Reason: Unsourced, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage of this band, or other clear indications of notability; they've released two albums on a relatively obscure label and opened for notable bands, but that's about it. The Italian wiki doesn't have an article on them.
Reason: Unsourced and appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. The closest thing to significant coverage I can find is
this, which doesn't seem to be all that significant. No serious claims of notability are made in the article.
Reason: Appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage of this group. One top-89 hit which was included in a few compilation albums doesn't establish notability either.
Reason: Tagged for notability since 2012, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage of this singer, apart from the cited NPR show, which is not sufficient by itself.
Reason: Practically unsourced BLP (the only accessible source, apart from the Youtube video, doesn't mention him). Tagged for notability since 2010 and has very obvious OR and POV issues. I can't find any significant coverage, although it may exist in other languages.
Reason: Unsourced since 2010 and appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage. Having one song featured on a compilation album and another in a TV commercial does not establish notability either.
Reason: Long-time poorly sourced BLP, fails
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage. The only real claim to notability is that he is a member of
Tree63, so I suggest redirecting to
Tree63 per
WP:BANDMEMBER.
Reason: Also nominating::Hecate's Angels (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)Both the band (Hecate's Angels) and the band's frontwoman (Pietra Wexstun) seem to fail
WP:MUSICBIO, as I can't find any significant coverage about either. They're associated with notable musician (and Wexstun's husband)
Stan Ridgway, but that isn't sufficient. Both articles have been unsourced for many years.
Reason: Fails
WP:NACADEMICS; there's no evidence that the subject has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline. The article relies on a single primary source and virtually nothing seems to be known about him apart from the
species described by him. See also the discussion at
User talk:Estopedist1#Vladimir Mironov.
Reason: Fails
WP:NAUTHOR. I can't find any significant coverage of her, or of her only novel. The current sources (her publisher's website and a blog) aren't nearly sufficient.
Reason: Seems to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage other than
this album review. The article has been unsourced (other than to the band's website) and tagged for notability since its creation in 2012.
Reason: Did this person even exist? The only listed reference is two blank pages of a book. I can't find any other reference to him either. Even if he did exist, it's unlikely he's notable.
Reason: Fails
WP:GNG; I can't find any significant coverage of this person. And while the list of awards looks impressive at first glance, it's not clear that any of these is a "major music competition" as required by
WP:MUSICBIO, nor does the subject appear to meet any of the other criteria listed there. It should also be noted that the creator is suspected to be closely connected to the subject, see
User talk:Cor32ed#February 2021.
Reason: Non-notable singer/songwriter/producer. There is no significant independent coverage to be found, nor other evidence of passing
WP:MUSICBIO/
WP:ANYBIO. Article is unsourced and promotional in tone. This page used to redirect to
David Dobrik, but Vulpis only gets a passing mention there that doesn't provide any information about him. I'd prefer deletion over restoring the redirect.
Reason: This redirect made me chuckle, but unfortunately serves no purpose. No one looking for any of the entries on the Eight Mile disambiguation page is going to type in "12.87 kilometer".
Reason: Agrae was apparently "a district within ancient Attica, likely populated by or associated with the
Agryle" (see
Talk:Athens#Agrae). Agrae is not mentioned at
Athens or
Attica;
Agryle mentions it, but doesn't have any substantial or sourced information about it. There also exists
Agrae (Pisidia), which is about an unrelated ancient place.
Reason: Not mentioned at target; suggest retargeting to
Socialist Party of Minnesota, where Public Ownership Party of Minnesota is mentioned as a former name. I can't find evidence of any other party ever having had this name, and all but one of the links to this redirect do indeed refer to the Minnesota party.
Reason: Fails
WP:BAND. I can't find any significant coverage nor other evidence of notability. The article itself (sourced only to the band's defunct site and IMDb) doesn't make any claims of notability either.
Reason: Fails
WP:NLIST: "
Nylon cover models" are not, as far as I can see, discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. Completely unsourced.
Reason: Fails
WP:ORG. Unsourced since 2007. I cannot find any significant coverage of this foundation, nor does the article make any credible claim of notability.
Reason: The single cited source contains no
significant coverage of the subject, nor can I find any online. The article itself doesn't seem to contain any credible claims of notability.
Reason: Non-notable novel by apparently non-notable author. I've been unable to find any significant coverage of the book or its author online. Completely unsourced, 100% original research ever since its creation by an
SPA in 2006.
Reason: Non-notable book by non-notable author, fails
WP:NBOOK. I have not been able to find any significant coverage online. Article consists of plot only.
Reason: This nomination also includes: *I Hate Fridays (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)These articles are about a children's book series and one particular entry of the series, respectively. Its writer and illustrator both lack Wikipedia entries and don't seem particularly notable. I can't find any significant coverage of the series, or of any specific entries, online, so it seems that
WP:NBOOK is not met. Both articles are completely unsourced and consist almost entirely of plot/character descriptions.
Reason: Fails
WP:NBOOK, unsourced and I can't find any significant coverage. The author has no Wikipedia entry. The article consists only of a few lines of plot summary.
