![]() |
The result was redirect to Donors Trust. Daniel ( talk) 03:48, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Just google "Whitney Lynn Ball". There is no RS coverage of note of this person. The notability of this person is solely tied to having been one of several founders of Donors Trust. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 00:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. The AFD has received three relists and remained open for around month, and there has been very minimal participation. Both arguments (those of delete & keep) incline me to close this as a "no consensus". (non-admin closure) ─ The Aafī (talk) 16:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Some Ukrainian coverage is cited, but I am not getting the impression that it meets the threshold for independent, significant coverage, or that other such coverage exists. Promotional article about a "herbalist and healer" who supposedly healed her own serious heart condition with herbal remedies. Also founded a non-notable political party that I've nominated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ukrainian Party "Green Planet". Lennart97 ( talk) 21:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was merge to Monotype system. SilkTork ( talk) 17:28, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Possible non-notable company, merging or deletion may be needed. Ahmetlii ( talk) 12:27, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Daniel ( talk) 12:17, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Not notable. Fails
WP:GNG.
DJFace1 (
talk)
17:41, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 15:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Person doesn't appear to be notable enough to have a own article. The article has multiple issues, lacks of good references and fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. Lorik17 ( talk) 16:37, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. I don't see sufficient weight to the keep argument to override the delete arguments. Being a commentator is not the same as being commented on. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 04:02, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Non notable business person who lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them. A before search shows hits in sources which aren’t independent of her or sources which are unreliable such as this & this. WP:ANYBIO is also not met. Celestina007 ( talk) 23:51, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Daniel ( talk) 03:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
The article is WP:OR as there are no sources for a “east syria insurgency” and combines multiple incidents into one conflict rather as a part of the broader syrian civil war. Ridax2020 ( talk) 09:35, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. This AfD has been relisted three times. It has had few contributors to the discussion. Of those !voting, three - including the nominator - are in favour of delete due to lack of significant reliable sources, with only one keep (from Piecesofuk, because they added sources). With three to one in favour of delete, numerically that would favour a delete. Also, lack of interest in a delete discussion in itself favours a delete on the principle of "no objection". On the other hand, the article was nominated for deletion when it was in this state: [1], when it had only two sources, and one of those was IMDB, which is generally considered to be an unreliable source, but it has been built on during the AfD discussion, and more sources added. However, two of the deletes came after the sources were added, and commented that the sources were not adequate - for example that the BBC source was an interview, and that coverage of her art career (her assumed notability) was sparse. Having looked at the BBC interview, I agree. The interview is about the town - she is used as a commentator on the town as a resident there. And other mentions, such as in the Irish Independent and Evening Herald, are "sparse" in that they mention her only in passing, in a trivial rather than the detailed or significant manner required of WP:GNG. However, The Impartial Reporter, a reliable source, does provide two detailed articles on her. And here's the rub. Certainly, they do not provide the information required of either WP:NACTOR or WP:NARTIST as pointed out by the nominator and user Possibly, when !voting delete, but they do provide some detailed coverage of her, as Possibly says, a "public personality". The downside of those sources is that they are local, which brings us back to the point made in the nomination that "The single source in the article is local coverage from her birthplace, so it counts for very little in terms of notability". That point has not been challenged, and has been implicitly supported by those commenting. It's also worth noting that two of those !voting to delete have been active in editing the article to provide sources, yet concluded after doing their research that there was not enough notability evidence for Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. SilkTork ( talk) 10:30, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet wither WP:NACTOR or WP:NARTIST. I was not able to find enough coverage of her to meet WP:GNG, or to indicate that she meets any of the points in the SNGs. The single source in the article is local coverage from her birthplace, so it counts for very little in terms of notability. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 20:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Daniel ( talk) 03:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG, and he doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria of WP:NSCHOLAR. Onel5969 TT me 16:24, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 23:16, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
fails NFOOTY as the 35 league appearances (which I highly doubt actually happened, given the lack of a soccerway/soccerbase profile) would have come in the Conference Premier. Fails GNG also, and is largely unsourced. TBH I would have thought this was a hoax, but I found a mention of him playing for Radford in 2014 here. Microwave Anarchist ( talk) 23:38, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 19:10, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I can't find any evidence that he's a notable speaker or computer scientist. The award is a community/group one and ignoring the fact that an interview doesn't work as independent coverage, it doesn't do much to make a case for notability either. Sourcing in the Greek article is similarly thin, and I can't find anything else. He isn't mentioned in One Laptop per Child and sourcing (also discussed in prior AfD) doesn't make it clear that his role was significant enough for this to be a redirect there. StarM 17:09, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
I don't think he passes WP:PROF, and I don't think being a sysadmin at MIT is enough to be notable. But he has collected a fair amount of press for his work at One Laptop Per Child and for networking Patmos, and was keynote speaker at several conferences. So I think he squeaks by on WP:GNG grounds.— David Eppstein ( talk) 17:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:50, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, no coverage found. Störm (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 23:15, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
strong NFOOTY fail and I'm seeing little evidence of GNG Microwave Anarchist ( talk) 22:53, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 23:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFOOTY as Belgian Second Division was not fully professional when Luke Giverin played for Royal Antwerp. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG either and the only article which links to this is 2016–17 Central Coast Mariners FC season although he does not appear to have ever played for. Article has been twice deleted before for similar reasons. Stevie fae Scotland ( talk) 22:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:50, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. First links when I google searched were to www.metal-archives.com, which is not a RS. The rest of the first five pages are social media, metal zines or sales sites. No RSes in the group. Only user reviews as sputnikmusic.com. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 22:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) ─ The Aafī (talk) 16:51, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Non notable minor record label that is now defunct. Tagged since 2009.
PROD removed due to "I found sources (not surprising given it is Stax-related)", but none were actually added.
Also, the notability tag was not removed, so let's decide once and for all if this is notable. Donaldd23 ( talk) 21:40, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 12:18, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Less sources, does not meet criteria. DasSoumik ( talk) 17:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 19:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
No evidence of any notability. Only ref is a mention in a book of obituaries. Searches reveal little better. Appeared to have been a steady bit-part film actor who never hit the big time. Fails WP:GNG Velella Velella Talk 14:12, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) ─ The Aafī (talk) 16:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
BLP tagged for notability since 2015 and has no sources. - Cupper52 Discuss! 09:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
"Sztuka ( Poland ) , vol . 10 , pt . 6 ( 1985 ) , p . 36 - 7 . 1 illus . biog . An introduction to the work of the Polish painter Cezary Paszkowski ( b . 1949 ) is followed by an analysis of his three major series of paintings , which depict the changeable..."[10] . Also, in another magazine,
"...Soon it appears that the serigraphy creates new workshop possibilities for him and he can use it effectively to create his individual world . Cezary Paszkowski was eminent in the generation of the seventies . His creative work is faithful to the..."[11]. There are many refs to sales and exhibitions sites and they naturally hype that he is a recipient on numerous awards. In fact, factual sources say he does have a couple awards from exhibitioins and museums (whose notability I am lazy to verify), but without refs to original awards, i.e., their level is unverifiable. Concluding, there are no modern sources and someone has to take pain to go to libraries to write a decent article from the times when he was famous. BTW Polish wp article says he is honorable citizen of New Orleans. His own website has no bragging, only works, meaning he is a decent person :-) [no argument for notability, just a note of respect] Lembit Staan ( talk) 19:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Despite the fact that the nominator has been blocked indefinite for abusing multiple accounts, the "keep" arguments make sense. The close as "keep" is not because of the sockpuppetry. (non-admin closure) ─ The Aafī (talk) 17:08, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
This is just like a promotional Article. Nothing more. And also fails
WP:NSCHOOL,
WP:ORG.
