The result was redirect to Poarch Band of Creek Indians. Liz Read! Talk! 06:53, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
A search of sources fails to find WP:SIGCOV beyond re-hashes of the same press releases about future expansion. IMO, fails WP:GNG, could be merged to Poarch Band of Creek Indians if need be but don't see the benefit since the information is largely unsourced and has not attracted coverage. >> Lil-unique1 ( talk) — 22:39, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, what target would you see for a possible redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:38, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still looking for a redirect target or were you considering
Poarch Band of Creek Indians as well,
MrsSnoozyTurtle?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. There was disagreement as to whether notability was met, and most users appeared to consider that it had. On balance, I believe there is a consensus for keep over any other outcome. If anyone disagrees with my close, please ping me on my talk page and I will undo the close and leave for an administrator. (non-admin closure) MaxnaCarta ( talk) 02:54, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 18:02, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
The only female participant, Lice Waqailiti from Fiji, has also hailed the positive impact of the course.). Then there's the sources listed by Das osmnezz: Fiji Sun is too short (Besides quotes, all content is
Lice Waqaliti says the onus is on their squad members to prove their worth to be considered for the National Women’s football side ... The top Lautoka women’s team goal keeper and head coach was part of the 2007 Pacific Games National Women’s side which won a bronze medal ... Waqaliti who is originally from Vanua Levu added that discipline would be a vital factor.(and even if it was SIGCOV, all articles from the Sun only count as one source, so we're still at 1/2 for GNG)); Fiji Times only has one sentence that is not quotes on Waqailiti (
Goalkeeper development officer Lice Waqaliti says the program was for both girls and boys.); the second Fiji Times article does not have enough on her to qualify (all non-quote content is
FORMER Fiji women’s football rep Lice Waqaliti is training the Fiji team goalkeepers for the 2017 Pacific Mini Games which starts in Vanuatu next week ... Waqaliti has high hopes from the goalkeepers.); FBC News also appears too short to be SIGCOV (less than five sentences on her that are not quotes); and then the final source listed is another from FBC News, which says its source is the OFC, so not independent. I'm just not seeing enough for a GNG pass. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 22:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Pseudoscience. Editors are welcome to improve an article that is part of an AFD discussion but do not move or change the status of an article while a discussion is ongoing. Liz Read! Talk! 07:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
I believe this article should be deleted as it is based on a single cited author's idea of "parascience". Additionally, the examples on this page provide little distinction over what is pseudoscience and "parascience", using examples such as Ufology next to Philosophy. I think the dilemmas of using scientific theory within other well established and regarded disciplines outside the natural sciences, such as social science, should be left as discussions on their methodology pages. Looking at Google Scholar, "parascience" as a term returns back a poor collection of sources, when searched on other databases such as Scopus it only returns 15 published articles where "parascience" is used as a pseudonym for pseudoscience, not a distinct conceptualisation as this page is presenting it.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:47, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
No evidence of notability. An Internet search yields no significant coverage that would meet the WP:GNG requirements. JTtheOG ( talk) 22:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:32, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
I do not believe this person is notable by our standards; the sourcing certainly gives no indication of that. Drmies ( talk) 21:16, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:32, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 21:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:33, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable company. Does not pass WP:GNG. DelUsion23 (talk) 20:59, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:33, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
This footballer seems to have played, at maximum, in the Scottish fourth tier. Consequently, the only nontrivial coverage (not passing mentions or statistics) I'm finding is on the website of Berwick Rangers, as linked in the article – nothing else coming up in a search. Not sure if this is sufficient to satisfy WP:GNG. Complex/ Rational 20:44, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 20:47, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
