The result was WP:SNOW keep. Per the discussion, the article will also be moved to Grand Loge des Philadelphes. BD2412 T 16:47, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Article has no sources or references, it’s not easy to read or understand. Devokewater ( talk) 23:58, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 09:39, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
No significant coverage in the article and I couldn't find any per WP:CORP. SL93 ( talk) 23:51, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 01:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Absolutely fails notability guidelines. Literally cannot find any sources for this subject. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 23:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Flori4nK
t •
c
14:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Flori4nK
t •
c
14:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 01:05, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable director and film maker. Most of the films directed are not notable. Clearly fails WP:GNG Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 23:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 12:33, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable film, does not have significant coverage from independent sources, seems to only have some blog-style reviews online, per WP:NF BOVINEBOY 2008 23:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 12:34, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Subject of article lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources hence doesn’t satisfy our general notability criteria. A before search shows no evidence of notability Celestina007 ( talk) 22:58, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:34, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Local perennial candidate fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. KidAd ( talk) 22:57, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:34, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Flori4nK
t •
c
14:40, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Flori4nK
t •
c
14:40, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Fails WP:ANYBIO, radically. John from Idegon ( talk) 22:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 09:11, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
A very confusing one because subject of article is mentioned in a host of Nigeria reliable sources but although mentioned in reliable sources, a further observation & review of all those reliable sources discussing her are in interviews hence not independent of her hence doesn’t satisfy nor adhere to WP:GNG. Furthermore the remaining reliable sources discussing her all appear to be paid sponsored posts or mere announcements. Celestina007 ( talk) 22:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
* Keep Moderator please note; I will refer you all to the article topic
Uche Pedro. 95% of the citations were sourced from 'bellanaija', which is her owned media firm. Before you consider deleting on the grounds of claimed and unprovable 'sponsored PR', kindly justify how that topic was not based on PR. However, more importantly let me reiterate that there is absolutely no proof that
Tobi Kukoyi is an article based on PR, considering the importance of the topic on Aphrodisiac in Nigeria and the many media buzz about it. It's simple. let's all use our preferred search engines. This is just an accusation from an editor who's bias cannot be ascertained either. Notwithstanding, I won't stand against policies, I'm only appealing to fairness. Thanks.
ContentBI (
talk)
07:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Modertor, please also note my second reference in Linda Ikeji. Majority of the citations done were based on owned media. How doesn't that qualify for 'sponsored PR' but as 'independent source' as my accuser has claimed?. I can go on and on... My point is, those are proven examples, while my article isn't. ContentBI ( talk) 09:11, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
https://daylightng.com/tobi-kukoyi-set-to-tow-the-film-path/
It wouldn't be difficult to understand the controversy in question and why journalists would rally around her.
But unfortunately, everyone is busy trying to insist that ContentBI was paid to write an article! Gush! I'm tired!!! ContentBI ( talk) 07:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Or is it difficult to understand because there is no article on 'kayanmata'? I can help the community with that, if it would aid comprehension ContentBI ( talk) 07:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://thenigerian.news/why-women-have-taken-up-the-kayan-mata-aphrodisiac/ | It doesn’t in any way discuss subject of our discussion rather it discusses a natural aphrodisiac | ✘ No | ||
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/aug/14/men-said-we-were-immoral-aphrodisiacs-challenging-taboos-nigeria | Again, doesn’t discuss subject of our discussion but rather discusses a natural aphrodisiac hence this source has nothing to do with our subject of discussion hence does nothing to substantiate her notability. | ✘ No | ||
https://nnn.com.ng/kayan-mata-divergent-views-trail-trending-sale-of-aphrodisiacs/ | Yet again this source discusses a natural aphrodisiac & not our subject. | ✘ No | ||
https://www.pulse.ng/lifestyle/food-travel/should-you-be-using-kayan-mata-products/nfmpeh7 | Of recent pulseNG is no longer considered a reliable source. | Yet again this source doesn’t discuss subject of our discussion rather it discusses a natural aphrodisiac hence does nothing to substantiate her supposed notability. | ✘ No | |
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/aug/14/men-said-we-were-immoral-aphrodisiacs-challenging-taboos-nigeria | As stated earlier the sources discusses a natural occurring aphrodisiac & not subject of our discussion hence doesn’t adhere to GNG | ✘ No | ||
https://www.premiumtimesng.com/entertainment/naija-fashion/391009-interview-why-kayanmata-isnt-fetish-traditional-sex-therapist-tobi-kukoyi.html | This is an interview with subject hence the source is not independent of her | Generally considered a reliable source. | Half the questions are related to a natural aphrodisiac | ✘ 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}}. |
Although a daunting task, I needed to create the table so our colleagues could see clearly what I was talking about. In summary the subject of our discussion fails to satisfy WP:BASIC or WP:GNG. Celestina007 ( talk) 11:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:18, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Semi-procedural nomination. An article about this person was deleted twice before ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Jahns and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Jahns (2nd nomination), but I just declined a G4 because the deleted versions of the page were considerably different—notably, virtually all claims were sourced to the subject's YouTube channel itself. This version also includes assertions of notability (impressive-sounding subscriber and view numbers) that were not present in the deleted versions. Having said that, I still have grave doubts that notability is made out, and so I didn't want to just decline the speedy and leave it at that. If the article is kept, it should probably be moved to Jeremy Jahns. Steve Smith ( talk) 22:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. per WP:SNOW. A clearly notable topic. No need to waste community's 7 days. If there seeems to be a problem with the title, then kindly go through WP:RM. Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 14:04, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Marking this article for deletion. The term is a derogatory one, and as the article calls out at some point seems to be directly leading to objectification of women. Recommendation is that content of relevance be merged into Music of Bollywood and this page be deleted. — posted by User:Kaisertalk, unsigned 5 July 2020
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:19, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't seem that notable Hemiauchenia ( talk) 20:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:25, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Here is an editor who thinks that making pacific racist depictions of pacific islanders for a "South Pacific Nite " party is "work", that
Revised nomination: Subject does not meet
WP:GNG and
WP:NARTIST, despite the creator's claims that the subject was "born ... to a notable economic and political family". That would be the family of the author.
Vexations (
talk)
15:28, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
a three-year old attending a reception is "noteworthy" and that traveling to France and to Claude Monet's Water Lilies is an event worth noting in an encyclopedia. No, this person is not noteworthy because she has not received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. She also fails every single notability criterion for artists.
