Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 26
Only sources for this company are WP:ROUTINE press releases. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 16:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous
WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Listicle with minimal coverage (and what it does get is from blog-type websites rather than any major news source). Violates MOS:FILMACCOLADES, specifically the sentence 'Awards bestowed by web-only entities are not generally included'. Survived an AfD in 2013 that was marred by WP:SPA activity. Sgubaldo ( talk) 16:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
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 23:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Unsourced; no evidence of notability. Dicklyon ( talk) 23:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 23:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't think an Emmy nomination is enough to hit WP:NACTOR BrigadierG ( talk) 22:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Police department for a town of 20k people. A cursory Google search doesn't turn up any particularly notable incidents that attracted wider media attention. WP:ORGDEPTH BrigadierG ( talk) 22:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This car/brand does not meet WP:N. I am unable to find any other sourcing, and the given source is only a listing that says "X (France) (1908-1909)." The article went unsourced for 18 years and the text has not been expanded upon since its original creation. Even given the age of this, it does not seem to have any claim to importance or historical significance since it existed for a year at most and "little is known about the marque." StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 21:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Procedural nomination per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 13#Tracy Grandstaff * Pppery * it has begun... 21:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Silesia is not a country, so it cannot be this. Rename it--but to what? There's no Frisian national football team or Walloon national football team either. Plus, the article is little more than a directory and a list of matches. Drmies ( talk) 21:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, the only source does not help to assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 20:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are entirely primary, are basically news announcement and does not help to assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 20:40, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Book source seems to say about as much as an obituary would about each person described there. Flounder fillet ( talk) 20:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are basically news announcement and does not help to assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 20:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are basically news announcement and does not assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 20:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. No indication of notability. Flounder fillet ( talk) 20:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:NBAND / WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 18:16, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 19:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 19:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy close. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
There is dispute about whether this page should exist, Or is two promotional/lacking sources. Hyperbolick ( talk) 19:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
A NN subdivision built sometime in the 1950s/'60s. Mangoe ( talk) 19:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Poorly sourced rugby BLP; subject made one pro appearance. I found a couple sentences of coverage here and not much else. Fails WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 19:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
A Japanese racing driver. Page fails WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. Doesn't have much beyond when he was born and died, and some scores. BlakeIsHereStudios ( talk | contributions) 18:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. Note that he is more commonly known by Mandisi Mthiyane, which seems to be his legal name. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The most I found was a few sentences of coverage here. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet GNG/NCORP. The only source that is about WRA and in-depth is the BBC. Some of the sources make no mention of WRA and the others are brief mentions or based on what the organization/those affiliated say. S0091 ( talk) 16:57, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
sports league/organization. Looking at this as neutrally as possible, the bar for coverage is met:
An organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it
A corporation is not notable merely because it owns notable subsidiaries
If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability? This is stated in WP:BASIC for people but surely the principle applies just as well in this situation. For an organization that is so widely covered in so many WP:RSP reliable sources, the more I research this topic the more I think we would be making a mistake to delete that may be biased by the behavior of COI editors. Thank you, -- Habst ( talk) 17:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
"there are likely sufficient sources to merit a stand-alone article". I'm open to other ideas, but in my review of the material I am having a hard time being comfortable with a delete decision here in light of the breadth of coverage. Thanks, -- Habst ( talk) 00:42, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
This guideline does not provide any general criteria for the presumed notability of sports teams and clubs. Some sports have specific criteria. Otherwise, teams and clubs are expected to demonstrate notability by the general notability guideline. Since notability is not inherited, the notability of an athlete does not imply the notability of a team or club, or vice versa.The BBC article describes WRA as a club, though they frame it as a travel club, so I think GNG is the relevant guideline. S0091 ( talk) 14:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 19:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Doczilla
Ohhhhhh, no! 17:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Biography of a former mayor, not
properly sourced as passing
WP:NPOL #2. As always, mayors are not "inherently" notable just because they existed, and have to pass conditional notability standards based on the depth of substance that can be written about their careers and the volume of sourcing that can be shown to support it -- but this, as written, is basically "mayor who existed" apart from a section that advertorially bulletpoints a generic list of "achievements" without really saying or sourcing anything whatsoever about what he personally had to do with any of them, and minimally cites the whole thing to one
primary source self-published by the city government that isn't support for notability at all, one unreliable source that isn't support for notability at all, and just one hit of
run of the mill local coverage upon his death that isn't enough to get him over GNG all by itself if it's the only GNG-worthy source in the mix.
Trois-Rivières is a significant enough city that a mayor would certainly be eligible to keep an article that was written substantially and sourced properly, so I'd be happy to withdraw this if somebody with much better access to the necessary resources than I've got can find enough GNG-worthy sourcing to salvage it, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have more substance and sourcing than this.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Article about a song, not properly referenced as having any serious claim to passing WP:NSONGS. As always, songs are not automatically entitled to have their own standalone articles just because they exist, and have to show and reliably source some claim of significance -- but the main attempt at a notability claim here is that versions of the song appeared on albums that had gold certification as albums, which is not in and of itself evidence that the song has its own standalone notability independently of those albums, and the article is referenced entirely to primary source directory entries that are not support for notability, with not a whit of GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about the song in media or books shown at all. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the song from having to be the subject of reliable source coverage. Bearcat ( talk) 17:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Candidates for UK Parliament are not automatically notable. Similarly, writing a few newspaper articles also does not confer notability. Propose deleting and if he is successful in his campaign, it would be appropriate to make a page once he is elected. Drerac ( talk) 17:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
All the sources provided are from June 2013. No lasting coverage or impact to meet WP:EVENT. LibStar ( talk) 14:36, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 15:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
All the sources provided are from time of event. No lasting coverage or impact to meet WP:EVENT. LibStar ( talk) 14:46, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 15:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This was nominated a year ago and the result was no consensus, because an organization that is the main feeder competition for the IOI has to have sources. I agree, but really, there is nothing, I've tried. I propose redirection to International Olympiad in Informatics. Snowmanonahoe ( talk · contribs · typos) 15:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Unsourced for over a decade, couldn't find source to meet WP:GNG. Found [5], but seems to be unrelated. Article on plwiki was deleted in 2021, see pl:Wikipedia:Poczekalnia/artykuły/2021:01:01:Wolność i Sprawiedliwość (Polska). ARandomName123 ( talk)Ping me! 14:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on Cielquiparle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Person had no notability. Sources of dubious quality. Only one other source could be found, and it alone could not be enough to build an article upon. aaronneallucas ( talk) 04:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Sources of dubious quality"? They are all from FIDE, the ultimate reliable source for chess. Pam D 22:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I think it was bad form to nominate this article for an AFD discussion less than an hour after the article was created. That's not enough time to create an article that could withstand scrutiny at an AFD. I'd also like to see some assessment of newly added content since its nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:57, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
References
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on the comments above?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This particular music genre fails WP:GNG, WP:NMUSIC and WP:SUBNOT. It has not been discussed in reliable secondary sources, and there isn't a single reliable source that discusses the genre in detail. All of the article's sources involve artists self-describing their music as Afro-fusion via press releases and interviews. The page creator gathered tons of random sources that mention the term "Afro fusion" and piece them together to create the article. Note to closing administrator: This discussion needs adequate time and my hope is that enough participants contribute to the discussion. Let me also add that the article contains false information. The page creator claims that the genre was "developed in South Africa" and "universalized by Freshlyground". However, the source cited to support this info doesn't state any of this. As a matter of fact, the source states that Freshlyground's style of music is unofficially called Afro fusion and that it "contains elements of traditional South African music with blues, jazz and a spoonful of indie rock".
Here are a few sources from the article. I created the table below to show that none of the article's sources discuss the music genre. The table isn't complete but if you go through each source, you will see that none of them discuss the music genre.