Reason: This poorly sourced biography has languished in
CAT:NN since 2009 and makes no explicit claim of notability. None of the cited references constitute significant coverage of any kind, nor can I find any significant coverage online; it may exist in Japanese sources, but the lack of a jpwiki entry doesn't seem promising.
Reason: Non-notable brand of water, fails
WP:NCORP; no significant coverage to be found. Unsourced (other than to a defunct version of the brand's website) and tagged for notability since 2012.
Reason: I'm unable to verify that this drink even exists, there's nothing to be found online. Article is entirely unsourced and I'm surprised it has been around in this state since 2006.
Reason: Non-notable energy drink brand, unsourced and there's no significant coverage to be found. (If this article is deleted,
Rooster Booster (horse) should be moved to this title.)
Reason: "Čhetáŋ" (not Cetan) is the Lakota word for
hawk, and though I don't doubt the existence of a hawk spirit of some kind in Lokota mythology, I can't find any evidence that this one is notable. Unsourced since 2002 (!).
List of Lakota deities, where Cetan is listed, could be a redirect target, but I don't see much use in redirecting without at least one reliable source confirming this spirit's existence.
Reason: Former local band, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. Unsourced. I can't find any significant coverage, although it's possible it exists offline. Online, all I can find is a mention of one of their songs in
this article, which isn't nearly enough.
Reason: Former local band, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. Unsourced. There's some mentions in local media but I can't find any significant coverage. (This is the second
band with vomit in the name that I'm nominating today, but I swear it's a coincidence.)
Reason: Unsourced article about a local band which appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. While they get some coverage in local media (
[1]) and genre specific outlets (
[2]), and one member in particular has received coverage in relation to the queer punk movement (
[3]), none of it amounts to the in-depth coverage by reliable sources that MUSICBIO/GNG requires. (Full disclosure: this nomination was suggested to me by
Doomsdayer520, inspired by some related bands that I nominated yesterday.)
Reason: Fails
WP:NBOOK, as I can't find any significant coverage of this novel. The author appears to be non-notable as well, at least as a writer. Unsourced original research.
Reason: Including: *Living Under God (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)Both the first book and its sequel appear to fail
WP:NBOOK, which requires a book to be the subject of two or more non-trivial, independent works. I can find only one piece of coverage for each book: a
Publishers Weekly review of Under God (
[4]) and a
Cross Rhythms review of Living Under God (
[5]). Both reviews are additionally fairly short and not particularly in-depth.
Reason: This book/toy line combination appears to fail
WP:NBOOK and
WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage. The toy line has won a few awards (
[6],
[7]), but none of them are particularly notable.
Reason: Band navigation template; the albums are not notable in their own right and as such I've redirected them to the band article. That leaves only two articles (the band and one member), making the template useless for navigation.
Reason: Local band (seemingly no longer active judging by the defunct website), fails
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage, or really any coverage at all, even local. Unsourced.
Reason: Unsourced one line stub about a supposed suburb of Johannesburg. I can't find any mention of it online apart from wikimirrors and it's not on Google Maps either. I wonder if there's somehow a mixup with
Marshalltown, Johannesburg.
Reason: Two unremarkable streets in Winnipeg. Unsourced since forever, no claims of notability are made in the article, and there's no coverage to be found.
Reason: Unremarkable golf/country club. The article is unsourced and makes no serious claim of notability (and neither does the nlwiki version, even though it's longer). I can't find any significant coverage on it, just a few mentions in local media.
Reason: Nothing more than a dictionary definition, and I don't see any potential for it becoming more than that. There's no doubt this term was used, but it doesn't seem to be a notable concept on its own, given the lack of significant coverage. An alternative deletion would be to merge it, maybe with
Here be dragons - according to
this article, terra pericolosa was normally used for the purpose that many people believe that hic sunt dracones was used (but it wasn't). Or into some kind of glossary of cartography, but we don't seem ot have that.
Reason: Unsourced school stub. The website is not working (defunct?) and as such I can't figure out exactly what kind of school this "Greek school" is (was?). But in any case, I can't find any coverage of it to satisfy
WP:GNG or
WP:ORG.
Reason: Unsourced, one-line stub about an Algerian town. The town does seem to exist, as it can be found
on Google Maps and on the
GEOnet Names Server. Neither of those satisfy
WP:GEOLAND, however, and I cannot find any reliable source that mentions the town.
Reason: Unsourced band bio, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. The article claims that the band's first album received reviews in
NME and
Record Collector. If that is true, these reviews could contribute to notability, but I can't find them online, nor any other significant coverage.
Reason: Unsourced, seems to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage of this band online. Since they were active in the 70s/80s, it's possible that coverage exists in print, but given that they were "mostly known for playing in clubs and pubs around the east of Manchester, Rochdale and Oldham", it's unlikely that it would amount to more than some routine local coverage.