Vexations (
talk) 19:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:26, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
No reliable references to demostrate notablity. Cites only self-published sources. Fails WP:GNG. P,TO 19104 ( talk) ( contribs) 19:05, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:27, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
The preceding AfD was 15 years ago (it was actually a VfD!) and much has changed. The station never came on air, and our notability guidelines are far stricter than they were in June 2005. This does not meet WP:BCAST. Raymie ( t • c) 18:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 09:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:MUSICBIO No evidence of notability. scope_creep Talk 15:09, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Economic sanctions. Sandstein 06:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
There is no cohesive theory or account of weaponization of finance (WoF) as such. All mentions of it are rather rhetorical flourishes used in discussion of economic sanctions, which the current WoF article details at length (even after having most of its specific context transferred to Economic sanctions). It should be noted that this page is tied to Ian Bremmer and the Eurasia Group, which have been involved in extensive paid editing dating back years (see here). The current sources used are inadequate:
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
(Dead link) Bremmer, Ian and Kupchan, Cliff. PDF of report, January 2015. | Appears to have been a primary source where the concept is outlined, specifically as one of the yearly "top 10 risks" the Eurasia Group publishes to advertise its risk analysis services | Non-published; produced by for-profit firm run by Bremmer | ✘ No | |
Holodny, Elena. [3], "Business Insider", January 5, 2015. | Spends several paragraphs outlining theory as argued by Bremmer. | ✔ Yes | ||
Bertrand, Natasha and Kelley, Michael B. [4], "Business Insider." April 1, 2015. | ~ This piece draws from a WaPo article. Makes note of weaponization of finance in title, briefly mentions it in body as something devised by Bremmer, but mainly repeats what the WaPo article says. Does not engage with WoF as idea on its merits; basically just says "Bremmer says it's this" | ~ Partial | ||
Bremmer, Ian. Obama pushes power of weaponised finance to its limits, "Financial Times," March 3, 2015. | Written by Bremmer | ✘ No | ||
(Dead link) "U.S. use of unilateral "weaponization of finance" makes top ten geopolitical risks of 2015". www.unitedliberty.org. Retrieved 2017-09-16. | ? | Internet Archive from around time WoF was devised by Bremmer seems to show some sort of blogroll/article aggregator from a now-defunct libertarian think tank. | ? Title suggests it is just parroting Eurasia Group press release cited in the first row of this table. | ✘ No |
Miroslav., Nincic (1988). United States foreign policy : choices and tradeoffs. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. ISBN 0871874490. OCLC 17264286. | Written decades before WoF was ever devised, actually | Published book | Used as original research, makes no mention of WoF as such | ✘ No |
Administrator. "The Adverse Consequences of Economic Sanctions". www.globalpolicy.org. Retrieved 2017-10-26. | This is a copy of The Bossuyt Report on Economic Sanctions made to the UN in 2000 | At no point mentions the idea of WoF, or even the word "Weaponization." Used in the article as original research. | ✘ No | |
Kim, Hyung Min (2013-03-01). "Determining the Success of Economic Sanctions". Australian Journal of Political Science. 48 (1): 85–100. doi: 10.1080/10361146.2012.731488. ISSN 1036-1146. | Published scholarly article | Original research, makes no mention of WoF as such | ✘ No | |
Dambisa, Moyo (2010-03-02). Dead aid : why aid is not working and how there is a better way for Africa (First American paperback ed.). New York.
ISBN
9780374532123.
OCLC
429024670.{{
cite book}} : CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
|
Published book | Original research, Moyo makes no mention of WoF | ✘ 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}}. |
Things get tricky because the phrase "weaponization of finance" itself is not novel, and has been used before. But I believe such mentions of WoF ultimately are just about what falls under the traditional scope of economic sanctions (or criticisms of US monetary hegemony, inter alia) rather than "weaponization of finance" as a theoretical concept per se, and thus do not meet a threshold for an independent article:
In short: this article fails WP:GNG because weaponization of finance is, at best, another way to refer to economic sanctions. WhinyTheYounger ( talk) 20:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Film with some notable cast members, but not the coverage or significance to meet WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 21:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. No consensus to Delete this article, and a consensus that it has met notability. (non-admin closure) Britishfinance ( talk) 18:32, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Collection of reviews but no proof of notability or serious info about the album. Fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 17:37, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable actor & model, who fails WP:GNG. He just participate a comedy show, So it's eligible for WP:BLP1E. Since he has not won any major national or internationally significant actor awards Fail WP:GNG. All of news source are only Zee Bangla show related news even here he is second runner-up so, its not means he is something or notable person. maybe is it WP:TOOSOON? . I believe that this article WP:COIEDIT related. This article should be delete. ErrorShadow420 ( talk) 21:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
2020-06 ✍️ create
The result was delete. There was no reason to relist this when it had a clear consensus for delete with zero opposition; I am closing this now per WP:RELIST. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 07:40, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
This article's creator appears to probably be an undisclosed paid editor. Therefore, I normally might have presumed that the subject was non-notable, and argued to delete per WP:N and/or WP:NOTPROMOTION. However, in this case, the article does state that the subject has won the German Order of Merit.
WP:ANYBIO says that, if someone has "received a well-known and significant award or honor", they're probably (but not definitely) notable. Is the German Order of Merit a "well-known and significant award or honor"? I live in Canada, and I don't think I'd ever heard of it before reading this article.
For now, I'm not sure about this article, so I'll vote to draftify. Please delete. —
Unforgettableid (
talk)
23:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus ( WP:NPASR). King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
No evidence of any notability - all the refs appear to be based on a single press release. No evidence that any TV roles have been significant. Searches reveal only the usual crop of social media and reprints of the same press release. Fails WP:GNG Velella Velella Talk 22:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
no evidence of notability Tdslk ( talk) 22:41, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 12:35, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
No indication of notability since this article contains no reliable sources. Sources only trivially mention the subject of the article. Article is written poorly. P,TO 19104 ( talk) ( contribs) 16:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't understand your comment reagrding the source quality. Which critiera do you base on to mention source are not reliable ? Most sources are coming from the main media specialize in the watchmaking field. Your answer will be highly appreciate in order to better source it if necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yves Damien ( talk • contribs)
The result was keep. Note that the nominator and two delete votes were the same editor using sockpuppetry. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 ( talk) 23:53, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Not notable enough to be on Wikipedia.
LuciferEdits (
talk) 15:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC) struck confirmed blocked sockpuppet,
Atlantic306 (
talk)
23:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
:: @
User:Popoblahblah I'm an Indian, mostly editing articles related to India. I've argued many a times to prevent notable Indian articles getting deleted from Wikipedia. Also, this article fails the General notability guidelines to be on Wikipedia, there's no bias based on ethnicity.
LuciferEdits (
talk) 06:46, 8 July 2020 (UTC) struck sockpuppet,
Atlantic306 (
talk)
23:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 12:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
It exists but I couldn't find anything to show it meets WP:GNG. I'm very aware though that I may be missing sources due to language - what do other people think? Boleyn ( talk) 07:42, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. WP:SNOW close. – Darkwind ( talk) 10:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Not notable LuciferEdits ( talk) 14:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
References
The result was delete. Sandstein 12:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 08:02, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was merge to LifeWay Christian Resources#World Changers. Sandstein 12:37, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 08:21, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The article notes, "In 2011, LifeWay partnered with NAMB to bring World Changers to the LifeWay student ministry family and assume day-to-day operations of the ministry. Summer 2012 was the first summer World Changers was operated by LifeWay."
