Fram (talk) 15:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Canada. Fram (talk) 15:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Finding an old car in a lake isn't notable, the case surrounding the missing person could be. This is very much 1E territory. Oaktree b (talk) 15:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:BLP1E. Article creator Memevietnam98 also uploaded the article's infobox image to Commons claiming a CC BY 3.0 license, which is unsupported by the provided source link, so I have nominated the image for deletion too. BluePenguin18 🐧 ( 💬 ) 01:18, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the events and sources are not something to base an encyclopedic biography upon. Geschichte (talk) 08:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Washington Freedom Season[edit]

2023 Washington Freedom Season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Simply scorecards and an unnecessary content fork for a non-notable team in a non-notable tournament. The remark from the PROD removal was "it has potential"; beyond what is there at the moment, where is the potential? Enough coverage will never exist to flesh out a well written article, so this will always violate WP:NOTSTATS and fail WP:GNG. AA (talk) 15:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caps (rapper)[edit]

Caps (rapper) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability. Looked for sources and found none (though that might be muddled by the simple name). —asparagusus (interaction) sprouts! 14:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Claude Saclag[edit]

Jean Claude Saclag (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet WP:NKICK criteria, as well as does not have significant coverage. Passing mentions and event results are not sufficient to meet WP:GNG. Lekkha Moun (talk) 14:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Devapāla's Conflict with Tibet[edit]

Devapāla's Conflict with Tibet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poor attempt of the author to keep Pala Tibetan War from AFD. Same content with different title. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pala Tibetan War.Imperial[AFCND] 14:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Devapāla came into conflict with Tibet, there is nothing impossible in this because Tibetan sources claim that their kings Khri-srong-lda-btsan and his son Mu-teg-btsan-po subdued India and forced Raja Dharma- pala to submit. Devapāla also may have come to clash with them and defeated them.[1]
  • Devapāla might have come into conflict with Tibet; there is nothing impossible in this because Tibetan sources claim that their kings Khri-Srong-Ida-Btsan and his son Mu-teg-Btsan-po subdued India and forced Dharma- pāla to submit. Devapāla also may have clashed with them and defeated them[2]
Based Kashmiri (talk) 15:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop listing down this big {{tq}} here. It was already a mess at the earlier discussion. Comment down if you've any possible arguments that could potentially save the article. I am pretty sure you haven't read what WP: NOTABILITY, and this reflects everywhere in the AFD. Long paragraphs are not the factor that determines whether it passes GNG or not. And I can see you've duplicated the text twice here. Imperial[AFCND] 19:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This event is notable and has received significant coverage in Reliable Sources (WP:RS) and it passes WP:GNG & WP:SIGCOV and this isn't WP:OR since reliable sources mention the event as Devapāla's Conflict with Tibet.
Also what do you mean by "And I can see you've duplicated the text twice here."?? I gave you two reliable sources which mentions the event in a similar way. Based Kashmiri (talk) 04:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Devapāla's Campaigns against Pratiharas[edit]

Devapāla's Campaigns against Pratiharas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A copy of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pala invasion of Kannauj. Same content, fails WP:GNG, poorly found in reliable sources. Part of Tripartite struggle, can be added to it. Imperial[AFCND] 14:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Based Kashmiri (talk) 15:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No results for "Devapāla's Campaigns against Pratiharas" in Google scholar, JSTOR [25], and literally zero result from Google keyword searching. Hardly found few sources (including what present in the article), that barely mentioned no more than two or three lines about the so called "Campaign". And passes GNG? See WP:SIGCOV. Imperial[AFCND] 15:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article is very notable and has been given significant coverage in reliable sources therefore it passes WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV.
  • The Gurjara lords against whom Devapāla fought must have been the Pratīhāra rulers. It is possible that Nagabhața II tried to assert his power after the death of Dharmapāla and if, as some scholars believe, he transferred his capital to Kanauj, he must have achieved some success. But Devapāla soon re-established the Pala supremacy, and it was possibly after his (Devapāla's) successful campaign against the Pratihāras that he advanced to the Hūņa and Kamboja princi- palities. Nāgabhața's son, Ramabhadra, probably also had his kingdom invaded by Devapāla. The next Pratihāra king Bhoja also, in spite of his initial success, suffered reverses at the hands of Devapāla, and could not restore the fortunes of his family so long as the Pala emperor was alive. Thus Devapāla successfully fought with three generations of Pratihāra rulers, and maintained the Pala supremacy in Northern India.[3][4]
Based Kashmiri (talk) 15:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"It is notable because I said so." Industrial Insect (talk) 18:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ignore WP:RS which has significant coverage about the topic of the article and just say "It is notable because I said so.", wow.
The article is notable for several reasons. First, it has significant coverage from WP:RS. Second, It passes WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. I hope this helps clarify why the article meets the notability criteria. Based Kashmiri (talk) 03:55, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isaac Álvarez (footballer)[edit]

Isaac Álvarez (footballer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. Has only two datbase entry / stats sources. Main statement is that he was on the team for a South American championship but didn't play. North8000 (talk) 14:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: From the DICCIONARIO BIOGRAFICO DEL FUTBOL BOLIVIANO (1930-2000):

"Nombre completo: Isaac Álvarez Moscoso. Apodo: La “Araña negra”. Nacimiento: Cochabamba, 6 de julio de 1933. Posición: Guardameta, No 1. Padres: ..... Esposa: ..... Hijos: Jorge Isaac, Jenny Carmiña, Martín Erick. Estudios: Primaria Escuela Carrillo, Secundaria Colegio Carrillo de Cochabamba. Otros Estudios: INSEF. Profesor de Educación Física. Cursos de Dirección Técnica. Clubes: En el Club 31 de Octubre (1963), de La Paz. Participación en la selección: Es Campeón Sudamericano de 1963. Jugó por la selección boliviana dos partidos oficiales (1963-1965) y fue batido en tres oportunidades. Es Campeón Sudamericano Invicto 1963. No tuvo participación oficial en dicho campeonato figurando en la banca. Dirección Técnica: Fue Preparador Físico en The 16 Strongest (1990). Otros Datos: Practicó el Atletismo, el Básquetbol, el Voleibol y el Fútbol. Distinciones: El gobierno mediante la repartición respectiva condecoró con la Medalla al Mérito Deportivo en el Grado de Caballero del Deporte, al cumplirse los 40 años de la conquista del XXI Campeonato Sudamericano. Además de ser acreedor a la pensión vitalicia de 4 sueldos mínimos mensuales."

There is also a bit of coverage here, which although not published in a reliable source, is definitely more evidence of notability. JTtheOG (talk) 17:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 18:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Craig Murray (disambiguation)[edit]

Craig Murray (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Page not needed. At present we really only have two articles with this name, so they can be dealt with by a hatnote. If more articles are created with this name, and they survive any notability challenge, we can create a disambiguation page, but not before then. PatGallacher (talk) 13:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep There are 4 different people on the page, and in the encyclopedia, and disentangling them is a useful service. PamD 14:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Disambiguations. ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 14:46, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep nomination doesn't mention this going against our guidelines. Disentangling them is important and this way readers can see where there is information on a person and click on the redlinks to see all incoming links. Boleyn (talk) 15:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - the two redlinked entries meet MOS:DABMENTION, as both are mentioned within their adjacent bluelinked articles. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 15:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Eat This Much[edit]

Eat This Much (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not appear to meet WP:PRODUCT at the moment, unfortunately. The CNN article seems borderline, but I could not find anything else meeting even that standard. Broader topic of "meal planning service" might satisfy NLIST though, in which case it may be possible to mention and redirect it there in the future. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:39, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Republican Movement[edit]

Irish Republican Movement (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Was never notable in the first place, although it had the potential to be at the start. There was a brief flurry of news in relation to a statement they put out, but no sources that covered the organisation in any significant depth. No publicity since that statement at all. Kathleen's bike (talk) 14:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Terrorism, Ireland, and Northern Ireland. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 14:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I think the references already present in the article establish notability. Even if the group is no longer active, "once notable, always notable." I seem to remember someone saying that some of the people in the handout photo that appears in several of the references weren't holding their weapons correctly, implying that this was never a serious group. I can't confirm this, though. Nonetheless, reliable sources have covered this group, which means it's notable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:35, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was never notable, although it had the potential to be if it had actually done anything. But other than releasing a statement, they've done nothing. Kathleen's bike (talk) 14:36, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Republican movement (Ireland). (And remove from Template:IRAs.) Per nom, the (current) topic/subject of the title (the org which asserted this name) is not notable. And never was. The only coverage suggests that a group(?), giving itself this name, released a statement (maybe two), back in 2019/2020. And that, seemingly, is all. The coverage, of those statements, doesn't meet WP:SIRS. In which the "S" ("S"ignificant) requires "significant coverage addressing the subject of the article directly and in depth". The coverage does NOT cover the subject org in any depth. At all. (For all we know the "group" could have 2 members. If even that.) Guliolopez (talk) 16:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The comment above mine makes a great point; once notable, always notable. Even if the group isn't as active as it used to be, there's nothing wrong with keeping it around as it provides insight into the contemporary Dissident movement.
Castroonthemoon (talk) 16:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Except, as repeatedly pointed out, it was never notable in the first place. A brief flurry of news about a single statement does not meet WP:SUSTAINED. See also guidance at WP:ORGDEPTH, there has to be coverage that "makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about the organization". Kathleen's bike (talk) 16:19, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to Republican movement (Ireland) - Per the argument put forward by Guliolopez. I agree with Guliolopez and Kathleen's bike that sources (or rather lack of) indicate that this organisation did not ever materialise in reality. While it's supposed founding was touted, it was never actually active. One press release is not enough to justify an article. CeltBrowne (talk) 14:19, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Óglaigh na hÉireann (Real IRA splinter group), where it is already mentioned. I agree that the topic is not standalone notable, but it's better discussed at the article where it splintered from, rather than just redirected to the main article on the republican movement. -- asilvering (talk) 04:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 00:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

