The result was keep and I will history merge this version with the existing draft. Whether to merge the different seasons into one article can be discussed further elsewhere. – Joe ( talk) 11:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Previously deleted article. Non notable football season. Insufficient references to satisfy GNG. Whiteguru ( talk) 02:11, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Another bilateral article mostly based on the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. No embassies, state visits. The agreements are relatively minor. LibStar ( talk) 01:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:07, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:02, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
No significant coverage and fails WP:CORP. It also can't be merged anywhere per the Wikipedia policy WP:V. SL93 ( talk) 01:33, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
The article notes: "慶眾汽車過去以生產福斯(VW)T4商用車聞名,結束與福斯的合作關係後,2000年時曾取得現代汽車代理權,但2002年代理權轉由三陽接手,慶眾就轉型為三陽代工廠。"
From Google Translate: "Chin Chun Motor used to be famous for producing Volkswagen (VW) T4 commercial vehicles. After ending the partnership with Volkswagen, it obtained the agency rights of Hyundai Motor in 2000, but in 2002, the agency rights were transferred to Sanyang, and Chin Chun Motor transformed itself into the Sanyang foundry."
The article notes: "慶眾汽車轉型為同集團的三陽工業「專屬代工廠」後,為三陽代工、經銷現代商(Hyundai)用車產品,以及代工生產國防部軍用卡車。由於現代與起亞產品系出同門,設計、零件共用比率極高,成為慶眾汽車爭取起亞代工的優勢,慶眾可針對現代與起亞車款,同步開發零件,降低生產成本。但市場傳出慶眾汽車取得三陽轉過來的軍卡組裝訂單後,對爭取起亞代工案態度趨於被動;但業界質疑,現代集團是否願意讓慶豐集團統包現代與起亞在台所有業務。"
From Google Translate: "After Chin Chun Motor was transformed into the "exclusive foundry" of Sanyang Industry, which is the same group, it is the OEM for Sanyang, the distribution of Hyundai's vehicle products, and the OEM production of military trucks for the Ministry of Defense. As the products of Hyundai and Kia are from the same family, the ratio of design and parts sharing is very high, which has become the advantage of Chin Chun Motor in striving for Kia's OEM. Chin Chun Motor can simultaneously develop parts for Hyundai and Kia models to reduce production costs. However, it was reported in the market that after Chin Chun Motor obtained the military card assembly order transferred from Sanyang, its attitude towards winning the Kia OEM case tended to be passive; however, the industry questioned whether Hyundai Group is willing to let Chin Chun Motor take all the ownership of Hyundai and Kia in Taiwan. business."
The article notes: "慶眾汽車看準國內旅遊巴士需求市場,透過同屬慶豐集團的三陽工業牽線,取得中國大陸第一大巴士製造廠金龍聯合汽車公司(大金龍)技術授權,擬在台組裝金龍巴士銷售。但慶眾汽車主管昨(18)日不願證實。不過,消息人士透露,此計畫若順利推展,慶眾最快能在一至二年內開始生產金龍巴士,將成為第一輛在台生產「大陸車」。"
From Google Translate: "Looking at the domestic tourist bus demand market, Chin Chun Motor has obtained the technical authorization of the largest bus manufacturer in mainland China, King Long United Automobile Company (King Long), through the help of Sanyang Motor, which is also under the Qingfeng Group, and plans to assemble King Long buses in Taiwan for sale. However, the head of Qingzhong Automobile was unwilling to confirm yesterday (18). However, according to sources, if the plan goes well, Qingzhong will be able to start producing King Long buses within one to two years at the earliest, and will become the first "Continental car" produced in Taiwan."
The article notes: "與三陽工業(2206)同屬慶豐集團的慶眾汽車,早年是與福斯汽車合資成立,並導入T4商用車生產迄今,後因故福斯撤資,慶眾仍保留在台組裝銷售T4權力直至2010年。"
From Google Translate: "Chin Chun Motor, which belongs to the Chinfon Group together with Sanyang Industry (2206), was established as a joint venture with Volkswagen in the early years, and has introduced T4 commercial vehicles for production so far. The public still retains the right to assemble and sell T4 in Taiwan until 2010."
The article notes: "慶豐集團整合旗下汽車事業,本月起將慶眾汽車銷售、服務部門,併入三陽工業子公司南陽實業,慶眾汽車轉型為純汽車代工廠。 ... 慶眾集團積極抓住柴油車成為市場熱潮的商機,包括慶眾積極協調韓國原廠,希望能提供更具競爭力、能符合四期法規的新商用車種,明年在台生產、上市;"
From Google Translate: "Chinfon Global Corporation has integrated its automobile business. Starting from this month, Chin Chun Motor's sales and service departments will be merged into Nanyang Industrial, a subsidiary of Sanyang Industrial. Chin Chun Motor will be transformed into a pure automobile foundry. . . . Chinfon Global Corporation actively seizes the business opportunity of diesel vehicles becoming a boom in the market, including Chin Chun Motor actively coordinating with Korean original factories, hoping to provide more competitive new commercial vehicles that can comply with Phase IV regulations, which will be produced and launched in Taiwan next year;"
This articles provides a paragraph of coverage about the subject. The article notes: "In 1991, Volkswagen had partnered with Chinfon Trading Group and jointly invested NT$4.8 billion (US$148.37 million) in the establishment of Chin Chun Motor Co. Ltd. to produce the Volkswagen Transporter T4 front-engined van on the island. However, with the two firms constantly at loggerheads over business operations, the relationship eventually ended on bad terms, with the German automaker deciding to pull out of Taiwan in the wake of the Asian financial crisis in 1997."
The article notes: "是 1991 年 7 月 10 日,隶属台湾三阳汽车工业公司董事长个人事业的庆众汽车投资公司与德国福斯 V.W.公司签约,在台湾生产 V.W.商用车,成立台湾第 11 家汽车制造厂,庆众汽车公司投资比例占 66.6 % ,德国福斯 V.W.公司占 33.4 %。"
From Google Translate: "On July 10, 1991, Chin Chun Motor, which is affiliated to the personal business of the chairman of Taiwan Sanyang Automobile Industry Co., Ltd., signed a contract with the German V.W. company to produce V.W. commercial vehicles in Taiwan, and established the 11th automobile manufacturing plant in Taiwan. The investment proportion of Chin Chun Motor accounted for 66.6%, and the German V.W. Company accounted for 33.4%."
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:05, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was Draftify.