The result was keep. No consensus to delete this article (non-admin closure) Britishfinance ( talk) 14:25, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Institute has changed its name and moved its campus. Check IILM University. No need for a separate page and also there is nothing to merge. Hatchens ( talk) 08:25, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Fenix down ( talk) 14:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable footballer. GhostDestroyer100 ( talk) 14:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Hungarian footballer. It baffles my mind how this "article" managed to stay here since 2012. The article only contains one source, which is not even independent from him. The Hungarian Wiki article also managed to stay there since 2012 but it's also up to deletion there as well. The thing is, Hungarian Wikipedia is full of articles on sportspeople like this one (articles that contain only one basic sentence, an infobox and one source which is either a database or a non-independent site) and that is a big problem there. I don't know about that situation here but I know for a fact that this footballer is not notable. I also did a Google search and I did not found anything besides databases and sources which are not independent. GhostDestroyer100 ( talk) 14:27, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 13:01, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
This article is predominantly about Cameron's son: he wouldn't be notable enough to warrant his own page without this famous connection, so fails WP:NOTINHERITED. ~dom Kaos~ ( talk) 13:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Flori4nK
t •
c
14:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Jack Frost ( talk) 03:20, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. There appears to be a policy-based consensus that the article meets the relevant notability criteria ( WP:AUTHOR and WP:GNG) with significant coverage in reliable sources. (non-admin closure) Jack Frost ( talk) 03:26, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
The subject is known for only the book (which redirects to this article) that she wrote, which in turn is what the film is based one. Clear case of WP:BLP1E. The motivational speaking activity does not hold because she hasn't won any notable award on that front. Also, she had a rare disease but not a subject for medical research. Sources also stink of typical PR mostly run by Bloomsbury or people close to he subject. 1.186.179.232 ( talk) 12:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Nomination on behalf of IP. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 13:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. No consensus to delete this BLP (non-admin closure) Britishfinance ( talk) 10:27, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
The subject has made two films but notability is not inherited. A quick Google search did not yield any results showcasing his notability nor has he won many notable awards to satisfy WP:ARTIST. Proposing AfD as PROD was declined. Request an editor to consider this and complete the process. 1.186.179.232 ( talk) 12:30, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
AFD nomination on behalf of IP. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 12:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Sandstein 09:28, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
What makes this Polish police unit (or unit type, I think) notable? I see only mentions in passing. Seems to fail WP:NORG/ WP:GNG. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 13:02, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NOTABILITY. Definitely WP:OR, possibly WP:FANCRUFT. Can we get this article deleted as soon as possible? REDMAN 2019 ( talk) 12:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Contested PROD - doesn't meet WP:NFILM. Passenger pigeon ( talk) 12:32, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 22:01, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Unnecessary and clear WP:OR REDMAN 2019 ( talk) 12:28, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 11:57, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Seems to be WP:SYNTH Spiderone 12:24, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
BornonJune8 ( talk) 3:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Some of the similarities between MLS and the 1968-1984 version of the North American Soccer League (think Pelé and the Cosmos) are hard to ignore. The NASL grew quickly through expansion, even as its established teams struggled; several MLS sides have fallen behind, as the league adds new teams virtually every season. Enthusiasm for a few of the NASL’s teams was counterbalanced by apathy among others. Likewise, several MLS sides draw enormous crowds while others, irrespective of the product on the field, struggle to draw fans. The similarities are even more striking on the women’s side, which saw two leagues close shop in less than a decade. Both the Women’s United Soccer Association (WUSA, 2001-03) and Women’s Professional Soccer (WPS, 2009-11) began with optimistic visions of being the best women’s league in the world. Both leagues had trouble attracting sponsors, fans and committed ownership. Both had to close down when the money ran out. Even though the NWSL has lasted into a sixth year and is thriving in several cities, the league last offseason lost two franchises that were unwilling to continue losing money. The biggest difference on the MLS side is the money at stake. NASL teams flitted around the map, folding at the drop of a hat, because their owners had invested so little that folding or moving a team made perfect financial sense. The Minnesota Kicks’ second, less-involved owner famously folded the team over the phone. Today’s MLS owners have franchises worth hundreds of millions of dollars and most have soccer-specific stadiums to host the teams — investments too large to let fail. The NWSL, though, is more concerning. Costs are more controlled than the WUSA or WPS, which is a positive. The league also has five teams that share ownership with MLS teams, plus the United States and Canadian soccer federations paying salaries for their national-team players. Those are helpful backstops to prevent a sudden end to the league.
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:35, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
I couldn't find significant coverage on the subject in reliable media. Fails WP:GNG as well as WP:COMPOSER. Less Unless ( talk) 12:17, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. The nominator and delete voter were sockpuppets which leaves no delete proposals. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 ( talk) 00:19, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Not a notable person and fails
WP:NACTOR. Redirect: She only is known for her appearance on Bigg Boss 11. She did small roles doesn’t mean she is a well know celebrity and haven’t been seen ever since.
TVactors (
talk) 12:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC) —
TVactors (
talk struck blocked sock,
Atlantic306 (
talk) 00:14, 13 July 2020 (UTC)*
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. BLOCKED SOCK.