St Andrews Typhoons[edit]

St Andrews Typhoons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacking in-depth secondary source coverage to meet the general notability guideline. Seen at NPP, moved to draftspace to allow for improvement but reverted by creator. AusLondonder (talk) 18:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't realize I reverted an initial draftspace sending, I was just editing over time. What sort of sources should I add to make more credibility? There's only a few sources (university, BUIHA and the team's website) I found out to use. Should I improve in the drafter before releasing or try to expand on the existing page? Fastfads (talk) 18:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They would have to be "significant coverage" to the subject, from secondary sources from multiple reputable media outlets. If such coverage doesn't exist, or consists of simple scores/stats or namedrops, an article cannot be sustained. My vote is to Redirect to the University of St Andrews article if no such sources are proffered. Ravenswing 08:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added quite a few sources to the new page (and a few new sections with the source expansions!) - direct resources which tell plenty of stories from plenty of reputable outlets (at least in my opinion). Would appreciate your opinion at this point in article growth. Fastfads (talk) 00:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Fastfads, firstly can I say this nomination is not a reflection on your work. Wikipedia does however have requirements articles must meet to demonstrate suitability for inclusion, most importantly the general notability guideline. Please take a look at the guideline for the kind of sources we require. Thanks, AusLondonder (talk) 16:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the motives for high quality articles and I understand the initial deletion nomination with what I originally published but I've put a significant amount work into making this article better. And once again, thank you for linking me to the many rules of Wikipedia article writing. It's been an learning experience and I feel my standards have had a lot of growth with recent edits - I think my extremely long "Keep" defense below gives evidence for that growth (and why this article should stay up). Yet I continue to have my work under a microscope - and the sources I have found criticized on the slightest details of independence. No matter what I do, it just doesn't seem like it is enough! At the same time when doing research I see one source articles for other teams in the same league remain with not a single complaint (not to say their existence is wrong - sometimes important histories don't have a lot of sources!). Even if I am told it isn't personal and not a reflection on my work, this perceived difference in standards undeniably makes it feel personal. It is extremely discouraging to me that this topic (on a website that is the de facto answer to any question that needs explanation - even something as niche as a UK university ice hockey team) gets me put under what I believe to be an excessive amount of scrutiny compared to similar articles.
Once again, I don't blame you for simply enforcing the rules of Wikipedia as you saw broken in my initial article. And I still believe in the mission of a global encyclopedia - I'll keep improving this page (to be done as explained in my "Keep" defense below) and pages around Wikipedia. However, regardless of outcome of this AfD (but especially if this fails; I can't spend hours finding sources, formatting and writing just to keep an article I wrote from being immediately sent to the morgue - with a chance that it could be sent back regardless) it will likely be some time before I attempt to create another article. I guess my final question is: What can I do to avoid an AfD on a new article in the future? And is this article still worthy of an AfD in your mind (and if so, why?) Fastfads (talk) 00:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've done a bit of research into the guidelines (thank you @AusLondonder and @Ravenswing for the advice and links - I see that the editorial standards of Wikipedia are higher than what was told to me in school) and spent a lot of time updating the page to what I believe would be above the minimum amount of content to reach the guidelines of general notability - and have found quite a bit of new information about the team along the way.
Point #1: One of the main problems was a lack of secondary sources as I was mainly using the main page of the BUIHA and the team's page at phoons.net - I've now done a significant amount of research into the team and have found a ton of new information about the team entirely from secondary sources ranging from the local student newspaper to the national newspapers (BBC). There even is a video from 2014 which was someone's TV reel that gave a ton of information about the team, including interviews with the founders of the club. There's now a lot more secondary sources on there.
Point #2: Relative to other team pages in the BUIHA (and to applications of the guidelines in general), the Typhoons are a strong pick to have their own page. Take, for example, the London Dragons which was originally my template for the start of this article. The entire page is summary, roster, awards, retired numbers and what universities are involved. The sources are all the University page, the website and the BUIHA website. Yet, I agree with Wikipedia's editors that as it remains up, it's a worthy article to keep in place in the history of British ice hockey even if it may need more sources as the note shows. While other pages like Oxford University Ice Hockey Club carries far more history and therefore sources, I find it exceptional to compare a team founded in 2011 to the team page of the most historic ice hockey club in Europe. Despite being founded so recently, they still have a shockingly deep history to the team, which brings me to the next point.
Point #3: The Typhoons are an notable and important subject in British university ice hockey as well as in the University of St Andrews culture and history. When I started this, I figured I'd make another team page to fill one of the missing spots on the BUIHA teams list. Yet thanks to the pressure for secondary sources, I found this team is extremely notable in university life in St Andrews - and has an extremely interesting (albeit tragic history). According to University of St Andrews, there are 11,280 students at the school right now, so there is on record just under 15% of the entire school (1500 people) attending Jonny Wookey Memorial Game. While it may not have the historical importance of something like Ice Hockey Varsity Match, attendance that high shows it is a huge event for the students of St Andrews and Scotland as a whole. The only one that seems to even come close in St Andrews would be The Scottish Varsity. Considering the difference in popularity between ice hockey and rugby in Scotland, the fact that the number of people interested is this close is an interesting fact in itself. The game is worth archiving on its own but is especially worth inclusion within the context of a team page that is so important in university ice hockey as they won the championship just 2 years ago.
Point #4: There is still significantly more content to go through. All of the sources I have posted have been from "official" newspapers and sources online, but I have not gone through the years of articles on the experience and history written by the St Andrews student newspaper "The Saint". Even right now on their front page is a new article about the experience at Jonny Wookey this year where they lost. I'm pretty busy right now (I fit in the edits and this piece in a bit of free time) but by Friday I should have a complete page with all secondary sources out there - and a pretty perfect page for Wikipedia if you allow it to stay up.
With all of this, I feel there is plenty of evidence that this article is suitable for conclusion and meets the general notability guideline. Please check out the original article with the new additions. I hope these changes (and new sources) will convince you that this article is worth inclusion. As for me, I'm going to keep working on this page when I have time and I'll be voting Keep for this page. Fastfads (talk) 20:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Sources are exclusively non-independent (websites of BUIHA, Phoons, St Andrews, and St Andrews student newspapers) or fail NOTNEWS (news reports on a missing student). JoelleJay (talk) 01:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would disagree with point #1 lightly with emphasis on the student newspaper - while there is a reliance on sources that are related (and this is considered acceptable in the case of London Dragons, Sheffield Bears, Cardiff Redhawks etc.), there still are independent sources from that student documentary video, The Tab, and most importantly the student newspaper (given it is not funded by the university - it is independent, just adjacent to the community the same way that we consider The Student independent in Edinburgh) - are all independent and direct evidence of the history of the team. If you want to quote the scores or stats, you can find all of these people exist simply through looking at Elite Prospects - but that seems like I'm source dumping just to prove a point that the first Wookey game was won 6-3. It's not like I made this team up. So I both lightly disagree with this point, but also don't see how this mixes with the general notability guideline from which this AfD is built.
In point #2, the NOTNEWS criticism, I do not understand in any way how this fits the criteria for this one. The news articles made in the name of Jonny Wookey are an integral part of the story of this hockey team's biggest event of the year and one of the primary notability reasons about them. NOTNEWS seems to be if I was using breaking news to make this entire article up - but it's an added piece to the stories of Kieran McCann and especially Jonny Wookey who both had an impact on the team - and therefore are viable sources. I would really need an explanation on the not news criticism to consider it.
Lastly, I'm going to take a piece from my looking at the many pages of AfD guidelines and precedents: AFDISNOTCLEANUP and DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP - if the style of sourcing is the problem but this is still notable and passes the guidelines, it isn't worth deleting or redirecting. Fastfads (talk) 01:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel W. Greear[edit]