The subject of this biographical page does not appear to satisfy criteria for sufficient significance to be included in Wikipedia. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib ( talk) 20:22, 14 August 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! 21:44, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG according to my searches in Google News, ProQuest and DDG. The best source that I can find is ESPN but this only mentions him once in passing meaning that the article potentially falls short of WP:SPORTBASIC as well. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:32, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Stats stub that looks to fail WP:GNG per my searches in Google News, DDG and ProQuest. The best that I can find is a passing mention in Panorama Sport which is not even close to significant coverage. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 17:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:43, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
other than some super puff pieces from huffpo, I don't see any actual in depth coverage in reliable sources of this Youtuber. There is nothing substantial to be found, in fact, the only coverage of him relates to a term he supposedly coined but that itself doesn't seem notable and neither does he. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:58, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Athletics at the 1972 Summer Olympics – Men's 400 metres#Heat 3. Liz Read! Talk! 21:42, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Barebones stub which merely recites that Faustin was a Haitian sprinter who competed in the 1972 Olympics. Faustin was not remotely competitive in his event, finishing with the slowest time among all competitors in the 400 metres (almost 8 seconds slower than the winning times) and failing to qualify for the quarterfinals let alone the semifinals or finals. Fails all applicable criteria: WP:SPORTBASIC (mandating at least one source with WP:SIGCOV, excluding database sources), WP:GNG (lack of SIGCOV in multiple, reliable, independent sources), and WP:NOLYMPICS (not a medalist). Cbl62 ( talk) 16:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Plane (esotericism). Liz Read! Talk! 21:41, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
This page is a tiny stub and has been since creation in 2008. There are no sources whatsoever. The subject matter appears to relate to Theosophy and anything on the matter of a divine plane can and should be fully contained within that article. There is nothing in this article that could be merged, so merge is inappropriate. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 16:55, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. Speedy deleted by Jimfbleak, CSD G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 11:02, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
I can't find any significant coverage in WP:RS under 'Kay Ken' or 'Kwesi Kendrick'. Does not appear to pass WP:GNG or WP:NMUSICIAN. All sources currently used are user-generated so cannot support a notability claim. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:04, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus for keep appears unanimous, with only a few hours left and no active discussions occurring I see fit to close this per SNOW - if anyone disagrees with me close ping me and I will undo and leave for an administrator. (non-admin closure) MaxnaCarta ( talk) 02:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Only source is the publisher himself. This [3] may be relevant either here or at Destroyer Magazine Doug Weller talk 15:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable film, lacking significant coverage by independent reliable sources per WP:NF BOVINEBOY 2008 15:46, 14 August 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! 21:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 15:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 14:59, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Also nominating:
The result was delete all except Mazraeh-ye Jonubi Rural District and Mazraeh-ye Shomali Rural District. Liz Read! Talk! 06:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails
WP:GEOLAND#1,
WP:CORP, and
WP:GNG. Name means literally "Tobacco research farm" according to machine translation. As such this is a business or other such
WP:ORG, however nothing even close to a notability pass for a business or other organisation is present.
GEOnet Names Server is an unreliable source. The Iranian census counts people according to a local reference point, in this case a farm/research centre, meaning that this is not a legally-recognised populated place as such. The co-ordinates provided in the article (the source of which is not known)
point to a random field on the outskirts of Urmia.
Together with this article I am also nominating the following articles, all of which are Iranian "village" articles apparently created by Carlossuarez46, all of which include the words Mazraeh-ye, which apparently means "the farm of". These all appear to be potentially farms, often ones belonging to someone identified by name or to a numbered location, and as such are unlikely to be real villages. In some cases Carlossuarez46 appears to have realised that this is what they actually were and then redirected them to names that they made up by removing the "Mazraeh-ye" part of the name, but this hardly made things better. In a lot of cases, the articles have co-ordinates added to them apparently based on GEOnet Names Server data or GeoNames data, both of which are unreliable.
WP:BEFORE sampling even of the more promising of these articles (e.g.,
Dashtok-e Olya, Yazd) failed to turn up any significant coverage needed for a
WP:GNG pass or evidence of legal recognition such as is needed for a
WP:GEOLAND#1 pass.
Bundling is justified per
WP:BUNDLE as these are spam/hoax articles created by the same author according to the same template.
Now that I've got AWB approval I plan to template all the articles in the list, but it may take me a day or two to do it so please have patience.