BD2412
T 07:13, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Merge into the main tour article. Q T C 23:50, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Pain of Salvation. Liz Read! Talk! 23:00, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG, I was unable to find coverage online or on Proquest beyond the inadequate sources currently cited. Redirect to Pain of Salvation, their most notable associated act, seems appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 17:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:46, 26 April 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:59, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
The subject does not appear to meet WP:NCORP. The commarts.com seems to be the only in-depth source, and it's likely native advertisement, since the site sells "feature articles" like this one [1]. MarioGom ( talk) 20:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:45, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:48, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
No evidence that this is notable. No RSs provided and none found in WP:BEFORE. Content could easily be accommodated in Inikiri Umuezeoka if needed and which itself is poorly sourced Velella Velella Talk 22:23, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:57, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 22:37, 26 April 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
The individual fails WP:NBASIC and WP:GNG; there are not multiple independent reliable sources that cover him significantly. The references currently in the article include a bio blurb from his employer (cited twice), a writing of his in the London Review of Books, an article that does not so much as mention his name, an advertisement for an essay collection he put together, and a YouTube video from "Bloggingheads.tv". No such references contribute towards WP:GNG, as they fail WP:INDEPENDENT, WP:RS, and/or fail to provide significant coverage of the individual. An online search for significant coverage of this individual yielded this NY Times piece on a play he participated in (though it really doesn't provide any significant coverage of him other than quoting him and indicating that he took a sip of a drink), and a handful of pieces that briefly quote him. He's written in a lot of places, but there isn't really enough coverage of him to meet WP:NBASIC and/or WP:GNG, so the article should be deleted as non-notable. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 21:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- ferret ( talk) 21:29, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
This article has been previously been deleted for lacking significant in-depth coverage from multiple reliable sources (i.e. failing WP:GNG). Since this is still the case, this article should be deleted. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 21:24, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Contested draftification, or a unilateral move after draftification by another editor who misunderstands the notability criteria. My instinct would be to draftily again, but that would be move warring. WP:IAR does not apply here, so we are at AfD. Fails WP:NACTOR/ WP:NMUSICIAN. References, while in ostensibly reliable sources, are pure churnalism. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:04, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. – Joe ( talk) 12:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Doesn't appear to be notable, also was deleted previously. AmirŞah 19:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
There is no such world day. It seem a local event, not enough notability to include in wikipedia. No WP:SIGCOV. আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk) 18:15, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. This garden either doesn't exist or is a private garden. I read through the very interesting comments from editors trying to track down the facts about this place but I don't see anyone advocating keeping this article. Great detective work though. Liz Read! Talk! 22:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Article is a stub covering an apparently non-existent or at least non-public and non-notable botanical garden. The address given appears to be a small, private residence with a 175m² garden behind it. The one source provided in the article is an entry in a database of botanic gardens which itself contains conflicting information regarding the location of the garden. See 2017 discussion on article's talkpage for more info and views: Talk:Jardin_botanique_alpin_"Daniella". Eric talk 17:13, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
More info: Google Maps link of address given in the cited BGCI entry; should open in satellite view centered on property. Note that the coordinates given in the article (and on the BGCI entry) point to a site approximately 2.5 km to the east, also a residential street. Eric talk 17:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
jardins botaniques alpins en France
, and got this
this map mash-up as the top result. With one exception, all the alpine botanical gardens shown are in the southeast, near the borders of Switzerland and Italy, where—surprise!—you find the foothills of the Alps, from which
alpine gardens take their name, and are likely to thrive. (The one exception is the
Jardin botanique de Lyon.) No map pins in Limoges, or nearby.So then I tried again, showing the top 100 web search results for
jardins botaniques a Limoges
, and you get a few dozen "Jardin de l'Évêché" results, and the "Daniella" garden shows up twice: once on the BGCI site, and once at
this page, which is a mirror of the fr-wiki article. The odds that an actual botanical garden exists in a major French city, and appears on no website in the world, other than a questionable
WP:SPS database, and a Wikipedia mirror, is vanishingly small. Admittedly, this is not a proof, as a single, reliable source would be enough to take apart this argument. But, we don't have a single reliable source.
Mathglot (
talk) 03:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
I've also checked Oldhedge's contributions which were already modified by someone else, and tried to revert them, too. With very few exceptions (like this one), all of them seem fake references and links.
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:47, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. Found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing else suitable enough was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 16:07, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn with no remaining delete proposals. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 ( talk) 02:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. Found only one review (needs two in order to be eligible) on Rotten Tomatoes. Nothing else suitable enough was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 16:04, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn by nom. No opinions to delete, hence speedy keep (non-admin closure) 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:30, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing else that's suitable enough was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 16:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
non notable production company pushed into mainspace repeatedly by socks PRAXIDICAE💕 15:38, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 03:01, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
The article lacks any reliable sources. I was unable to find any other sources that said anything that is for sure about this person. There was an attorney named Bailey Walsh, who worked for the federal government, but I was not able to find much about that person, and nothing that for sure indicates it was the same person. A Bailey Walsh was an attorney for 2 Chicago companies in 1953, he is mentioned in an over 1000 page federal document from that year. The 1936 mention in a very detailed report (thus a primary document) is probably this Bailey Walsh, and from it we learn that at some point prior to 1936 he was assistant US attorney for the western District of Tennessee. Being a US attorney for a specific district is at least a strong indication of notability, being an assistant is not, so the non-secondary sources I find on what is probably this person indicate his postions are not notability giving, and I cannot find any reliable secondary sources that mention him at all. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 15:09, 26 April 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 12:40, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Although the subject participated in a major music competition, she was fourth and never featured hence does not meet WP: NMUSICIAN, also I can't find sources to prove notability. Megan B.... It’s all coming to me till the end of time 13:38, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was draftify. ✗ plicit 12:42, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Does not meet the relevant notability guideline ( WP:ACADEMIC). Ari T. Benchaim ( talk) 14:10, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Article fails notability requirements for inclusion ( WP:N). It appears to be promotional advertisement and puffery. A WP:BEFORE Google search fails to turn up multiple independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage ( WP:RS). The article references primary sources for some claims but most are unsourced so are not verifiable ( WP:V). I would not be opposed to a redirect should a proper one be offered. ARose Wolf 14:09, 26 April 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 14:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
No notable wrestler. Sources are reports of events, WP:ROUTINE, which don't established notability for the subject. No in-deep coverage of the wrestler. HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 13:30, 26 April 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 14:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
No notable wrestler. Sources are reports of events, WP:ROUTINE, which don't established notability for the subject. No in-deep coverage of the wrestler. HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 13:30, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:24, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable animated Web series. PepperBeast (talk) 11:50, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:26, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Delete. Only 3 sources, not notable, does not indicate where to find the series. ArdynOfTheAncients — Preceding undated comment added 17:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 13:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was transfer to Commons and delete. Consensus is clear that Wikipedia is not served by a repository of all flags of all municipalities in a region.