Daniel W. Greear (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject is a lawyer, currently serving as a judge in the West Virginia Intermediate Court of Appeals - that is not a role that would make one inherently notable, so we are looking at WP:GNG. The only secondary sources in the article look like rehashed press releases, recording the fact that he was given the '2021 Legislative Staff Achievement Award' - not a notable award. The other sources appear to be primary; I don't see any better sources, WP:GNG is not met. Girth Summit (blether) 13:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rowen's Arcade[edit]

Rowen's Arcade (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Small, local shopping arcade with no obvious notability. Appears to be WP:MILL, based mostly original research and the few sources provided are either deadlinks, primary sources (Web pages of tenants), real estate listings or limited to very local media coverage. Has been previously tagged for notability, but tagging was reverted/removed without discussion on talk page or obvious improvement. Dfadden (talk) 12:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: "Guy builds a house and other stuff" in an article about a shopping plaza is not really what we're looking for. This would be more suited for some local history project. I don't see notability with what's given and I don't find sourcing about this place. Delete for any lack of notability or lack of coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 15:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Shopping malls and Australia. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pratikur Rahaman[edit]

Pratikur Rahaman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. This is also written promotionally. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tawal[edit]

Tawal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't see this meets the criteria laid out in WP:NCORP The article relies on unreliable sources and press releases, and therefore fails WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 12:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miami International Holdings[edit]

Miami International Holdings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. 6 of the 11 references are non-rs and routine business news scope_creepTalk 11:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review. I've gone ahead to add several WP:RS/WP:INDEPENDENT references from Bloomberg, Reuters, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology.
I've also added segments that reference news coverage on some prolonged controversy and lawsuits involving other companies to meet substantial coverage requirements as per WP:ORGDEPTH, and how the firm has first-ever approval to operate a derivatives exchange for digital assets in the US.
With these changes, a majority of the 22 references should be WP:RS with several intended to meet WP:N/WP:SIGCOV requirements that are not routine business events or have significance at regulatory level that has implications to national WP:AUD, e.g. IPO, lawsuits from or against other major international corporations, provision of a major financial index. Keep.
- Cara Wellington (talk) 14:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Davide Sanclimenti[edit]

Davide Sanclimenti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not meeting WP:NACTOR. Not enough coverage to establish the notability. - The9Man (Talk) 11:39, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bandhan Mutual Fund[edit]

Bandhan Mutual Fund (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Trivial coverage according to WP:ORGTRIV. Citations are collections of paid news which are highly pervasive and deeply integrated practice within Indian news media WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The primary issue arises from the editor's attempt to pass off two financial products (exchange traded funds), namely BANDHAN S&P BSE SENSEX ETF (BSE:540154) and BANDHAN NIFTY 50 ETF (NSE:IDFNIFTYYET), as company's own stock market listings, which they are not, thereby failing to adhere to WP:LISTED. A comparable effort was observed in the AFD discussion of Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance, wherein the company tried to be part of NIFTY 50 without proper validation. In a nutshell, the company falls short when it comes to meeting WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:ORGIND. To put it mildly, they couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with a banjo and their depth is about as shallow as a puddle in the Sahara. TCBT1CSI (talk) 12:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:28, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 11:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador[edit]

Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has been erased several times on Spanish Wikipedia (and is nor creation protected) for repeated efforts to promotionally recreate it. This suggests serious WP:PROMO risk. In addition, the sources here aren't notable, all are either WP:ROUTINE, or lacking WP:DEPTH. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador article deserves to remain on Wikipedia because it contributes to the encyclopedia's mission of providing comprehensive information about educational institutions around the world

Misunderstanding of notability: The repeated deletion attempts might be due to a misunderstanding of the university's notability. We should strive to improve articles with proper sources rather than deletion.

Improve the sources: If the sources used previously were not notable, we can find alternative sources that meet Wikipedia's criteria. There are plenty of reputable Ecuadorian news outlets about the university's achievements, programs, or events, even though most of these would be reptitive and not part of an encyclopedic entry.

Scholarly articles, news coverage, and government websites can be good starting points for finding reliable sources.

Comprehensiveness of Wikipedia: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that strives to be comprehensive. Deleting an article about a university in Ecuador limits the information available to users about higher education in the country. The following List of universities in Ecuador used to include articles for each of the accredited institutions in the country. As of April 29th 2024 it seems that most of these articles have been deleted.

Notability

In general, most legitimate colleges and universities are notable[5] and should be included on Wikipedia. For notability of sub-articles, see relevant advice below. ... It is also important to bear in mind that anyone can set up an institution and call it a "college" or, in many countries, a "university", so that it is essential to be clear whether an institution warrants inclusion in Wikipedia based on that institution's use of these terms.

Government websites listing UPACIFICO and other universities as an accredited institution or mentioning its programs. Were part of the article prior to edits on April 29 2024.

Enhancing the Article's Quality:

A collective effort can be made to find and add high-quality sources that meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. Despite this information being deleted because it was in "ugly tables"The article's content can be expanded to include information about the university's: History and mission Academic programs and faculty expertise Research activities and achievements Student life and campus facilities Accreditation status

Addressing Promotional Concerns:

We can collaborate to ensure the article presents a neutral and objective viewpoint. Promotional language can be replaced with factual descriptions of the university's academics, research, and student life. Editors can focus on providing verifiable information about the university's history, faculty, programs, and accreditation status.

With regards to the concern regarding repeated promotional recreation on the Spanish Wikipedia, this shouldn't automatically lead to deletion on the English version as the translation of this article into spanish does automatically reflect the existance of the article in wikipedia.es. The editing communities on each language version have some autonomy.

Independent Efforts: I translated the article into Spanish, demonstrating it wasn't a mere copy-paste attempt. Additionally, you mentioned finding the article created by other editors, further suggesting independent interest in the university. In my last edit on the Spanish Wikipedia my edit focused on adding a recognition which I had added to wikipedia.en, not promotional language, this led to the pages deletion, and blocking of my wikipedia.es account. Let me reiterate that wikipedia.es has a delitionist policy rather than a broader inclusionist perspective regarding knowledge.

Inconsistent Treatment: If you check [Universidades de Ecuador] All universities in Ecuador have entries on the Spanish Wikipedia. The Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador which has been deleted (and now reroutes to the English entry) seems inconsistent with this practice.

Proposal for Moving Forward:

Perhaps a communication channel can be established between the Spanish and English Wikipedia editors to discuss the university and ensure consistent treatment. I am more than willing to translate the Univerity entries in Spanish back into English in order to once again have a List of universities in Ecuador with entries to the different Universtites.

HarveyPrototype (talk) 17:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 11:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All this is fine, but there are no sources about the school that we can use. Being on a list isn't notable. Oaktree b (talk) 15:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete despite what "College and university article advice" says, the actual notability guidelines do have requirements beyond being a legitimate university. It looks like the advice page may be a tad out of date. (Also there's no particular requirement to be consistent with the Spanish Wikipedia, they can do what they want). -- D'n'B-t -- 12:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Sure it exists, but sourcing from a list of "50 best xxx" and interviews aren't what we're looking for... This is PROMO. I can't find anything beyond confirmation that the place exists. Oaktree b (talk) 15:46, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023–24 Porsche Carrera Cup Middle East[edit]

2023–24 Porsche Carrera Cup Middle East (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reviewed during NPP. Stats-only article for a season with no sources other than themselves about a series which doesn't have an article. GNG sourcing of the season per se is unfindable and unlikely to exist. The series itself would probably be a good topic for an article. But there is nothing here to move to it. North8000 (talk) 13:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First to reinforce, this article is not about the series, it's stats for 1 season of the series. There is no article for the series. On your question, I'm never sure that something doesn't exist but I looked and couldn't find any real coverage of the season, much less GNG coverage. North8000 (talk) 00:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 11:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The Porsche Carrera Cup Middle East could be notable, but I don't see enough coverage for this collection of stats. Cortador (talk) 12:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are some sources mentioning PCCME - Australians talking about Walls and Jones (here), or Middle Eastern sources referring to PCCME as a F1 or WEC support event (here). The series is notable as a support event on two Formula One events, as well as WEC support during 1st Bahrain round. Apart from that, a lot of notable drivers took part in the races including Theo Oeverhaus, Harry King, Harri Jones, Robert de Haan or F3 Charlie Wurz. The series doesn't have an article, as it's very new, but it may be created by me in coming days. So, I think that the season is notable enough to not delete the article. Maceekim (talk) 13:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability of a parent topic isn't passed down to articles of the same topic. Cortador (talk) 13:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, seasons are not presumed notable under the SNG. So the the relevant definition of wp:notability is having suitable GNG coverage, not the elements which you are listing. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify in anticipation of the series article being created. It is new and looks pretty notable, and having this in draft space is completely fine. Geschichte (talk) 08:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ellicott Dredges[edit]