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:Versace1608
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://www.nme.com/features/music-interviews/bnxn-afrofusion-superstar-interview-wizkid-burna-boy-3512374 | An interview BNXN granted to NME. Article doesn't discuss the Afro-fusion genre, just that the artist makes said genre. | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
https://www.timeslive.co.za/tshisa-live/tshisa-live/2023-10-02-afro-fusion-star-siphokazi-chats-music-hiatus-and-new-project-in-the-pipeline/#google_vignette | An interview Siphokazi granted to Times Live. Article doesn't discuss the Afro-fusion genre, just mentions it in its title | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
https://mshale.com/2013/02/01/freshlyground-refreshing-music-hailing-south-africa/ | Makes mention of the band's members and stated that the band's music has been dubbed Afro-fusion. | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
https://web.archive.org/web/20240409204623/https://newsghana.com.gh/villy-is-a-nigerian-afro-fusion-and-soul-singer/ | All of the article's material was copied from another blog | Promotional website. Per the website, users can email their stories to an email address listed | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No |
https://uproxx.com/music/burna-boy-i-told-them-review/ | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | ||
https://www.thesouthafrican.com/lifestyle/celeb-news/waka-waka-hitmakers-where-did-freshlyground-disappear-to-breaking-25-june-2023/ | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | ||
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-40580246 | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | ||
https://hiphopdx.com/news/jidenna-afro-dance-fusion-album-ready-to-go | Article is littered with quotes from Jidenna | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
https://www.arabnews.com/offbeat/afro-japanese-fusion-music-puzzles-traditionalists | Article contains several quotations from Mango | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
https://www.timeslive.co.za/tshisa-live/tshisa-live/2017-07-17-shocked-us-star-paul-simon-offers-support-to-ray-phiris-family/ | Semi-indepedent | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
Versace1608 Wanna Talk? 02:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To hear from more independent editors please
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 00:29, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I cannot see how this subject possibly meets the criteria in WP:notability#Stand-alone lists. Searching for "how did companies get their names", there are a number of hits, but 1) most of them are blogs and forums, and 2) most of them are about a selected set of companies. I hven't found anything which treats the question as a general topic. ColinFine ( talk) 16:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Article about a band, not
properly referenced as having a strong claim to passing
WP:NMUSIC. The attempted notability claims here are (a) being booked to play a major festival tour but then not doing it because their stage was cancelled, which is not a free pass over the touring criterion as they obviously can't have gotten coverage for a tour that didn't happen; (b) releasing one album on a major label, where NMUSIC requires two albums before the mere existence of albums becomes a notability clinch in and of itself; and (c) placing songs in video games and compilation albums, which is the one criterion in NMUSIC that explicitly undermines itself with a "not enough if it's the only criterion they pass" stopper clause.
But this is referenced solely to an AllMusic profile, which is a valid starter source but not enough all by itself, and since all of this happened 15-20 years ago a Google search is only landing me directory entries and
primary sources rather than
WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage.
So I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with much better access than I've got to archived US music media coverage from the naughts can find enough proper sourcing to salvage it, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have a lot more than just one GNG-worthy footnote.
Bearcat (
talk) 15:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 16:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Appears PROMO. I don't see articles about this individual, only interviews or use of him as an expert on xyz health topic in various media. Odd that all sourcing here is from Nigeria, but none in the home country, possible "pay to publish" as we see typically in Nigerian media. I have my concerns, bringing ti AfD to discuss. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 16:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm not finding anything in a BEFORE search that establishes the notability of this blog/website. All I see online is the blogs own posts on other social media platforms like twitter and X. I also see to bloggish/churnalist-type stories where the writer is guessing or implying who the author of the blog may be. Fails GNG, NCORP and WP:WEBCRIT. Netherzone ( talk) 16:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The last entry in the now-depopulated Category:The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle and Friends episodes (other episodes and story arcs proved to be non-notable and got redirected after prods and AfDs). This one, being the first story arc, is... well, longer than many others but still does not show why it is notable. We have a gigantic plot summary with poor references and my BEFORE fails to find much of use. I suggest redirecting this one as well. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 16:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
3 of the 4 sources are primary. The 4th is not indepth. Not much interaction besides diplomatic recognition. Fails GNG. LibStar ( talk) 10:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 15:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 15:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NATHLETE, WP:GNG. Only source included is a WP:TRIVIALMENTION Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 15:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 15:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Apparently I have to use AfD for this: I think this article should be moved to draftspace as it as the potential to be a good article similar to FA Cup semi-finals. However it is currently incomplete, unreferenced, and is not fit for the mainspace. Mn1548 ( talk) 15:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No indication that the titular subject (the diarist/author) or the actual subject (the diary) meet any applicable criteria. In terms of the writer (the author of the diary), writing a personal diary (even in the 18th century) doesn't make one a notable author ( WP:AUTHOR). In terms of the book (based on the diary), there is no indication that WP:NBOOK is met. (It appears to be like any other history work based on collated primary sources). WP:GNG is also not met. Frankly, and with every respect, this is another in a long-line of contributions from a Wikipedia editor who should have considered WP:WITHIN. (And perhaps used this source within and in support of other articles. Rather than writing individual articles on every historical person/name they encountered.) I cannot conceive of any appropriate WP:ATDs (redirect/draftify/etc). And so am left with AfD... Guliolopez ( talk) 13:50, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 15:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 15:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The subsidiary doesn't seem notable. This page can be a redirect to Securian Financial Group. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 15:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The vast majority of sources about Jews in the context of "Mauritania" are discussing Jews in the Roman provinces of " Mauretania," which encompass the north of present-day Morocco and Algeria, not Mauritania proper. The Jewish people don't appear to have ever had much of a presence in what is now Mauritania. There isn't much material to expand the article with, just minor controversies regarding recent antisemitic statements and sentiments in the country, which I believe shouldn't be what makes up the article. Mooonswimmer 15:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 14:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Unable to locate much beyond fairly trivial mentions. Not seeing in-depth coverage specifically about him and his career. AusLondonder ( talk) 14:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous
WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Nominating this article for deletion because it does not meet the notability guidelines. No reliable sources are referenced or can be found online. Alexwiki0496 ( talk) 13:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Practically a duplicate of the main election article. A general regional election article isn't needed as each state in South India has an article about the general election taking place in the respective state. Regional articles for India would only create more for the sake of more and would be more stats articles and wouldn't provide meaningful context. Articles about the election in each state and territory for the country is enough outside the main election article.
And the creator who contest the speedy deletion tag, states article like UK elections in England is a precenident type article. However, England is not a region in the UK. It is one of the countries part of the UK thus an article for each UK member country makes sense. Regions in England like Midlands, London, etc don't need articles for each general election result as that would be overkill. Articles like these would be overkill as well. WikiCleanerMan ( talk) 14:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
In the WP:VG/RS custom Google search engine, I get zero results looking up "silfade". Looking up creator SmokingWOLF, I get two (a 4gamer piece and an interview with Famitsu. Using Google Translate, I see the different spelling 'sylphide'. Again, zero results (except results to the unrelated ballet La Sylphide). Fails WP:GNG. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:13, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
In addition to AllMusic, I was able to find a review from Hit Parader, but that's all. HCS.net ( archived) appears to be a blog and I doubt it would hold up to scrutiny in terms of reliability. The sales claim might be worth investigating but could've easily been made up for all I know. Maybe other editors will consider AllMusic and Hit Parader to be the bare minimum for a pass, but I think we ought to be just a tad more strict than that. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 14:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV. References are atrocious and consist mostly interviews, passing mentions and tangenital links and profiles. scope_creep Talk 14:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
*Comment Seems to a lot of canvassing going on here, from Hebrew speaking Jewish editors again, espousing the same arguments I've heard before about being fanstastically well known and article has enough references. We will find out.