JaiMahadev (
talk)
06:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:51, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Unreferenced since it was created six years ago. Searching finds no in-depth coverage in independent RS. Although searching is complicated by the number of hits in hotel booking sites, I didn't see anything else usable as a ref. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG MB 21:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Daniel ( talk) 03:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
No third-party sources listed to establish notability. This sounds like an article drafted in order to promote the book. I can't tell if this is the product of paid editing or the product of someone who is weirdly enthusiastic about the book. -- Beland ( talk) 21:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Notability tag has been on the article for several years, has no sources. -- Beland ( talk) 20:28, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. AfD Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) — Amkgp 💬 14:21, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON, player has played only one match for St Mirren F.C. in 2021 and looks not notable enough per WP:NFOOTBALL — Amkgp 💬 19:53, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Comment: Withdraw nomination per discussion above. —
Amkgp
💬
14:20, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Daniel ( talk) 03:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV. Sources are not WP:RS Jenyire2 19:37, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. TNT case and I'd suggest that any recreation sticks closely to any sources. Spartaz Humbug! 15:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Non notable organization that doesn’t satisfy WP:NGO. They lack in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources & a before search links me to mostly user generated sources obviously not independent of the organization. Celestina007 ( talk) 22:49, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi again - it seems somewhat absurd to me that this page is being considered for deletion - still. When I first created the page, I included just a thumbnail. Since then, I have added news and other links demonstrating this is an important conservation organization in Canada. Perhaps the original lister can review the revisions and reconsider the non-notability tag. thanks. SabaBPC ( talk) 16:06, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
As the person who created the article, I have no conflict. I have no personal relationship with OLTA. I noticed that Wiki has almost no information about land conservation in Canada. To fix this, wiki needs to have information about the 2 treaties mentioned, information about ECAN, then the 3 regional conservation umbrella organizations, then the main land trusts like Nature Conservancy Canada and Ducks Unlimited. Canada and Ontario give conservation grants through OLTA. If it's a quasi-government institution - a public institution - I can't see why it's not notable. I would really appreciate revisions rather than removing content from wiki, which is necessary to educate the public. SabaBPC ( talk) 16:22, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Daniel ( talk) 03:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Disputed PROD: "my lack of norwegian stops me from being able to analyse many of the sources, but there are encouraging sources here - https://www.nb.no/search?q=%22Tore%20Kallstad%22&mediatype=aviser" Fails WP:NFOOTBALL and - respectfully - I beg to differ on the sources archived at nb.no, which look to fall short of the sustained, non-trivial coverage required to meet WP:GNG. Bring back Daz Sampson ( talk) 23:21, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 10:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
A not notable Entrepreneur fails WP:GNG Hulatam ( talk) 06:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Dear, John Pack Lambert. I noticed that you voted against keeping this article. I looked at your logs for March 1, and all you did that day was go through deletion discussions. In every single deletion discussion, you voted to delete the article, which is already a red flag (there were about fifty that you voted on). Additionally, the time stamps show that you are averaging about two minutes per article, showing that there is no way you can have a complete understanding of the situation when you practically spend no time looking into it. Just because the person is not a household name does not mean that they are not notable. Also, you have had about fifteen articles speedily deleted in February 2021, which makes me wonder if you should really be voting in these discussions. I mean this in no disrespect, but I implore you to slow down and learn more about these individuals. Thank you; I know you have good intentions. B.KaiEditor ( talk) 21:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was merge to Takanawa#Notable sites. Daniel ( talk) 03:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Does not establish notability under WP:NBUILD (not a national historic site). Failed to find reliable sources in English and Japanese. Allanlw 04:12, 27 February 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 03:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
There's nothing sourcing wise to justify this being notable. This article has sat for 12 years with no sources at all, which is a very clear violation of our verifiability rules. A quick google search turned up no reliable sources at all.
JaiMahadev (
talk)
03:24, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Of the three sources, two don't mention this company specifically and the first is a puff-piece interview. Does not meet GNG. Written by a SPA, probably COI, and is a declined AFC. May even qualify for G11 CSD. MB 02:53, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Noting that CSD G5: pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, is also applicable. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 21:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I've been party to various "is this a meaningful list or isn't it" debates, but I reckon this takes the biscuit. WP:LISTCRUFT -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 18:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 18:24, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
This was deleted about three months ago for failing WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL; this still applies despite what's written in the article. The Scottish Championship is not listed at WP:FPL so his 26 min appearance doesn't pass the guideline (see Soccerbase and Soccerway). In terms of coverage, I'm seeing a few hype pieces in Rangers News but nothing really in independent sources. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:00, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete and redirect to Operation Claw-Eagle 2. Spartaz Humbug! 06:59, 15 March 2021 (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}} . |
WP:POVFORK of
Operation Claw-Eagle 2. This fork uses unreliable sources (for example,
Erdogan's state-run media,
Anadolu Agency) (compare with sources at
Operation Claw-Eagle 2#References and
Operation Claw-Eagle 2#Further reading). It portrays the death of 13 hostages (the responsibility for which is still debated) as a "massacre". Compare with how the NYT describes it: President Recep Tayyip Erdogan blamed the United States and opposition Kurdish politicians in an effort to deflect responsibility for a failed rescue operation.
[29]. The title "Gara massacre" is not backed by RS, and is highly POV, and perhaps should not be kept even as a redirect. There is nothing to merge because nothing is in this fork that isn't already stated with better sources and more neutrally at
Operation Claw-Eagle 2.
Levivich
harass/
hound
17:33, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a person notable primarily as mayor of a smallish city, not adequately referenced for the purposes of passing WP:NPOL #2. As always, mayors are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist: the notability test for a mayor hinges on the ability to write and source some genuine substance about their political significance -- specific things they did in the job, specific effects they had on the development of the city, and on and so forth -- but this is sourced to just four hits of purely local verification of election results, and features no substance at all about his political impact. Making a mayor notable enough for inclusion requires a lot more than just offering technical verification that he won one or more mayoral elections: we need to see some real evidence that his mayoralty is genuinely important, not just minimal proof that it exists. Bearcat ( talk) 16:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:58, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON. Not being released for a year and a half. ... discospinster talk 16:16, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:55, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
No indication of notability per WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC. ... discospinster talk 16:13, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:55, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
WP:BLP1E. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO scope_creep Talk 15:14, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination is Withdrawn. I think they just made it in the last few days. (non-admin closure) scope_creep Talk 15:43, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Currently non-notable. Perhaps WP:TOOSOON. scope_creep Talk 15:10, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Daniel ( talk) 03:55, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Deprodded without rationale or improvement. While this street existed, not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 15:08, 6 March 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 03:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Generic hotel site article. Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creep Talk 15:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Reads like a press release, was even worse before I cleaned it up, but feel like I am wasting my time given that it provides no independent sources and I can find no substantial coverage other than press releases Dexxtrall ( talk) 14:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Non-notable. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:PRODUCER. scope_creep Talk 14:58, 6 March 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 03:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV. Potentially notable. scope_creep Talk 14:48, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Bit-part actor. Fails WP:NACTOR, WP:SIGCOV scope_creep Talk 14:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