Ellicott Dredges (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It exists, but I don't think it has the significance or coverage to meet N. Boleyn (talk) 12:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 11:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Hi @Boleyn: I was starting on the cat:nn list after a few weeks away and came across this. Are they any good

I think its likely notable, give its age at 139 years. They're is likely mountains of coverage. scope_creepTalk 08:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MIAX Pearl Equities[edit]

MIAX Pearl Equities (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. References are company news and routine annoucements. scope_creepTalk 11:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't agree with this nomination.
1. Statement is untrue. I have included references from Financial Times meeting general notability criteria as outlined in WP:ORGCRIT and WP:SIGCOV.
2. This is also balanced with other sources such as The Royal Gazette, and another company's press release, meeting WP:SECONDARY and WP:IS criteria.
3. Remaining primary sources, press releases and company pages, beyond that are stylistic choices of the author's own, but sufficiency is met even if those references were removed.
4. All other US stock exchanges, including smaller ones such as Long-Term Stock Exchange, and Investors Exchange already have their own pages.
5. Crucially, Consolidated Tape Association and Unlisted Trading Privileges have long pointed to each of these exchanges' pages for WP:POFR, and only MIAX Pearl Equities remains redirected to its holding company Miami International Holdings.
- Cara Wellington (talk) 11:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For avoidance of doubt, I have added WP:RS and non-business news from Wall Street Journal and S&P Global.
- Cara Wellington (talk) 12:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Got a bit distracted looking at Long-Term Stock Exchange, oops. But I took a quick squiz at the ProQuest results, unfortunately could not find anything there either. I'm sorry to say that the WP:ORGDEPTH requirements are a bit stricter than what's available, and it's quite rare for routine coverage of launches to go beyond WP:ORGTRIV. Unfortunately, delete. (Also, full disclosure, I only got about 6 pages in before it started showing the regulatory filings again, so I did not review the full 2748 results ProQuest gave me, only slightly over a fifth of that, but I do not anticipate it making a material difference) Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the review.
    1. Could you reconsider your opinion if you search for "Miami Exchange" or "MIAX" instead? "MIAX Pearl Equities" is the formal entity name of the stock exchange as per regulatory filings, and I have followed this convention. However, the exchange is more commonly referred to as "MIAX", which unfortunately conflates with MIH's naming for options exchanges and causes this confusion.
    2. I made the above search on ProQuest and don't see a problem meeting WP:SIGCOV given the extensive coverage in Financial Times, Boston Globe, Wall Street Journal, Barron's, Bloomberg that not only relate to the company itself, but also rivals Nasdaq and CBOE.
    3. Further, a national stock exchange's history appears to meet WP:ORGDEPTH guidelines, which I cite:
    • "An encyclopedia entry giving an overview of the history of an organization".
    • "Significant coverage in media with an international, national, or at least regional audience".
    4. I should point out that deletion would be an inconsistent application of guidelines, considering similar or less coverage of other national exchanges found on ProQuest, some of which have much less volume or are even defunct altogether:
    - Cara Wellington (talk) 13:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    MIAX was the search term I used for ProQuest. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    OK. That explains: for some reason, your search only yields 2,748 results but I see 12,960 results for MIAX. It appears that this inconsistency is because ProQuest is not a WP:REPUTABLE or reliable source. I wrote a Python script to scan all of such 12,960 results for MIAX and also the 96 "Newspapers" entries returned and it appears not to index links from many reliable sources, such as these ones:
    Let me know if you can corroborate these findings, e.g. with screenshots of the 6 pages you've seen or the payload returned from the proquest.com/resultsol/ endpoint that I can run a script on, or if there's anything else I can do to help. In any case, I'll go ahead to add some of these references to the article to resolve your WP:ORGTRIV concerns. Thanks again.
    - Cara Wellington (talk) 14:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ProQuest is a collection of databases, it doesn't really index things the same way a web search engine would. Most of my search results would have been from ProQuest Central, because historical newspapers aren't very likely to be of interest (I also have access to One Academic, but, again). After excluding The Federal Register and a few other publications, you should find the number quite comparable. Also, I'm fairly sure scraping would violate something in my TOU somewhere, and I would rather not get in trouble with my institutions, or my institution in trouble with ProQuest.
    Also not sure how you expect the sources in your most recent comment to meet WP:ORGDEPTH where the others didn't. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Unfortunately, I'm unable to replicate your methodology and will invite the next editor who visits this discussion to do so, because "quite comparable" is a vague quantifier. 12,960 or 2,748 - those two numbers are too drastically different and cannot be dismissed as "quite comparable". I've also given you concrete, specific links which are not tracked in this tool or apparently outdated collection of databases.
    • I've also identified the two specific clauses of WP:ORGDEPTH guidelines that I specifically sought to address, in point 3 above. This seems to be a case of WP:THIS or WP:THAT or WP:THEOTHER without an attempted interpretation of what WP:ORGDEPTH means.
    • Trivially, one has likely heard of Reuters, Bloomberg, and CNBC, however this is the first time I've heard of ProQuest. The latter appears to be unreliable and not a meaningful measure of WP:NCORP or WP:ORGDEPTH. So if you intend on admitting WP:NOTRS for relevance, I hope you agree that the burden of proof is on you, not myself, to show how you expect your sources to matter to this discussion.
    - Cara Wellington (talk) 17:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Next you'll tell me you've never heard of Gale or EBSCO either. Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:48, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure. My contributions are mostly in finance, CS, math, which also aligns with my professional background. We use different research databases in our area and so I find this is a strange barometer of ORGDEPTH, in the same way you wouldn't use a search on Nature or NEJM to indicate GNG on a political person of interest.
    I'm sure they're meaningful in your area of subject matter expertise and that's great. I'm not questioning your expertise, just pointing out how your methodology appears flawed and unscientific, so we can make the editorial process a little bit better for the next person who comes along here with an article in finance.
    There's no WP acronym to express my respect for people who're trying to make the world a better place. So as critical as I sound, it doesn't mean my respect for you is diminished. You have a hard enough job patrolling the AfD queue and I don't mean to make life more difficult for you.
    - Cara Wellington (talk) 11:28, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are pretty solid secondary sources. I wish to see you more at Afd. Nomination Withdrawn. scope_creepTalk 08:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the prompt withdrawal of your nomination. Would you kindly review your nomination in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miami International Holdings again if you have the time as well? The same editor has also provided similar analysis of the coverage on the parent company, and I've also tried my best to improve the article to meet guidelines.
- Cara Wellington (talk) 10:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This editor is a WP:SPA. scope_creepTalk 08:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Quick Shave and Brush-up[edit]

A Quick Shave and Brush-up (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence that this is a notable film. Can be redirected to George Albert Smith (filmmaker)#Selected filmography. Fram (talk) 07:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 11:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Wreck in a Gale[edit]

A Wreck in a Gale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence that this 43-second film is notable, hasn't received significant attention. No good redirect target found. Fram (talk) 07:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United Kingdom. Fram (talk) 07:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Meets WP:NFILM as I mentioned in my edit summary when I "PROD-conned" it. See the guideline. Shown at festival more than 5 years after production. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • That line in NFILM gives only a presumption which needs to be supported by reliable sources indicating that it meets WP:GNG. A screening on a niche festival which shows more than 500 such rediscoveries each year is hardly a clear indication of importance, more of being a curio of passing interest. Fram (talk) 13:01, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Thank you for sharing your opinion. I'll stand by my Keep, if you allow me, as I find this short clearly does meet the inclusionary criteria (not only a "line"), which is quite clear. It also proves, btw, that this short has received the "significant attention" you mentioned in your rationale. What you call a "niche festival" has indeed been a very important film event for almost 40 years. You are free to call this "a curio of passing interest" but the film has been screened at a very notable festival (much) more than 5 years after its production and that is, I'm afraid, a fact. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. N:FILM says "meeting these criteria is not an absolute guarantee that Wikipedia should have a separate, stand-alone article entirely dedicated to the film," and that is true here, where there are no reliable sources to describe the notability of this film beyond its mere existence. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 11:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ladysmith – Naval Brigade Dragging 4.7 Guns into Ladysmith[edit]

Ladysmith – Naval Brigade Dragging 4.7 Guns into Ladysmith (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication that this is a notable film (well, a 31 second static shot). Apparently not only have we no idea who actually made it (just the producre), but we also don't know what is being shown according to this. Perhaps some list for this and many similar non-notable shorts may be feasible, but at the moment I don't see a good redirect target. Perhaps William Kennedy Dickson filmography, which gives an idea of the number of such ultrashort films that were made (and is clearly incomplete, as e.g. this very one isn't on that list). Fram (talk) 07:42, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 11:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Jay Glen[edit]