scope_creep
Talk 16:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Out of the 15 references in the first block, the majority of which are interviews. So nothing to prove any long term viability for this WP:BLP article. scope_creep Talk 18:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
So another block of junk reference. Not one of them is a WP:SECONDARY source. Some passing mentions, lots of interviews, a lot of business PR and not one that satisfies WP:BIO or WP:SIGCOV. The article is a complete crock. (edit conflict) scope_creep Talk 19:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Comment There has been linking to essays, guidelines, and policies which I feel in several cases has been incorrect regarding what they are, their applicability (including the context of where they came from) and interpretations of them. Other than to note that, I don't plan to get deeper in on them individually. IMO the core question is whether the topic/article has the sources to comply with a customary application of WP:GNG Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 20:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable baseball player, fails WP:GNG. This is all the coverage I have found of him and it would fail WP:BLP1E. – Muboshgu ( talk) 14:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 14:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Classic example of WP:TOOSOON. Article is based upon a Jan 2024 paper which made a minor splash with popular science blogs and journals. There is no true evidence of notability, this type of article is not what Wikipedia is for. The topic could be returned to in a year if many others copy it. Ldm1954 ( talk) 04:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Therefore, I believe there is no need for a year-long wait as you suggest, because the subject meets the GNG. I will substantiate that below:Once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage. -- WP:NTEMP
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
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) 14:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 14:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 13:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No notability upon WP:BEFORE. Doesn't meet GNG or NME 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 13:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Copy of Draft:Kharvela's conquests and invasions (created by now-blocked User:Logical pharaoh). The article is heavily promotional, and uncritically follows the only primary source ( Hathigumpha inscription) with some added embellishing. I'd recommend WP:TNT if there was a need for a separate article from Kharavela, but there doesn't seem to be, as the topic is already treated in context at Kharavela#Biography. Chaotıċ Enby ( talk · contribs) 13:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This BLP reads like a CV. None of the listed works or awards strike me as noteworthy or notable, indicating a failure to meet WP:AUTHOR. Additionally, there appears to be a lack of significant coverage in WP:RS, which means the subject also fails basic WP:GNG. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 13:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Hashmi, Alamgir (1951– ), was born in Lahore, educated in Pakistan and the United States, and has worked as a professor of English, editor, and broadcaster. His early work ... is characterized by a terse, witty, imagistic style, and reveals a recurring preoccupation with language, time, and place. The poet's peripatetic career in America, Europe, and Pakistan is reflected in the concerns of his subsequent collections, .... As Hashmi has developed, there has been a broadening of human sympathies and an emerging political awareness which have modified the virtuosity and self-absorption of some of his earliest writing. His most recent publications are ....
The result was speedy deleted by Canterbury Tail ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) as " A7: No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events)". The nominator had already quickly withdrawn in deference to a pre-existing speedy tag, anyway. (non-admin closure) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The article is clearly unnotable and should instead merely be a section on the page for Max Fosh. Gaismagorm ( talk) 13:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject is a case of WP:BIO1E as a beauty pageant contestant, with a lack of WP:GNG level coverage. Let'srun ( talk) 13:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This appears to be a clear case of WP:AUTOBIO. None of the subject's work appears outstanding, which means he fails to meet WP:AUTHOR. Additionally, there is a lack of significant coverage in WP:RS, further failing to meet the basic WP:GNG. Moreover, the BLP seems overly promotional and is written by SPAs Urdulibrary ( talk · contribs) Hammad.anwar ( talk · contribs) Sibyl12drip ( talk · contribs) — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 13:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
no RS outside of IndGoV sources Sohom ( talk) 13:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Follow-up to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eastern European identity. Similar to the Northwestern European people, Eastern European people and Eastern European identity articles by the same user that have also been deleted, this similarly written article has the same problems. WP:SYNTH + WP:REFBOMBED issues where the article just references random articles with the phrase "Eastern European" in it. NLeeuw ( talk) 13:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Took a look at this article at the suggestion of another editor who suggested a delete nom. After reviewing it, I'm gonna agree with him. The only sources I can find of this guy are, a Vice interview (not enough) and coverage of his magazine (sexual misconduct allegations, mostly) The magazine he founded, Ma3azef, may have a case for notability despite being a redlink, but this is not
WP:INHERITED (and additionally, fails
WP:AUTHOR 3.). Then there is the matter of his book, the english translation of the book seems to have gotten no coverage whatsoever and frankly, the fact that it was only longlisted for a rather niche prize (the Banipal, which is awarded to english translations of Arabic books), seems to only strengthen the case here. Given that this article has had this sourcing issue for at least four years, it seems to suggest that nobody else can find sources either. Hence, this likely fails
WP:GNG and
WP:NAUTHOR/
WP:NEDITOR.
Allan Nonymous (
talk) 17:27, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 19:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 12:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This article about a Web fails Wikipedia:Notability (Web); Because it did not meet the conditions for notability. The company's history, adaptation, awards and nomination, etc. were not introduced. Also, there are no articles that can attract attention. It should be deleted or redirected to the list of webtoon sites in Korea. Hkm5420 ( talk) 05:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 12:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I think this is a non-existent term and there are not many related reference materials in the article. Meets the criteria of Delete policy 6. Neologisms, it is recommended to delete. SU YIQI ( talk) 05:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 12:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of notability, no independent sources, tagged since 2018. Greenman ( talk) 07:42, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 12:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No non-primary sourcing. Sohom ( talk) 12:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, notability is not inherited per WP:NARENA and WP:NBUILDING. Nagol0929 ( talk) 12:11, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 12:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Practically unsourced since creation. No evidence of notability. Previously deleted and salted as Swayd. Also including Lunar Sound, the studio he operated, which is similarly unreferenced. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To evaluate the
additions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 19:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 12:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 11:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Unlikely to become notable, if the team is defunct. Unsourced (though I know that's probably fixable). Curb Safe Charmer ( talk) 11:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Same rationale as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Road signs in Lesotho. It's a WP:NOTGALLERY violation apparently by intention. There are tons of these articles that don't appear to be attempts at creating an encyclopedia article at all, but are just making a space to put 100+ images. There's already a place for that, and it's on Commons. GMG talk 10:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are 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) 10:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, not a single source. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. 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) 10:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are archived pages of 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) 09:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Not a single source in any shape or form. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:FILMMAKER or WP:BIO. The subject has coverage only for winning a private island. No other significant coverage on his works or states any importance for an article. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 09:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No significant coverage or importance on the subject to have an article. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject is not notable. The award "Cesarica" is not at all notable to value the importance of the subject. Upon WP:BEFORE, I could find 3 articles about him, which doesn't show notability. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable. Doesn't meet WP:ENT yet. Can go for soft-deletion. Sources are poor. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:51, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:NCORP. No primary sources, no reliable sources. There is one article about this label signing a part with SM Entertainment, but that alone doesn't subject to notability. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:40, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Contextes are there to claim 'channel x' brought out the right to coverages in 'country x', not to assert notability. 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) 08:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Contextes are there to claim 'channel x' brought out the right to coverages in 'country x', not to assert notability. 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) 08:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Contextes are there to claim 'channel x' brought out the right to coverages in 'country x', not to assert notability. 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) 08:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Contextes are there to claim 'channel x' brought out the right to coverages in 'country x', not to assert notability. 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) 08:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The term exists, but most uses of it seem to be promotional, many tied to the mentioned CEREC company. Unsure if this term alone meets WP:GNG and especially a need for independent sourcing. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 08:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Contextes are there to claim 'channel x' brought out the right to voerages in 'country x', not to assert notability. 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) 08:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
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) 08:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
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) 07:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. No context to assert notability. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are 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) 07:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, the only source are nothing but news announcement and does not assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 07:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Case of BLP1E. Fails WP:NPOL and GNG as BLP is contesting in the 2024 Indian general election and has not been elected to any office positions yet. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 07:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NORG. All sources provided in article are either linked to the subject (1, 5-9) or passing mentions (2-4).