No indication of significance or success that meets WP:NACADEMIC (a range of little-cited papers are listed at Scopus). No substantial coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG (uncritical media appearances don't count). Even if the topic were notable, the article could be worth WP:TNTing per WP:COI or WP:FRINGE as it seems to have been written largely by its subject without a conflict of interest disclosure (at the very least the editor is an WP:SPA), and Teitelbaum appears to be a proponent of "alternative" medicine i.e. pseudoscience, but the article is written thoroughly non-neutrally in promotion of his content. A PROD succeeded in 2016, following which a refund by the suspected COI editor led to the page's reinstatement. — Bilorv ( talk) 14:43, 6 March 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 03:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORGIND, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:SIRS. scope_creep Talk 14:40, 6 March 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 03:59, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORGIND, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:SIRS scope_creep Talk 14:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
2019-06 ✍️ create
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 04:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
A non notable leader of a students wing of a political party. Sources are covering about something else rather than the subject. Could not find anything on doing WP:Before and fails GNG Kichu🐘 Discuss 14:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 04:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. No reliable sources listed other than YouTube and Twitter - both of which are not reliable. Only sources I could possibly find were the two articles by Forbes, which talks about another YouTube channel covering the similar subjects (and not reliable anyway due to WP:FORBESCON). No luck searching up his real name either. theinstantmatrix ( talk) 13:59, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 04:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Could not find any sources that gives the subject enough WP:SIGCOV. On doing a WP:Before, this [35] was the only source I could find. But this is only his response to a controversy he has involved with. Some other unreliable sources are there regarding the same incident. The subject is only a district committe member of his party and fails WP:GNG Kichu🐘 Discuss 13:50, 6 March 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 04:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
A non notable muslim youth leader, who has neven been elected into any assemblies. The sources provided are not independently giving brief coverage about the subject. They are just mentioning and passing by. And the publisher of this source [36] is the propoganda newspaper of the political party he leads. Kichu🐘 Discuss 13:35, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. No prejudice against merging or moving. (non-admin closure) ~ Aseleste charge-parity time 08:08, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Previous PROD, template removed by dynamic IP. WP:NOTNEWS, no apparent notability. NoonIcarus ( talk) 12:12, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was Procedural close. Spartaz Humbug! 06:55, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Current sources don't satisfy WP:BASIC Cuoxo ( talk) 12:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was speedy deleted. Thanks for the heads up, Prax. El_C 15:53, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Sources fail in passing WP:GNG Cuoxo ( talk) 12:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete per G5 ( Weareme234). Closing as page was deleted, but this AfD closure does not preclude a non-sockpuppet re-creating the article or merging. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 21:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not suppose to be a guidebook. Govvy ( talk) 12:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
It is not fully completed need more things. Simply nominating for deletion. Metteler ( talk · contribs) 14:19, 06 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:54, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
A spammy article about a non-notable black hat SEO platform. BEFORE search finds nothing useful, and the existing sourcing is as follows:
Source analysis
|
---|
|
Hence delete. Blablubbs| talk 11:51, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:53, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Other than ONE BNN piece, the rest of this is self published/promo (and published in several sites by the same employee of HiMama) so it lacks the necessary independent rs. CUPIDICAE💕 11:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Sri Lanka Schools XI representative cricketers. Spartaz Humbug! 06:52, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, nothing in my searches. Störm (talk) 14:00, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:51, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I see no change in notability since the first AFD in 2012 but figured after 8 years it needed to go again. Fails NMUSIC, no meaningful coverage in German or English and quite frankly appears to be vanity spam. CUPIDICAE💕 11:10, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
hello my fellow wikipedians, maybe you don't see any relevance for my article, because the artist in the article is "too small" in your eyes .... I wish one would give up-and-coming musicians, who are not yet so well known also a chance, and not only the larger ones, like that also in such a way, does which you for correct holds....had actually rather your assistance with my article hoped, than only depreciating remarks...I thank you nevertheless....ein attempt was worth it...lg wikileseratte
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810A:F3F:E4B0:DC5C:B8A5:9988:C040 ( talk) 22:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
hello everybody, Bastian Harpers Profile on Facebook has nearly 4000 followers https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100046689306568 , but which guideline at wikipedia says how many followers an artist must have to get a wikipedia article? i think we should not reduce ourselves to such things....much more important is the music and the lifeblood what is in it, even if not so many people have discovered so many emerging artists, it does not mean that they are bad or could get more attention. ...The BirdsShedTears I like to look at the Nina Hagen article and try to build it up so similar..but I need some time ...warm greetings to all wikipedianer....all the best for you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikileseratte ( talk • contribs) 19:30, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
hello everybody ,i try to find sources : Hits Paris Newspaper: http://www.laparisiennelife.com/2020/08/le-hit-dance-la-parisienne-life-n-233-24-aout-2020.html bastian harper horny night #25 , http://www.laparisiennelife.com/2019/05/le-hit-dance-la-parisienne-life-n-167-24-mai-2019.html Bastian Harper - Im a Freak #10, Radio Antenne Berlin Bastian Harper - Stranger in my Eyes Mainstreamlist: https://onlineradiobox.com/track/1476360407980958745/?cs=de.radioitsfun , Radio: 8 Songs in 10 Radio Stations Europe : https://onlineradiobox.com/artist/315539612-bastian-harper and so on.... i hope you can give a chance ,because you have already approved many artists from Kontorrecords Germany.. /info/en/?search=Kontor_Records thx for yor time and for reading ..i hope i can convince you of my very first article in english..wikileseratte 8 March 2021 ill try to learn about wikipedia programming, maybe i need som help...thx
The result was no consensus. The nominator has opted to change their view and would have sought to withdraw if all !votes supported clear retention. As this is not the case, closing as keep would not be appropriate, although delete !votes do not consider the sources subsequently identified. Any editor wishing to relist at AfD may renominate without prejudice. (non-admin closure) Bungle ( talk • contribs) 11:22, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
It seems he fails NFOOTY, with no appearances higher than Portugal's third tier or Germany's fourth tier. [38] looks like it may be SIGCOV, but I cant find any other decent sources, so at the moment, I think it also fails GNG. Microwave Anarchist ( talk) 11:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Quip. Spartaz Humbug! 06:50, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Doesn't look notable to me. All the press mentions just briefly state that he is a co-founder of Quip. Probably should be re-directed to the company's page. Bbarmadillo ( talk) 18:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
*Delete, per nom. Fails
WP:GNG. The search suggested by
Jeepday returns no results. There are Google Book search results for other Kevin Gibbs.
SailingInABathTub (
talk)
13:22, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Slavic#Languages, alphabets, and names. Spartaz Humbug! 06:49, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
This disambiguation page is not required. It is an incomplete list of entries that are already linked from Slavic languages. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 10:31, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete (G12). MER-C 18:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Poorly-sourced promo/vanity piece. Search finds nothing beyond social media and similar. Fails WP:GNG / WP:BIO. -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 08:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 21:17, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Subject is only known for creating album cover art. Does not meet WP:GNG Walter Görlitz ( talk) 08:30, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Not quite a soft delete since there's a consensus without opposition. I'm willing to undelete if significant reliable sources (better than what was already in the article) are located. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 04:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Procedural nomination to get broader input so I abstain. I've declined a WP:G11 request on this as I don't consider it unambiguously promotional and it looks like the author has at least made some attempt to source it to something other than press releases. However, I don't think this company appears likely to reach Wikipedia's notability standards; Wikipedia isn't a directory and we only cover companies that have independent notability in some way, and I'm not seeing that here. The Colorado cannabis market is something about which I know very little and it's possible I just don't know where to look, so I'm neutral on the potential that this is a legitimate topic. ‑ Iridescent 07:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Bungle ( talk • contribs) 09:26, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill band. As a draft at AFC, I would decline it as not addressing any of the musical notability criteria, except that I declined the draft as duplicating this article. Also does not address general notability.