Reason: Minor Italian political party, seems to fail
WP:GNG/
WP:ORG. There is certainly no significant coverage in English, and as far as I can tell there's nothing in Italian either, as a search for partito politico "Per il Sud" turns up nothing useful (and for supposedly the first Italian party founded over the internet, there's a surprising lack of online presence in general). The article itself states that the party is not represented in any parliament or assembly, and as such it makes no credible claim to notability. The absence of an article on the Italian wiki is also not promising.
Reason: This collaboration fails
WP:MUSICBIO, if that even applies to a fictional band, and
WP:GNG, as I can't find any coverage of the group or their album. Multiple members of the group have articles, so there's no valid redirect target.
Reason: Dictionary definition. The term
exists but I don't see any potential for a valid encyclopedic article; all I can find online is other dictionary definitions. Merging could be an option if there's a suitable target.
Reason: Fails
WP:GNG, I can't find any coverage of this font. Note that this is font is apparently unrelated to Lexia Readable, subject of for example
this PC World review, which was
previously deleted.
Reason: Unsourced surname etymology stub. Per
WP:NNAME, If at least two articles matching the surname or given name of the subject of a name article do not exist, then the surname or given name list article would not be notable and should not be created. A properly sourced article about a name may still be notable without a list. This article fails on both counts, as there are no articles on people with this surname (unless maybe there are spelling variants that I'm unaware of) and there is no significant coverage on the surname itself.
Reason: Per
WP:NNAME, If at least two articles matching the surname or given name of the subject of a name article do not exist, then the surname or given name list article would not be notable and should not be created. A properly sourced article about a name may still be notable without a list. This stub fails on the first count, as there are no article on people with this surname. There is also no significant coverage of the surname itself; the source currently used in the article is a genealogy hobby project.
Reason: This nomination includes:*In Isendjef (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)Two one-line, long-time unsourced stubs about two Algerian desert towns. I can't find any mention of them in reliable sources, nor any other kind of coverage. Additionally, neither of them can be found on Google Maps or on the
GEOnet Names Server.
Reason: Dictionary definition without potential for growth. The term is certainly used by all kinds of sources including media, books, and journal articles, but I can't find significant coverage on the concept itself, which suggests it's not a notable one.
Reason: Unremarkable local tobacco company, appears to fail
WP:CORP/
WP:GNG. The closest thing to significant coverage that I can find is
this article (
archive), but it's local, short, and reads very much like routine coverage. Apart from some reviews and mentions in tobacco-specific media, there doesn't seem to be anything else.
Reason: While there are certainly some Hindus living in Macau, they do not make up a significant part of the population, <0.1% according to
Pew. More importantly, I cannot locate any significant coverage on the topic of Hinduism in Macau, meaning it fails
WP:GNG. If any relevant information can be sourced at all, it should instead be added to
Religion in Macau, where Hinduism currently isn't mentioned, and/or to
Hinduism in China, where Macau currently isn't mentioned.
Reason: This Prussian watchmaker and jeweler, despite allegedly having shops as far as Vienna, seems to fail GNG, at least from what I can find online. There's nothing on Google Scholar or JSTOR, and on Google Books there's just
2 hits from contemporary Prussian newspapers: one is a bankruptcy announcement and the other one I can't quite figure out, but is certainly no significant coverage either. Unsourced since 2006.
Reason: Appears to fail
WP:NBOOK. Unsourced, consists of nothing but a few lines of plot. I can't find any significant coverage of this novel, nor of the authors, who lack their own Wikipedia entries.
Reason: Unsourced band stub. I can't find significant coverage of the band or their releases in reliable sources, or any other indication of notability.
Reason: Unsourced ministub on a very minor political party in Lesotho, which has as far as I can tell never won a seat in the country's national assembly. The party appears in lists of parties by e.g. CIA World Factbook and gets passing mentions in news articles (e.g.
[8]), but I can't find significant coverage or anything else that would allow it to pass
WP:ORG or
WP:GNG.
Reason: Unsourced, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO; I can't find any significant coverage of this band. Apparently signed to a major record label, but only released two singles and no albums; no other claim of notability.
Reason: Unsourced band stub, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage other than
one album review from
All About Jazz. Article itself doesn't provide any claim of notability or even any information other than a discography.
Reason: Short-lived band, possibly influential in its local scene but probably not beyond it. Fails
WP:MUSICBIO; no significant coverage to be found. Unsourced.
Reason: Actor with only three acting credits (according to the
Swedish Film Database which seems reliable), none of them major roles and as such failing
WP:NACTOR (also has some songwriting credits, equally minor).
WP:GNG is not met either as far as I can tell; I included in my BEFORE a
search of Swedish newspapers where there are a few mentions but no significant coverage.
Reason: Fails
WP:MUSICBIO; the best sources I can find are
this article by
WMOT, not quite significant coverage, and only a passing mention in
this NPR piece. No claim to notability other than winning a non-notable championship. The article is currently only sourced to Mahler's own website.