User is likely COI, created a similar article in draftspace at Draft:Independent Investment Advisors which was rejected three times before they ultimately created a mainspace article directly by moving from userspace. Triptothecottage ( talk) 06:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I guess this has been recreated—wasn't quite sure what had happened here initially, but as I was planning on commenting on the previous AFD I guess I may as well nom it. I couldn't find anything useful in my own search. Editing history of the creator also seems a bit odd but I'm not too familiar with that kind of thing. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 16:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
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 05:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I can't claim to be an expert in this area, but I was unable to find sources to confirm notability. Boleyn ( talk) 20:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 05:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Article is based entirely on work by the subject and has no evidence of third-party notability. Almost identical to article previously speedy deleted and salted as Leopoldo Soto * Pppery * it has begun... 18:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 05:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Non notable musician. Has multiple sources but they are either bylined to him or is an interview. Has a big laundry list of awards but none are major. Claims lots of #1 singles but they're are not on the countries national chart. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. A search found nothing better. (last afd was for a different Tommy Brandt) duffbeerforme ( talk) 03:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 05:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NMUSIC. Just because we have several articles about music produced by him does not make him notable, I find that he is not notable as a musician or a producer. Nagol0929 ( talk) 15:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 16:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 18:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 05:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I initially tagged this for UPE for cleanup but after it was challenged by two SPAs, and at the request of one, I dug further into cleanup. The issue is that the references, other than this, are not reliable to show notability. Everything is mentions, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, press releases, churnalism, interviews, or otherwise unreliable. I removed some WP:FAKEREFerences prior but kept everything else in tact so the AfD could be judged based on how it sits currently. CNMall41 ( talk) 04:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This is a non notable voice actor. The article doesn't even meet WP:THREE. The only source I see is for a convention that sources one of her works.
So this is currently at RfD on the Simple English Wikipedia, and likewise to the nominator there, I don't think the coverage is enough for notability. Cleo Cooper ( talk) 04:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Guy has a messy and (and coincidentally, also unsourced) wikipedia article on spanish wikipedia, which I cut. Not really enough sources to establish anything beyond the fact that this guy exists, which is, unfortunately, not enough for WP:GNG. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 04:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Biography with no evidence of notability, but that has persisted for quite a while. Sadads ( talk) 01:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
an important figure...widely cited by peers or successorsNope. (B)
originated a significant new concept, theory, or techniqueNone that we're aware of. (C)
created -or played a major role in co-creating- a significant or well-known workThere are 2 films directed by Roberge that have Wikipedia pages of their own but that does not mean that their director is worthy of an article himself. First of all, we need independent notability, and, segundo, the films might be Wikinotable but they are certainly not some "significant" work. And (D)
[his] work has become a significant monument, been part of a significant exhibition, won significant critical attention, or been represented within permanent collectionsNo, no, no, and no. - The Gnome ( talk) 14:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 03:13, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable television episode. Boarder line WP:ALLPLOT Couldnt find any sources on the episode Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 01:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 03:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
There are references that verify its existence but nothing that shows notability under WP:GNG. Once of many forks from List of Apache Software Foundation projects. Can be redirected back to the list page as an WP:ATD but bringing to discussion in case someone is able to find better sourcing. CNMall41 ( talk) 00:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 03:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
According to the county history source, this "nearly extinct" town never really took off in the first place. This is the kind of place that gives
WP:GEOLAND a bad name, because even though one can use the two sources to give a location and something of a history, there's no way this place passess any real notability standard, and so I predict we will be left arguing whether this was a real unincorporated communitytown or not.
Mangoe (
talk) 03:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Nothing notable, nor relevant per GNG. No SIGCOV. The author is blocked for evading the block Gavrover ( talk) 20:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 03:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No indication of notability outside of the college. I am unable to find significant discussion of this mascot in independent sources. ... discospinster talk 03:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Only one legitimate entry for spoilage. I've transferred the most numerous entries to Spoiled. Articles could easily be written (and should) about spoilage in business and of food in its place. Clarityfiend ( talk) 02:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Lacks significant coverage, though his company Design Projects is an extremely generic name. No possible redirect as his company does not have an article. He seems to have worked mostly on B movies. —Kaliforniyka Hi! 01:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Feels entirely like WP:NEO. Half the usage section is just dedicated to Elon Musk (at the time of AFD nomination).
Look I understand Go woke, go broke exists, but that feels like WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Is every popular iteration of a phrase invoking the ideas of wokeness going to have its own article?
According to the article, "Vanity Fair has titled whole sections of stories under the "Woke Mind Virus" label." This isn't actually a label that is selectable/catagorized/tagged like "politics", but a custom label for one article.
I do not doubt the phrase's usage in popular media and by influential people, but it is essentially the same thing as woke. I could go on, but I think this can be deleted and redirected to woke. Alternatively, this content can be merged into woke as its own section with the criticism. -- Classicwiki ( talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 01:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Articles on neologisms that have little or no usage in reliable sources are commonly deleted, but in this case this phrase is very widely cited across an enormous variety of reliable sources. The phrase probably should also be mentioned at the woke article and other mentions should be added and included, but a page for Woke Mind Virus itself makes sense given the sources as broad and significant as they are. Iljhgtn ( talk) 02:27, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Some neologisms can be in frequent use, and it may be possible to pull together many facts about a particular term and show evidence of its usage on the Internet or in larger society.This is not in question. I do not doubt it will be utilized in large portions of media and scholarly works. Until it is shown to be its own distinct concept, it is essentially a branch term used to criticize wokeness. There is a criticism section in woke that this neologism can direct to in my opinion. Currently, Anti-woke redirects to woke. Anti-woke is an older term than woke mind virus and used it much more media/scholarly works. WMV is just a substitute term for being against wokeness (or anti-woke). Alternatively, I think a separate article that incorporates
reliable secondary sources say about the term or concept, not just sources that use the termtitled something along the lines of "Criticisms of woke/wokeness" or even "anti-woke" could also be appropriate, where WMV redirects to. I do not see the point of a standalone article about Woke Mind Virus. -- Classicwiki ( talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Despite his repeated use of the phrase, the precise meaning of “woke mind virus” has been difficult to pin down. Musk told Bill Maher during an interview on HBO: “I think we need to be very cautious about anything that is anti-meritocratic, and anything that … results in the suppression of free speech. Those are two aspects of the woke mind virus that I think are very dangerous.”This source speaks uniquely of the WMV by saying much about Musk's use of it from a critical perspective. This source again uses both "woke" as well as WMV and refers to them as distinct terms with their own meanings. This source predominantly focuses on just the "woke" phrase but has an important passing mention of WMV, though obviously passing mentions in general are not to carry weight towards an AfD consideration. This source covers the phrase and the Netflix mention with some detail. I believe the above, and much more can be found with fairly little work and effort actually to support an independent page for both the WMV phrase as well as woke and other phrases mentioned by other editors. Iljhgtn ( talk) 19:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No independent notability apart from two collapsed buildings. Revirvlkodlaku ( talk) 01:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Boxer whose only reference is a database entry. There is a draft for a diplomat, Draft: Artur Khachatryan, which will otherwise require disambiguation. The need for disambiguation is not a reason to delete, but the lack of sports notability is Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 00:13, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an English rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I am also nominating the folllowing article as he is a member of the same team ( St Helens R.F.C.) who also fails to meet WP:SPORTBASIC:
Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk) 01:54, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 18:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 00:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
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) 18:27, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 18:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 00:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. See table below. GMH Melbourne ( talk) 01:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
burger created exclusively for heraldsun.com.auwhich leads me to doubt the independence of the broadsheet articles. - GMH Melbourne ( talk) 00:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While current sentiment is leaning towards delete, giving this another seven days to assess if further input continues to lean that way.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 00:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No secondary sources. Sole source is government list. Article on an individual office of the IOM which simply states it exists and its location. Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. Nothing to merge and an implausible search term. AusLondonder ( talk) 00:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 26