Britishfinance (
talk)
13:28, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Awdal. Sandstein 13:03, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
The bulk of the article (demographics section) is identical to that of the "Awdal" page. Moreover, contains poor citations throughout. For example, 1) Citation 1 makes no reference to "Awdalland" and it being a "former region". 2) No citation for the claim that "Awdalland (also spelled Adelland) takes its name from the Adel Sultanate". 3) Citation 4 is unreliable as it links to a Somali news tabloid website. 4)Citation 5 links to a Japanese website irrelevant to the article. 5) Though some sources touch on Awdalland, a Google Books search returns very limited results for "Awdalland" [8], thus may not qualify for notability in the sense of gaining "sufficiently significant attention by the world". Therefore, this article should be deleted due to lack of relevance and unreliable citations. Jacob300 ( talk) 11:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Comment: Citation 5, for some reason, points to an archive.org snapshot that took place after the website had changed its content (apparently taken over as an advertisement and/or holding space). An earlier version of the cited source appears here. That said, it's a blog post that probably runs afoul of WP:SPS. But as long as I'm here I'd suggest redirect to Awdal, as opposed to "merge and redirect": I wouldn't suggest merging problematic content elsewhere, and anyway both the separatist movement and the opposition to it are already mentioned there. I did notice that the article's creator was blocked via WP:CU but no mention of the other account(s) with whom they're affiliated. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:23, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. No consensus to delete this BLP and a consensus that it satisfies NPROF; a clean up is needed, but that is not for AfD. (non-admin closure) Britishfinance ( talk) 10:29, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Can someone nominate this article into AFD as the editor has connection with the article and probably non-notable person. 184.22.70.110 ( talk) 10:18, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Nomination on behalf of IP. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 11:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 10:38, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't see how this article is really that helpful, I see a clear breach of WP:OR, the excessively long title, I can't see anyone typing that in to google! Encyclopaedias are suppose to be about an item, biography, entities, not "comparisons". This feels at odds with what the project stands for. Govvy ( talk) 10:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
BornonJune8 ( talk) 3:04, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Some of the similarities between MLS and the 1968-1984 version of the North American Soccer League (think Pelé and the Cosmos) are hard to ignore. The NASL grew quickly through expansion, even as its established teams struggled; several MLS sides have fallen behind, as the league adds new teams virtually every season. Enthusiasm for a few of the NASL’s teams was counterbalanced by apathy among others. Likewise, several MLS sides draw enormous crowds while others, irrespective of the product on the field, struggle to draw fans. The similarities are even more striking on the women’s side, which saw two leagues close shop in less than a decade. Both the Women’s United Soccer Association (WUSA, 2001-03) and Women’s Professional Soccer (WPS, 2009-11) began with optimistic visions of being the best women’s league in the world. Both leagues had trouble attracting sponsors, fans and committed ownership. Both had to close down when the money ran out. Even though the NWSL has lasted into a sixth year and is thriving in several cities, the league last offseason lost two franchises that were unwilling to continue losing money. The biggest difference on the MLS side is the money at stake. NASL teams flitted around the map, folding at the drop of a hat, because their owners had invested so little that folding or moving a team made perfect financial sense. The Minnesota Kicks’ second, less-involved owner famously folded the team over the phone. Today’s MLS owners have franchises worth hundreds of millions of dollars and most have soccer-specific stadiums to host the teams — investments too large to let fail. The NWSL, though, is more concerning. Costs are more controlled than the WUSA or WPS, which is a positive. The league also has five teams that share ownership with MLS teams, plus the United States and Canadian soccer federations paying salaries for their national-team players. Those are helpful backstops to prevent a sudden end to the league.
The result was delete. Sandstein 13:03, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Multiple unreffed sections which sound promotional. The essence of this page is already in the main Walter Lewin article, which is why I'm not suggesting a merge. If not a full delete, it should be a redirect I believe. Kj cheetham ( talk) 09:56, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete per WP:A7. So Why 08:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Advertisement of a Non-notable company. Lack of independent reliable Resources. fails WP:GNG, WP:NCORP DMySon 09:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Ethnic group. (non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 09:56, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
The very poor fork from Ethnic group. See discussion on talk page. I propose restore the original redirect to Ethnic group. Andronof ( talk) 09:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 13:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Whilst the organisation is notable, I would argue that the list alone is not notable enough to deserve a place in the Encyclopedia. OXYLYPSE ( talk) 08:33, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 07:39, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG; doesn't appear to be a notable manager; has never managed a professional club Spiderone 07:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 06:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Not a notable hotel. Fails WP:NBUILD -- Pontificalibus 06:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 20:15, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
This article is a duplication of Miss US Virgin Islands with the additions of contestants (which I deleted) to non-notable pageants that were deleted many times via wiki consensus like Miss Supranational, Miss Grand International, Miss Intercontinental. Richie Campbell ( talk) 05:26, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
2019-09 ✍️ create
The result was delete. With no arguments for keeping this article, the consensus is to delete. Should they meet the criteria for inclusion at a future date, an article can be re-created. PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 19:46, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
appears to be paid for promo about a non-notable musician. the few sources that exist about him are questionable at best, straitstimes in particular has the most hits which is dubious considering their history of sloppy reporting. Praxidicae ( talk) 13:26, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface.-- Otr500 ( talk) 22:30, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 13:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
A non-notable film with no significant coverage in reliable sources. Current sources are mostly about Hema Malini producing the film ( WP:NOTINHERITED). It was released in August 2019 and I'm not seeing any review per WP:NFILM. GSS 💬 04:15, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
This Internet radio station does not meet the WP:GNG. Raymie ( t • c) 03:49, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 20:15, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Local Catholic cable TV channel that airs very little if any local programming, mostly EWTN output. This is not a broadcast station, just a cable channel. Fails WP:GNG. Raymie ( t • c) 03:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Deftones discography. (non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 09:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure if for a video album we are still looking at WP:NALBUM, but I don't think this meets any part of WP:NOTABILITY. Possibly worth a redirect and Deftones is probably the best redirect target. Boleyn ( talk) 12:39, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete; redirected to Zee TV per WP:PRESERVE. BD2412 T 00:15, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORG and appears to exist only to promote Zee TV shows ,to which the award belongs also Draft:Golden Petal Awards was rejected for same reason. Princepratap1234 ( talk) 14:12, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 01:46, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:SOLDIER. The article has no references, and I can only find one source in a Google search. Lettler hello 01:09, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 01:45, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Pure WP:LISTCRUFT. There is no accompanying page to discuss this and nor is there likely to ever be, since "artists that have a song with the name name as their band" isn't really a notable topic or even something that gets coverage outside of maybe some listicles. There's no sources, either, and it's likely that everything listed is WP:OR. Was PRODed back in 2010 but it was challenged and the page has doddered on since. — Kawnhr ( talk) 01:05, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. BD2412 T 00:12, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Borderline and has been in CAT:NN for over 11 years because it's tricky. TV series on BBC, with notable actors and writers. I don't think it does pass WP:NOTABILITY though, based on coverage and significance. Boleyn ( talk) 13:07, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect. All redirected to List of longest living dogs or List of oldest cats. (non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 09:47, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I am nominating Rubble's page, and several other similar pages, for deletion for the same reason as my previous AFD nomination: holding the title of "oldest living cat" (or oldest living dog) for a year or two is not enough to pass WP:BIO and is a textbook example of a case of WP:1E where the one event isn't even particularly notable outside of the Guinness Book of World Records. Wikipedia already has lists for the pets who held this achievement ( cats, dogs), which these articles could possibly redirect to. I am also nominating the following related pages because they are non-notable for the same reasons as Rubble.