BD2412
T 19:20, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
WP:NOTGALLERY. Fram ( talk) 13:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Also nominated are the separate pages of flags:
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:16, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Unable to find sufficient sources independent of the subject of this WP:BLP to establish WP:GNG, does not appear to meet the criteria for WP:NAUTHOR J04n( talk page) 12:52, 26 April 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 12:37, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Although this company has produced a few notable films, it does not appear to have received the significant coverage in independent reliable sources needed to meet WP:NCORP. My WP:BEFORE search in English and Kannada found only single-sentence passing mentions, for instance sources that say "The series will be produced by T R Chandrashekar and Crystal Park Cinemas" and nothing more. None of the available sources qualify as significant coverage, in my view. ( NPP action) Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:17, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:14, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 12:35, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:37, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Hoax? The two sources are not correct (ISBN links to other books, title of first one as given don't exist). I can't find references which use "war theatre" with this meaning (as far as meaning can be found in this article). If it exists and is notable, it will need a thorough rewriting. Fram ( talk) 12:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Major Lazer. – Joe ( talk) 13:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG also concerns about sock puppetry and undisclosed paid editing. Theroadislong ( talk) 19:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 06:13, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 12:27, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. sources have emerged rendering much of the nom moot. Star Mississippi 02:08, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
This was created by the subject's great grandson, and reads like something someone would write on a family member, not like an encyclopedia article. There has been no sourcing for 10 years, the one source I added lacks significant coverage. The creator claims there are entries in the New York Times but my search for such sources produced nothing at all. My searches in multiple different places turned up no significant coverage. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 20:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 06:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 12:27, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Although what becomes clear is that this needs serious cleanup if it is to be kept. Sandstein 11:10, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
No independent, reliable, secondary sourcing for the "commune as a model of government"; none in the last decade and none forthcoming. An article for revolutionary government would be scoped too wide for our purposes. While Commune (Marx) could link to his The Civil War in France (where he discusses the Paris Commune), it would not make sense to use this "model of government" article title for that purpose. No other suitable redirect or merge targets. czar 01:34, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 05:48, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 12:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🙃 ( ICE-T • ICE CUBE) 12:45, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I don't think the album itself meets notability criteria from WP:NALBUM. Tow ( talk) 15:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 06:15, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 🇺🇦
FiddleTimtrent
FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:11, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Reiji Yamada. Star Mississippi 02:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Unreferenced article. No evidence of notability in over ten years since its creation. - Xexerss ( talk) 06:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Modussiccandi (
talk) 09:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Hiroya Oku. further input is unlikely. Valid ATD Star Mississippi 02:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Some months ago I tried to fix the article, but I couldn't find enough reliable secondary sources. I found out that it was licensed in other countries, like in Italy, but I didn't find anything useful and reliable in that language either. - Xexerss ( talk) 06:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Modussiccandi (
talk) 09:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics. Star Mississippi 01:59, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod and notability tag removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE - all we know about him is his name, his nationality, and that he played for FC 1880 Frankfurt. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 11:56, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Germany. Sandstein 11:13, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 11:55, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Rosters per WP:ATD. – Joe ( talk) 13:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod and notability tag removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE - all we know about him is his name, his nationality, and that he played for FC 1880 Frankfurt. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 11:37, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics. Star Mississippi 01:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 10:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Pam D 16:17, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Unsourced since its creation by an editor who made no other edits, in 2011. Does not appear on maps that I can find, although there is a ski run called "Tuba Zapatilla" in Candanchú. Either non-notable or possibly a hoax. It was edited ( unconstructively) in 2020 by an IP I've just reported for vandalism, which may be a coincidence (but it was led me to look at this stub). Pam D 10:01, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. consensus is the quantity of references does not meet qualtity required Star Mississippi 01:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP - little to no third party coverage. As far I can tell the company is only mentioned in refs #5 and #7 which are not independent of the subject. KH-1 ( talk) 09:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Discussion was relisted twice, with no discussion since. (non-admin closure) — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Non notable organization, cross wiki spam by lock evading socks. No meaningful coverage. CUPIDICAE💕 14:20, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 17:16, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Spinning
Spark 09:39, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics. Star Mississippi 01:57, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 09:34, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics. or the #Rosters section. That's within editorial discretion. Star Mississippi 01:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 09:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Rosters. however, if someone thinks Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics is preferable, that's also fine. Star Mississippi 01:55, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5, and
WP:NOLYMPICS. No significant coverage in our article or the German article (there is one dead link there, the archived version can be found
here but it only mentions him in a list of players), and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 09:31, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:54, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
The squads in this article are completely unsourced, and we don't really need a list of squads for an annual competition like the Champions League. If people want to know who was contracted to each club that season, they can go to (for example) 2020–21 FC Bayern Munich season. – Pee Jay 07:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The squads in this article are completely unsourced- I'm sure that's a fixable point and shouldn't be part of a deletion rationale.
If people want to know who was contracted to each club that season, they can go to (for example) 2020–21 FC Bayern Munich seasonI'm not sure what the rules are in Europe, but in the A-League Men in Australia, when clubs send squads to the AFC Champions League, there are limitations on squad size and number of foreign players allowed, leading to clubs announcing the ACL squad specifically (for example from this year: Melbourne City, Sydney FC), meaning that the club's season page won't neccesarily reflect the ACL status. Also there have been cases of players being signed only for the ACL campaign and weren't able to participate in the domestic league. Also, not neccesarily every club has a season page, no? -- SuperJew ( talk) 09:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:53, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I've declined a WP:A7 request on this as it does contain credible claims of significance, but this is clearly not appropriate for a biography of a living person. What sources there are are to unreliable sources, and there doesn't appear to be sufficient coverage in reliable sources to construct a viable article. ‑ Iridescent 06:53, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Non notable studio. Looks like an advert. Lacks significant coverage which are independent of the subject. Fails WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. DMySon ( talk) 05:30, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Dragon Ball characters#Grandpa Gohan. and protect the original page. Liz Read! Talk! 03:35, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
To start, this is a straightforward case of a topic about a fictional character which fail to meet the threshold of the requirements of WP:GNG. I have done a considerable amount of research into this topic area and I can confidently say that this character lacks significant coverage from multiple reliable and independent secondary sources. The single CBR article is decent, but we need a lot more then that to justify a standalone page for the character.