Only sources for this company are WP:ROUTINE press releases. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 16:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous
WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Listicle with minimal coverage (and what it does get is from blog-type websites rather than any major news source). Violates MOS:FILMACCOLADES, specifically the sentence 'Awards bestowed by web-only entities are not generally included'. Survived an AfD in 2013 that was marred by WP:SPA activity. Sgubaldo ( talk) 16:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
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 23:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Unsourced; no evidence of notability. Dicklyon ( talk) 23:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 23:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't think an Emmy nomination is enough to hit WP:NACTOR BrigadierG ( talk) 22:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Police department for a town of 20k people. A cursory Google search doesn't turn up any particularly notable incidents that attracted wider media attention. WP:ORGDEPTH BrigadierG ( talk) 22:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This car/brand does not meet WP:N. I am unable to find any other sourcing, and the given source is only a listing that says "X (France) (1908-1909)." The article went unsourced for 18 years and the text has not been expanded upon since its original creation. Even given the age of this, it does not seem to have any claim to importance or historical significance since it existed for a year at most and "little is known about the marque." StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 21:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Procedural nomination per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 13#Tracy Grandstaff * Pppery * it has begun... 21:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Silesia is not a country, so it cannot be this. Rename it--but to what? There's no Frisian national football team or Walloon national football team either. Plus, the article is little more than a directory and a list of matches. Drmies ( talk) 21:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, the only source does not help to assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 20:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are entirely primary, are basically news announcement and does not help to assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 20:40, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Book source seems to say about as much as an obituary would about each person described there. Flounder fillet ( talk) 20:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are basically news announcement and does not help to assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 20:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are basically news announcement and does not assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 20:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. No indication of notability. Flounder fillet ( talk) 20:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:NBAND / WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 18:16, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 19:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 19:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy close. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
There is dispute about whether this page should exist, Or is two promotional/lacking sources. Hyperbolick ( talk) 19:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
A NN subdivision built sometime in the 1950s/'60s. Mangoe ( talk) 19:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Poorly sourced rugby BLP; subject made one pro appearance. I found a couple sentences of coverage here and not much else. Fails WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 19:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
A Japanese racing driver. Page fails WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. Doesn't have much beyond when he was born and died, and some scores. BlakeIsHereStudios ( talk | contributions) 18:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. Note that he is more commonly known by Mandisi Mthiyane, which seems to be his legal name. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The most I found was a few sentences of coverage here. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet GNG/NCORP. The only source that is about WRA and in-depth is the BBC. Some of the sources make no mention of WRA and the others are brief mentions or based on what the organization/those affiliated say. S0091 ( talk) 16:57, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
sports league/organization. Looking at this as neutrally as possible, the bar for coverage is met:
An organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it
A corporation is not notable merely because it owns notable subsidiaries
If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability? This is stated in WP:BASIC for people but surely the principle applies just as well in this situation. For an organization that is so widely covered in so many WP:RSP reliable sources, the more I research this topic the more I think we would be making a mistake to delete that may be biased by the behavior of COI editors. Thank you, -- Habst ( talk) 17:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
"there are likely sufficient sources to merit a stand-alone article". I'm open to other ideas, but in my review of the material I am having a hard time being comfortable with a delete decision here in light of the breadth of coverage. Thanks, -- Habst ( talk) 00:42, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
This guideline does not provide any general criteria for the presumed notability of sports teams and clubs. Some sports have specific criteria. Otherwise, teams and clubs are expected to demonstrate notability by the general notability guideline. Since notability is not inherited, the notability of an athlete does not imply the notability of a team or club, or vice versa.The BBC article describes WRA as a club, though they frame it as a travel club, so I think GNG is the relevant guideline. S0091 ( talk) 14:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 19:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Doczilla
Ohhhhhh, no! 17:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Biography of a former mayor, not
properly sourced as passing
WP:NPOL #2. As always, mayors are not "inherently" notable just because they existed, and have to pass conditional notability standards based on the depth of substance that can be written about their careers and the volume of sourcing that can be shown to support it -- but this, as written, is basically "mayor who existed" apart from a section that advertorially bulletpoints a generic list of "achievements" without really saying or sourcing anything whatsoever about what he personally had to do with any of them, and minimally cites the whole thing to one
primary source self-published by the city government that isn't support for notability at all, one unreliable source that isn't support for notability at all, and just one hit of
run of the mill local coverage upon his death that isn't enough to get him over GNG all by itself if it's the only GNG-worthy source in the mix.
Trois-Rivières is a significant enough city that a mayor would certainly be eligible to keep an article that was written substantially and sourced properly, so I'd be happy to withdraw this if somebody with much better access to the necessary resources than I've got can find enough GNG-worthy sourcing to salvage it, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have more substance and sourcing than this.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Article about a song, not properly referenced as having any serious claim to passing WP:NSONGS. As always, songs are not automatically entitled to have their own standalone articles just because they exist, and have to show and reliably source some claim of significance -- but the main attempt at a notability claim here is that versions of the song appeared on albums that had gold certification as albums, which is not in and of itself evidence that the song has its own standalone notability independently of those albums, and the article is referenced entirely to primary source directory entries that are not support for notability, with not a whit of GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about the song in media or books shown at all. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the song from having to be the subject of reliable source coverage. Bearcat ( talk) 17:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Candidates for UK Parliament are not automatically notable. Similarly, writing a few newspaper articles also does not confer notability. Propose deleting and if he is successful in his campaign, it would be appropriate to make a page once he is elected. Drerac ( talk) 17:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
All the sources provided are from June 2013. No lasting coverage or impact to meet WP:EVENT. LibStar ( talk) 14:36, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 15:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
All the sources provided are from time of event. No lasting coverage or impact to meet WP:EVENT. LibStar ( talk) 14:46, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 15:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This was nominated a year ago and the result was no consensus, because an organization that is the main feeder competition for the IOI has to have sources. I agree, but really, there is nothing, I've tried. I propose redirection to International Olympiad in Informatics. Snowmanonahoe ( talk · contribs · typos) 15:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Unsourced for over a decade, couldn't find source to meet WP:GNG. Found [5], but seems to be unrelated. Article on plwiki was deleted in 2021, see pl:Wikipedia:Poczekalnia/artykuły/2021:01:01:Wolność i Sprawiedliwość (Polska). ARandomName123 ( talk)Ping me! 14:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on Cielquiparle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Person had no notability. Sources of dubious quality. Only one other source could be found, and it alone could not be enough to build an article upon. aaronneallucas ( talk) 04:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Sources of dubious quality"? They are all from FIDE, the ultimate reliable source for chess. Pam D 22:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I think it was bad form to nominate this article for an AFD discussion less than an hour after the article was created. That's not enough time to create an article that could withstand scrutiny at an AFD. I'd also like to see some assessment of newly added content since its nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:57, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
References
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on the comments above?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This particular music genre fails WP:GNG, WP:NMUSIC and WP:SUBNOT. It has not been discussed in reliable secondary sources, and there isn't a single reliable source that discusses the genre in detail. All of the article's sources involve artists self-describing their music as Afro-fusion via press releases and interviews. The page creator gathered tons of random sources that mention the term "Afro fusion" and piece them together to create the article. Note to closing administrator: This discussion needs adequate time and my hope is that enough participants contribute to the discussion. Let me also add that the article contains false information. The page creator claims that the genre was "developed in South Africa" and "universalized by Freshlyground". However, the source cited to support this info doesn't state any of this. As a matter of fact, the source states that Freshlyground's style of music is unofficially called Afro fusion and that it "contains elements of traditional South African music with blues, jazz and a spoonful of indie rock".
Here are a few sources from the article. I created the table below to show that none of the article's sources discuss the music genre. The table isn't complete but if you go through each source, you will see that none of them discuss the music genre.