This is a great story ! do not delete! Some one please make a table of the oldest living cats like is done for the supercentarians, by country. I think every cat who makes it to 30 yers old deserves to be on the list. Besides, there is a lot of less interesting stuff on wikipedia anyway. Is someone afraid wikipediamwill run out of space? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.66.248.191 ( talk) 00:39, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Don't delete it, the cat is a record holder and is worth having his wiki. Start by deleting all the people who fail to meet notability criteria and have a page on Wikipedia, or the tons of mostly unknown bands littering wikipedia. 2A02:587:391C:7800:18EC:F68C:A696:31B8 ( talk) 10:14, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was WP:SNOW keep. Per the discussion, the article will also be moved to Grand Loge des Philadelphes. BD2412 T 16:47, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Article has no sources or references, it’s not easy to read or understand. Devokewater ( talk) 23:58, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 09:39, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
No significant coverage in the article and I couldn't find any per WP:CORP. SL93 ( talk) 23:51, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 01:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Absolutely fails notability guidelines. Literally cannot find any sources for this subject. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 23:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Flori4nK
t •
c
14:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Flori4nK
t •
c
14:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 01:05, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable director and film maker. Most of the films directed are not notable. Clearly fails WP:GNG Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 23:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 12:33, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable film, does not have significant coverage from independent sources, seems to only have some blog-style reviews online, per WP:NF BOVINEBOY 2008 23:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 12:34, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Subject of article lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources hence doesn’t satisfy our general notability criteria. A before search shows no evidence of notability Celestina007 ( talk) 22:58, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:34, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Local perennial candidate fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. KidAd ( talk) 22:57, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:34, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Flori4nK
t •
c
14:40, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Flori4nK
t •
c
14:40, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Fails WP:ANYBIO, radically. John from Idegon ( talk) 22:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. North America 1000 09:11, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
A very confusing one because subject of article is mentioned in a host of Nigeria reliable sources but although mentioned in reliable sources, a further observation & review of all those reliable sources discussing her are in interviews hence not independent of her hence doesn’t satisfy nor adhere to WP:GNG. Furthermore the remaining reliable sources discussing her all appear to be paid sponsored posts or mere announcements. Celestina007 ( talk) 22:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
* Keep Moderator please note; I will refer you all to the article topic
Uche Pedro. 95% of the citations were sourced from 'bellanaija', which is her owned media firm. Before you consider deleting on the grounds of claimed and unprovable 'sponsored PR', kindly justify how that topic was not based on PR. However, more importantly let me reiterate that there is absolutely no proof that
Tobi Kukoyi is an article based on PR, considering the importance of the topic on Aphrodisiac in Nigeria and the many media buzz about it. It's simple. let's all use our preferred search engines. This is just an accusation from an editor who's bias cannot be ascertained either. Notwithstanding, I won't stand against policies, I'm only appealing to fairness. Thanks.
ContentBI (
talk)
07:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Modertor, please also note my second reference in Linda Ikeji. Majority of the citations done were based on owned media. How doesn't that qualify for 'sponsored PR' but as 'independent source' as my accuser has claimed?. I can go on and on... My point is, those are proven examples, while my article isn't. ContentBI ( talk) 09:11, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
https://daylightng.com/tobi-kukoyi-set-to-tow-the-film-path/
It wouldn't be difficult to understand the controversy in question and why journalists would rally around her.
But unfortunately, everyone is busy trying to insist that ContentBI was paid to write an article! Gush! I'm tired!!! ContentBI ( talk) 07:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Or is it difficult to understand because there is no article on 'kayanmata'? I can help the community with that, if it would aid comprehension ContentBI ( talk) 07:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://thenigerian.news/why-women-have-taken-up-the-kayan-mata-aphrodisiac/ | It doesn’t in any way discuss subject of our discussion rather it discusses a natural aphrodisiac | ✘ No | ||
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/aug/14/men-said-we-were-immoral-aphrodisiacs-challenging-taboos-nigeria | Again, doesn’t discuss subject of our discussion but rather discusses a natural aphrodisiac hence this source has nothing to do with our subject of discussion hence does nothing to substantiate her notability. | ✘ No | ||
https://nnn.com.ng/kayan-mata-divergent-views-trail-trending-sale-of-aphrodisiacs/ | Yet again this source discusses a natural aphrodisiac & not our subject. | ✘ No | ||
https://www.pulse.ng/lifestyle/food-travel/should-you-be-using-kayan-mata-products/nfmpeh7 | Of recent pulseNG is no longer considered a reliable source. | Yet again this source doesn’t discuss subject of our discussion rather it discusses a natural aphrodisiac hence does nothing to substantiate her supposed notability. | ✘ No | |
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/aug/14/men-said-we-were-immoral-aphrodisiacs-challenging-taboos-nigeria | As stated earlier the sources discusses a natural occurring aphrodisiac & not subject of our discussion hence doesn’t adhere to GNG | ✘ No | ||
https://www.premiumtimesng.com/entertainment/naija-fashion/391009-interview-why-kayanmata-isnt-fetish-traditional-sex-therapist-tobi-kukoyi.html | This is an interview with subject hence the source is not independent of her | Generally considered a reliable source. | Half the questions are related to a natural aphrodisiac | ✘ 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}}. |
Although a daunting task, I needed to create the table so our colleagues could see clearly what I was talking about. In summary the subject of our discussion fails to satisfy WP:BASIC or WP:GNG. Celestina007 ( talk) 11:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:18, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Semi-procedural nomination. An article about this person was deleted twice before ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Jahns and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Jahns (2nd nomination), but I just declined a G4 because the deleted versions of the page were considerably different—notably, virtually all claims were sourced to the subject's YouTube channel itself. This version also includes assertions of notability (impressive-sounding subscriber and view numbers) that were not present in the deleted versions. Having said that, I still have grave doubts that notability is made out, and so I didn't want to just decline the speedy and leave it at that. If the article is kept, it should probably be moved to Jeremy Jahns. Steve Smith ( talk) 22:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. per WP:SNOW. A clearly notable topic. No need to waste community's 7 days. If there seeems to be a problem with the title, then kindly go through WP:RM. Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 14:04, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Marking this article for deletion. The term is a derogatory one, and as the article calls out at some point seems to be directly leading to objectification of women. Recommendation is that content of relevance be merged into Music of Bollywood and this page be deleted. — posted by User:Kaisertalk, unsigned 5 July 2020
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:19, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't seem that notable Hemiauchenia ( talk) 20:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:25, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Here is an editor who thinks that making pacific racist depictions of pacific islanders for a "South Pacific Nite " party is "work", that
Revised nomination: Subject does not meet
WP:GNG and
WP:NARTIST, despite the creator's claims that the subject was "born ... to a notable economic and political family". That would be the family of the author.
Vexations (
talk)
15:28, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
a three-year old attending a reception is "noteworthy" and that traveling to France and to Claude Monet's Water Lilies is an event worth noting in an encyclopedia. No, this person is not noteworthy because she has not received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. She also fails every single notability criterion for artists.