Rick Jay Glen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources at all, lacks notability, extreme amounts of fluff - looks very much like just a self-promo page. Hornpipe2 (talk) 03:50, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • (comment) having some doubts over whether the IPv6 editor, and also the user "rickory", have a conflict of interest going on with this Hornpipe2 (talk) 06:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sources added. Content has been edited and cut down to remove fluff. 2601:644:9280:7C80:B58D:218D:9C58:17C8 (talk) 20:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 11:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete of the sources that aren't IMDB only one actually mentions the subject in passing. Others don't mention the subject at all, leaving all of the biographical parts of the article unverified. Agree lacks notability. Orange sticker (talk) 15:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Esteghlal B F.C.[edit]

Esteghlal B F.C. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Empty article without any sources or material Shahin (talk) 11:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atlus USA[edit]

Atlus USA (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reads like a video game essay, insufficient standalone notability. Only source I found that might have sufficient coverage is the Game Informer one, suggesting merger with Atlus. IgelRM (talk) 02:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. IgelRM (talk) 02:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Seems quite notable, cites over 77 sources, many of which are secondary. I will note that if language is an issue, just tag it. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 02:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I could have tagged for style but generally interviews, which are a large part of the sources, don't give sufficient notability. IgelRM (talk) 17:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: A fairly in-depth article that explains its significance outside of the parent company; several dozen hits when looking at a cursory Google Books search. I do not see a strong reason to delete. Why? I Ask (talk) 02:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am assuming you are referring to "notable in its localization approach in preserving as much of the original", but I struggle to find a notable source for that and mentioned Game Informer article doesn't say it. It would help me if you could pick an example book with significant coverage. IgelRM (talk) 17:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Neutral: I know I'm biased, and if things go another way I'll accept the decision. If style and writing is the issue, then it needs a rewrite. Or maybe trimming down in places like that huge game list. --ProtoDrake (talk) 06:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Biased means article creator here for outsiders) It only makes sense to rewrite if it is notable. The game list seems fine although ideally it should be sourced and maybe spun-out to a separate page. IgelRM (talk) 18:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 03:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Somewhat off-topic but the name in the lead was changed from "USA to "West" (as well as on the Atlus article), which does not appear to an official name. IgelRM (talk) 18:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, concur with others below, fails WP:THREE, see discussion on my talk Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 01:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Atlus. After (briefly) looking through the 77 sources and Google Books, I'm simply not seeing significant coverage of Atlus USA in reliable, secondary, independent sources. The article clearly has plenty of sources, but they're all trivial mentions (not significant coverage) or interviews (not secondary or independent), plus a few primary sources from Atlus. A few sources do border on significant coverage of Atlus, the parent company, but not Atlus USA, the subject of this article. The only source that is unequivocally significant coverage of Atlus USA is Game Informer, as mentioned above. Will gladly change my mind if anyone can point to two more sources that actually demonstrate SIGCOV. Woodroar (talk) 12:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Deliberating a possible merge: History section (except staff section, which does not appear notable) to Atlus; Localization approach section (mostly about localizing SMT) to Megami Tensei; Publishing section and third-party list into an additional section on List of Atlus games. IgelRM (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This makes sense to me! Woodroar (talk) 13:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Editors are free to merge whatever content they want to other articles but XFDcloser can only handle one Merge target article in closing a discussion. Would that be Atlus? Liz Read! Talk! 17:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge I've been going back and forth on this one, but Woodroar more or less said where I ended up. The GameInformer is a huge in-depth source, but as I went through the rest, I simply could not find anything else. A few passing mentions in relation to games ("And Atlus USA is translating" and the like), and many of the non-interviews/non-primaries seemed to not mention Atlus USA at all. Calls for the !Keeps to provide at minimum three are unanswered at this time. -- ferret (talk) 13:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm just curious, is there policy/precedent for not spinning out regional branches like this? Nintendo of America for example doesn't have a standalone article even though it seemingly could. I know WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't an argument for or against deletion, I'm just wondering if there was some previous consensus on this. CurlyWi (talk) 17:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think ideally every single article is as comprehensive as possible, so I would need to ask why (maybe because of the section length?) and what a spin-out would improve. IgelRM (talk) 18:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per above. The article doesn't have enough in-depth sources to exist on it's own, most articles are about the Japanese developer. Swordman97 talk to me 03:42, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 11:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Seems quite notable per WP:NORG. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 18:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Would you mind identifying the three best sources demonstrating notability for Atlus USA? Woodroar (talk) 18:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I really really want to change my position, but no one has provided a single source other than Game Informer that shows in-depth independnent sigcov. -- ferret (talk) 18:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It currently fails WP:NCORP. I looked at the first block of references in detail and quickly looked at the second block. The first block is mostly made up of profiles with no byline, routine business news, PR and interviews with leading folk in the company, none of which passes WP:SIRS or WP:ORGIND. The second block is just equally as bad. It is completely non-notable. Possible small merge to main article, a sentence or two at most as they're is nothing to support anything bigger. scope_creepTalk 09:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of movie theaters[edit]

List of movie theaters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This appears to be an underinclusive and unnecessary duplication of Category:Cinemas and movie theaters by country, which includes many more theaters which are not on this list. I don't believe this page is particularly useful as a stand-alone list. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is an absurdly incomplete list. Taking France as an example, the creator seems to think that Paris is all there is in France, unaware that the oldest cinema still in operation after 125 years, is in La Ciotat (https://edencinemalaciotat.com/le-plus-ancien-cinema-du-monde/). Similar problems apply in other countries, for example Chile, which apparently has just one cinema, though I saw Jurassic Park and The Color Purple in two different ones. Even if the list was made complete it would still be pointless. Athel cb (talk) 15:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is obviously only a list of notable movie theaters that have articles because they are historic or otherwise significant, which is a typical criterion for SALs. It needs some clean-up and is likely missing many, but I don't think we have an article on the oldest theater in La Ciotat so of course it's not on here. Reywas92Talk 16:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      OK. I failed to notice the qualification "notable enough for Wikipedia articles," but it's still a ridiculous list. You are right that there is no "article on the oldest theater in La Ciotat", but there damn well should be. Athel cb (talk) 16:43, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Perhaps you could make it? Then we should consider how List of oldest cinemas is not an article, but certainly notable. Conyo14 (talk) 22:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Perhaps I will, but I'm not sure my knowledge is sufficient. La Ciotat is about 45 minutes drive from where I live (at least, it would be if I still drove significant distances). I've passed the Eden Cinema, but I've never been inside. Athel cb (talk) 17:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I would note that Category:Cinemas and movie theaters by country is, of course, organized by country -- which is how this list is organized too. The difference is that there are a number of cinemas which Wikipedia has articles about, but which are not listed here on List of movie theaters. So this list is trying to fulfill the same function as Category:Cinemas and movie theaters by country, but not as well since it doesn't include all of the movie theaters that already have Wikipedia articles. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and improve. With some work and dedication it has the potential to be an informative list of historical/notable theaters. Archives908 (talk) 01:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm kind of leery of a page like this, though. The amount of work it would need to maintain would be kind of exhausting. I think that a far more manageable option would be for the page to limit itself to something like "oldest movie theater" by country, with the further requirement being that the theater would either have to be still operational OR the building itself would still have to be standing, in the case of a company that's now defunct but the building still stands. Otherwise this is a page that could potentially contain hundreds upon thousands of theaters. It would also be kind of prone to people coming around to list their mini (non-notable) theater as well. I'm not using that as an argument to delete mind you, just say that a page like this needs to be more limited out of necessity to make it more encyclopedic. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Allows an organised overview with photographs and notes, which a category cannot do. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 11:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Higher Education and Research Opportunities in the UK[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Higher Education and Research Opportunities in the UK (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Defunct goverment website without any claim to notability. previous AfD was "no consensus" but keep arguments didn't seem to go past USEFUL (even then I can't tell if they were saying that the article is useful or the website itself) and the article has not had any sources since then.