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:Versace1608
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://www.nme.com/features/music-interviews/bnxn-afrofusion-superstar-interview-wizkid-burna-boy-3512374 | An interview BNXN granted to NME. Article doesn't discuss the Afro-fusion genre, just that the artist makes said genre. | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
https://www.timeslive.co.za/tshisa-live/tshisa-live/2023-10-02-afro-fusion-star-siphokazi-chats-music-hiatus-and-new-project-in-the-pipeline/#google_vignette | An interview Siphokazi granted to Times Live. Article doesn't discuss the Afro-fusion genre, just mentions it in its title | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
https://mshale.com/2013/02/01/freshlyground-refreshing-music-hailing-south-africa/ | Makes mention of the band's members and stated that the band's music has been dubbed Afro-fusion. | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
https://web.archive.org/web/20240409204623/https://newsghana.com.gh/villy-is-a-nigerian-afro-fusion-and-soul-singer/ | All of the article's material was copied from another blog | Promotional website. Per the website, users can email their stories to an email address listed | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No |
https://uproxx.com/music/burna-boy-i-told-them-review/ | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | ||
https://www.thesouthafrican.com/lifestyle/celeb-news/waka-waka-hitmakers-where-did-freshlyground-disappear-to-breaking-25-june-2023/ | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | ||
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-40580246 | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | ||
https://hiphopdx.com/news/jidenna-afro-dance-fusion-album-ready-to-go | Article is littered with quotes from Jidenna | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
https://www.arabnews.com/offbeat/afro-japanese-fusion-music-puzzles-traditionalists | Article contains several quotations from Mango | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
https://www.timeslive.co.za/tshisa-live/tshisa-live/2017-07-17-shocked-us-star-paul-simon-offers-support-to-ray-phiris-family/ | Semi-indepedent | The source does not discuss the genre whatsover | ✘ No | |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
Versace1608 Wanna Talk? 02:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To hear from more independent editors please
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 00:29, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 16:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I cannot see how this subject possibly meets the criteria in WP:notability#Stand-alone lists. Searching for "how did companies get their names", there are a number of hits, but 1) most of them are blogs and forums, and 2) most of them are about a selected set of companies. I hven't found anything which treats the question as a general topic. ColinFine ( talk) 16:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Article about a band, not
properly referenced as having a strong claim to passing
WP:NMUSIC. The attempted notability claims here are (a) being booked to play a major festival tour but then not doing it because their stage was cancelled, which is not a free pass over the touring criterion as they obviously can't have gotten coverage for a tour that didn't happen; (b) releasing one album on a major label, where NMUSIC requires two albums before the mere existence of albums becomes a notability clinch in and of itself; and (c) placing songs in video games and compilation albums, which is the one criterion in NMUSIC that explicitly undermines itself with a "not enough if it's the only criterion they pass" stopper clause.
But this is referenced solely to an AllMusic profile, which is a valid starter source but not enough all by itself, and since all of this happened 15-20 years ago a Google search is only landing me directory entries and
primary sources rather than
WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage.
So I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with much better access than I've got to archived US music media coverage from the naughts can find enough proper sourcing to salvage it, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have a lot more than just one GNG-worthy footnote.
Bearcat (
talk) 15:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 16:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Appears PROMO. I don't see articles about this individual, only interviews or use of him as an expert on xyz health topic in various media. Odd that all sourcing here is from Nigeria, but none in the home country, possible "pay to publish" as we see typically in Nigerian media. I have my concerns, bringing ti AfD to discuss. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 16:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm not finding anything in a BEFORE search that establishes the notability of this blog/website. All I see online is the blogs own posts on other social media platforms like twitter and X. I also see to bloggish/churnalist-type stories where the writer is guessing or implying who the author of the blog may be. Fails GNG, NCORP and WP:WEBCRIT. Netherzone ( talk) 16:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The last entry in the now-depopulated Category:The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle and Friends episodes (other episodes and story arcs proved to be non-notable and got redirected after prods and AfDs). This one, being the first story arc, is... well, longer than many others but still does not show why it is notable. We have a gigantic plot summary with poor references and my BEFORE fails to find much of use. I suggest redirecting this one as well. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 16:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
3 of the 4 sources are primary. The 4th is not indepth. Not much interaction besides diplomatic recognition. Fails GNG. LibStar ( talk) 10:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 15:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 15:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NATHLETE, WP:GNG. Only source included is a WP:TRIVIALMENTION Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 15:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 15:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Apparently I have to use AfD for this: I think this article should be moved to draftspace as it as the potential to be a good article similar to FA Cup semi-finals. However it is currently incomplete, unreferenced, and is not fit for the mainspace. Mn1548 ( talk) 15:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No indication that the titular subject (the diarist/author) or the actual subject (the diary) meet any applicable criteria. In terms of the writer (the author of the diary), writing a personal diary (even in the 18th century) doesn't make one a notable author ( WP:AUTHOR). In terms of the book (based on the diary), there is no indication that WP:NBOOK is met. (It appears to be like any other history work based on collated primary sources). WP:GNG is also not met. Frankly, and with every respect, this is another in a long-line of contributions from a Wikipedia editor who should have considered WP:WITHIN. (And perhaps used this source within and in support of other articles. Rather than writing individual articles on every historical person/name they encountered.) I cannot conceive of any appropriate WP:ATDs (redirect/draftify/etc). And so am left with AfD... Guliolopez ( talk) 13:50, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 15:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 15:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The subsidiary doesn't seem notable. This page can be a redirect to Securian Financial Group. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 15:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The vast majority of sources about Jews in the context of "Mauritania" are discussing Jews in the Roman provinces of " Mauretania," which encompass the north of present-day Morocco and Algeria, not Mauritania proper. The Jewish people don't appear to have ever had much of a presence in what is now Mauritania. There isn't much material to expand the article with, just minor controversies regarding recent antisemitic statements and sentiments in the country, which I believe shouldn't be what makes up the article. Mooonswimmer 15:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 14:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Unable to locate much beyond fairly trivial mentions. Not seeing in-depth coverage specifically about him and his career. AusLondonder ( talk) 14:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous
WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Nominating this article for deletion because it does not meet the notability guidelines. No reliable sources are referenced or can be found online. Alexwiki0496 ( talk) 13:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Practically a duplicate of the main election article. A general regional election article isn't needed as each state in South India has an article about the general election taking place in the respective state. Regional articles for India would only create more for the sake of more and would be more stats articles and wouldn't provide meaningful context. Articles about the election in each state and territory for the country is enough outside the main election article.
And the creator who contest the speedy deletion tag, states article like UK elections in England is a precenident type article. However, England is not a region in the UK. It is one of the countries part of the UK thus an article for each UK member country makes sense. Regions in England like Midlands, London, etc don't need articles for each general election result as that would be overkill. Articles like these would be overkill as well. WikiCleanerMan ( talk) 14:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
In the WP:VG/RS custom Google search engine, I get zero results looking up "silfade". Looking up creator SmokingWOLF, I get two (a 4gamer piece and an interview with Famitsu. Using Google Translate, I see the different spelling 'sylphide'. Again, zero results (except results to the unrelated ballet La Sylphide). Fails WP:GNG. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:13, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
In addition to AllMusic, I was able to find a review from Hit Parader, but that's all. HCS.net ( archived) appears to be a blog and I doubt it would hold up to scrutiny in terms of reliability. The sales claim might be worth investigating but could've easily been made up for all I know. Maybe other editors will consider AllMusic and Hit Parader to be the bare minimum for a pass, but I think we ought to be just a tad more strict than that. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 14:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV. References are atrocious and consist mostly interviews, passing mentions and tangenital links and profiles. scope_creep Talk 14:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
*Comment Seems to a lot of canvassing going on here, from Hebrew speaking Jewish editors again, espousing the same arguments I've heard before about being fanstastically well known and article has enough references. We will find out.