There is currently an entry for the character at List of Dragon Ball characters, and normally I'd advocate for a merge proposal, or I'd boldly redirect this myself. However, versions of this topic have been constantly recreated under the name of "Grandpa Son Gohan" by a specific editor since April 2021. Each and every time, it has been reverted by other editors. For further context, please refer to the page history of that title. The current version of this article is recreated by an IP editor, but the editor who seemed to be obsessed with recreating the contents of Grandpa Son Gohan got involved with editing the article's contents right away. It does make me wonder whether there is collusion or socking involved. Anyway, in light of the constant recreation of this topic by editors whose competence may be called into question, I think an AfD would be appropriate. I propose that the contents of this page be deleted, and both Grandpa Gohan or Grandpa Son Gohan be salted indefinitely to prevent further frivolous disruption. Haleth ( talk) 03:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete and redirect.
BD2412
T 07:11, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable political party. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Curbon7 ( talk) 03:32, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 21:34, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Deproded article. Here's my PROD reason which is still valid for AfD
Seems to be a non-notable local saint. WP:BEFORE found no hits on Google Books, Scholar or News Archives. Found only two sources. ( https://www.spot.ph/newsfeatures/the-latest-news-features/71434/10-filipinos-with-extraordinary-gifts-a1806-20170922-lfrm3) which seems to be a copy of this article and ( https://www.pep.ph/news/kuwentong-kakaiba/157526/filomena-almarines-saint-binan-a4437-20210329-lfrm) which literally states that the Catholic Church ignores her claims for sainthood. Lenticel ( talk) 00:38, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 05:47, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:32, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Ian Fraser (naturalist). Liz Read! Talk! 03:09, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
fails WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR. Could not find significant coverage. LibStar ( talk) 03:58, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:32, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 03:06, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
This film appears to fail the general notability guideline and the specific notability guideline for films. I've checked both the Danish and Norwegian articles and they do not have citations which could be pulled into the English Wikipedia to satisfy notability requirements. I was hoping that the director might have an article ... but no, so redirection there is not an option. Thanks for considering this - and it would be great if someone came up with sufficient sources to retain this article. Regards --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 01:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC) User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 01:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 01:16, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Couldn't find any sources whatsoever. It's mentioned in passing in articles about and interviews with A7X, but those are just name-drops. Could find no evidence of the Kerrang review either Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 01:01, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to France at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Medalists. ✗ plicit 01:23, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, WP:SPORTCRIT #5, and WP:NOLYMPICS.
The French Wikipedia includes an additional reference,
km17, but the link is dead and it is not archived, so it is unknown whether it is independent, reliable, or significant. Other sources could not be found.
Redirect may not be suitable, as there is no clear target; Racing 92, Tug of war at the 1900 Summer Olympics, and Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics are all options. BilledMammal ( talk) 00:59, 26 April 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 01:18, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
As a writer they are known for their book 100 Sporting Events You Must See Live. Doesn't appear to be notable. References have mentions, but not significant coverage. Jsfodness ( talk) 00:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Football at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Medalists. ✗ plicit 01:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, WP:SPORTCRIT #5, and WP:NOLYMPICS.
The French Wikipedia has three additional sources, but two are databases and the third only mentions him in a list of players. Other sources could not be found. BilledMammal ( talk) 00:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 01:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
It doesn't have significant coverege on reliable and independent sources. Most of the content of the article is non-encyclopedic and probably added to create an illusion to make it look notable. Being "worth a visit" or "recommended" are not notable information at all. It would be enough to mention that on Geoffrey Kleinman and Internet Brands articles. Nanahuatl ( talk) 00:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Football at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Medalists. ✗ plicit 01:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, WP:SPORTCRIT #5, WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE. All we know about him is his name, his nationality, and that he competed in the 1900 Olympics. BilledMammal ( talk) 00:17, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was merge to Shingletown, California. consensus is clear that there is sourcing, although it's currently beyond the access of many participants. There does not appear to be consensus that we need a standalone page, and a merger is a viable ATD, also solving the lack of mention in Shingletown article Star Mississippi 01:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
De-prodded by RecycledPixels with the rationale "meets notability". Airport in town of 2,000 people closed in 2002, only source does not mention it. Nor is it mentioned at Shingletown, California. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NAIRPORT which states "Significant, independent and reliable sources specifically about the airport must exist". AusLondonder ( talk) 19:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Some sources have been provided, which seems to contradict the arguments for deletion that there is "no evidence". However, whether this is sufficient to warrant a stand-alone page or be merged into the article about its location (one pertinent link would be
WP:NOPAGE), remains open to debate, and there is no clear consensus for that amongst the discussion's participants.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
RandomCanadian (
talk /
contribs) 00:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate presence or citation in an article.. The question whether local sources are enough for notability or not is not one that has a settled answer in policy: in this case, however, and without pronouncing myself on the issue, even if the sources are not enough to establish notability for a stand-alone article, that would not exclude it being mentioned on the article about the locality where this airport was (hence, de facto, a merge). Hence something which does pretty much warrant further discussion. Cheers, RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 02:24, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Football at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Medalists. ✗ plicit 01:21, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, WP:SPORTCRIT #5, WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE. All we know about him is his name, his nationality, his date and place of birth, and that he competed in the 1900 Olympics. BilledMammal ( talk) 00:11, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
"Q2: If a sports figure meets the criteria specified in a sports-specific notability guideline, does this mean they do not have to meet the general notability guideline?
A2: No, the article must still eventually provide sources indicating that the subject meets the general notability guideline. Although the criteria for a given sport should be chosen to be a very reliable predictor of the availability of appropriate secondary coverage from reliable sources, there can be exceptions. For contemporary persons, given a reasonable amount of time to locate appropriate sources, the general notability guideline should be met in order for an article to meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. (For subjects in the past where it is more difficult to locate sources, it may be necessary to evaluate the subject's likely notability based on other persons of the same time period with similar characteristics.)"It simply isn't likely at all that sources will ever be found to support a GNG pass for a Belgian university football player born in 1879 about whom literally nothing is known. At the very least my WP:BEFORE failed to uncover anything. I frankly don't blame Lugnuts for not being aware that the NSport standard has yet again changed so that GNG must eventually be met, however I disagree that FR wiki has any useful additional sources - the only thing it has additional is an non-RS family tree of the Spanoghe family and database entries. FOARP ( talk) 08:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep and I will history merge this version with the existing draft. Whether to merge the different seasons into one article can be discussed further elsewhere. – Joe ( talk) 11:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Previously deleted article. Non notable football season. Insufficient references to satisfy GNG. Whiteguru ( talk) 02:11, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Another bilateral article mostly based on the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. No embassies, state visits. The agreements are relatively minor. LibStar ( talk) 01:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:07, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:02, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
No significant coverage and fails WP:CORP. It also can't be merged anywhere per the Wikipedia policy WP:V. SL93 ( talk) 01:33, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
The article notes: "慶眾汽車過去以生產福斯(VW)T4商用車聞名,結束與福斯的合作關係後,2000年時曾取得現代汽車代理權,但2002年代理權轉由三陽接手,慶眾就轉型為三陽代工廠。"
From Google Translate: "Chin Chun Motor used to be famous for producing Volkswagen (VW) T4 commercial vehicles. After ending the partnership with Volkswagen, it obtained the agency rights of Hyundai Motor in 2000, but in 2002, the agency rights were transferred to Sanyang, and Chin Chun Motor transformed itself into the Sanyang foundry."