The generic name makes searching difficult, but I find it highly unlikely that what was only ever an information portal would have seen significant coverage. I did find all of one entry in a directory which doesn't really establish anything. -- D'n'B-t -- 10:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Public infrastructure[edit]

Public infrastructure (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Merge to Infrastructure.Most infrastructure around the world is public.There is no need to create additional article just for public infrastructure. Moreover, the article is not long and the content can be completely covered by Infrastructure.日期20220626 (talk) 00:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 10:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge per nom although I believe this should have been discussed as a merger rather than brought to AfD. Mooonswimmer 19:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Bierman[edit]

Adam Bierman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability I can see, seeking delete and redirect rather than just BLAR due to promotional nature and it being most likely UPE spam. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a WP:SPA. scope_creepTalk 08:15, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Classic UPE article non-notable ceo. A WP:BEFORE didn't find much. Several interviews in the context of the company. The references, again the first two blocks are more to do with company than him. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:BIO. scope_creepTalk 08:15, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sirimongkol Rattanapoom[edit]

Sirimongkol Rattanapoom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing has been written that suggests notability, and any argument like there being sources that are full-length can shake the elephant in the room, the Catch-22 if you will: if this player is so notable, why isn't he playing? He's played zero minutes this season in Belgium's amateur third division. He has no international appearances, and in all due respect it's easier to be chosen for Thailand than for Brazil or Spain. He's 22 this month, so if he's some special player who passes WP:GNG without any professional appearances, when are they going to come? I know people like to make articles about teenagers at big clubs, based on hype press, but a 22-year-old at an amateur Belgian club is clearly a different kettle of fish. While I disagree with the old WP:NFOOTY regulation that a player was notable as soon as they made one professional appearance, it's a good measure at least. Also bear in mind that [29] this source comes from King Power, the Thai company that owns his Belgian club, so it is not independent anyway. Additionally, the creator made this article as an incomprehensible quote farm from Google Translate, suggesting an unfamiliarity with Thai sources. [30] Unknown Temptation (talk) 09:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plunder of Murshidabad (1742)[edit]

Plunder of Murshidabad (1742) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP: NOTABILITY. The event is a part of the Maratha invasions of Bengal, and the prelude of First Battle of Katwa. Not much coverage in WP:RS, except some scattered lines. Not enough coverage in reliable sources for an article; and "Plunder of Murshidabad" is WP:OR as such an event is not named by any Historians. Imperial[AFCND] 09:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • '''Keep''' Look, this article has already been accepted by the admin, and that's proof of its [[Wikipedia:Notability|notability]]. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Akshunwar#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation:_Plunder_of_Murshidabad_(1742)_has_been_accepted] Even in Reliable Sources, this event receives significant coverage: 1. {{tq|In 1742 Maratha general Bhaskar Ram invaded Bengal and surrounded the Nawab at Burdwan, but he escaped. The Marathas plundered Murshidabad, the capital of the Nawab, and secured a booty of about 2 crores of rupees. They captured Orissa.}}<ref>{{Cite book |last=Vaish |first=Devi Charan Lal |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wvcgAAAAMAAJ&newbks=0&hl=en |title=The Rise of British Power and the Fall of Marathas |date=1972 |publisher=Upper India Publishing House |language=en}}</ref>
2. The nawabi had since 1740 been ruled by a Turkish adventurer, Alivardi Khan, who had, from the abundant treasury at Murshidabad, sent two crores of rupees to Delhi to secure his nomination as nawab. The British found him ready to sustain the conditions in which business flourished, but he was no match for the Marathas, who swept into Bengal in April 1742 and plundered Murshidabad. Their outfliers caused panic in Calcutta where the Company began to dig the Maratha ditch to keep them out. For the next seven years the golden province of Bengal was afflicted by roving armies, until Alivardi Khan bought off the Marathas by paying chauth of 12 lakhs of rupees a year. The merchants of Calcutta trembled, but one merchant in Bengal saw only advantage in the weakness of formerly powerful Mughal princes in the face of Maratha attack.
3. <ref>{{Cite book |last=Cavaliero |first=Roderick |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BxKJDwAAQBAJ&newbks=0&hl=en |title=Strangers in the Land: The Rise and Decline of the British Indian Empire |date=2002-06-28 |publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing |isbn=978-0-85771-707-8 |language=en}}</ref>
4. There are already articles on Wikipedia which are based on the place name where the event took place and this doesn't violate WP:OR. Akshunwar (talk) 22:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs about Dubai[edit]

List of songs about Dubai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The deletion reason is the same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about Ahmedabad, Madras, Oslo etc.: The list fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:LISTN and WP:OR. There is little to nothing worthwhile in this list, be it content or context - the mishmash sources or the songs' lack of standalone notability don't help. Geschichte (talk) 08:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs about Bangalore[edit]

AfDs for this article:
List of songs about Bangalore (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previous AFD was a mass nomination that ended in keep, for many reasons, except for the article's actual merits. Because there are none.

The deletion reason is the same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about Ahmedabad, Madras, Oslo etc.: The list fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:LISTN and WP:OR. There is little to nothing worthwhile in this list, be it content or context. Geschichte (talk) 08:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nisar Ahmed (politician)[edit]

Nisar Ahmed (politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Didn't win the election, never elected into an office. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 08:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Looks like the subject might not meet WP:POLITICIAN since there's no record of them being elected to parliament. Also, not seeing much coverage, so not even passes WN:GNG either. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 09:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete: This should be speedily deleted and the author should be warned\blocked as after the AFD of Hakeem Nisar Ahmad, the author of that article created the same article under different name space. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 10:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But the author is an admin. You can't really say anything to them without consequences, you know? —Saqib (talk | contribs) 10:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ROFL. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 12:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete A7. Mccapra (talk) 17:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

House of Wisdom for Conflict Resolution & Governance[edit]

House of Wisdom for Conflict Resolution & Governance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete or merge into Ahmed Yousef. Fails WP:NORG. Only fleeting mentions of this organization in RS, and an official testifying before the UK Parliament does not establish notability. Longhornsg (talk) 00:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 08:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hero Envy[edit]

Hero Envy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm not sure if the subject of the article is notable. There are at least two newspaper articles about this series, in the Leominster Champion and in the Telegram & Gazette, however, both are local sources (Worcester County, Massachusetts), and both articles are from August 2006. Hero Envy is also present in the book Internet Comedy Television Series, 1997-2015, where about 130 words are dedicated to the summary of the plot/characters, and about 75 words of additional commentary (mainly about the spin-off). The article also cites Nerd Caliber, but that doesn't seem like an RS. Perhaps I've missed something, though. toweli (talk) 08:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Lane (actor)[edit]

Alex Lane (actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not appear to possess roles that adequately satisfy WP:NCREATIVE. Most sources currently present in the article say the same thing, in which subject is mentioned once to declare being a co-producer. I cannot find satisfactory GNG sourcing online. —Sirdog (talk) 07:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. I hope editors can add some of this information into the article so it can be expanded a bit? Liz Read! Talk! 17:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Məlikzadə[edit]

Məlikzadə (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A one sentence page that fails WP:GNG. It has been like that for around 10 years now. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 20:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Asia, and Azerbaijan. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 20:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: On the map, it shows up north of Gülüzənbinə and has enough houses that I don't doubt (contrary to about a hundred AFDs on US locations) that it's populated. However, they are very close to eachother and a case might be made that these are constituent parts of a larger village. Geschichte (talk) 21:10, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Geschichte: in the two articles I found, Məlikzadə and Gülüzənbinə were mentioned as 2 different villages. The frustrating thing is that most likely a very different spelling would have been used in Soviet and pre-Soviet times, I can't find how it was written then. --Soman (talk) 22:35, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - for a village, there is no requirement for much more info that what is available in the article. It's a village, it has coords, it is located in a municipality. Here there is mention (WP:RS?) on Gypsy population being resettled in Melikzade in by Shah Abbas the Great as a measure to suppress local rebellions, seems it is was of the main sites of Gypsy population in Azerbaijan. [31] confirms same point, and affirms that they are Persian speakers. --Soman (talk) 23:43, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • add Keep, a separate village should be ok for notability per WP:NPLACE. --Soman (talk) 22:39, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Separate village. Satisfies WP:GEOLAND. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: meets NPLACE by virtue of being a legally recognised, populated settlement. That critereon could be looked at, but not on an individual basis. -- D'n'B-t -- 11:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

TalkLocal[edit]

AfDs for this article:
TalkLocal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails the notability guideline for companies. Previously deleted at AfD but I could not verify whether G4 applied. There is some not-totally-worthless Washington Post coverage [32] [33], but (1) the company is Maryland-based and so WaPo coverage is not as significant as it otherwise would be and (2) we need multiple independent sources. The rest are either unreliable or non-independent. My source checks covered both "TalkLocal" and its former name "Seva Call". – Teratix ₵ 05:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KYNM-CD[edit]

KYNM-CD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, This article needs reducing, not deleting. Searched the station, and was able to pick up a source from the LPTV Report, and even then, the article seems to have enough to justify saving it. --Danubeball (talk) 20:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KQDF-LD[edit]

KQDF-LD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. This was actually one that I myself slid in some extra sources in back when the whole HC2 mass destruction thing was happening. Still think it deserves to stay kinda. Danubeball (talk) 20:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Queen Killing Kings[edit]