Vexations (
talk) 19:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:26, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
No reliable references to demostrate notablity. Cites only self-published sources. Fails WP:GNG. P,TO 19104 ( talk) ( contribs) 19:05, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:27, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
The preceding AfD was 15 years ago (it was actually a VfD!) and much has changed. The station never came on air, and our notability guidelines are far stricter than they were in June 2005. This does not meet WP:BCAST. Raymie ( t • c) 18:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 09:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:MUSICBIO No evidence of notability. scope_creep Talk 15:09, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Economic sanctions. Sandstein 06:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
There is no cohesive theory or account of weaponization of finance (WoF) as such. All mentions of it are rather rhetorical flourishes used in discussion of economic sanctions, which the current WoF article details at length (even after having most of its specific context transferred to Economic sanctions). It should be noted that this page is tied to Ian Bremmer and the Eurasia Group, which have been involved in extensive paid editing dating back years (see here). The current sources used are inadequate:
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
(Dead link) Bremmer, Ian and Kupchan, Cliff. PDF of report, January 2015. | Appears to have been a primary source where the concept is outlined, specifically as one of the yearly "top 10 risks" the Eurasia Group publishes to advertise its risk analysis services | Non-published; produced by for-profit firm run by Bremmer | ✘ No | |
Holodny, Elena. [3], "Business Insider", January 5, 2015. | Spends several paragraphs outlining theory as argued by Bremmer. | ✔ Yes | ||
Bertrand, Natasha and Kelley, Michael B. [4], "Business Insider." April 1, 2015. | ~ This piece draws from a WaPo article. Makes note of weaponization of finance in title, briefly mentions it in body as something devised by Bremmer, but mainly repeats what the WaPo article says. Does not engage with WoF as idea on its merits; basically just says "Bremmer says it's this" | ~ Partial | ||
Bremmer, Ian. Obama pushes power of weaponised finance to its limits, "Financial Times," March 3, 2015. | Written by Bremmer | ✘ No | ||
(Dead link) "U.S. use of unilateral "weaponization of finance" makes top ten geopolitical risks of 2015". www.unitedliberty.org. Retrieved 2017-09-16. | ? | Internet Archive from around time WoF was devised by Bremmer seems to show some sort of blogroll/article aggregator from a now-defunct libertarian think tank. | ? Title suggests it is just parroting Eurasia Group press release cited in the first row of this table. | ✘ No |
Miroslav., Nincic (1988). United States foreign policy : choices and tradeoffs. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. ISBN 0871874490. OCLC 17264286. | Written decades before WoF was ever devised, actually | Published book | Used as original research, makes no mention of WoF as such | ✘ No |
Administrator. "The Adverse Consequences of Economic Sanctions". www.globalpolicy.org. Retrieved 2017-10-26. | This is a copy of The Bossuyt Report on Economic Sanctions made to the UN in 2000 | At no point mentions the idea of WoF, or even the word "Weaponization." Used in the article as original research. | ✘ No | |
Kim, Hyung Min (2013-03-01). "Determining the Success of Economic Sanctions". Australian Journal of Political Science. 48 (1): 85–100. doi: 10.1080/10361146.2012.731488. ISSN 1036-1146. | Published scholarly article | Original research, makes no mention of WoF as such | ✘ No | |
Dambisa, Moyo (2010-03-02). Dead aid : why aid is not working and how there is a better way for Africa (First American paperback ed.). New York.
ISBN
9780374532123.
OCLC
429024670.{{
cite book}} : CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
|
Published book | Original research, Moyo makes no mention of WoF | ✘ 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}}. |
Things get tricky because the phrase "weaponization of finance" itself is not novel, and has been used before. But I believe such mentions of WoF ultimately are just about what falls under the traditional scope of economic sanctions (or criticisms of US monetary hegemony, inter alia) rather than "weaponization of finance" as a theoretical concept per se, and thus do not meet a threshold for an independent article:
In short: this article fails WP:GNG because weaponization of finance is, at best, another way to refer to economic sanctions. WhinyTheYounger ( talk) 20:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Film with some notable cast members, but not the coverage or significance to meet WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 21:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. No consensus to Delete this article, and a consensus that it has met notability. (non-admin closure) Britishfinance ( talk) 18:32, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Collection of reviews but no proof of notability or serious info about the album. Fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 17:37, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable actor & model, who fails WP:GNG. He just participate a comedy show, So it's eligible for WP:BLP1E. Since he has not won any major national or internationally significant actor awards Fail WP:GNG. All of news source are only Zee Bangla show related news even here he is second runner-up so, its not means he is something or notable person. maybe is it WP:TOOSOON? . I believe that this article WP:COIEDIT related. This article should be delete. ErrorShadow420 ( talk) 21:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
2020-06 ✍️ create
The result was delete. There was no reason to relist this when it had a clear consensus for delete with zero opposition; I am closing this now per WP:RELIST. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 07:40, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
This article's creator appears to probably be an undisclosed paid editor. Therefore, I normally might have presumed that the subject was non-notable, and argued to delete per WP:N and/or WP:NOTPROMOTION. However, in this case, the article does state that the subject has won the German Order of Merit.
WP:ANYBIO says that, if someone has "received a well-known and significant award or honor", they're probably (but not definitely) notable. Is the German Order of Merit a "well-known and significant award or honor"? I live in Canada, and I don't think I'd ever heard of it before reading this article.
For now, I'm not sure about this article, so I'll vote to draftify. Please delete. —
Unforgettableid (
talk)
23:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was no consensus ( WP:NPASR). King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
No evidence of any notability - all the refs appear to be based on a single press release. No evidence that any TV roles have been significant. Searches reveal only the usual crop of social media and reprints of the same press release. Fails WP:GNG Velella Velella Talk 22:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
no evidence of notability Tdslk ( talk) 22:41, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 12:35, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
No indication of notability since this article contains no reliable sources. Sources only trivially mention the subject of the article. Article is written poorly. P,TO 19104 ( talk) ( contribs) 16:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't understand your comment reagrding the source quality. Which critiera do you base on to mention source are not reliable ? Most sources are coming from the main media specialize in the watchmaking field. Your answer will be highly appreciate in order to better source it if necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yves Damien ( talk • contribs)
The result was keep. Note that the nominator and two delete votes were the same editor using sockpuppetry. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 ( talk) 23:53, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Not notable enough to be on Wikipedia.
LuciferEdits (
talk) 15:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC) struck confirmed blocked sockpuppet,
Atlantic306 (
talk)
23:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
:: @
User:Popoblahblah I'm an Indian, mostly editing articles related to India. I've argued many a times to prevent notable Indian articles getting deleted from Wikipedia. Also, this article fails the General notability guidelines to be on Wikipedia, there's no bias based on ethnicity.
LuciferEdits (
talk) 06:46, 8 July 2020 (UTC) struck sockpuppet,
Atlantic306 (
talk)
23:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 12:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
It exists but I couldn't find anything to show it meets WP:GNG. I'm very aware though that I may be missing sources due to language - what do other people think? Boleyn ( talk) 07:42, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. WP:SNOW close. – Darkwind ( talk) 10:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Not notable LuciferEdits ( talk) 14:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
References
The result was delete. Sandstein 12:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 08:02, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was merge to LifeWay Christian Resources#World Changers. Sandstein 12:37, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 08:21, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The article notes, "In 2011, LifeWay partnered with NAMB to bring World Changers to the LifeWay student ministry family and assume day-to-day operations of the ministry. Summer 2012 was the first summer World Changers was operated by LifeWay."