Note Number | Independent | Significant | |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Describes band as WP:UPANDCOMING | ? | No |
2 | Interview | No | ? |
3 | Interview | No | ? |
Naïve Google search shows that the band exists. We knew that. It also shows that the band had a first album. No third-party coverage found (and no third-party coverage listed in sources). Robert McClenon ( talk) 07:10, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Mojo Hand ( talk) 20:37, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Non-notable political candidate, who ran as the vice-presidential nominee for a minor party in 2008. He did not receive the coverage necessary to pass WP:GNG before, after or during that campaign, and he fails WP:NPOL, as he has never held elected office. Devonian Wombat ( talk) 06:19, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Withdrawn. postdlf ( talk) 20:36, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
This article covers the same Roman family group as the article called Atinia gens. Chewings72 ( talk) 05:44, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Mojo Hand ( talk) 14:50, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Totally unsourced article. A search reveals no coverage anywhere at all, massively failing WP:GNG, and no indication of passing WP:NMUSIC either. ser! ( chat to me). 04:51, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Mojo Hand ( talk) 14:46, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Movie which was shelved before 2019 as per this The Indian Express article - [57] . Not notable enough to merit an article per WP:NFILM Jupitus Smart 04:49, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. I am not seeing a consensus for a redirect, which an editorial decision can be made about separately. Taking my admin hat off, I'll note that while Minecraft#Gameplay discusses it, "The End Poem" or "End Poem" are not mentioned by name, and many sources don't give it this name in a general (i.e. non-Minecraft) context, so it's arguably not a good redirect. — The Earwig ( talk) 06:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
I can't see how the End Poem would be independently notable of its own, apart from its sole use in a video game Minecraft. No reliable sources on this article other than Boing Boing, which is an interview. Plus the article content wholly screams WP:VGSCOPE violation to me. theinstantmatrix ( talk) 04:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC) edited 06:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Obvious consensus. Note that the article was also a copyvio. Anarchyte ( talk • work) 11:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Infobox says that 150 people belong to this community. Both references are dead. I couldn't find notability criteria for ethnic groups, but this doesn't seem to justify an article. Park3r ( talk) 03:53, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 10:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG. Of the provided sources, only this one mentions the existence of a rivalry at all, and still does not cover the rivalry aspect in significant depth. The rivalry also appears to have only existed for one year thus far; it is likely WP:TOOSOON for serious coverage to have been written about this subject. signed, Rosguill talk 03:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. The keep argument does not reflect policy and the source analysis and delete arguments are compelling. Spartaz Humbug! 06:47, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I prodded this with "e coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (media) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar.". Prod was removed with no meaningful rationale, article has not been improved, so here we go. At best this could be redirected to The_Times#Related_publications where the subject is mentioned (I'd do so myself but given the PROD was simply removed with no redirect I expect redirecting would be challenged, plus I dislike stealth deletion by redirecting w/ no discussion). And hey, maybe someone can dig up something I missed and rescue this as a stand-alone entry? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:32, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:45, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I don't think this meets WP:ORGCRITE. This piece in The Independent appears to be the extent of independent coverage in reliable sources. signed, Rosguill talk 03:22, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
@ Rosguill: oppose/keep Hello, I think Freedom United does indeed meet WP:ORGCRITE. Numerous reliable sources have covered the organization; please view all recent sources here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rxt6jvjCJmkV3qWDMg4rwgalf69odNmLhQ8_FQPfkbc/edit#gid=0. . Carloladd ( talk) 14:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)Carlo
@ Rosguill: oppose/keep These independent articles all reference Freedom United as a NGO doing solid work: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201013005758/en/NGOs-Are-Industry-and-Governments-Watering-Down-New-Cocoa-Report-Data-to-Downplay-Persistent-Child-Labor-and-Farmer-Poverty; https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewelinaochab/2020/12/21/the-bitter-truth-behind-hot-chocolate-this-christmas/?sh=6da5201e566b; https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/beyond-trafficking-and-slavery/interview-why-does-freedom-united-use-the-term-modern-slavery/; A Freedom United petition recorded in Australia's Hansard - the official parliamentary record https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber/hansards/c213941c-eb14-4c54-a8dc-11b938aad7dc/&sid=0044(use CTRL F to find!); The UK government appointed Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner supports a Freedom United initiative in her official report to UK parliament https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/918675/CCS207_CCS0520602790-001_IASC_Annual_Report_2019-2020_Web_Accessible_final.pdf (page 44, 7.1.3); report posted on the UN Office for the High Commissioner for Human Rights website by the UN Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Slavery/SR/Freedom_United_Hidden_Viticims_COVID19_Moden_Slavery.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:6b0:cc50:ccfe:723f:d7f8:3843 ( talk • contribs) 16:52, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was Procedural close. Nominator has been blocked and no further support for deletion. The article can be renominated at any time. Spartaz Humbug! 06:45, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Recreation of a previously deleted page. Most of the sources talk about company, misses in-depth sources. Hulatam ( talk) 15:06, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Moved from the Talk Page where I accidentally put it last week...
As the creator of the page I am obviously not thrilled with the idea of having spent several hours researching and creating an article for it to be deleted. This is not a re-creation of a deleted page, it's a new creation in place of a previously deleted page put together by a now-banned editor I have no relationship with. I found the dead link on the Stadium Goods page and, not knowing about the history, thought I'd give creation a go. When doing so, I got the note about a previous article and held off on my work. Instead, I did my due diligence in checking in with the person who had done the deletion to ensure that he hadn't deleted for reasons other than the lack of trust in the original author. I felt that, having confirmed before the article was created that it was worthy of creation (the convo was originally on the article's talk page and is now on mine), I was good to go, but took a lot of care to ensure the article follows the rules for creating biographies for people who are relatively unknown. The article is not about a company, it is about a person. In fact, I mention 8 companies and 2 universities in 8 lines, so hardly a focus on a company.
The deletion for lack of notability is absolutely not in line with Wikipedia's general notability guideline as the criteria required to be met are actually met:
"Significant coverage": 4 of 10 sources are directly about the subject, all others have extensive mentions of him even if the primary focus are the companies he founded "Reliable": Forbes, WWD, Complex, Business of Fashion and the Wall Street Journal are definitely all reliable sources with journalistic independence and integrity. I consciously left out sources like Yahoo and when citing articles about Stadium Goods avoided any sources that sounded like a copy of a corporate press release. "Sources": All but one of the cited sources are secondary sources (there is no named record of his university attendance other than speaker notes at a Fastcompany event). There are 10 sources and 12 citations on an article that currently spans 7 lines. "Independent of the subject": It is. I don't know John McPheters. I understand that notability is relative and that the bio guideline is clear that just because the above criteria are met, it is not guaranteed that a person deserves a mention. I also agree that the article is thin, but that is a feature of my time constraints not of its topic. Another article I created a few years back on ShopStyle is not much longer and currently spans 8 lines. It deserves a "please help build out this article" note, not a deletion warning.
I edit mostly smaller company and lesser-known people's pages as I am a huge fan of not equating size with importance. If someone has created a company with a unique model - as John has done with Stadium Goods - they deserve a mention if the criteria are met otherwise the world will continue to be dominated by big corporate entities and the contribution of individuals continue to be ignored.
Incidentally, you may notice that I did not create an article for Jed Stiller even though he also has a dead link from Stadium Goods, which is what motivated me to create John's article in the first place. While I have no opinon about Jed's contribution to the company (I also don't know him), I couldn't find a single citable source about him and thus decided that - unlike John - he did not meet the necessary criteria for a standalone page.