scope_creep
Talk 16:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Out of the 15 references in the first block, the majority of which are interviews. So nothing to prove any long term viability for this WP:BLP article. scope_creep Talk 18:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
So another block of junk reference. Not one of them is a WP:SECONDARY source. Some passing mentions, lots of interviews, a lot of business PR and not one that satisfies WP:BIO or WP:SIGCOV. The article is a complete crock. (edit conflict) scope_creep Talk 19:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Comment There has been linking to essays, guidelines, and policies which I feel in several cases has been incorrect regarding what they are, their applicability (including the context of where they came from) and interpretations of them. Other than to note that, I don't plan to get deeper in on them individually. IMO the core question is whether the topic/article has the sources to comply with a customary application of WP:GNG Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 20:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable baseball player, fails WP:GNG. This is all the coverage I have found of him and it would fail WP:BLP1E. – Muboshgu ( talk) 14:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 14:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Classic example of WP:TOOSOON. Article is based upon a Jan 2024 paper which made a minor splash with popular science blogs and journals. There is no true evidence of notability, this type of article is not what Wikipedia is for. The topic could be returned to in a year if many others copy it. Ldm1954 ( talk) 04:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Therefore, I believe there is no need for a year-long wait as you suggest, because the subject meets the GNG. I will substantiate that below:Once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage. -- WP:NTEMP
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
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) 14:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 14:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 13:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No notability upon WP:BEFORE. Doesn't meet GNG or NME 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 13:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Copy of Draft:Kharvela's conquests and invasions (created by now-blocked User:Logical pharaoh). The article is heavily promotional, and uncritically follows the only primary source ( Hathigumpha inscription) with some added embellishing. I'd recommend WP:TNT if there was a need for a separate article from Kharavela, but there doesn't seem to be, as the topic is already treated in context at Kharavela#Biography. Chaotıċ Enby ( talk · contribs) 13:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This BLP reads like a CV. None of the listed works or awards strike me as noteworthy or notable, indicating a failure to meet WP:AUTHOR. Additionally, there appears to be a lack of significant coverage in WP:RS, which means the subject also fails basic WP:GNG. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 13:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Hashmi, Alamgir (1951– ), was born in Lahore, educated in Pakistan and the United States, and has worked as a professor of English, editor, and broadcaster. His early work ... is characterized by a terse, witty, imagistic style, and reveals a recurring preoccupation with language, time, and place. The poet's peripatetic career in America, Europe, and Pakistan is reflected in the concerns of his subsequent collections, .... As Hashmi has developed, there has been a broadening of human sympathies and an emerging political awareness which have modified the virtuosity and self-absorption of some of his earliest writing. His most recent publications are ....
The result was speedy deleted by Canterbury Tail ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) as " A7: No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events)". The nominator had already quickly withdrawn in deference to a pre-existing speedy tag, anyway. (non-admin closure) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The article is clearly unnotable and should instead merely be a section on the page for Max Fosh. Gaismagorm ( talk) 13:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject is a case of WP:BIO1E as a beauty pageant contestant, with a lack of WP:GNG level coverage. Let'srun ( talk) 13:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This appears to be a clear case of WP:AUTOBIO. None of the subject's work appears outstanding, which means he fails to meet WP:AUTHOR. Additionally, there is a lack of significant coverage in WP:RS, further failing to meet the basic WP:GNG. Moreover, the BLP seems overly promotional and is written by SPAs Urdulibrary ( talk · contribs) Hammad.anwar ( talk · contribs) Sibyl12drip ( talk · contribs) — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 13:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
no RS outside of IndGoV sources Sohom ( talk) 13:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Follow-up to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eastern European identity. Similar to the Northwestern European people, Eastern European people and Eastern European identity articles by the same user that have also been deleted, this similarly written article has the same problems. WP:SYNTH + WP:REFBOMBED issues where the article just references random articles with the phrase "Eastern European" in it. NLeeuw ( talk) 13:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Took a look at this article at the suggestion of another editor who suggested a delete nom. After reviewing it, I'm gonna agree with him. The only sources I can find of this guy are, a Vice interview (not enough) and coverage of his magazine (sexual misconduct allegations, mostly) The magazine he founded, Ma3azef, may have a case for notability despite being a redlink, but this is not
WP:INHERITED (and additionally, fails
WP:AUTHOR 3.). Then there is the matter of his book, the english translation of the book seems to have gotten no coverage whatsoever and frankly, the fact that it was only longlisted for a rather niche prize (the Banipal, which is awarded to english translations of Arabic books), seems to only strengthen the case here. Given that this article has had this sourcing issue for at least four years, it seems to suggest that nobody else can find sources either. Hence, this likely fails
WP:GNG and
WP:NAUTHOR/
WP:NEDITOR.
Allan Nonymous (
talk) 17:27, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 19:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 12:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This article about a Web fails Wikipedia:Notability (Web); Because it did not meet the conditions for notability. The company's history, adaptation, awards and nomination, etc. were not introduced. Also, there are no articles that can attract attention. It should be deleted or redirected to the list of webtoon sites in Korea. Hkm5420 ( talk) 05:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 12:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I think this is a non-existent term and there are not many related reference materials in the article. Meets the criteria of Delete policy 6. Neologisms, it is recommended to delete. SU YIQI ( talk) 05:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 12:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of notability, no independent sources, tagged since 2018. Greenman ( talk) 07:42, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 12:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No non-primary sourcing. Sohom ( talk) 12:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, notability is not inherited per WP:NARENA and WP:NBUILDING. Nagol0929 ( talk) 12:11, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 12:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Practically unsourced since creation. No evidence of notability. Previously deleted and salted as Swayd. Also including Lunar Sound, the studio he operated, which is similarly unreferenced. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To evaluate the
additions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 19:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 12:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 11:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Unlikely to become notable, if the team is defunct. Unsourced (though I know that's probably fixable). Curb Safe Charmer ( talk) 11:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Same rationale as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Road signs in Lesotho. It's a WP:NOTGALLERY violation apparently by intention. There are tons of these articles that don't appear to be attempts at creating an encyclopedia article at all, but are just making a space to put 100+ images. There's already a place for that, and it's on Commons. GMG talk 10:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are 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) 10:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, not a single source. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. 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) 10:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are archived pages of 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) 09:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Not a single source in any shape or form. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:FILMMAKER or WP:BIO. The subject has coverage only for winning a private island. No other significant coverage on his works or states any importance for an article. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 09:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No significant coverage or importance on the subject to have an article. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject is not notable. The award "Cesarica" is not at all notable to value the importance of the subject. Upon WP:BEFORE, I could find 3 articles about him, which doesn't show notability. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable. Doesn't meet WP:ENT yet. Can go for soft-deletion. Sources are poor. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:51, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:NCORP. No primary sources, no reliable sources. There is one article about this label signing a part with SM Entertainment, but that alone doesn't subject to notability. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:40, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Contextes are there to claim 'channel x' brought out the right to coverages in 'country x', not to assert notability. 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) 08:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Contextes are there to claim 'channel x' brought out the right to coverages in 'country x', not to assert notability. 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) 08:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Contextes are there to claim 'channel x' brought out the right to coverages in 'country x', not to assert notability. 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) 08:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Contextes are there to claim 'channel x' brought out the right to coverages in 'country x', not to assert notability. 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) 08:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The term exists, but most uses of it seem to be promotional, many tied to the mentioned CEREC company. Unsure if this term alone meets WP:GNG and especially a need for independent sourcing. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 08:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Contextes are there to claim 'channel x' brought out the right to voerages in 'country x', not to assert notability. 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) 08:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
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) 08:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
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) 07:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. No context to assert notability. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are 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) 07:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, the only source are nothing but news announcement and does not assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 07:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Case of BLP1E. Fails WP:NPOL and GNG as BLP is contesting in the 2024 Indian general election and has not been elected to any office positions yet. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 07:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NORG. All sources provided in article are either linked to the subject (1, 5-9) or passing mentions (2-4).