Reason: Former weatherman on BBC, which is of course a prominent position but does not grant inherent notability, and there seems to be a lack of significant coverage for this bio to pass
WP:GNG. His BBC profile cited in the article, while probably reliable, isn't independent;
this article, about an incident involving him accusing another weatherman of workplace bullying, contains no more than a passing mention of him, as does related coverage.
Reason: Unsourced, seems to fail
WP:BAND. I can't find significant coverage from reliable sources; just some pieces by metal webzines like
this and
this which as far as I can tell are not considered RS. No clear claims of notability (being on the second stage of some festivals doesn't mean much) and there's no corresponding entry on the Italian WP.
Reason: Band navbox, no longer serves a purpose for navigation. I redirected three non-notable albums to the band article, which leaves this template with just the band itself, one member, and two related articles which don't use the template.
Reason: Local band, fails
WP:BAND: I can't find any significant coverage online, no other indication of notability. See also related AfD
Devoid of Faith.
Reason: Local band, fails
WP:BAND: I can't find any significant coverage online, no other indication of notability. See also related AfD
Monster X (band).
Reason: Appears to fail
WP:BAND; filtering out
Justice League-related results to the best of my ability, I can find no significant coverage of this group or any other indication of notability. (One member went on to play in some notable bands, but that doesn't make this one notable.)
Reason: Appears to be an unremarkable company, failing
WP:NCORP. I could not find any more independent coverage than the cited
Northumberland Gazette piece (which reads mostly like a press release, perhaps not entirely independent) and a passing mention in
this Guardian article.
Reason: Fails
WP:NSONG; I can't find any significant coverage of the song, and even the unreliable sources cited in the article are not about the song specifically. There doesn't seem to be a good merge/redirect target as this recording isn't on any notable release (though redirecting to
potted shrimps as an alternative spelling/capitalisation of the dish is of course possible).
Reason: Fails
WP:BAND; I can't find any significant coverage of this group. No reliable sources are cited (mostly a defunct web forum). The claims that their songs were used in MTV shows and that they toured with notable acts don't establish notability either (and I really can't find any evidence that they "toured overseas with
Flo Rida", by the way).
Reason: Fails
WP:BAND; I can find no significant coverage of this band or any other indication of notability. I suggest redirecting to
Tim Keegan, its only notable member.
Reason: Fails
WP:ORG; I can't find any significant coverage or other indication of notability of this school. Unsourced. (Previously
kept in the era when high schools were presumed to be inherently notable, more recently included in
a trainwreck).
Reason: Appears to fail
WP:BAND. They released two albums on a non-notable label. I cannot find any significant coverage or other indication of notability.
This 2018 peer review of the article came to pretty much the same conclusion.
Reason: Fails
WP:GNG, as I can't find any significant coverage of this referee, only passing mentions. Refereed at FIFA World Cup qualifers and UEFA Cup group stage matches, but as far as I can tell this does not grant a referee automatic notability. Sourced only to football databases.
Reason:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sensorium (band) closed as delete in 2016; the current version was created in 2018, this time with a few sources. However, neither the cited sources nor the limited coverage by some metal webzines that I can find online (
[9],
[10]) add up to the significant coverage required to pass
WP:BAND.
Reason: Not a notable musician, fails
WP:MUSICBIO. There's no significant coverage by reliable sources (the two sources cited in the article are not reliable), no releases on major lables and no other indication of notability.
Reason: Practically unsourced and I can't find significant coverage. The band had some airplay and appearances on radio shows and festivals if the article is to be believed, but nothing that would make them pass
WP:MUSICBIO.
Reason: Fails
WP:MUSICBIO. There are a few reviews in metal webzines, but overall a lack of significant coverage by reliable sources. Unsourced, no other indications of notability.
Reason: This businessman doen't appear to pass
WP:ANYBIO, with neither his business activities nor his family connections sufficient claims of notability. The closest thing to significant coverage I could find is
this short article about his wedding, but it reads like routine coverage of a high society wedding and provides very little information on the subject himself.
Reason: Including:*The Time Wreccas (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)Two books from the same non−notable author which fail
WP:NBOOK. I can find no professional reviews or other significant coverage, nor any other indication of notability, of either book.
Reason: This article started under the title British in India, about some aspect of British rule in India
[11]. Somehow, at some point, it became a list of "British people who were born in India or lived there at any point", which it still is, and which is clearly not an unencyclopedic topic. Even if we were to limit the scope to just "British people born in India", I don't think that would be a valid list; there are no other "List of X people born in Y" articles. Perhaps
British people in India, i.e. people of British descent currently living in India, could be a notable topic, like
British people in Pakistan, but nothing in the current article or its history is useful for that, so in that case it would be better to
start over.
Reason: Obvious POV issues aside, this is not a notable topic; "battles in which Sikhs were outnumbered" is not a topic that is discussed by independent, reliable sources. We already have
List of battles involving the Sikh Empire and
List of battles between Mughals and Sikhs, in addition to articles about the individual battles. This seems to be a
WP:POVFORK part of a wider trend of Sikh history-related POV-pushing on Wikipedia.