The article notes: "慶眾汽車轉型為同集團的三陽工業「專屬代工廠」後,為三陽代工、經銷現代商(Hyundai)用車產品,以及代工生產國防部軍用卡車。由於現代與起亞產品系出同門,設計、零件共用比率極高,成為慶眾汽車爭取起亞代工的優勢,慶眾可針對現代與起亞車款,同步開發零件,降低生產成本。但市場傳出慶眾汽車取得三陽轉過來的軍卡組裝訂單後,對爭取起亞代工案態度趨於被動;但業界質疑,現代集團是否願意讓慶豐集團統包現代與起亞在台所有業務。"
From Google Translate: "After Chin Chun Motor was transformed into the "exclusive foundry" of Sanyang Industry, which is the same group, it is the OEM for Sanyang, the distribution of Hyundai's vehicle products, and the OEM production of military trucks for the Ministry of Defense. As the products of Hyundai and Kia are from the same family, the ratio of design and parts sharing is very high, which has become the advantage of Chin Chun Motor in striving for Kia's OEM. Chin Chun Motor can simultaneously develop parts for Hyundai and Kia models to reduce production costs. However, it was reported in the market that after Chin Chun Motor obtained the military card assembly order transferred from Sanyang, its attitude towards winning the Kia OEM case tended to be passive; however, the industry questioned whether Hyundai Group is willing to let Chin Chun Motor take all the ownership of Hyundai and Kia in Taiwan. business."
The article notes: "慶眾汽車看準國內旅遊巴士需求市場,透過同屬慶豐集團的三陽工業牽線,取得中國大陸第一大巴士製造廠金龍聯合汽車公司(大金龍)技術授權,擬在台組裝金龍巴士銷售。但慶眾汽車主管昨(18)日不願證實。不過,消息人士透露,此計畫若順利推展,慶眾最快能在一至二年內開始生產金龍巴士,將成為第一輛在台生產「大陸車」。"
From Google Translate: "Looking at the domestic tourist bus demand market, Chin Chun Motor has obtained the technical authorization of the largest bus manufacturer in mainland China, King Long United Automobile Company (King Long), through the help of Sanyang Motor, which is also under the Qingfeng Group, and plans to assemble King Long buses in Taiwan for sale. However, the head of Qingzhong Automobile was unwilling to confirm yesterday (18). However, according to sources, if the plan goes well, Qingzhong will be able to start producing King Long buses within one to two years at the earliest, and will become the first "Continental car" produced in Taiwan."
The article notes: "與三陽工業(2206)同屬慶豐集團的慶眾汽車,早年是與福斯汽車合資成立,並導入T4商用車生產迄今,後因故福斯撤資,慶眾仍保留在台組裝銷售T4權力直至2010年。"
From Google Translate: "Chin Chun Motor, which belongs to the Chinfon Group together with Sanyang Industry (2206), was established as a joint venture with Volkswagen in the early years, and has introduced T4 commercial vehicles for production so far. The public still retains the right to assemble and sell T4 in Taiwan until 2010."
The article notes: "慶豐集團整合旗下汽車事業,本月起將慶眾汽車銷售、服務部門,併入三陽工業子公司南陽實業,慶眾汽車轉型為純汽車代工廠。 ... 慶眾集團積極抓住柴油車成為市場熱潮的商機,包括慶眾積極協調韓國原廠,希望能提供更具競爭力、能符合四期法規的新商用車種,明年在台生產、上市;"
From Google Translate: "Chinfon Global Corporation has integrated its automobile business. Starting from this month, Chin Chun Motor's sales and service departments will be merged into Nanyang Industrial, a subsidiary of Sanyang Industrial. Chin Chun Motor will be transformed into a pure automobile foundry. . . . Chinfon Global Corporation actively seizes the business opportunity of diesel vehicles becoming a boom in the market, including Chin Chun Motor actively coordinating with Korean original factories, hoping to provide more competitive new commercial vehicles that can comply with Phase IV regulations, which will be produced and launched in Taiwan next year;"
This articles provides a paragraph of coverage about the subject. The article notes: "In 1991, Volkswagen had partnered with Chinfon Trading Group and jointly invested NT$4.8 billion (US$148.37 million) in the establishment of Chin Chun Motor Co. Ltd. to produce the Volkswagen Transporter T4 front-engined van on the island. However, with the two firms constantly at loggerheads over business operations, the relationship eventually ended on bad terms, with the German automaker deciding to pull out of Taiwan in the wake of the Asian financial crisis in 1997."
The article notes: "是 1991 年 7 月 10 日,隶属台湾三阳汽车工业公司董事长个人事业的庆众汽车投资公司与德国福斯 V.W.公司签约,在台湾生产 V.W.商用车,成立台湾第 11 家汽车制造厂,庆众汽车公司投资比例占 66.6 % ,德国福斯 V.W.公司占 33.4 %。"
From Google Translate: "On July 10, 1991, Chin Chun Motor, which is affiliated to the personal business of the chairman of Taiwan Sanyang Automobile Industry Co., Ltd., signed a contract with the German V.W. company to produce V.W. commercial vehicles in Taiwan, and established the 11th automobile manufacturing plant in Taiwan. The investment proportion of Chin Chun Motor accounted for 66.6%, and the German V.W. Company accounted for 33.4%."
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:05, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was Draftify.