PS- you might think that 130 articles is a lot, but please remember that Carlossuarez46 was creating these articles at a rate of up to 100 or more per day so in reality this is still only dealing with their articles at a fraction of the rate they were created at. Deletion has to keep pace with mass-creation, otherwise we are allowing mass-creators to establish a fait accompli. Similarly WP:BEFORE as to be proportionate to the original work that was done to confirm the notability of the article that was created, which in this case was zero, otherwise again we are simply permitting a fait-accompli. FOARP ( talk) 14:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 15:00, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Local amateur football league that appears to exist way below the defined part of the English football league system as far as I can tell. This is in no way different to Furness Premier Football League, Mid-Somerset Football League and Guildford and Woking Alliance League all of which were deleted for failing WP:GNG and not meeting the rule of thumb outlined at WP:FOOTYN, in fact it's 6 tiers lower than where it would need to be to be presumed notable.
Google News contains a few hits all of which are single passing mentions of the league. ProQuest has a few results roundups and a few trivial mentions in local papers. I couldn't find anything useful on BNA. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:21, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Maynooth University#Publications. While there is no need to merge, nor consensus for this to remain as an article, there's no reason not to redirect it to where it's mentioned in case a reader is looking for information. Star Mississippi 01:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
As part of cleaning up efforts to bring the article in line with our writing guide (prior version here), I've looked into this journal more closely and... I just can't find any indication of notability. It's not indexed in any selective databases, and there's no substantial coverage that I can find per WP:GNG.
I could be convinced of merging to Maynooth University, but it's already mentioned Maynooth University#Publications and that might be sufficient. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 16:48, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 09:43, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 14:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 14:11, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Local amateur football league that appears to exist outside of the English football league system as far as I can tell. This is in no way different to Furness Premier Football League, Mid-Somerset Football League and Guildford and Woking Alliance League all of which were deleted for failing WP:GNG and not meeting the rule of thumb outlined at WP:FOOTYN.
I've tried multiple searches under variations of the name and found this Google News search to be the best but its two trivial mentions. Likewise in ProQuest. BNA also only contains trivial local coverage. A results roundup in a small fraction of a column on one page of the Staines & Ashford News is hardly worthy of a Wikipedia article. I mean the local school fête and Easter egg hunt would take up a similar amount of space in such a paper and we'd never dream of writing an article about those! Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was merge to Zdravko Ponoš. Star Mississippi 01:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Serbia Centre is not notable as a movement at the moment, I'd say it fails WP:GNG considering little amount of information about the movement currently exists. Reliable sources regarding the movement exist, although they only cover two announcements that Zdravko Ponoš made regarding the movement (this can be seen at his own page). Considering that it was created less than a month ago, I think that it is too early for this movement to get its own page. It can be re-created when it gets more media coverage, and national attention, and when it certainly gets more notable around the public. Vacant0 ( talk) 09:47, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 13:32, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
North America
1000 14:07, 14 August 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 13:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
No reliable sources with more than passing coverage found. Most sources are either deprecated (Sputnik), or very questionable (like Al Manar, owned by the Hezbollah, or Pars Today, a state-owned Iranian website). Some WP:SPS as well, but nothing reliable. BilletsMauves €500 12:57, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:LISTN and WP:NOT. Seems obvious why we don't maintain WP:FANCRUFT lists such as this. Anyway, no independent sources outside wide ranging databases discuss this non-defining intersection of cricketer and league. wjemather please leave a message... 10:49, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Solely notable for appearing in Forbes Africa (not the real Forbes or a subsidiary) 30 Under 30. No significant coverage save for interviews. Reading Beans ( talk) 09:10, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 10:39, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:19, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable singer with lack of coverage in WP:Independent sources. Of two sources cited, one is a link to her IMDB. A Google search shows that the sources that discuss her are mostly paid ones. Fails both WP:GNG and WP:SINGER.