The result was keep. No consensus to delete this article (non-admin closure) Britishfinance ( talk) 14:25, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Institute has changed its name and moved its campus. Check IILM University. No need for a separate page and also there is nothing to merge. Hatchens ( talk) 08:25, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Fenix down ( talk) 14:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Non-notable footballer. GhostDestroyer100 ( talk) 14:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Hungarian footballer. It baffles my mind how this "article" managed to stay here since 2012. The article only contains one source, which is not even independent from him. The Hungarian Wiki article also managed to stay there since 2012 but it's also up to deletion there as well. The thing is, Hungarian Wikipedia is full of articles on sportspeople like this one (articles that contain only one basic sentence, an infobox and one source which is either a database or a non-independent site) and that is a big problem there. I don't know about that situation here but I know for a fact that this footballer is not notable. I also did a Google search and I did not found anything besides databases and sources which are not independent. GhostDestroyer100 ( talk) 14:27, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 13:01, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
This article is predominantly about Cameron's son: he wouldn't be notable enough to warrant his own page without this famous connection, so fails WP:NOTINHERITED. ~dom Kaos~ ( talk) 13:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Flori4nK
t •
c
14:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Jack Frost ( talk) 03:20, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. There appears to be a policy-based consensus that the article meets the relevant notability criteria ( WP:AUTHOR and WP:GNG) with significant coverage in reliable sources. (non-admin closure) Jack Frost ( talk) 03:26, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
The subject is known for only the book (which redirects to this article) that she wrote, which in turn is what the film is based one. Clear case of WP:BLP1E. The motivational speaking activity does not hold because she hasn't won any notable award on that front. Also, she had a rare disease but not a subject for medical research. Sources also stink of typical PR mostly run by Bloomsbury or people close to he subject. 1.186.179.232 ( talk) 12:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Nomination on behalf of IP. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 13:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. No consensus to delete this BLP (non-admin closure) Britishfinance ( talk) 10:27, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
The subject has made two films but notability is not inherited. A quick Google search did not yield any results showcasing his notability nor has he won many notable awards to satisfy WP:ARTIST. Proposing AfD as PROD was declined. Request an editor to consider this and complete the process. 1.186.179.232 ( talk) 12:30, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
AFD nomination on behalf of IP. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 12:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. Sandstein 09:28, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
What makes this Polish police unit (or unit type, I think) notable? I see only mentions in passing. Seems to fail WP:NORG/ WP:GNG. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 13:02, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:NOTABILITY. Definitely WP:OR, possibly WP:FANCRUFT. Can we get this article deleted as soon as possible? REDMAN 2019 ( talk) 12:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Contested PROD - doesn't meet WP:NFILM. Passenger pigeon ( talk) 12:32, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 22:01, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Unnecessary and clear WP:OR REDMAN 2019 ( talk) 12:28, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 11:57, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Seems to be WP:SYNTH Spiderone 12:24, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
BornonJune8 ( talk) 3:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Some of the similarities between MLS and the 1968-1984 version of the North American Soccer League (think Pelé and the Cosmos) are hard to ignore. The NASL grew quickly through expansion, even as its established teams struggled; several MLS sides have fallen behind, as the league adds new teams virtually every season. Enthusiasm for a few of the NASL’s teams was counterbalanced by apathy among others. Likewise, several MLS sides draw enormous crowds while others, irrespective of the product on the field, struggle to draw fans. The similarities are even more striking on the women’s side, which saw two leagues close shop in less than a decade. Both the Women’s United Soccer Association (WUSA, 2001-03) and Women’s Professional Soccer (WPS, 2009-11) began with optimistic visions of being the best women’s league in the world. Both leagues had trouble attracting sponsors, fans and committed ownership. Both had to close down when the money ran out. Even though the NWSL has lasted into a sixth year and is thriving in several cities, the league last offseason lost two franchises that were unwilling to continue losing money. The biggest difference on the MLS side is the money at stake. NASL teams flitted around the map, folding at the drop of a hat, because their owners had invested so little that folding or moving a team made perfect financial sense. The Minnesota Kicks’ second, less-involved owner famously folded the team over the phone. Today’s MLS owners have franchises worth hundreds of millions of dollars and most have soccer-specific stadiums to host the teams — investments too large to let fail. The NWSL, though, is more concerning. Costs are more controlled than the WUSA or WPS, which is a positive. The league also has five teams that share ownership with MLS teams, plus the United States and Canadian soccer federations paying salaries for their national-team players. Those are helpful backstops to prevent a sudden end to the league.
The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:35, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
I couldn't find significant coverage on the subject in reliable media. Fails WP:GNG as well as WP:COMPOSER. Less Unless ( talk) 12:17, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. The nominator and delete voter were sockpuppets which leaves no delete proposals. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 ( talk) 00:19, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Not a notable person and fails
WP:NACTOR. Redirect: She only is known for her appearance on Bigg Boss 11. She did small roles doesn’t mean she is a well know celebrity and haven’t been seen ever since.
TVactors (
talk) 12:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC) —
TVactors (
talk struck blocked sock,
Atlantic306 (
talk) 00:14, 13 July 2020 (UTC)*
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. BLOCKED SOCK.