2021-01 ✍️ create
, 2020-10 ✗
G5
The result was delete. North America 1000 18:37, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO and WP:BLP and not notable musician /writer to be here. Owlf 03:19, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:BIO. Non-notable. scope_creep Talk 01:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:42, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
The subject is not competing at the elite level of the sport and has insufficient coverage in significant third party sources to meet general notability. Also, the creator may possibly be the subject, given the username. SFB 01:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 01:10, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
The article has no source and quite clearly its a WP:GNG failing article. The image in second heading also seems to be promotional as the person portrayed has the school named after him.It is not incorrect to call it an article written for the purpose of advertisement. Heba Aisha ( talk) 00:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was redirect to Donors Trust. Daniel ( talk) 03:48, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Just google "Whitney Lynn Ball". There is no RS coverage of note of this person. The notability of this person is solely tied to having been one of several founders of Donors Trust. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 00:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. The AFD has received three relists and remained open for around month, and there has been very minimal participation. Both arguments (those of delete & keep) incline me to close this as a "no consensus". (non-admin closure) ─ The Aafī (talk) 16:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Some Ukrainian coverage is cited, but I am not getting the impression that it meets the threshold for independent, significant coverage, or that other such coverage exists. Promotional article about a "herbalist and healer" who supposedly healed her own serious heart condition with herbal remedies. Also founded a non-notable political party that I've nominated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ukrainian Party "Green Planet". Lennart97 ( talk) 21:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was merge to Monotype system. SilkTork ( talk) 17:28, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Possible non-notable company, merging or deletion may be needed. Ahmetlii ( talk) 12:27, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Daniel ( talk) 12:17, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Not notable. Fails
WP:GNG.
DJFace1 (
talk)
17:41, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 15:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Person doesn't appear to be notable enough to have a own article. The article has multiple issues, lacks of good references and fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. Lorik17 ( talk) 16:37, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. I don't see sufficient weight to the keep argument to override the delete arguments. Being a commentator is not the same as being commented on. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 04:02, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Non notable business person who lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them. A before search shows hits in sources which aren’t independent of her or sources which are unreliable such as this & this. WP:ANYBIO is also not met. Celestina007 ( talk) 23:51, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Daniel ( talk) 03:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
The article is WP:OR as there are no sources for a “east syria insurgency” and combines multiple incidents into one conflict rather as a part of the broader syrian civil war. Ridax2020 ( talk) 09:35, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. This AfD has been relisted three times. It has had few contributors to the discussion. Of those !voting, three - including the nominator - are in favour of delete due to lack of significant reliable sources, with only one keep (from Piecesofuk, because they added sources). With three to one in favour of delete, numerically that would favour a delete. Also, lack of interest in a delete discussion in itself favours a delete on the principle of "no objection". On the other hand, the article was nominated for deletion when it was in this state: [1], when it had only two sources, and one of those was IMDB, which is generally considered to be an unreliable source, but it has been built on during the AfD discussion, and more sources added. However, two of the deletes came after the sources were added, and commented that the sources were not adequate - for example that the BBC source was an interview, and that coverage of her art career (her assumed notability) was sparse. Having looked at the BBC interview, I agree. The interview is about the town - she is used as a commentator on the town as a resident there. And other mentions, such as in the Irish Independent and Evening Herald, are "sparse" in that they mention her only in passing, in a trivial rather than the detailed or significant manner required of WP:GNG. However, The Impartial Reporter, a reliable source, does provide two detailed articles on her. And here's the rub. Certainly, they do not provide the information required of either WP:NACTOR or WP:NARTIST as pointed out by the nominator and user Possibly, when !voting delete, but they do provide some detailed coverage of her, as Possibly says, a "public personality". The downside of those sources is that they are local, which brings us back to the point made in the nomination that "The single source in the article is local coverage from her birthplace, so it counts for very little in terms of notability". That point has not been challenged, and has been implicitly supported by those commenting. It's also worth noting that two of those !voting to delete have been active in editing the article to provide sources, yet concluded after doing their research that there was not enough notability evidence for Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. SilkTork ( talk) 10:30, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet wither WP:NACTOR or WP:NARTIST. I was not able to find enough coverage of her to meet WP:GNG, or to indicate that she meets any of the points in the SNGs. The single source in the article is local coverage from her birthplace, so it counts for very little in terms of notability. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 20:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Daniel ( talk) 03:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG, and he doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria of WP:NSCHOLAR. Onel5969 TT me 16:24, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 23:16, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
fails NFOOTY as the 35 league appearances (which I highly doubt actually happened, given the lack of a soccerway/soccerbase profile) would have come in the Conference Premier. Fails GNG also, and is largely unsourced. TBH I would have thought this was a hoax, but I found a mention of him playing for Radford in 2014 here. Microwave Anarchist ( talk) 23:38, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 19:10, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I can't find any evidence that he's a notable speaker or computer scientist. The award is a community/group one and ignoring the fact that an interview doesn't work as independent coverage, it doesn't do much to make a case for notability either. Sourcing in the Greek article is similarly thin, and I can't find anything else. He isn't mentioned in One Laptop per Child and sourcing (also discussed in prior AfD) doesn't make it clear that his role was significant enough for this to be a redirect there. StarM 17:09, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
I don't think he passes WP:PROF, and I don't think being a sysadmin at MIT is enough to be notable. But he has collected a fair amount of press for his work at One Laptop Per Child and for networking Patmos, and was keynote speaker at several conferences. So I think he squeaks by on WP:GNG grounds.— David Eppstein ( talk) 17:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:50, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, no coverage found. Störm (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 23:15, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
strong NFOOTY fail and I'm seeing little evidence of GNG Microwave Anarchist ( talk) 22:53, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 23:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFOOTY as Belgian Second Division was not fully professional when Luke Giverin played for Royal Antwerp. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG either and the only article which links to this is 2016–17 Central Coast Mariners FC season although he does not appear to have ever played for. Article has been twice deleted before for similar reasons. Stevie fae Scotland ( talk) 22:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:50, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. First links when I google searched were to www.metal-archives.com, which is not a RS. The rest of the first five pages are social media, metal zines or sales sites. No RSes in the group. Only user reviews as sputnikmusic.com. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 22:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) ─ The Aafī (talk) 16:51, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Non notable minor record label that is now defunct. Tagged since 2009.
PROD removed due to "I found sources (not surprising given it is Stax-related)", but none were actually added.
Also, the notability tag was not removed, so let's decide once and for all if this is notable. Donaldd23 ( talk) 21:40, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 12:18, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Less sources, does not meet criteria. DasSoumik ( talk) 17:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 19:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
No evidence of any notability. Only ref is a mention in a book of obituaries. Searches reveal little better. Appeared to have been a steady bit-part film actor who never hit the big time. Fails WP:GNG Velella Velella Talk 14:12, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) ─ The Aafī (talk) 16:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
BLP tagged for notability since 2015 and has no sources. - Cupper52 Discuss! 09:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
"Sztuka ( Poland ) , vol . 10 , pt . 6 ( 1985 ) , p . 36 - 7 . 1 illus . biog . An introduction to the work of the Polish painter Cezary Paszkowski ( b . 1949 ) is followed by an analysis of his three major series of paintings , which depict the changeable..."[10] . Also, in another magazine,
"...Soon it appears that the serigraphy creates new workshop possibilities for him and he can use it effectively to create his individual world . Cezary Paszkowski was eminent in the generation of the seventies . His creative work is faithful to the..."[11]. There are many refs to sales and exhibitions sites and they naturally hype that he is a recipient on numerous awards. In fact, factual sources say he does have a couple awards from exhibitioins and museums (whose notability I am lazy to verify), but without refs to original awards, i.e., their level is unverifiable. Concluding, there are no modern sources and someone has to take pain to go to libraries to write a decent article from the times when he was famous. BTW Polish wp article says he is honorable citizen of New Orleans. His own website has no bragging, only works, meaning he is a decent person :-) [no argument for notability, just a note of respect] Lembit Staan ( talk) 19:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Despite the fact that the nominator has been blocked indefinite for abusing multiple accounts, the "keep" arguments make sense. The close as "keep" is not because of the sockpuppetry. (non-admin closure) ─ The Aafī (talk) 17:08, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
This is just like a promotional Article. Nothing more. And also fails
WP:NSCHOOL,
WP:ORG.