-- Umakant Bhalerao ( talk) 09:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:21, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Practically unknown communist organization, absent from the sources. It ran in the Italian general elections in 2001 in Tuscany, with poor results. It doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG. Scia Della Cometa ( talk) 09:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus on where to merge this content. Suggest continuing the discussion at the Talk page as there's no case made for deleting, nor for a standalone. Star Mississippi 01:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable. Article lacks any refs, and my BEFORE search lacks any RS meeting GNG. Apparently, it's so obscure, that no one rated it on BGG, where it also lacks refs. As there're no refs, IMO this should be deleted. Possible PROD candidate, but BOZ, Piotrus, or Guinness323 frequently find older magazines covering niche, obscure games, so I'm taking to AfD instead. Many thanks! VickKiang ( talk) 01:38, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Merge to Guidon Games until old paper-only sources can be found. There are undoubtedly hobby press reviews from 1972, but I have not been able to uncover any of them on line. Guinness323 ( talk) 05:40, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
mentioned 3 timesisn't SIGCOV- it needs to have at least one quite lengthy paragraph. As it only is "mentioned", IMO the coverage of the first one is trivial. Besides, how long is the
Panzerfaust #52article (is it a capsule review)? I'm also unconvinced that this should be kept based on that
[all] of the other wargames that Gygax worked on as part of the Wargaming with Miniatures Series have articles, saying others have articles isn't a great keep rationale IMO. Even if these are significant, could you please add the refs and transclude in talk page to show that they're long enough and are RS? VickKiang ( talk) 09:17, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I see support for "Delete" as well as "Merge" but more than one merge target mentioned.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:23, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Comr Melody Idoghor
(talk) 08:42, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was merge to The Order of the Stick. I see a consensus that this article should not be left as is. In terms of the outcome, merges have both a numerical and a policy-based advantage. -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 17:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
It does not appear that there is enough independent coverage of the characters themselves to provide notability for a separate article on the characters. The main article on the comic can provide coverage of the key characters. HenryCrun15 ( talk) 23:11, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
concentrates on the characters. It contains a brief list of them in one paragraph, and then another paragraph with one to two sentences of coverage each on the main hero and the main villain. The fist "lesser source" does not appear to be a reliable source, and the second one seems to be little more than a bunch of passing mentions. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:39, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Comr Melody Idoghor
(talk) 08:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Star Mississippi 01:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, WP:NGYMNASTICS and WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 20:13, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Keep the article doesn’t fail WP:NGYMNASTICS as Murayama meets the criteria Won an individual gold medal, in the junior division, at an elite international competition, particularly 3 individual medals at the 2017 Junior Asian Championships. WP:GNG is also met as the FIG link describes the gymnast’s information directly & in details, & FIG is a reliable source & independent of the gymnast himself. NguyenDuyAnh1995 ( talk) 18:21, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:47, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:52, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Comr Melody Idoghor
(talk) 08:23, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Most of the sources are adult industry publicity, and the few that aren't give trivial coverage 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 ( talk) 19:34, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:31, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Comr Melody Idoghor
(talk) 08:23, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Aside from the fact that a substantial majority of discussion participants !voted to keep (leaving no possible interpretation of the outcome as a consensus to delete), there is certainly no question or assertion that this article is a hoax, or indeed that the subject of this article is not, in fact, one of the leading athletes in the history of his country. As a project, we must have some sensitivity to the fact that there will be subjects from minority groups in smaller countries for whom sources in English will be sparse or less accessible than for subjects in large English-speaking countries. I would encourage editors researching this article to look for transcripts or recordings of Tuvaluan radio broadcasts on the subject.
BD2412
T 18:28, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Doesn't meet GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT even with the sources presented last AfD, per source assess table below (does not include the database sources).