BD2412
T 07:13, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Merge into the main tour article. Q T C 23:50, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Pain of Salvation. Liz Read! Talk! 23:00, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG, I was unable to find coverage online or on Proquest beyond the inadequate sources currently cited. Redirect to Pain of Salvation, their most notable associated act, seems appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 17:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:46, 26 April 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:59, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
The subject does not appear to meet WP:NCORP. The commarts.com seems to be the only in-depth source, and it's likely native advertisement, since the site sells "feature articles" like this one [1]. MarioGom ( talk) 20:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:45, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:48, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
No evidence that this is notable. No RSs provided and none found in WP:BEFORE. Content could easily be accommodated in Inikiri Umuezeoka if needed and which itself is poorly sourced Velella Velella Talk 22:23, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:57, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 22:37, 26 April 2022 (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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
The individual fails WP:NBASIC and WP:GNG; there are not multiple independent reliable sources that cover him significantly. The references currently in the article include a bio blurb from his employer (cited twice), a writing of his in the London Review of Books, an article that does not so much as mention his name, an advertisement for an essay collection he put together, and a YouTube video from "Bloggingheads.tv". No such references contribute towards WP:GNG, as they fail WP:INDEPENDENT, WP:RS, and/or fail to provide significant coverage of the individual. An online search for significant coverage of this individual yielded this NY Times piece on a play he participated in (though it really doesn't provide any significant coverage of him other than quoting him and indicating that he took a sip of a drink), and a handful of pieces that briefly quote him. He's written in a lot of places, but there isn't really enough coverage of him to meet WP:NBASIC and/or WP:GNG, so the article should be deleted as non-notable. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 21:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- ferret ( talk) 21:29, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
This article has been previously been deleted for lacking significant in-depth coverage from multiple reliable sources (i.e. failing WP:GNG). Since this is still the case, this article should be deleted. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 21:24, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Contested draftification, or a unilateral move after draftification by another editor who misunderstands the notability criteria. My instinct would be to draftily again, but that would be move warring. WP:IAR does not apply here, so we are at AfD. Fails WP:NACTOR/ WP:NMUSICIAN. References, while in ostensibly reliable sources, are pure churnalism. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:04, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. – Joe ( talk) 12:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Doesn't appear to be notable, also was deleted previously. AmirŞah 19:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
There is no such world day. It seem a local event, not enough notability to include in wikipedia. No WP:SIGCOV. আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk) 18:15, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. This garden either doesn't exist or is a private garden. I read through the very interesting comments from editors trying to track down the facts about this place but I don't see anyone advocating keeping this article. Great detective work though. Liz Read! Talk! 22:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Article is a stub covering an apparently non-existent or at least non-public and non-notable botanical garden. The address given appears to be a small, private residence with a 175m² garden behind it. The one source provided in the article is an entry in a database of botanic gardens which itself contains conflicting information regarding the location of the garden. See 2017 discussion on article's talkpage for more info and views: Talk:Jardin_botanique_alpin_"Daniella". Eric talk 17:13, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
More info: Google Maps link of address given in the cited BGCI entry; should open in satellite view centered on property. Note that the coordinates given in the article (and on the BGCI entry) point to a site approximately 2.5 km to the east, also a residential street. Eric talk 17:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
jardins botaniques alpins en France
, and got this
this map mash-up as the top result. With one exception, all the alpine botanical gardens shown are in the southeast, near the borders of Switzerland and Italy, where—surprise!—you find the foothills of the Alps, from which
alpine gardens take their name, and are likely to thrive. (The one exception is the
Jardin botanique de Lyon.) No map pins in Limoges, or nearby.So then I tried again, showing the top 100 web search results for
jardins botaniques a Limoges
, and you get a few dozen "Jardin de l'Évêché" results, and the "Daniella" garden shows up twice: once on the BGCI site, and once at
this page, which is a mirror of the fr-wiki article. The odds that an actual botanical garden exists in a major French city, and appears on no website in the world, other than a questionable
WP:SPS database, and a Wikipedia mirror, is vanishingly small. Admittedly, this is not a proof, as a single, reliable source would be enough to take apart this argument. But, we don't have a single reliable source.
Mathglot (
talk) 03:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
I've also checked Oldhedge's contributions which were already modified by someone else, and tried to revert them, too. With very few exceptions (like this one), all of them seem fake references and links.
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:47, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. Found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing else suitable enough was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 16:07, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn with no remaining delete proposals. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 ( talk) 02:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. Found only one review (needs two in order to be eligible) on Rotten Tomatoes. Nothing else suitable enough was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 16:04, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn by nom. No opinions to delete, hence speedy keep (non-admin closure) 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:30, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing else that's suitable enough was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator ( talk) 16:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
non notable production company pushed into mainspace repeatedly by socks PRAXIDICAE💕 15:38, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 03:01, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
The article lacks any reliable sources. I was unable to find any other sources that said anything that is for sure about this person. There was an attorney named Bailey Walsh, who worked for the federal government, but I was not able to find much about that person, and nothing that for sure indicates it was the same person. A Bailey Walsh was an attorney for 2 Chicago companies in 1953, he is mentioned in an over 1000 page federal document from that year. The 1936 mention in a very detailed report (thus a primary document) is probably this Bailey Walsh, and from it we learn that at some point prior to 1936 he was assistant US attorney for the western District of Tennessee. Being a US attorney for a specific district is at least a strong indication of notability, being an assistant is not, so the non-secondary sources I find on what is probably this person indicate his postions are not notability giving, and I cannot find any reliable secondary sources that mention him at all. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 15:09, 26 April 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 12:40, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Although the subject participated in a major music competition, she was fourth and never featured hence does not meet WP: NMUSICIAN, also I can't find sources to prove notability. Megan B.... It’s all coming to me till the end of time 13:38, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was draftify. ✗ plicit 12:42, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Does not meet the relevant notability guideline ( WP:ACADEMIC). Ari T. Benchaim ( talk) 14:10, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Article fails notability requirements for inclusion ( WP:N). It appears to be promotional advertisement and puffery. A WP:BEFORE Google search fails to turn up multiple independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage ( WP:RS). The article references primary sources for some claims but most are unsourced so are not verifiable ( WP:V). I would not be opposed to a redirect should a proper one be offered. ARose Wolf 14:09, 26 April 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 14:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
No notable wrestler. Sources are reports of events, WP:ROUTINE, which don't established notability for the subject. No in-deep coverage of the wrestler. HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 13:30, 26 April 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 14:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
No notable wrestler. Sources are reports of events, WP:ROUTINE, which don't established notability for the subject. No in-deep coverage of the wrestler. HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 13:30, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:24, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable animated Web series. PepperBeast (talk) 11:50, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:26, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Delete. Only 3 sources, not notable, does not indicate where to find the series. ArdynOfTheAncients — Preceding undated comment added 17:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 13:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was transfer to Commons and delete. Consensus is clear that Wikipedia is not served by a repository of all flags of all municipalities in a region.