Reason: Unsourced, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage of this band, or other clear indications of notability; they've released two albums on a relatively obscure label and opened for notable bands, but that's about it. The Italian wiki doesn't have an article on them.
Reason: Unsourced and appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. The closest thing to significant coverage I can find is
this, which doesn't seem to be all that significant. No serious claims of notability are made in the article.
Reason: Appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage of this group. One top-89 hit which was included in a few compilation albums doesn't establish notability either.
Reason: Tagged for notability since 2012, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage of this singer, apart from the cited NPR show, which is not sufficient by itself.
Reason: Practically unsourced BLP (the only accessible source, apart from the Youtube video, doesn't mention him). Tagged for notability since 2010 and has very obvious OR and POV issues. I can't find any significant coverage, although it may exist in other languages.
Reason: Unsourced since 2010 and appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage. Having one song featured on a compilation album and another in a TV commercial does not establish notability either.
Reason: Long-time poorly sourced BLP, fails
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage. The only real claim to notability is that he is a member of
Tree63, so I suggest redirecting to
Tree63 per
WP:BANDMEMBER.
Reason: Also nominating::Hecate's Angels (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)Both the band (Hecate's Angels) and the band's frontwoman (Pietra Wexstun) seem to fail
WP:MUSICBIO, as I can't find any significant coverage about either. They're associated with notable musician (and Wexstun's husband)
Stan Ridgway, but that isn't sufficient. Both articles have been unsourced for many years.
Reason: Fails
WP:NACADEMICS; there's no evidence that the subject has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline. The article relies on a single primary source and virtually nothing seems to be known about him apart from the
species described by him. See also the discussion at
User talk:Estopedist1#Vladimir Mironov.
Reason: Fails
WP:NAUTHOR. I can't find any significant coverage of her, or of her only novel. The current sources (her publisher's website and a blog) aren't nearly sufficient.
Reason: Seems to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage other than
this album review. The article has been unsourced (other than to the band's website) and tagged for notability since its creation in 2012.
Reason: Did this person even exist? The only listed reference is two blank pages of a book. I can't find any other reference to him either. Even if he did exist, it's unlikely he's notable.
Reason: Fails
WP:GNG; I can't find any significant coverage of this person. And while the list of awards looks impressive at first glance, it's not clear that any of these is a "major music competition" as required by
WP:MUSICBIO, nor does the subject appear to meet any of the other criteria listed there. It should also be noted that the creator is suspected to be closely connected to the subject, see
User talk:Cor32ed#February 2021.
Reason: Non-notable singer/songwriter/producer. There is no significant independent coverage to be found, nor other evidence of passing
WP:MUSICBIO/
WP:ANYBIO. Article is unsourced and promotional in tone. This page used to redirect to
David Dobrik, but Vulpis only gets a passing mention there that doesn't provide any information about him. I'd prefer deletion over restoring the redirect.
Reason: This redirect made me chuckle, but unfortunately serves no purpose. No one looking for any of the entries on the Eight Mile disambiguation page is going to type in "12.87 kilometer".
Reason: Agrae was apparently "a district within ancient Attica, likely populated by or associated with the
Agryle" (see
Talk:Athens#Agrae). Agrae is not mentioned at
Athens or
Attica;
Agryle mentions it, but doesn't have any substantial or sourced information about it. There also exists
Agrae (Pisidia), which is about an unrelated ancient place.
Reason: Not mentioned at target; suggest retargeting to
Socialist Party of Minnesota, where Public Ownership Party of Minnesota is mentioned as a former name. I can't find evidence of any other party ever having had this name, and all but one of the links to this redirect do indeed refer to the Minnesota party.
Reason: Fails
WP:BAND. I can't find any significant coverage nor other evidence of notability. The article itself (sourced only to the band's defunct site and IMDb) doesn't make any claims of notability either.
Reason: Fails
WP:NLIST: "
Nylon cover models" are not, as far as I can see, discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. Completely unsourced.
Reason: Fails
WP:ORG. Unsourced since 2007. I cannot find any significant coverage of this foundation, nor does the article make any credible claim of notability.
Reason: The single cited source contains no
significant coverage of the subject, nor can I find any online. The article itself doesn't seem to contain any credible claims of notability.
Reason: Non-notable novel by apparently non-notable author. I've been unable to find any significant coverage of the book or its author online. Completely unsourced, 100% original research ever since its creation by an
SPA in 2006.
Reason: Non-notable book by non-notable author, fails
WP:NBOOK. I have not been able to find any significant coverage online. Article consists of plot only.
Reason: This nomination also includes: *I Hate Fridays (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)These articles are about a children's book series and one particular entry of the series, respectively. Its writer and illustrator both lack Wikipedia entries and don't seem particularly notable. I can't find any significant coverage of the series, or of any specific entries, online, so it seems that
WP:NBOOK is not met. Both articles are completely unsourced and consist almost entirely of plot/character descriptions.
Reason: Fails
WP:NBOOK, unsourced and I can't find any significant coverage. The author has no Wikipedia entry. The article consists only of a few lines of plot summary.