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Comr Melody Idoghor
(talk) 08:21, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
"Individual events in these championships must contain either several heats or extended fields" is a criteria and both medals were won in events with less than eight entrants, ie no heats/qualification. Therefore Tinilau fails WP:NATH as well.") above. That qualifier is only present for NATH#1, but is not present for NATH#2, which is the criterion he meets. NATH#2 explicitly mentions that
"prestigious small field meets"qualify for meeting that criterion (emphasis mine). House Blaster talk 01:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of 24 characters. Clear consensus not to retain a standalone article. As there is a redirect target and this is a plausible search term, redirecting as WP:ATD. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 05:03, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
In-universe fictography more appropriate for a 24 wiki than WP. See maintenance tags for specific objections. Just Another Cringy Username ( talk) 07:34, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 04:01, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Local restaurant in Finland. I see nothing stated in the article that would indicate why it is notable. It appears to be a direct translation of an Finnish WP article, without verification of the sources. One is a deadlink, and the other says the restaurant is currently closed - not reflected in the article. Does not meet WP:NORG, lack of in-depth independent coverage. MB 03:33, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:27, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:53, 14 August 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! 03:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:50, 14 August 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! 03:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
This article should be deleted because it is about a military standard of little impact outside of military purchasing specifications. It has been tagged for notability for a couple of years with no improvements to suggest it has encyclopediac value here. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. There are military standards for everything armed forces buy, and few of them are notable outside of their baliwick. This standard is obscure outside of those working in manufacture of wire or in military purchasing. Wtshymanski ( talk) 02:46, 14 August 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! 03:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:46, 14 August 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! 03:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:43, 14 August 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! 03:56, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:41, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:55, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
This has been unreferenced since 2010 and I'm unable to find reliable sources that discuss it in any significant way. ... discospinster talk 02:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Environmental policy in China. Seek help with revision deletion of copyrighted content. Liz Read! Talk! 01:20, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Essay-like piece that is duplicative of environmental policy in China. Amigao ( talk) 01:23, 14 August 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! 01:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 00:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Poarch Band of Creek Indians. Liz Read! Talk! 06:53, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
A search of sources fails to find WP:SIGCOV beyond re-hashes of the same press releases about future expansion. IMO, fails WP:GNG, could be merged to Poarch Band of Creek Indians if need be but don't see the benefit since the information is largely unsourced and has not attracted coverage. >> Lil-unique1 ( talk) — 22:39, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, what target would you see for a possible redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:38, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still looking for a redirect target or were you considering
Poarch Band of Creek Indians as well,
MrsSnoozyTurtle?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. There was disagreement as to whether notability was met, and most users appeared to consider that it had. On balance, I believe there is a consensus for keep over any other outcome. If anyone disagrees with my close, please ping me on my talk page and I will undo the close and leave for an administrator. (non-admin closure) MaxnaCarta ( talk) 02:54, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 18:02, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
The only female participant, Lice Waqailiti from Fiji, has also hailed the positive impact of the course.). Then there's the sources listed by Das osmnezz: Fiji Sun is too short (Besides quotes, all content is
Lice Waqaliti says the onus is on their squad members to prove their worth to be considered for the National Women’s football side ... The top Lautoka women’s team goal keeper and head coach was part of the 2007 Pacific Games National Women’s side which won a bronze medal ... Waqaliti who is originally from Vanua Levu added that discipline would be a vital factor.(and even if it was SIGCOV, all articles from the Sun only count as one source, so we're still at 1/2 for GNG)); Fiji Times only has one sentence that is not quotes on Waqailiti (
Goalkeeper development officer Lice Waqaliti says the program was for both girls and boys.); the second Fiji Times article does not have enough on her to qualify (all non-quote content is
FORMER Fiji women’s football rep Lice Waqaliti is training the Fiji team goalkeepers for the 2017 Pacific Mini Games which starts in Vanuatu next week ... Waqaliti has high hopes from the goalkeepers.); FBC News also appears too short to be SIGCOV (less than five sentences on her that are not quotes); and then the final source listed is another from FBC News, which says its source is the OFC, so not independent. I'm just not seeing enough for a GNG pass. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 22:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Pseudoscience. Editors are welcome to improve an article that is part of an AFD discussion but do not move or change the status of an article while a discussion is ongoing. Liz Read! Talk! 07:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