The Queen Killing Kings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article has some sources, but I could not find sustained coverage and to me it appears that it doesn't meet the criteria laid out at WP:NMUSIC. I think the community should decide whether this band merits having their own page. Keivan.fTalk 05:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arora Akanksha[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Arora Akanksha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPOL as a former candidate who got exactly 0 votes. Since her 2021 run, she did absolutely nothing that is notable, so I'm renominating this article for deletion. All the sources fit squarely in WP:BLP1E territory. Mottezen (talk) 04:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Canada. Mottezen (talk) 04:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Not passing WP:NPOL does not mean that she cannot be notable through any other criteria. The previous AfD from 2021 was kept on WP:GNG grounds; can you clarify why you think that result was incorrect? Curbon7 (talk) 05:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In the previous nomination, the 2021 United Nations Secretary-General selection was not yet completed. While, most !keep voters in the previous AfD did not even acknowledge the BLP1E issue, those that did exaggerated her importance in the election.
    Example for exaggerated importance: even if the coverage relates to one event (where both the event & the role of the subject is significant); such articles are usually kept. and Invoking WP:BLP1E here isn't right because she pretty clearly has a significant role in the selection. Remember, she got no votes and no country endorsements, so her role in the event was insignificant. Even the UN ambassador for her own country didn't reply to her request for a meeting to discuss her candidacy.
    Of note: about a year after the end of her campaign, her campaign website https://unow.org/ went down, and her last campaign post on facebook was before the 2021 selection. Arora moved on to become a lecturer. Mottezen (talk) 05:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - as in the first AfD, I think the question of notability centers on WP:BLP1E, since WP:GNG is clearly met. BLP1E states that we should not have an article if all 3 conditions are met. Here, Criteria #1 and #2 are clearly met (only covered in context of one event, otherwise low-profile). So is Criteria #3 met? Well, the UN Secretary-General selection is clearly significant, so that's ok. Was Arora's role "not substantial" or "not well-documented"? As GNG is met, we can cross off "not well-documented." On "not substantial", we come to a matter of opinion. Since she received no backing or actual votes, I can see why those in favor of deletion would argue her role was insubstantial. On the other hand, this candidacy was outside the norms of the UN system and attracted reliable media coverage for that reason. I would argue it was substantial enough to merit her inclusion as a standalone page. However, a merge to 2021 United Nations Secretary-General selection would also be a reasonable outcome. —Ganesha811 (talk) 13:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to 2021 United Nations Secretary-General selection. Not convinced there's enough here for WP:GNG.-KH-1 (talk) 02:40, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete a BLP1E similar to an article about a losing candidate - if there's anything to cover, it can be done on the election page. SportingFlyer T·C 04:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. As Ganesha811 points out, with the amount of coverage received this is not a case of Arora being "not well-documented". I see WP:GNG met in this case, and losses can be notable if covered in reliable secondary sources. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 08:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hovhannes Mkrtchyan[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Hovhannes Mkrtchyan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Ineligible for PROD. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Angela Maxwell[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Angela Maxwell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 18:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gerhard Lomer[edit]

Gerhard Lomer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing shows the notability. Of the three sources; two are written by the subject and the other by their employer. -- NotCharizard 🗨 03:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- NotCharizard 🗨 03:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Canada, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    keep I have added a number of citations. There are many, many more available.
    A BEFORE search, if one was done, would have revealed numerous sources about the article subject. For example, this search[34] should have been a clue that notability would be shown. I used archive links so there wouldn't be a paywall issue. Per WP:NEXISTS even without citations in the article this nomination would have been without foundation. Oblivy (talk) 05:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- the quote from a reliable source "undoubtedly the single most important individual in the history of Canadian library education" is enough to show notability unless there are significant reasons to doubt the independence. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 08:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    McNally wrote that in 1996, and at the time he was chair of the Canadian Library Association. It looks like Quebec Library Association (of which Lomer was honorary president until 1970) did not become a member of the rebooted national group until 2016. So even though McNally certainly has some pro-librarian bias I don't see anything that would call his independence, or that of the publisher, into question. Oblivy (talk) 10:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep passes WP:GNG based on current content plus found more on a newspapers.com search (for instance [35] [36] [37] [38] [39]). KylieTastic (talk) 13:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Yuga Labs[edit]

Yuga Labs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This stub's information on Yuga Labs' ownership of Bored Ape and CryptoPunks NFTs, doxxing of its founders, and new CEO hiring are all covered in more detail at the existing Bored Ape article. I propose redirecting this article to Bored Ape (which was how Pppery originally created the article in June 2022), as the latter already has more information on the company. BluePenguin18 🐧 ( 💬 ) 03:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maicol Azzolini[edit]

Maicol Azzolini (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Italian rugby player who fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I found this interview and a couple of transactional announcements (1, 2, 3), but nothing substantial. JTtheOG (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmada[edit]

Ahmada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

lack of notability Minmarion (talk) 02:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aida Vee[edit]

Aida Vee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

lack of notability. little to no 3rd party articles detailing artist Minmarion (talk) 02:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CD Country[edit]

CD Country (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 19:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Los Zodiac[edit]

Los Zodiac (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This was hard to assess, especially as there are varying spellings used. I couldn't find enough to show it meets WP:NBAND / WP:GNG. Survived 2005 AfD ([[40]], but standards very different then. Boleyn (talk) 10:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • From this it seems like there is some level of coverage in 2018's Demoler. El rock en el Perú 1965-1975 by Carlos Torres Rotondo
  • There may be some leads from this: "Very little has been written about the History of Rock in our environment. Only sketches (as some newspapers usually publish) and some studies such as the one done by Jose Miguel Gonzalo Garcia, entitled Development of Youth Music in Peru, give us a brief idea of this whole matter. But the closest thing to a treatise on the so-called underground current or alternative music comes from the university works of which I mention (but always from a giraffe perspective, based more on journalistic data or conversations with subways, than on personal experiences), the job that my friend Miguel Lescano did at the beginning of the 90s, or the Underground Rock -10 Years of Wild Operas by Alvaro Olano Dextre. All of them are the first formal attempts to capture a history of underground rock. Someone will try to object to me by saying, what about Pedro Cornejo's book? I'm sorry to contradict you little brother, but the Game without Borders - Approaches to Contemporary Music that Pedro published in 1994 is not considered, not even by Pedro Cornejo himself, a total work, at least it is not what many (like me) expected from Pedro Cornejo Guinassi, graduate in Philosophy, professor at La Católica, participant in the first years of underground rock, editor and collaborator of alternative publications and other publications."
  • es-wiki does not have an article for them, and nor are they actually covered at es:Rock_del_Perú or es:Historia_del_rock_en_el_Perú
  • They are not the Los Zodiacs from Getxo in Spain who had a song in a Pepsi ad (see this from El Correo)
I can't see what's in Torres, etc, but there's otherwise a dearth of reliable sourcing for the band other than being one of a number of early 60s Peruvian rock bands. Unless adequate info is discovered in Torres or other RS, redirect with retention of history and categories seems the sensible option. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 12:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Premier League overseas broadcasters[edit]

List of Premier League overseas broadcasters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 15:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per sources found by Claudio Fernag. Esolo5002 (talk) 13:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep GNG is well passed here and the sourcing for this list is certainly not in question, while the article is monitored closely to revert any errors or vandalism near immediately. We disqualify outright press releases, but certainly not reliable news sources, and the nominator is advised that they are perfectly acceptable to source a broadcast partner. Nate • (chatter) 18:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Airbiquity[edit]

Airbiquity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All sources for this company are WP:ROUTINE coverage. Allan Nonymous (talk) 16:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, Software, Transportation, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean keep very difficult to find under all the regurgitated press releases but the Seattle Post-Intelligencer has done a couple of more substantial pieces on the company,[6][7] which looks to have been more prominent in the 2000s. (I don't think the articles are still available online – if anyone would like me to email the full text to review, let me know). I'm not yet fully convinced of notability – we would want to see decent coverage from more than one source – but the situation is not quite as bad as it looks. – Teratix ₵ 06:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Sinha, Bindeshwari Prasad (1974). Comprehensive History Of Bihar Vol.1; Pt.2.
  2. ^ Diwakar, R. R. (1958). Bihar through the ages.
  3. ^ Majumdar, R. C. (2009). History and Culture of the Indian People, Volume 04, The Age Of Imperial Kanauj. Public Resource. Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. pp. 50–51.
  4. ^ Others, Muzaffar H. Syed & (2022-02-20). History of Indian Nation : Ancient India. K.K. Publications. p. 287.
  5. ^ "Wikipedia:College and university article advice". Wikipedia.
  6. ^ Cook, John (21 October 2005). "Ex-startup Airbiquity experiences a rebirth". Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
  7. ^ Cook, John (22 January 2008). "Airbiquity rebounds with funding, deals". Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I opened all of the refs, they are routine press releases, 404, tangential and such. Nothing to establish notability. A 1997 startup that had 50-100 employess before being bought up recently and has now disappeared. Desertarun (talk) 19:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Did you look for sources that weren't in the article? – Teratix ₵ 04:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Tash Garrison[edit]

Al-Tash Garrison (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find any sources besides the one 2003 report. Given it seems to lack official government recognition, WP:GNG applies over WP:NPLACE and I can find basically nothing about this place. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iraq. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but rename. There was a refugee camp there and I believe it was notable per 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and other sources. I think “garrison” is just a mistranslation of “مخيم” and the intended meaning is “refugee camp”. Mccapra (talk) 06:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The problem here is that, since this place is not government recognized, WP:GNG applies. The first four here are primary sources, 5 is WP:ROUTINE coverage, and 6 about another camp and only mentions this one in passing. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy based input please
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Melo e Castro[edit]