Britishfinance (
talk)
13:28, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Awdal. Sandstein 13:03, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
The bulk of the article (demographics section) is identical to that of the "Awdal" page. Moreover, contains poor citations throughout. For example, 1) Citation 1 makes no reference to "Awdalland" and it being a "former region". 2) No citation for the claim that "Awdalland (also spelled Adelland) takes its name from the Adel Sultanate". 3) Citation 4 is unreliable as it links to a Somali news tabloid website. 4)Citation 5 links to a Japanese website irrelevant to the article. 5) Though some sources touch on Awdalland, a Google Books search returns very limited results for "Awdalland" [8], thus may not qualify for notability in the sense of gaining "sufficiently significant attention by the world". Therefore, this article should be deleted due to lack of relevance and unreliable citations. Jacob300 ( talk) 11:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Comment: Citation 5, for some reason, points to an archive.org snapshot that took place after the website had changed its content (apparently taken over as an advertisement and/or holding space). An earlier version of the cited source appears here. That said, it's a blog post that probably runs afoul of WP:SPS. But as long as I'm here I'd suggest redirect to Awdal, as opposed to "merge and redirect": I wouldn't suggest merging problematic content elsewhere, and anyway both the separatist movement and the opposition to it are already mentioned there. I did notice that the article's creator was blocked via WP:CU but no mention of the other account(s) with whom they're affiliated. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:23, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. No consensus to delete this BLP and a consensus that it satisfies NPROF; a clean up is needed, but that is not for AfD. (non-admin closure) Britishfinance ( talk) 10:29, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Can someone nominate this article into AFD as the editor has connection with the article and probably non-notable person. 184.22.70.110 ( talk) 10:18, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Nomination on behalf of IP. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 11:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 10:38, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't see how this article is really that helpful, I see a clear breach of WP:OR, the excessively long title, I can't see anyone typing that in to google! Encyclopaedias are suppose to be about an item, biography, entities, not "comparisons". This feels at odds with what the project stands for. Govvy ( talk) 10:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
BornonJune8 ( talk) 3:04, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Some of the similarities between MLS and the 1968-1984 version of the North American Soccer League (think Pelé and the Cosmos) are hard to ignore. The NASL grew quickly through expansion, even as its established teams struggled; several MLS sides have fallen behind, as the league adds new teams virtually every season. Enthusiasm for a few of the NASL’s teams was counterbalanced by apathy among others. Likewise, several MLS sides draw enormous crowds while others, irrespective of the product on the field, struggle to draw fans. The similarities are even more striking on the women’s side, which saw two leagues close shop in less than a decade. Both the Women’s United Soccer Association (WUSA, 2001-03) and Women’s Professional Soccer (WPS, 2009-11) began with optimistic visions of being the best women’s league in the world. Both leagues had trouble attracting sponsors, fans and committed ownership. Both had to close down when the money ran out. Even though the NWSL has lasted into a sixth year and is thriving in several cities, the league last offseason lost two franchises that were unwilling to continue losing money. The biggest difference on the MLS side is the money at stake. NASL teams flitted around the map, folding at the drop of a hat, because their owners had invested so little that folding or moving a team made perfect financial sense. The Minnesota Kicks’ second, less-involved owner famously folded the team over the phone. Today’s MLS owners have franchises worth hundreds of millions of dollars and most have soccer-specific stadiums to host the teams — investments too large to let fail. The NWSL, though, is more concerning. Costs are more controlled than the WUSA or WPS, which is a positive. The league also has five teams that share ownership with MLS teams, plus the United States and Canadian soccer federations paying salaries for their national-team players. Those are helpful backstops to prevent a sudden end to the league.
The result was delete. Sandstein 13:03, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Multiple unreffed sections which sound promotional. The essence of this page is already in the main Walter Lewin article, which is why I'm not suggesting a merge. If not a full delete, it should be a redirect I believe. Kj cheetham ( talk) 09:56, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete per WP:A7. So Why 08:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Advertisement of a Non-notable company. Lack of independent reliable Resources. fails WP:GNG, WP:NCORP DMySon 09:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Ethnic group. (non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 09:56, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
The very poor fork from Ethnic group. See discussion on talk page. I propose restore the original redirect to Ethnic group. Andronof ( talk) 09:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 13:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Whilst the organisation is notable, I would argue that the list alone is not notable enough to deserve a place in the Encyclopedia. OXYLYPSE ( talk) 08:33, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 07:39, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG; doesn't appear to be a notable manager; has never managed a professional club Spiderone 07:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 06:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Not a notable hotel. Fails WP:NBUILD -- Pontificalibus 06:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 20:15, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
This article is a duplication of Miss US Virgin Islands with the additions of contestants (which I deleted) to non-notable pageants that were deleted many times via wiki consensus like Miss Supranational, Miss Grand International, Miss Intercontinental. Richie Campbell ( talk) 05:26, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
2019-09 ✍️ create
The result was delete. With no arguments for keeping this article, the consensus is to delete. Should they meet the criteria for inclusion at a future date, an article can be re-created. PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 19:46, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
appears to be paid for promo about a non-notable musician. the few sources that exist about him are questionable at best, straitstimes in particular has the most hits which is dubious considering their history of sloppy reporting. Praxidicae ( talk) 13:26, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface.-- Otr500 ( talk) 22:30, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 13:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
A non-notable film with no significant coverage in reliable sources. Current sources are mostly about Hema Malini producing the film ( WP:NOTINHERITED). It was released in August 2019 and I'm not seeing any review per WP:NFILM. GSS 💬 04:15, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 23:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
This Internet radio station does not meet the WP:GNG. Raymie ( t • c) 03:49, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 20:15, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Local Catholic cable TV channel that airs very little if any local programming, mostly EWTN output. This is not a broadcast station, just a cable channel. Fails WP:GNG. Raymie ( t • c) 03:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Deftones discography. (non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 09:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure if for a video album we are still looking at WP:NALBUM, but I don't think this meets any part of WP:NOTABILITY. Possibly worth a redirect and Deftones is probably the best redirect target. Boleyn ( talk) 12:39, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete; redirected to Zee TV per WP:PRESERVE. BD2412 T 00:15, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORG and appears to exist only to promote Zee TV shows ,to which the award belongs also Draft:Golden Petal Awards was rejected for same reason. Princepratap1234 ( talk) 14:12, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 01:46, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Fails WP:SOLDIER. The article has no references, and I can only find one source in a Google search. Lettler hello 01:09, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 01:45, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Pure WP:LISTCRUFT. There is no accompanying page to discuss this and nor is there likely to ever be, since "artists that have a song with the name name as their band" isn't really a notable topic or even something that gets coverage outside of maybe some listicles. There's no sources, either, and it's likely that everything listed is WP:OR. Was PRODed back in 2010 but it was challenged and the page has doddered on since. — Kawnhr ( talk) 01:05, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The result was keep. BD2412 T 00:12, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Borderline and has been in CAT:NN for over 11 years because it's tricky. TV series on BBC, with notable actors and writers. I don't think it does pass WP:NOTABILITY though, based on coverage and significance. Boleyn ( talk) 13:07, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The result was redirect. All redirected to List of longest living dogs or List of oldest cats. (non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 09:47, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I am nominating Rubble's page, and several other similar pages, for deletion for the same reason as my previous AFD nomination: holding the title of "oldest living cat" (or oldest living dog) for a year or two is not enough to pass WP:BIO and is a textbook example of a case of WP:1E where the one event isn't even particularly notable outside of the Guinness Book of World Records. Wikipedia already has lists for the pets who held this achievement ( cats, dogs), which these articles could possibly redirect to. I am also nominating the following related pages because they are non-notable for the same reasons as Rubble.
This is a great story ! do not delete! Some one please make a table of the oldest living cats like is done for the supercentarians, by country. I think every cat who makes it to 30 yers old deserves to be on the list. Besides, there is a lot of less interesting stuff on wikipedia anyway. Is someone afraid wikipediamwill run out of space? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.66.248.191 ( talk) 00:39, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Don't delete it, the cat is a record holder and is worth having his wiki. Start by deleting all the people who fail to meet notability criteria and have a page on Wikipedia, or the tons of mostly unknown bands littering wikipedia. 2A02:587:391C:7800:18EC:F68C:A696:31B8 ( talk) 10:14, 5 July 2020 (UTC)