JaiMahadev (
talk)
06:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:51, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Unreferenced since it was created six years ago. Searching finds no in-depth coverage in independent RS. Although searching is complicated by the number of hits in hotel booking sites, I didn't see anything else usable as a ref. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG MB 21:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Daniel ( talk) 03:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
No third-party sources listed to establish notability. This sounds like an article drafted in order to promote the book. I can't tell if this is the product of paid editing or the product of someone who is weirdly enthusiastic about the book. -- Beland ( talk) 21:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Notability tag has been on the article for several years, has no sources. -- Beland ( talk) 20:28, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. AfD Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) — Amkgp 💬 14:21, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON, player has played only one match for St Mirren F.C. in 2021 and looks not notable enough per WP:NFOOTBALL — Amkgp 💬 19:53, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Comment: Withdraw nomination per discussion above. —
Amkgp
💬
14:20, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Daniel ( talk) 03:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV. Sources are not WP:RS Jenyire2 19:37, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. TNT case and I'd suggest that any recreation sticks closely to any sources. Spartaz Humbug! 15:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Non notable organization that doesn’t satisfy WP:NGO. They lack in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources & a before search links me to mostly user generated sources obviously not independent of the organization. Celestina007 ( talk) 22:49, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi again - it seems somewhat absurd to me that this page is being considered for deletion - still. When I first created the page, I included just a thumbnail. Since then, I have added news and other links demonstrating this is an important conservation organization in Canada. Perhaps the original lister can review the revisions and reconsider the non-notability tag. thanks. SabaBPC ( talk) 16:06, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
As the person who created the article, I have no conflict. I have no personal relationship with OLTA. I noticed that Wiki has almost no information about land conservation in Canada. To fix this, wiki needs to have information about the 2 treaties mentioned, information about ECAN, then the 3 regional conservation umbrella organizations, then the main land trusts like Nature Conservancy Canada and Ducks Unlimited. Canada and Ontario give conservation grants through OLTA. If it's a quasi-government institution - a public institution - I can't see why it's not notable. I would really appreciate revisions rather than removing content from wiki, which is necessary to educate the public. SabaBPC ( talk) 16:22, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Daniel ( talk) 03:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Disputed PROD: "my lack of norwegian stops me from being able to analyse many of the sources, but there are encouraging sources here - https://www.nb.no/search?q=%22Tore%20Kallstad%22&mediatype=aviser" Fails WP:NFOOTBALL and - respectfully - I beg to differ on the sources archived at nb.no, which look to fall short of the sustained, non-trivial coverage required to meet WP:GNG. Bring back Daz Sampson ( talk) 23:21, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 10:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
A not notable Entrepreneur fails WP:GNG Hulatam ( talk) 06:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Dear, John Pack Lambert. I noticed that you voted against keeping this article. I looked at your logs for March 1, and all you did that day was go through deletion discussions. In every single deletion discussion, you voted to delete the article, which is already a red flag (there were about fifty that you voted on). Additionally, the time stamps show that you are averaging about two minutes per article, showing that there is no way you can have a complete understanding of the situation when you practically spend no time looking into it. Just because the person is not a household name does not mean that they are not notable. Also, you have had about fifteen articles speedily deleted in February 2021, which makes me wonder if you should really be voting in these discussions. I mean this in no disrespect, but I implore you to slow down and learn more about these individuals. Thank you; I know you have good intentions. B.KaiEditor ( talk) 21:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was merge to Takanawa#Notable sites. Daniel ( talk) 03:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Does not establish notability under WP:NBUILD (not a national historic site). Failed to find reliable sources in English and Japanese. Allanlw 04:12, 27 February 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 03:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
There's nothing sourcing wise to justify this being notable. This article has sat for 12 years with no sources at all, which is a very clear violation of our verifiability rules. A quick google search turned up no reliable sources at all.
JaiMahadev (
talk)
03:24, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Of the three sources, two don't mention this company specifically and the first is a puff-piece interview. Does not meet GNG. Written by a SPA, probably COI, and is a declined AFC. May even qualify for G11 CSD. MB 02:53, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Noting that CSD G5: pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, is also applicable. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 21:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I've been party to various "is this a meaningful list or isn't it" debates, but I reckon this takes the biscuit. WP:LISTCRUFT -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 18:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 18:24, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
This was deleted about three months ago for failing WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL; this still applies despite what's written in the article. The Scottish Championship is not listed at WP:FPL so his 26 min appearance doesn't pass the guideline (see Soccerbase and Soccerway). In terms of coverage, I'm seeing a few hype pieces in Rangers News but nothing really in independent sources. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:00, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete and redirect to Operation Claw-Eagle 2. Spartaz Humbug! 06:59, 15 March 2021 (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}} . |
WP:POVFORK of
Operation Claw-Eagle 2. This fork uses unreliable sources (for example,
Erdogan's state-run media,
Anadolu Agency) (compare with sources at
Operation Claw-Eagle 2#References and
Operation Claw-Eagle 2#Further reading). It portrays the death of 13 hostages (the responsibility for which is still debated) as a "massacre". Compare with how the NYT describes it: President Recep Tayyip Erdogan blamed the United States and opposition Kurdish politicians in an effort to deflect responsibility for a failed rescue operation.
[29]. The title "Gara massacre" is not backed by RS, and is highly POV, and perhaps should not be kept even as a redirect. There is nothing to merge because nothing is in this fork that isn't already stated with better sources and more neutrally at
Operation Claw-Eagle 2.
Levivich
harass/
hound
17:33, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a person notable primarily as mayor of a smallish city, not adequately referenced for the purposes of passing WP:NPOL #2. As always, mayors are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist: the notability test for a mayor hinges on the ability to write and source some genuine substance about their political significance -- specific things they did in the job, specific effects they had on the development of the city, and on and so forth -- but this is sourced to just four hits of purely local verification of election results, and features no substance at all about his political impact. Making a mayor notable enough for inclusion requires a lot more than just offering technical verification that he won one or more mayoral elections: we need to see some real evidence that his mayoralty is genuinely important, not just minimal proof that it exists. Bearcat ( talk) 16:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:58, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON. Not being released for a year and a half. ... discospinster talk 16:16, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:55, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
No indication of notability per WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC. ... discospinster talk 16:13, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:55, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
WP:BLP1E. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO scope_creep Talk 15:14, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination is Withdrawn. I think they just made it in the last few days. (non-admin closure) scope_creep Talk 15:43, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Currently non-notable. Perhaps WP:TOOSOON. scope_creep Talk 15:10, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. Daniel ( talk) 03:55, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Deprodded without rationale or improvement. While this street existed, not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 15:08, 6 March 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 03:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Generic hotel site article. Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creep Talk 15:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Reads like a press release, was even worse before I cleaned it up, but feel like I am wasting my time given that it provides no independent sources and I can find no substantial coverage other than press releases Dexxtrall ( talk) 14:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Non-notable. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:PRODUCER. scope_creep Talk 14:58, 6 March 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 03:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV. Potentially notable. scope_creep Talk 14:48, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Bit-part actor. Fails WP:NACTOR, WP:SIGCOV scope_creep Talk 14:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 03:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