Reason: This poorly sourced biography has languished in
CAT:NN since 2009 and makes no explicit claim of notability. None of the cited references constitute significant coverage of any kind, nor can I find any significant coverage online; it may exist in Japanese sources, but the lack of a jpwiki entry doesn't seem promising.
Reason: Non-notable brand of water, fails
WP:NCORP; no significant coverage to be found. Unsourced (other than to a defunct version of the brand's website) and tagged for notability since 2012.
Reason: I'm unable to verify that this drink even exists, there's nothing to be found online. Article is entirely unsourced and I'm surprised it has been around in this state since 2006.
Reason: Non-notable energy drink brand, unsourced and there's no significant coverage to be found. (If this article is deleted,
Rooster Booster (horse) should be moved to this title.)
Reason: "Čhetáŋ" (not Cetan) is the Lakota word for
hawk, and though I don't doubt the existence of a hawk spirit of some kind in Lokota mythology, I can't find any evidence that this one is notable. Unsourced since 2002 (!).
List of Lakota deities, where Cetan is listed, could be a redirect target, but I don't see much use in redirecting without at least one reliable source confirming this spirit's existence.
Reason: Former local band, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. Unsourced. I can't find any significant coverage, although it's possible it exists offline. Online, all I can find is a mention of one of their songs in
this article, which isn't nearly enough.
Reason: Former local band, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. Unsourced. There's some mentions in local media but I can't find any significant coverage. (This is the second
band with vomit in the name that I'm nominating today, but I swear it's a coincidence.)
Reason: Unsourced article about a local band which appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. While they get some coverage in local media (
[1]) and genre specific outlets (
[2]), and one member in particular has received coverage in relation to the queer punk movement (
[3]), none of it amounts to the in-depth coverage by reliable sources that MUSICBIO/GNG requires. (Full disclosure: this nomination was suggested to me by
Doomsdayer520, inspired by some related bands that I nominated yesterday.)
Reason: Fails
WP:NBOOK, as I can't find any significant coverage of this novel. The author appears to be non-notable as well, at least as a writer. Unsourced original research.
Reason: Including: *Living Under God (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)Both the first book and its sequel appear to fail
WP:NBOOK, which requires a book to be the subject of two or more non-trivial, independent works. I can find only one piece of coverage for each book: a
Publishers Weekly review of Under God (
[4]) and a
Cross Rhythms review of Living Under God (
[5]). Both reviews are additionally fairly short and not particularly in-depth.
Reason: This book/toy line combination appears to fail
WP:NBOOK and
WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage. The toy line has won a few awards (
[6],
[7]), but none of them are particularly notable.
Reason: Band navigation template; the albums are not notable in their own right and as such I've redirected them to the band article. That leaves only two articles (the band and one member), making the template useless for navigation.
Reason: Local band (seemingly no longer active judging by the defunct website), fails
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage, or really any coverage at all, even local. Unsourced.
Reason: Unsourced one line stub about a supposed suburb of Johannesburg. I can't find any mention of it online apart from wikimirrors and it's not on Google Maps either. I wonder if there's somehow a mixup with
Marshalltown, Johannesburg.
Reason: Two unremarkable streets in Winnipeg. Unsourced since forever, no claims of notability are made in the article, and there's no coverage to be found.
Reason: Unremarkable golf/country club. The article is unsourced and makes no serious claim of notability (and neither does the nlwiki version, even though it's longer). I can't find any significant coverage on it, just a few mentions in local media.
Reason: Nothing more than a dictionary definition, and I don't see any potential for it becoming more than that. There's no doubt this term was used, but it doesn't seem to be a notable concept on its own, given the lack of significant coverage. An alternative deletion would be to merge it, maybe with
Here be dragons - according to
this article, terra pericolosa was normally used for the purpose that many people believe that hic sunt dracones was used (but it wasn't). Or into some kind of glossary of cartography, but we don't seem ot have that.
Reason: Unsourced school stub. The website is not working (defunct?) and as such I can't figure out exactly what kind of school this "Greek school" is (was?). But in any case, I can't find any coverage of it to satisfy
WP:GNG or
WP:ORG.
Reason: Unsourced, one-line stub about an Algerian town. The town does seem to exist, as it can be found
on Google Maps and on the
GEOnet Names Server. Neither of those satisfy
WP:GEOLAND, however, and I cannot find any reliable source that mentions the town.
Reason: Unsourced band bio, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. The article claims that the band's first album received reviews in
NME and
Record Collector. If that is true, these reviews could contribute to notability, but I can't find them online, nor any other significant coverage.
Reason: Unsourced, seems to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage of this band online. Since they were active in the 70s/80s, it's possible that coverage exists in print, but given that they were "mostly known for playing in clubs and pubs around the east of Manchester, Rochdale and Oldham", it's unlikely that it would amount to more than some routine local coverage.