User is likely COI, created a similar article in draftspace at Draft:Independent Investment Advisors which was rejected three times before they ultimately created a mainspace article directly by moving from userspace. Triptothecottage ( talk) 06:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I guess this has been recreated—wasn't quite sure what had happened here initially, but as I was planning on commenting on the previous AFD I guess I may as well nom it. I couldn't find anything useful in my own search. Editing history of the creator also seems a bit odd but I'm not too familiar with that kind of thing. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 16:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
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 05:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I can't claim to be an expert in this area, but I was unable to find sources to confirm notability. Boleyn ( talk) 20:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 05:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Article is based entirely on work by the subject and has no evidence of third-party notability. Almost identical to article previously speedy deleted and salted as Leopoldo Soto * Pppery * it has begun... 18:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 05:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Non notable musician. Has multiple sources but they are either bylined to him or is an interview. Has a big laundry list of awards but none are major. Claims lots of #1 singles but they're are not on the countries national chart. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. A search found nothing better. (last afd was for a different Tommy Brandt) duffbeerforme ( talk) 03:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 05:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NMUSIC. Just because we have several articles about music produced by him does not make him notable, I find that he is not notable as a musician or a producer. Nagol0929 ( talk) 15:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 16:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 18:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 05:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I initially tagged this for UPE for cleanup but after it was challenged by two SPAs, and at the request of one, I dug further into cleanup. The issue is that the references, other than this, are not reliable to show notability. Everything is mentions, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, press releases, churnalism, interviews, or otherwise unreliable. I removed some WP:FAKEREFerences prior but kept everything else in tact so the AfD could be judged based on how it sits currently. CNMall41 ( talk) 04:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This is a non notable voice actor. The article doesn't even meet WP:THREE. The only source I see is for a convention that sources one of her works.
So this is currently at RfD on the Simple English Wikipedia, and likewise to the nominator there, I don't think the coverage is enough for notability. Cleo Cooper ( talk) 04:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Guy has a messy and (and coincidentally, also unsourced) wikipedia article on spanish wikipedia, which I cut. Not really enough sources to establish anything beyond the fact that this guy exists, which is, unfortunately, not enough for WP:GNG. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 04:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Biography with no evidence of notability, but that has persisted for quite a while. Sadads ( talk) 01:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
an important figure...widely cited by peers or successorsNope. (B)
originated a significant new concept, theory, or techniqueNone that we're aware of. (C)
created -or played a major role in co-creating- a significant or well-known workThere are 2 films directed by Roberge that have Wikipedia pages of their own but that does not mean that their director is worthy of an article himself. First of all, we need independent notability, and, segundo, the films might be Wikinotable but they are certainly not some "significant" work. And (D)
[his] work has become a significant monument, been part of a significant exhibition, won significant critical attention, or been represented within permanent collectionsNo, no, no, and no. - The Gnome ( talk) 14:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 03:13, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable television episode. Boarder line WP:ALLPLOT Couldnt find any sources on the episode Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 01:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 03:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
There are references that verify its existence but nothing that shows notability under WP:GNG. Once of many forks from List of Apache Software Foundation projects. Can be redirected back to the list page as an WP:ATD but bringing to discussion in case someone is able to find better sourcing. CNMall41 ( talk) 00:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 03:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
According to the county history source, this "nearly extinct" town never really took off in the first place. This is the kind of place that gives
WP:GEOLAND a bad name, because even though one can use the two sources to give a location and something of a history, there's no way this place passess any real notability standard, and so I predict we will be left arguing whether this was a real unincorporated communitytown or not.
Mangoe (
talk) 03:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Nothing notable, nor relevant per GNG. No SIGCOV. The author is blocked for evading the block Gavrover ( talk) 20:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 03:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No indication of notability outside of the college. I am unable to find significant discussion of this mascot in independent sources. ... discospinster talk 03:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Only one legitimate entry for spoilage. I've transferred the most numerous entries to Spoiled. Articles could easily be written (and should) about spoilage in business and of food in its place. Clarityfiend ( talk) 02:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Lacks significant coverage, though his company Design Projects is an extremely generic name. No possible redirect as his company does not have an article. He seems to have worked mostly on B movies. —Kaliforniyka Hi! 01:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Feels entirely like WP:NEO. Half the usage section is just dedicated to Elon Musk (at the time of AFD nomination).
Look I understand Go woke, go broke exists, but that feels like WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Is every popular iteration of a phrase invoking the ideas of wokeness going to have its own article?
According to the article, "Vanity Fair has titled whole sections of stories under the "Woke Mind Virus" label." This isn't actually a label that is selectable/catagorized/tagged like "politics", but a custom label for one article.
I do not doubt the phrase's usage in popular media and by influential people, but it is essentially the same thing as woke. I could go on, but I think this can be deleted and redirected to woke. Alternatively, this content can be merged into woke as its own section with the criticism. -- Classicwiki ( talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 01:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Articles on neologisms that have little or no usage in reliable sources are commonly deleted, but in this case this phrase is very widely cited across an enormous variety of reliable sources. The phrase probably should also be mentioned at the woke article and other mentions should be added and included, but a page for Woke Mind Virus itself makes sense given the sources as broad and significant as they are. Iljhgtn ( talk) 02:27, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Some neologisms can be in frequent use, and it may be possible to pull together many facts about a particular term and show evidence of its usage on the Internet or in larger society.This is not in question. I do not doubt it will be utilized in large portions of media and scholarly works. Until it is shown to be its own distinct concept, it is essentially a branch term used to criticize wokeness. There is a criticism section in woke that this neologism can direct to in my opinion. Currently, Anti-woke redirects to woke. Anti-woke is an older term than woke mind virus and used it much more media/scholarly works. WMV is just a substitute term for being against wokeness (or anti-woke). Alternatively, I think a separate article that incorporates
reliable secondary sources say about the term or concept, not just sources that use the termtitled something along the lines of "Criticisms of woke/wokeness" or even "anti-woke" could also be appropriate, where WMV redirects to. I do not see the point of a standalone article about Woke Mind Virus. -- Classicwiki ( talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Despite his repeated use of the phrase, the precise meaning of “woke mind virus” has been difficult to pin down. Musk told Bill Maher during an interview on HBO: “I think we need to be very cautious about anything that is anti-meritocratic, and anything that … results in the suppression of free speech. Those are two aspects of the woke mind virus that I think are very dangerous.”This source speaks uniquely of the WMV by saying much about Musk's use of it from a critical perspective. This source again uses both "woke" as well as WMV and refers to them as distinct terms with their own meanings. This source predominantly focuses on just the "woke" phrase but has an important passing mention of WMV, though obviously passing mentions in general are not to carry weight towards an AfD consideration. This source covers the phrase and the Netflix mention with some detail. I believe the above, and much more can be found with fairly little work and effort actually to support an independent page for both the WMV phrase as well as woke and other phrases mentioned by other editors. Iljhgtn ( talk) 19:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No independent notability apart from two collapsed buildings. Revirvlkodlaku ( talk) 01:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Boxer whose only reference is a database entry. There is a draft for a diplomat, Draft: Artur Khachatryan, which will otherwise require disambiguation. The need for disambiguation is not a reason to delete, but the lack of sports notability is Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 00:13, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an English rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I am also nominating the folllowing article as he is a member of the same team ( St Helens R.F.C.) who also fails to meet WP:SPORTBASIC:
Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk) 01:54, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 18:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 00:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
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) 18:27, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 18:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 00:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. See table below. GMH Melbourne ( talk) 01:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
burger created exclusively for heraldsun.com.auwhich leads me to doubt the independence of the broadsheet articles. - GMH Melbourne ( talk) 00:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While current sentiment is leaning towards delete, giving this another seven days to assess if further input continues to lean that way.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 00:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
No secondary sources. Sole source is government list. Article on an individual office of the IOM which simply states it exists and its location. Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. Nothing to merge and an implausible search term. AusLondonder ( talk) 00:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)