No indication of significance or success that meets WP:NACADEMIC (a range of little-cited papers are listed at Scopus). No substantial coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG (uncritical media appearances don't count). Even if the topic were notable, the article could be worth WP:TNTing per WP:COI or WP:FRINGE as it seems to have been written largely by its subject without a conflict of interest disclosure (at the very least the editor is an WP:SPA), and Teitelbaum appears to be a proponent of "alternative" medicine i.e. pseudoscience, but the article is written thoroughly non-neutrally in promotion of his content. A PROD succeeded in 2016, following which a refund by the suspected COI editor led to the page's reinstatement. — Bilorv ( talk) 14:43, 6 March 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 03:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORGIND, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:SIRS. scope_creep Talk 14:40, 6 March 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 03:59, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORGIND, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:SIRS scope_creep Talk 14:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
2019-06 ✍️ create
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 04:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
A non notable leader of a students wing of a political party. Sources are covering about something else rather than the subject. Could not find anything on doing WP:Before and fails GNG Kichu🐘 Discuss 14:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 04:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. No reliable sources listed other than YouTube and Twitter - both of which are not reliable. Only sources I could possibly find were the two articles by Forbes, which talks about another YouTube channel covering the similar subjects (and not reliable anyway due to WP:FORBESCON). No luck searching up his real name either. theinstantmatrix ( talk) 13:59, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Daniel ( talk) 04:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Could not find any sources that gives the subject enough WP:SIGCOV. On doing a WP:Before, this [35] was the only source I could find. But this is only his response to a controversy he has involved with. Some other unreliable sources are there regarding the same incident. The subject is only a district committe member of his party and fails WP:GNG Kichu🐘 Discuss 13:50, 6 March 2021 (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. Daniel ( talk) 04:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
A non notable muslim youth leader, who has neven been elected into any assemblies. The sources provided are not independently giving brief coverage about the subject. They are just mentioning and passing by. And the publisher of this source [36] is the propoganda newspaper of the political party he leads. Kichu🐘 Discuss 13:35, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. No prejudice against merging or moving. (non-admin closure) ~ Aseleste charge-parity time 08:08, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Previous PROD, template removed by dynamic IP. WP:NOTNEWS, no apparent notability. NoonIcarus ( talk) 12:12, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was Procedural close. Spartaz Humbug! 06:55, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Current sources don't satisfy WP:BASIC Cuoxo ( talk) 12:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was speedy deleted. Thanks for the heads up, Prax. El_C 15:53, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Sources fail in passing WP:GNG Cuoxo ( talk) 12:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete per G5 ( Weareme234). Closing as page was deleted, but this AfD closure does not preclude a non-sockpuppet re-creating the article or merging. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 21:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not suppose to be a guidebook. Govvy ( talk) 12:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
It is not fully completed need more things. Simply nominating for deletion. Metteler ( talk · contribs) 14:19, 06 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:54, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
A spammy article about a non-notable black hat SEO platform. BEFORE search finds nothing useful, and the existing sourcing is as follows:
Source analysis
|
---|
|
Hence delete. Blablubbs| talk 11:51, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:53, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Other than ONE BNN piece, the rest of this is self published/promo (and published in several sites by the same employee of HiMama) so it lacks the necessary independent rs. CUPIDICAE💕 11:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Sri Lanka Schools XI representative cricketers. Spartaz Humbug! 06:52, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, nothing in my searches. Störm (talk) 14:00, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:51, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I see no change in notability since the first AFD in 2012 but figured after 8 years it needed to go again. Fails NMUSIC, no meaningful coverage in German or English and quite frankly appears to be vanity spam. CUPIDICAE💕 11:10, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
hello my fellow wikipedians, maybe you don't see any relevance for my article, because the artist in the article is "too small" in your eyes .... I wish one would give up-and-coming musicians, who are not yet so well known also a chance, and not only the larger ones, like that also in such a way, does which you for correct holds....had actually rather your assistance with my article hoped, than only depreciating remarks...I thank you nevertheless....ein attempt was worth it...lg wikileseratte
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810A:F3F:E4B0:DC5C:B8A5:9988:C040 ( talk) 22:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
hello everybody, Bastian Harpers Profile on Facebook has nearly 4000 followers https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100046689306568 , but which guideline at wikipedia says how many followers an artist must have to get a wikipedia article? i think we should not reduce ourselves to such things....much more important is the music and the lifeblood what is in it, even if not so many people have discovered so many emerging artists, it does not mean that they are bad or could get more attention. ...The BirdsShedTears I like to look at the Nina Hagen article and try to build it up so similar..but I need some time ...warm greetings to all wikipedianer....all the best for you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikileseratte ( talk • contribs) 19:30, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
hello everybody ,i try to find sources : Hits Paris Newspaper: http://www.laparisiennelife.com/2020/08/le-hit-dance-la-parisienne-life-n-233-24-aout-2020.html bastian harper horny night #25 , http://www.laparisiennelife.com/2019/05/le-hit-dance-la-parisienne-life-n-167-24-mai-2019.html Bastian Harper - Im a Freak #10, Radio Antenne Berlin Bastian Harper - Stranger in my Eyes Mainstreamlist: https://onlineradiobox.com/track/1476360407980958745/?cs=de.radioitsfun , Radio: 8 Songs in 10 Radio Stations Europe : https://onlineradiobox.com/artist/315539612-bastian-harper and so on.... i hope you can give a chance ,because you have already approved many artists from Kontorrecords Germany.. /info/en/?search=Kontor_Records thx for yor time and for reading ..i hope i can convince you of my very first article in english..wikileseratte 8 March 2021 ill try to learn about wikipedia programming, maybe i need som help...thx
The result was no consensus. The nominator has opted to change their view and would have sought to withdraw if all !votes supported clear retention. As this is not the case, closing as keep would not be appropriate, although delete !votes do not consider the sources subsequently identified. Any editor wishing to relist at AfD may renominate without prejudice. (non-admin closure) Bungle ( talk • contribs) 11:22, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
It seems he fails NFOOTY, with no appearances higher than Portugal's third tier or Germany's fourth tier. [38] looks like it may be SIGCOV, but I cant find any other decent sources, so at the moment, I think it also fails GNG. Microwave Anarchist ( talk) 11:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Quip. Spartaz Humbug! 06:50, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Doesn't look notable to me. All the press mentions just briefly state that he is a co-founder of Quip. Probably should be re-directed to the company's page. Bbarmadillo ( talk) 18:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
*Delete, per nom. Fails
WP:GNG. The search suggested by
Jeepday returns no results. There are Google Book search results for other Kevin Gibbs.
SailingInABathTub (
talk)
13:22, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Slavic#Languages, alphabets, and names. Spartaz Humbug! 06:49, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
This disambiguation page is not required. It is an incomplete list of entries that are already linked from Slavic languages. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 10:31, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete (G12). MER-C 18:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Poorly-sourced promo/vanity piece. Search finds nothing beyond social media and similar. Fails WP:GNG / WP:BIO. -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 08:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 21:17, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Subject is only known for creating album cover art. Does not meet WP:GNG Walter Görlitz ( talk) 08:30, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Not quite a soft delete since there's a consensus without opposition. I'm willing to undelete if significant reliable sources (better than what was already in the article) are located. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 04:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Procedural nomination to get broader input so I abstain. I've declined a WP:G11 request on this as I don't consider it unambiguously promotional and it looks like the author has at least made some attempt to source it to something other than press releases. However, I don't think this company appears likely to reach Wikipedia's notability standards; Wikipedia isn't a directory and we only cover companies that have independent notability in some way, and I'm not seeing that here. The Colorado cannabis market is something about which I know very little and it's possible I just don't know where to look, so I'm neutral on the potential that this is a legitimate topic. ‑ Iridescent 07:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Bungle ( talk • contribs) 09:26, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill band. As a draft at AFC, I would decline it as not addressing any of the musical notability criteria, except that I declined the draft as duplicating this article. Also does not address general notability.