Paul Melo e Castro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Orphan article with no evidence of notability. Lecturer does not meet WP:PROF and an h-Index of 4 means the research output had little impact. Tried to find book reviews to see if the subject could meet WP:NAUTHOR but I was only able to find this one and I don't think it's enough to qualify for notability. No evidence of WP:SIGCOV as well. Contributor892z (talk) 17:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retain. There is a misunderstanding here, on at least two counts. Firstly, the attainments of the subject are not as a Lecturer or in a British context, but rather in the field of Indo-Portuguese (and Portuguese) translations, and in the Lusophone world. Secondly, since the article is of niche and specialised interest (from a friend not many might understand or appreciate), it has not been updated for long. Melo e Castro's recent attainments have been overlooked in this listing. Have made some updates, please note. Fredericknoronha (talk)

Honorary Chaplain to the King[edit]

Honorary Chaplain to the King (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page is fundamentally flawed. The position of Honorary Chaplain to the King is a military appointment, for serving regular and reserve chaplains in the British and some Commonwealth armed forces. However much of the text refers to Chaplains to the King, who are members of the Ecclesiastical Household of the Royal Household, and are civilians, usually senior parish priests. I do not believe that the article can be repaired. As an alternative to deletion it would have to be wholly rewritten. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncox001 (talk • contribs) 10:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC); listed on the log at 21:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The nominator's contention is incorrect - Honorary Chaplain to the King is NOT a military appointment. In recent times a number of HCs have been appointed from the forces but many are also appointed who have no link to the forces. All are absolutely part of the ecclesiastical household. As such, the assertion that the article "cannot be repaired" is flawed. It should be improved, perhaps by starting here (p304) which details the creation of the position in 1881.----Pontificalibus 06:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete As lacking significant in-depth coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources. Also per WP:TNT: if someone believes this topic is notable, create a new article that's not a mess like this and with sufficient sources. AusLondonder (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 17:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Park Scholarships[edit]

Park Scholarships (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject is not independently notable (and notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization). ElKevbo (talk) 21:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: I have not found significant coverage of this scholarship in reliable sources. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Supermium[edit]

Supermium (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Supermium is essentially just Chromium backported to Windows XP. Is this really notable enough for its own article? Seems like it could just have a short mention in the Chromium page. Bringing up the phrase "Supermium" on Google news just reports two articles related to the program, and two related to a Spotify subscription tier. There are several videos made on it however on YouTube (though, mostly by small creators). HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 01:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it also seems like the article was originally created by a sockpuppet, if that contributes anything. HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 01:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Supporting old versions of Windows is a large enough niche, and the article already has 2 external refs because of it. (Plus there are plenty of other browser articles for even smaller, less-relevant niches.) -Pmffl (talk) 17:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Fusitua[edit]

Josh Fusitua (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a New Zealand rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 23:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per JTtheOG, can't see any thorough coverage of this person. David Palmer aka cloventt (talk) 02:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a young player at the beginning of his career and he is playing regularly for the Blues now. There are already more sources available about this player than used for this stub and it is foreseeable that there will be more written about him in the future. Ruggalicious (talk) 23:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akade[edit]

Akade (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No clear notability. Creation tends to indicate an undeclared conflict of interest. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jaars-Townsend Airport[edit]

Jaars-Townsend Airport (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable private airport. Coverage in secondary sources is nil. Could be redirected to JAARS. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this article does not meet the notability criteria then I second Mangoe’s suggestion L.arlanda27 (talk) 06:03, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jacques Fick[edit]

Jacques Fick (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poorly sourced rugby BLP; subject made one pro appearance. Having a hard time finding the necessary sourcing to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 23:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shaun Squires[edit]

Shaun Squires (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG. I am unable to find much of anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. Best thing that came up was three sentences here. JTtheOG (talk) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indiana University Informatics & Communications Technology Complex[edit]

Indiana University Informatics & Communications Technology Complex (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Most substantial source cited is a student newspaper article from time of construction. Further searches suggest that neither original construction or recent developments appear to have generated significant independent coverage. All coverage is from university or contractor press releases, or passing mentions as location of various departments. No indication building meets WP:GNG or WP:NBUILD. Triptothecottage (talk) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Logs: 2024-04 ✗ deleted
--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan audio leaks controversy[edit]

Pakistan audio leaks controversy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

per WP:SINGLEEVENT. This fails WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 13:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This isn't about a single event, and coverage has been ongoing for months and months at this point (see here, here, and here). The article needs an update, but as usual, AfD isn't clean-up. Cortador (talk) 14:22, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But this article discusses audio leaks involving Pakistan's prime ministers, but the sources you provided doesn't pertain to prime ministers. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article starts with the sentence "The Pakistan audio leaks controversy stems from several leaked audio conversations involving Pakistan's prime minister Shehbaz Sharif and former prime minister Imran Khan among others." Emphasis mine. The second article talks about "the recent audio leaks involving politicians, judges, and their relatives", confirming that sources treat the audio leaks controversy as one event, whether or not a given leak featuring a (former) prime minister or not. Cortador (talk) 06:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While the topic has indeed received extended coverage over a significant period, the accumulation of sources does not inherently justify the retention of an article. The core issue pertains to notability and whether the subject matter has sustained coverage that adds substantial information. The main concern is the notability and consistent, in-depth coverage. The provided references don’t seem to enhance the topic’s comprehension. While it’s true that the AfD isn’t just for clean-up, it does allow for evaluating an article’s significance. In this instance, the article seems to fall short of the expected encyclopedic depth and quality.  samee  converse  02:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a delete but you really should copyedit your generated tokens from an AI prompt. Recent ChatGPT models are trained on guest post spam and they will obvously spill out crap like this - avoid it all cost or you will loose your reputation [45]. If you still want to use chatbot then use the advanced model of Claude instead. At least it is objective and concise like Wikipedia. 111.119.37.78 (talk) 02:27, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:Notability. Also lack of depth. Wikibear47 (talk) 00:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Would like to point out that WP:SINGLEEVENT (cited in the nomination) explicitly doesn't apply here as that is for articles about people, not articles about events. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems like this should procedurally closed then for lack of a valid reason for deletion. Cortador (talk) 15:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let's allow the AfD to run its course. As Samee pointed out, the primary concern still revolves around WP:N and consistent, in-depth coverage as demanded per WP:GNG. Lets not forget WP is not an indiscriminate collection of information. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Atlanta[edit]

Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Atlanta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacking secondary sources specifically about the consulate. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORGCRIT. AusLondonder (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 17:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tythan Adams[edit]

Tythan Adams (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 19:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 15:24, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Max Silvestri[edit]

Max Silvestri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable - no significant coverage of the subject and possibly promotional Pprsmv (talk) 19:21, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Entertainment, United States of America, and Rhode Island. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:28, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Not a strong keep, but there appears to be sufficient notability - The sources in the article currently are not useful due to being interviews or dead links, but there are some reviews of his work that can be found with minimal effort that tend to indicate notability (Exclaim, The Diamondback, Vulture) - There are also interviews, Q&As and other sources, but generally they are not as strong as the 3 reviews above to establish notoriety. Shazback (talk) 19:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rome Chambers[edit]

Rome Chambers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Played a single, unremarkable game over 120 years ago. No other information can be found on him and the MLB's own website has the exact same info. Extremely doubtful that this player meets notability standards. Lindsey40186 (talk) 01:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fayse Goh[edit]

Fayse Goh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

the article appears to be very promotional. I also searched up the name, and it appears to plagarize his youtube channel's description. Gaismagorm (talk) 20:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Malaysia. Gaismagorm (talk) 20:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing.
Logs: 2024-04 ✍️ create
--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Washington USA[edit]

Miss Washington USA (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is not ready for main space and should be draftified, at least. The references that exist do not add anything beyond individuals who won pageants in two recent years out of a claimed more than 50 years of events. There is not one reference for the pageant organization itself even to back up the claimed ownership or year it was formed. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Draftify or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 00:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by Shaquille O'Neal[edit]

List of career achievements by Shaquille O'Neal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an indiscriminate collection of trivia that is a clear WP:NOTSTATS violation. The most pertinent info is already in the main article so there is no need for any type of merge. Let'srun (talk) 00:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by Kevin Durant[edit]

List of career achievements by Kevin Durant (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a collection of indiscriminate trivia that falls into WP:NOTSTATS. Let'srun (talk) 00:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:NOTSTATS, and there's pretty resounding consensus by this point that nothing in is notable. Would support a group nom to round these out and reduce editor effort. BrigadierG (talk) 21:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/Yesterday&oldid=768995417"