Reason: Minor Italian political party, seems to fail
WP:GNG/
WP:ORG. There is certainly no significant coverage in English, and as far as I can tell there's nothing in Italian either, as a search for partito politico "Per il Sud" turns up nothing useful (and for supposedly the first Italian party founded over the internet, there's a surprising lack of online presence in general). The article itself states that the party is not represented in any parliament or assembly, and as such it makes no credible claim to notability. The absence of an article on the Italian wiki is also not promising.
Reason: This collaboration fails
WP:MUSICBIO, if that even applies to a fictional band, and
WP:GNG, as I can't find any coverage of the group or their album. Multiple members of the group have articles, so there's no valid redirect target.
Reason: Dictionary definition. The term
exists but I don't see any potential for a valid encyclopedic article; all I can find online is other dictionary definitions. Merging could be an option if there's a suitable target.
Reason: Fails
WP:GNG, I can't find any coverage of this font. Note that this is font is apparently unrelated to Lexia Readable, subject of for example
this PC World review, which was
previously deleted.
Reason: Unsourced surname etymology stub. Per
WP:NNAME, If at least two articles matching the surname or given name of the subject of a name article do not exist, then the surname or given name list article would not be notable and should not be created. A properly sourced article about a name may still be notable without a list. This article fails on both counts, as there are no articles on people with this surname (unless maybe there are spelling variants that I'm unaware of) and there is no significant coverage on the surname itself.
Reason: Per
WP:NNAME, If at least two articles matching the surname or given name of the subject of a name article do not exist, then the surname or given name list article would not be notable and should not be created. A properly sourced article about a name may still be notable without a list. This stub fails on the first count, as there are no article on people with this surname. There is also no significant coverage of the surname itself; the source currently used in the article is a genealogy hobby project.
Reason: This nomination includes:*In Isendjef (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)Two one-line, long-time unsourced stubs about two Algerian desert towns. I can't find any mention of them in reliable sources, nor any other kind of coverage. Additionally, neither of them can be found on Google Maps or on the
GEOnet Names Server.
Reason: Dictionary definition without potential for growth. The term is certainly used by all kinds of sources including media, books, and journal articles, but I can't find significant coverage on the concept itself, which suggests it's not a notable one.
Reason: Unremarkable local tobacco company, appears to fail
WP:CORP/
WP:GNG. The closest thing to significant coverage that I can find is
this article (
archive), but it's local, short, and reads very much like routine coverage. Apart from some reviews and mentions in tobacco-specific media, there doesn't seem to be anything else.
Reason: While there are certainly some Hindus living in Macau, they do not make up a significant part of the population, <0.1% according to
Pew. More importantly, I cannot locate any significant coverage on the topic of Hinduism in Macau, meaning it fails
WP:GNG. If any relevant information can be sourced at all, it should instead be added to
Religion in Macau, where Hinduism currently isn't mentioned, and/or to
Hinduism in China, where Macau currently isn't mentioned.
Reason: This Prussian watchmaker and jeweler, despite allegedly having shops as far as Vienna, seems to fail GNG, at least from what I can find online. There's nothing on Google Scholar or JSTOR, and on Google Books there's just
2 hits from contemporary Prussian newspapers: one is a bankruptcy announcement and the other one I can't quite figure out, but is certainly no significant coverage either. Unsourced since 2006.
Reason: Appears to fail
WP:NBOOK. Unsourced, consists of nothing but a few lines of plot. I can't find any significant coverage of this novel, nor of the authors, who lack their own Wikipedia entries.
Reason: Unsourced band stub. I can't find significant coverage of the band or their releases in reliable sources, or any other indication of notability.
Reason: Unsourced ministub on a very minor political party in Lesotho, which has as far as I can tell never won a seat in the country's national assembly. The party appears in lists of parties by e.g. CIA World Factbook and gets passing mentions in news articles (e.g.
[8]), but I can't find significant coverage or anything else that would allow it to pass
WP:ORG or
WP:GNG.
Reason: Unsourced, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO; I can't find any significant coverage of this band. Apparently signed to a major record label, but only released two singles and no albums; no other claim of notability.
Reason: Unsourced band stub, appears to fail
WP:MUSICBIO. I can't find any significant coverage other than
one album review from
All About Jazz. Article itself doesn't provide any claim of notability or even any information other than a discography.
Reason: Short-lived band, possibly influential in its local scene but probably not beyond it. Fails
WP:MUSICBIO; no significant coverage to be found. Unsourced.
Reason: Actor with only three acting credits (according to the
Swedish Film Database which seems reliable), none of them major roles and as such failing
WP:NACTOR (also has some songwriting credits, equally minor).
WP:GNG is not met either as far as I can tell; I included in my BEFORE a
search of Swedish newspapers where there are a few mentions but no significant coverage.
Reason: Fails
WP:MUSICBIO; the best sources I can find are
this article by
WMOT, not quite significant coverage, and only a passing mention in
this NPR piece. No claim to notability other than winning a non-notable championship. The article is currently only sourced to Mahler's own website.