Note Number | Independent | Significant | |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Describes band as WP:UPANDCOMING | ? | No |
2 | Interview | No | ? |
3 | Interview | No | ? |
Naïve Google search shows that the band exists. We knew that. It also shows that the band had a first album. No third-party coverage found (and no third-party coverage listed in sources). Robert McClenon ( talk) 07:10, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Mojo Hand ( talk) 20:37, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Non-notable political candidate, who ran as the vice-presidential nominee for a minor party in 2008. He did not receive the coverage necessary to pass WP:GNG before, after or during that campaign, and he fails WP:NPOL, as he has never held elected office. Devonian Wombat ( talk) 06:19, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Withdrawn. postdlf ( talk) 20:36, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
This article covers the same Roman family group as the article called Atinia gens. Chewings72 ( talk) 05:44, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Mojo Hand ( talk) 14:50, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Totally unsourced article. A search reveals no coverage anywhere at all, massively failing WP:GNG, and no indication of passing WP:NMUSIC either. ser! ( chat to me). 04:51, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Mojo Hand ( talk) 14:46, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Movie which was shelved before 2019 as per this The Indian Express article - [57] . Not notable enough to merit an article per WP:NFILM Jupitus Smart 04:49, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. I am not seeing a consensus for a redirect, which an editorial decision can be made about separately. Taking my admin hat off, I'll note that while Minecraft#Gameplay discusses it, "The End Poem" or "End Poem" are not mentioned by name, and many sources don't give it this name in a general (i.e. non-Minecraft) context, so it's arguably not a good redirect. — The Earwig ( talk) 06:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
I can't see how the End Poem would be independently notable of its own, apart from its sole use in a video game Minecraft. No reliable sources on this article other than Boing Boing, which is an interview. Plus the article content wholly screams WP:VGSCOPE violation to me. theinstantmatrix ( talk) 04:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC) edited 06:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Obvious consensus. Note that the article was also a copyvio. Anarchyte ( talk • work) 11:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Infobox says that 150 people belong to this community. Both references are dead. I couldn't find notability criteria for ethnic groups, but this doesn't seem to justify an article. Park3r ( talk) 03:53, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 10:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG. Of the provided sources, only this one mentions the existence of a rivalry at all, and still does not cover the rivalry aspect in significant depth. The rivalry also appears to have only existed for one year thus far; it is likely WP:TOOSOON for serious coverage to have been written about this subject. signed, Rosguill talk 03:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. The keep argument does not reflect policy and the source analysis and delete arguments are compelling. Spartaz Humbug! 06:47, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I prodded this with "e coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (media) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar.". Prod was removed with no meaningful rationale, article has not been improved, so here we go. At best this could be redirected to The_Times#Related_publications where the subject is mentioned (I'd do so myself but given the PROD was simply removed with no redirect I expect redirecting would be challenged, plus I dislike stealth deletion by redirecting w/ no discussion). And hey, maybe someone can dig up something I missed and rescue this as a stand-alone entry? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:32, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:45, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I don't think this meets WP:ORGCRITE. This piece in The Independent appears to be the extent of independent coverage in reliable sources. signed, Rosguill talk 03:22, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
@ Rosguill: oppose/keep Hello, I think Freedom United does indeed meet WP:ORGCRITE. Numerous reliable sources have covered the organization; please view all recent sources here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rxt6jvjCJmkV3qWDMg4rwgalf69odNmLhQ8_FQPfkbc/edit#gid=0. . Carloladd ( talk) 14:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)Carlo
@ Rosguill: oppose/keep These independent articles all reference Freedom United as a NGO doing solid work: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201013005758/en/NGOs-Are-Industry-and-Governments-Watering-Down-New-Cocoa-Report-Data-to-Downplay-Persistent-Child-Labor-and-Farmer-Poverty; https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewelinaochab/2020/12/21/the-bitter-truth-behind-hot-chocolate-this-christmas/?sh=6da5201e566b; https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/beyond-trafficking-and-slavery/interview-why-does-freedom-united-use-the-term-modern-slavery/; A Freedom United petition recorded in Australia's Hansard - the official parliamentary record https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber/hansards/c213941c-eb14-4c54-a8dc-11b938aad7dc/&sid=0044(use CTRL F to find!); The UK government appointed Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner supports a Freedom United initiative in her official report to UK parliament https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/918675/CCS207_CCS0520602790-001_IASC_Annual_Report_2019-2020_Web_Accessible_final.pdf (page 44, 7.1.3); report posted on the UN Office for the High Commissioner for Human Rights website by the UN Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Slavery/SR/Freedom_United_Hidden_Viticims_COVID19_Moden_Slavery.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:6b0:cc50:ccfe:723f:d7f8:3843 ( talk • contribs) 16:52, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was Procedural close. Nominator has been blocked and no further support for deletion. The article can be renominated at any time. Spartaz Humbug! 06:45, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Recreation of a previously deleted page. Most of the sources talk about company, misses in-depth sources. Hulatam ( talk) 15:06, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Moved from the Talk Page where I accidentally put it last week...
As the creator of the page I am obviously not thrilled with the idea of having spent several hours researching and creating an article for it to be deleted. This is not a re-creation of a deleted page, it's a new creation in place of a previously deleted page put together by a now-banned editor I have no relationship with. I found the dead link on the Stadium Goods page and, not knowing about the history, thought I'd give creation a go. When doing so, I got the note about a previous article and held off on my work. Instead, I did my due diligence in checking in with the person who had done the deletion to ensure that he hadn't deleted for reasons other than the lack of trust in the original author. I felt that, having confirmed before the article was created that it was worthy of creation (the convo was originally on the article's talk page and is now on mine), I was good to go, but took a lot of care to ensure the article follows the rules for creating biographies for people who are relatively unknown. The article is not about a company, it is about a person. In fact, I mention 8 companies and 2 universities in 8 lines, so hardly a focus on a company.
The deletion for lack of notability is absolutely not in line with Wikipedia's general notability guideline as the criteria required to be met are actually met:
"Significant coverage": 4 of 10 sources are directly about the subject, all others have extensive mentions of him even if the primary focus are the companies he founded "Reliable": Forbes, WWD, Complex, Business of Fashion and the Wall Street Journal are definitely all reliable sources with journalistic independence and integrity. I consciously left out sources like Yahoo and when citing articles about Stadium Goods avoided any sources that sounded like a copy of a corporate press release. "Sources": All but one of the cited sources are secondary sources (there is no named record of his university attendance other than speaker notes at a Fastcompany event). There are 10 sources and 12 citations on an article that currently spans 7 lines. "Independent of the subject": It is. I don't know John McPheters. I understand that notability is relative and that the bio guideline is clear that just because the above criteria are met, it is not guaranteed that a person deserves a mention. I also agree that the article is thin, but that is a feature of my time constraints not of its topic. Another article I created a few years back on ShopStyle is not much longer and currently spans 8 lines. It deserves a "please help build out this article" note, not a deletion warning.
I edit mostly smaller company and lesser-known people's pages as I am a huge fan of not equating size with importance. If someone has created a company with a unique model - as John has done with Stadium Goods - they deserve a mention if the criteria are met otherwise the world will continue to be dominated by big corporate entities and the contribution of individuals continue to be ignored.
Incidentally, you may notice that I did not create an article for Jed Stiller even though he also has a dead link from Stadium Goods, which is what motivated me to create John's article in the first place. While I have no opinon about Jed's contribution to the company (I also don't know him), I couldn't find a single citable source about him and thus decided that - unlike John - he did not meet the necessary criteria for a standalone page.
2021-01 ✍️ create
, 2020-10 ✗
G5
The result was delete. North America 1000 18:37, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO and WP:BLP and not notable musician /writer to be here. Owlf 03:19, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:BIO. Non-notable. scope_creep Talk 01:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 06:42, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
The subject is not competing at the elite level of the sport and has insufficient coverage in significant third party sources to meet general notability. Also, the creator may possibly be the subject, given the username. SFB 01:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 01:10, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
The article has no source and quite clearly its a WP:GNG failing article. The image in second heading also seems to be promotional as the person portrayed has the school named after him.It is not incorrect to call it an article written for the purpose of advertisement. Heba Aisha ( talk) 00:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)