BD2412
T 19:20, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
WP:NOTGALLERY. Fram ( talk) 13:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Also nominated are the separate pages of flags:
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:16, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Unable to find sufficient sources independent of the subject of this WP:BLP to establish WP:GNG, does not appear to meet the criteria for WP:NAUTHOR J04n( talk page) 12:52, 26 April 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 12:37, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Although this company has produced a few notable films, it does not appear to have received the significant coverage in independent reliable sources needed to meet WP:NCORP. My WP:BEFORE search in English and Kannada found only single-sentence passing mentions, for instance sources that say "The series will be produced by T R Chandrashekar and Crystal Park Cinemas" and nothing more. None of the available sources qualify as significant coverage, in my view. ( NPP action) Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:17, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:14, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 12:35, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:37, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Hoax? The two sources are not correct (ISBN links to other books, title of first one as given don't exist). I can't find references which use "war theatre" with this meaning (as far as meaning can be found in this article). If it exists and is notable, it will need a thorough rewriting. Fram ( talk) 12:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Major Lazer. – Joe ( talk) 13:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG also concerns about sock puppetry and undisclosed paid editing. Theroadislong ( talk) 19:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 06:13, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 12:27, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. sources have emerged rendering much of the nom moot. Star Mississippi 02:08, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
This was created by the subject's great grandson, and reads like something someone would write on a family member, not like an encyclopedia article. There has been no sourcing for 10 years, the one source I added lacks significant coverage. The creator claims there are entries in the New York Times but my search for such sources produced nothing at all. My searches in multiple different places turned up no significant coverage. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 20:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 06:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 12:27, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Although what becomes clear is that this needs serious cleanup if it is to be kept. Sandstein 11:10, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
No independent, reliable, secondary sourcing for the "commune as a model of government"; none in the last decade and none forthcoming. An article for revolutionary government would be scoped too wide for our purposes. While Commune (Marx) could link to his The Civil War in France (where he discusses the Paris Commune), it would not make sense to use this "model of government" article title for that purpose. No other suitable redirect or merge targets. czar 01:34, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 05:48, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 12:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🙃 ( ICE-T • ICE CUBE) 12:45, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I don't think the album itself meets notability criteria from WP:NALBUM. Tow ( talk) 15:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 06:15, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 🇺🇦
FiddleTimtrent
FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:11, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Reiji Yamada. Star Mississippi 02:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Unreferenced article. No evidence of notability in over ten years since its creation. - Xexerss ( talk) 06:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Modussiccandi (
talk) 09:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Hiroya Oku. further input is unlikely. Valid ATD Star Mississippi 02:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Some months ago I tried to fix the article, but I couldn't find enough reliable secondary sources. I found out that it was licensed in other countries, like in Italy, but I didn't find anything useful and reliable in that language either. - Xexerss ( talk) 06:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Modussiccandi (
talk) 09:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics. Star Mississippi 01:59, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod and notability tag removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE - all we know about him is his name, his nationality, and that he played for FC 1880 Frankfurt. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 11:56, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Germany. Sandstein 11:13, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 11:55, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Rosters per WP:ATD. – Joe ( talk) 13:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod and notability tag removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE - all we know about him is his name, his nationality, and that he played for FC 1880 Frankfurt. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 11:37, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics. Star Mississippi 01:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 10:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Pam D 16:17, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Unsourced since its creation by an editor who made no other edits, in 2011. Does not appear on maps that I can find, although there is a ski run called "Tuba Zapatilla" in Candanchú. Either non-notable or possibly a hoax. It was edited ( unconstructively) in 2020 by an IP I've just reported for vandalism, which may be a coincidence (but it was led me to look at this stub). Pam D 10:01, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. consensus is the quantity of references does not meet qualtity required Star Mississippi 01:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP - little to no third party coverage. As far I can tell the company is only mentioned in refs #5 and #7 which are not independent of the subject. KH-1 ( talk) 09:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Discussion was relisted twice, with no discussion since. (non-admin closure) — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Non notable organization, cross wiki spam by lock evading socks. No meaningful coverage. CUPIDICAE💕 14:20, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 17:16, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Spinning
Spark 09:39, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics. Star Mississippi 01:57, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 09:34, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics. or the #Rosters section. That's within editorial discretion. Star Mississippi 01:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5,
WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of
WP:NOTDATABASE. No significant coverage in our article or the German article, and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 09:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Rosters. however, if someone thinks Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics is preferable, that's also fine. Star Mississippi 01:55, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Prod removed without explanation or addition of sources. Prod justification was Fails
WP:GNG,
WP:SPORTCRIT #5, and
WP:NOLYMPICS. No significant coverage in our article or the German article (there is one dead link there, the archived version can be found
here but it only mentions him in a list of players), and no coverage identifiable in a search.
BilledMammal (
talk) 09:31, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:54, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
The squads in this article are completely unsourced, and we don't really need a list of squads for an annual competition like the Champions League. If people want to know who was contracted to each club that season, they can go to (for example) 2020–21 FC Bayern Munich season. – Pee Jay 07:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The squads in this article are completely unsourced- I'm sure that's a fixable point and shouldn't be part of a deletion rationale.
If people want to know who was contracted to each club that season, they can go to (for example) 2020–21 FC Bayern Munich seasonI'm not sure what the rules are in Europe, but in the A-League Men in Australia, when clubs send squads to the AFC Champions League, there are limitations on squad size and number of foreign players allowed, leading to clubs announcing the ACL squad specifically (for example from this year: Melbourne City, Sydney FC), meaning that the club's season page won't neccesarily reflect the ACL status. Also there have been cases of players being signed only for the ACL campaign and weren't able to participate in the domestic league. Also, not neccesarily every club has a season page, no? -- SuperJew ( talk) 09:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:53, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I've declined a WP:A7 request on this as it does contain credible claims of significance, but this is clearly not appropriate for a biography of a living person. What sources there are are to unreliable sources, and there doesn't appear to be sufficient coverage in reliable sources to construct a viable article. ‑ Iridescent 06:53, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Non notable studio. Looks like an advert. Lacks significant coverage which are independent of the subject. Fails WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. DMySon ( talk) 05:30, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Dragon Ball characters#Grandpa Gohan. and protect the original page. Liz Read! Talk! 03:35, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
To start, this is a straightforward case of a topic about a fictional character which fail to meet the threshold of the requirements of WP:GNG. I have done a considerable amount of research into this topic area and I can confidently say that this character lacks significant coverage from multiple reliable and independent secondary sources. The single CBR article is decent, but we need a lot more then that to justify a standalone page for the character.