Reason: Former weatherman on BBC, which is of course a prominent position but does not grant inherent notability, and there seems to be a lack of significant coverage for this bio to pass
WP:GNG. His BBC profile cited in the article, while probably reliable, isn't independent;
this article, about an incident involving him accusing another weatherman of workplace bullying, contains no more than a passing mention of him, as does related coverage.
Reason: Unsourced, seems to fail
WP:BAND. I can't find significant coverage from reliable sources; just some pieces by metal webzines like
this and
this which as far as I can tell are not considered RS. No clear claims of notability (being on the second stage of some festivals doesn't mean much) and there's no corresponding entry on the Italian WP.
Reason: Band navbox, no longer serves a purpose for navigation. I redirected three non-notable albums to the band article, which leaves this template with just the band itself, one member, and two related articles which don't use the template.
Reason: Local band, fails
WP:BAND: I can't find any significant coverage online, no other indication of notability. See also related AfD
Devoid of Faith.
Reason: Local band, fails
WP:BAND: I can't find any significant coverage online, no other indication of notability. See also related AfD
Monster X (band).
Reason: Appears to fail
WP:BAND; filtering out
Justice League-related results to the best of my ability, I can find no significant coverage of this group or any other indication of notability. (One member went on to play in some notable bands, but that doesn't make this one notable.)
Reason: Appears to be an unremarkable company, failing
WP:NCORP. I could not find any more independent coverage than the cited
Northumberland Gazette piece (which reads mostly like a press release, perhaps not entirely independent) and a passing mention in
this Guardian article.
Reason: Fails
WP:NSONG; I can't find any significant coverage of the song, and even the unreliable sources cited in the article are not about the song specifically. There doesn't seem to be a good merge/redirect target as this recording isn't on any notable release (though redirecting to
potted shrimps as an alternative spelling/capitalisation of the dish is of course possible).
Reason: Fails
WP:BAND; I can't find any significant coverage of this group. No reliable sources are cited (mostly a defunct web forum). The claims that their songs were used in MTV shows and that they toured with notable acts don't establish notability either (and I really can't find any evidence that they "toured overseas with
Flo Rida", by the way).
Reason: Fails
WP:BAND; I can find no significant coverage of this band or any other indication of notability. I suggest redirecting to
Tim Keegan, its only notable member.
Reason: Fails
WP:ORG; I can't find any significant coverage or other indication of notability of this school. Unsourced. (Previously
kept in the era when high schools were presumed to be inherently notable, more recently included in
a trainwreck).
Reason: Appears to fail
WP:BAND. They released two albums on a non-notable label. I cannot find any significant coverage or other indication of notability.
This 2018 peer review of the article came to pretty much the same conclusion.
Reason: Fails
WP:GNG, as I can't find any significant coverage of this referee, only passing mentions. Refereed at FIFA World Cup qualifers and UEFA Cup group stage matches, but as far as I can tell this does not grant a referee automatic notability. Sourced only to football databases.
Reason:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sensorium (band) closed as delete in 2016; the current version was created in 2018, this time with a few sources. However, neither the cited sources nor the limited coverage by some metal webzines that I can find online (
[9],
[10]) add up to the significant coverage required to pass
WP:BAND.
Reason: Not a notable musician, fails
WP:MUSICBIO. There's no significant coverage by reliable sources (the two sources cited in the article are not reliable), no releases on major lables and no other indication of notability.
Reason: Practically unsourced and I can't find significant coverage. The band had some airplay and appearances on radio shows and festivals if the article is to be believed, but nothing that would make them pass
WP:MUSICBIO.
Reason: Fails
WP:MUSICBIO. There are a few reviews in metal webzines, but overall a lack of significant coverage by reliable sources. Unsourced, no other indications of notability.
Reason: This businessman doen't appear to pass
WP:ANYBIO, with neither his business activities nor his family connections sufficient claims of notability. The closest thing to significant coverage I could find is
this short article about his wedding, but it reads like routine coverage of a high society wedding and provides very little information on the subject himself.
Reason: Including:*The Time Wreccas (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)Two books from the same non−notable author which fail
WP:NBOOK. I can find no professional reviews or other significant coverage, nor any other indication of notability, of either book.
Reason: This article started under the title British in India, about some aspect of British rule in India
[11]. Somehow, at some point, it became a list of "British people who were born in India or lived there at any point", which it still is, and which is clearly not an unencyclopedic topic. Even if we were to limit the scope to just "British people born in India", I don't think that would be a valid list; there are no other "List of X people born in Y" articles. Perhaps
British people in India, i.e. people of British descent currently living in India, could be a notable topic, like
British people in Pakistan, but nothing in the current article or its history is useful for that, so in that case it would be better to
start over.
Reason: Obvious POV issues aside, this is not a notable topic; "battles in which Sikhs were outnumbered" is not a topic that is discussed by independent, reliable sources. We already have
List of battles involving the Sikh Empire and
List of battles between Mughals and Sikhs, in addition to articles about the individual battles. This seems to be a
WP:POVFORK part of a wider trend of Sikh history-related POV-pushing on Wikipedia.