There is currently an entry for the character at List of Dragon Ball characters, and normally I'd advocate for a merge proposal, or I'd boldly redirect this myself. However, versions of this topic have been constantly recreated under the name of "Grandpa Son Gohan" by a specific editor since April 2021. Each and every time, it has been reverted by other editors. For further context, please refer to the page history of that title. The current version of this article is recreated by an IP editor, but the editor who seemed to be obsessed with recreating the contents of Grandpa Son Gohan got involved with editing the article's contents right away. It does make me wonder whether there is collusion or socking involved. Anyway, in light of the constant recreation of this topic by editors whose competence may be called into question, I think an AfD would be appropriate. I propose that the contents of this page be deleted, and both Grandpa Gohan or Grandpa Son Gohan be salted indefinitely to prevent further frivolous disruption. Haleth ( talk) 03:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete and redirect.
BD2412
T 07:11, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable political party. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Curbon7 ( talk) 03:32, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 21:34, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Deproded article. Here's my PROD reason which is still valid for AfD
Seems to be a non-notable local saint. WP:BEFORE found no hits on Google Books, Scholar or News Archives. Found only two sources. ( https://www.spot.ph/newsfeatures/the-latest-news-features/71434/10-filipinos-with-extraordinary-gifts-a1806-20170922-lfrm3) which seems to be a copy of this article and ( https://www.pep.ph/news/kuwentong-kakaiba/157526/filomena-almarines-saint-binan-a4437-20210329-lfrm) which literally states that the Catholic Church ignores her claims for sainthood. Lenticel ( talk) 00:38, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DMySon (
talk) 05:47, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:32, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Ian Fraser (naturalist). Liz Read! Talk! 03:09, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
fails WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR. Could not find significant coverage. LibStar ( talk) 03:58, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:32, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 03:06, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
This film appears to fail the general notability guideline and the specific notability guideline for films. I've checked both the Danish and Norwegian articles and they do not have citations which could be pulled into the English Wikipedia to satisfy notability requirements. I was hoping that the director might have an article ... but no, so redirection there is not an option. Thanks for considering this - and it would be great if someone came up with sufficient sources to retain this article. Regards --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 01:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC) User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 01:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 01:16, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Couldn't find any sources whatsoever. It's mentioned in passing in articles about and interviews with A7X, but those are just name-drops. Could find no evidence of the Kerrang review either Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 01:01, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to France at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Medalists. ✗ plicit 01:23, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, WP:SPORTCRIT #5, and WP:NOLYMPICS.
The French Wikipedia includes an additional reference,
km17, but the link is dead and it is not archived, so it is unknown whether it is independent, reliable, or significant. Other sources could not be found.
Redirect may not be suitable, as there is no clear target; Racing 92, Tug of war at the 1900 Summer Olympics, and Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics are all options. BilledMammal ( talk) 00:59, 26 April 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 01:18, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
As a writer they are known for their book 100 Sporting Events You Must See Live. Doesn't appear to be notable. References have mentions, but not significant coverage. Jsfodness ( talk) 00:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Football at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Medalists. ✗ plicit 01:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, WP:SPORTCRIT #5, and WP:NOLYMPICS.
The French Wikipedia has three additional sources, but two are databases and the third only mentions him in a list of players. Other sources could not be found. BilledMammal ( talk) 00:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 01:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
It doesn't have significant coverege on reliable and independent sources. Most of the content of the article is non-encyclopedic and probably added to create an illusion to make it look notable. Being "worth a visit" or "recommended" are not notable information at all. It would be enough to mention that on Geoffrey Kleinman and Internet Brands articles. Nanahuatl ( talk) 00:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Football at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Medalists. ✗ plicit 01:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, WP:SPORTCRIT #5, WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE. All we know about him is his name, his nationality, and that he competed in the 1900 Olympics. BilledMammal ( talk) 00:17, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was merge to Shingletown, California. consensus is clear that there is sourcing, although it's currently beyond the access of many participants. There does not appear to be consensus that we need a standalone page, and a merger is a viable ATD, also solving the lack of mention in Shingletown article Star Mississippi 01:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
De-prodded by RecycledPixels with the rationale "meets notability". Airport in town of 2,000 people closed in 2002, only source does not mention it. Nor is it mentioned at Shingletown, California. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NAIRPORT which states "Significant, independent and reliable sources specifically about the airport must exist". AusLondonder ( talk) 19:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Some sources have been provided, which seems to contradict the arguments for deletion that there is "no evidence". However, whether this is sufficient to warrant a stand-alone page or be merged into the article about its location (one pertinent link would be
WP:NOPAGE), remains open to debate, and there is no clear consensus for that amongst the discussion's participants.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
RandomCanadian (
talk /
contribs) 00:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate presence or citation in an article.. The question whether local sources are enough for notability or not is not one that has a settled answer in policy: in this case, however, and without pronouncing myself on the issue, even if the sources are not enough to establish notability for a stand-alone article, that would not exclude it being mentioned on the article about the locality where this airport was (hence, de facto, a merge). Hence something which does pretty much warrant further discussion. Cheers, RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 02:24, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Football at the 1900 Summer Olympics#Medalists. ✗ plicit 01:21, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, WP:SPORTCRIT #5, WP:NOLYMPICS, and violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE. All we know about him is his name, his nationality, his date and place of birth, and that he competed in the 1900 Olympics. BilledMammal ( talk) 00:11, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
"Q2: If a sports figure meets the criteria specified in a sports-specific notability guideline, does this mean they do not have to meet the general notability guideline?
A2: No, the article must still eventually provide sources indicating that the subject meets the general notability guideline. Although the criteria for a given sport should be chosen to be a very reliable predictor of the availability of appropriate secondary coverage from reliable sources, there can be exceptions. For contemporary persons, given a reasonable amount of time to locate appropriate sources, the general notability guideline should be met in order for an article to meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. (For subjects in the past where it is more difficult to locate sources, it may be necessary to evaluate the subject's likely notability based on other persons of the same time period with similar characteristics.)"It simply isn't likely at all that sources will ever be found to support a GNG pass for a Belgian university football player born in 1879 about whom literally nothing is known. At the very least my WP:BEFORE failed to uncover anything. I frankly don't blame Lugnuts for not being aware that the NSport standard has yet again changed so that GNG must eventually be met, however I disagree that FR wiki has any useful additional sources - the only thing it has additional is an non-RS family tree of the Spanoghe family and database entries. FOARP ( talk) 08:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)