I believe this article should be deleted as it is based on a single cited author's idea of "parascience". Additionally, the examples on this page provide little distinction over what is pseudoscience and "parascience", using examples such as Ufology next to Philosophy. I think the dilemmas of using scientific theory within other well established and regarded disciplines outside the natural sciences, such as social science, should be left as discussions on their methodology pages. Looking at Google Scholar, "parascience" as a term returns back a poor collection of sources, when searched on other databases such as Scopus it only returns 15 published articles where "parascience" is used as a pseudonym for pseudoscience, not a distinct conceptualisation as this page is presenting it.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:47, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
No evidence of notability. An Internet search yields no significant coverage that would meet the WP:GNG requirements. JTtheOG ( talk) 22:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:32, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
I do not believe this person is notable by our standards; the sourcing certainly gives no indication of that. Drmies ( talk) 21:16, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:32, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 21:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:33, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable company. Does not pass WP:GNG. DelUsion23 (talk) 20:59, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:33, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
This footballer seems to have played, at maximum, in the Scottish fourth tier. Consequently, the only nontrivial coverage (not passing mentions or statistics) I'm finding is on the website of Berwick Rangers, as linked in the article – nothing else coming up in a search. Not sure if this is sufficient to satisfy WP:GNG. Complex/ Rational 20:44, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 20:47, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
The subject of this biographical page does not appear to satisfy criteria for sufficient significance to be included in Wikipedia. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib ( talk) 20:22, 14 August 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! 21:44, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG according to my searches in Google News, ProQuest and DDG. The best source that I can find is ESPN but this only mentions him once in passing meaning that the article potentially falls short of WP:SPORTBASIC as well. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:32, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Stats stub that looks to fail WP:GNG per my searches in Google News, DDG and ProQuest. The best that I can find is a passing mention in Panorama Sport which is not even close to significant coverage. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 17:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:43, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
other than some super puff pieces from huffpo, I don't see any actual in depth coverage in reliable sources of this Youtuber. There is nothing substantial to be found, in fact, the only coverage of him relates to a term he supposedly coined but that itself doesn't seem notable and neither does he. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:58, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Athletics at the 1972 Summer Olympics – Men's 400 metres#Heat 3. Liz Read! Talk! 21:42, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Barebones stub which merely recites that Faustin was a Haitian sprinter who competed in the 1972 Olympics. Faustin was not remotely competitive in his event, finishing with the slowest time among all competitors in the 400 metres (almost 8 seconds slower than the winning times) and failing to qualify for the quarterfinals let alone the semifinals or finals. Fails all applicable criteria: WP:SPORTBASIC (mandating at least one source with WP:SIGCOV, excluding database sources), WP:GNG (lack of SIGCOV in multiple, reliable, independent sources), and WP:NOLYMPICS (not a medalist). Cbl62 ( talk) 16:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Plane (esotericism). Liz Read! Talk! 21:41, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
This page is a tiny stub and has been since creation in 2008. There are no sources whatsoever. The subject matter appears to relate to Theosophy and anything on the matter of a divine plane can and should be fully contained within that article. There is nothing in this article that could be merged, so merge is inappropriate. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 16:55, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. Speedy deleted by Jimfbleak, CSD G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 11:02, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
I can't find any significant coverage in WP:RS under 'Kay Ken' or 'Kwesi Kendrick'. Does not appear to pass WP:GNG or WP:NMUSICIAN. All sources currently used are user-generated so cannot support a notability claim. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:04, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus for keep appears unanimous, with only a few hours left and no active discussions occurring I see fit to close this per SNOW - if anyone disagrees with me close ping me and I will undo and leave for an administrator. (non-admin closure) MaxnaCarta ( talk) 02:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Only source is the publisher himself. This [3] may be relevant either here or at Destroyer Magazine Doug Weller talk 15:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable film, lacking significant coverage by independent reliable sources per WP:NF BOVINEBOY 2008 15:46, 14 August 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! 21:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 15:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 14:59, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Also nominating:
The result was delete all except Mazraeh-ye Jonubi Rural District and Mazraeh-ye Shomali Rural District. Liz Read! Talk! 06:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails
WP:GEOLAND#1,
WP:CORP, and
WP:GNG. Name means literally "Tobacco research farm" according to machine translation. As such this is a business or other such
WP:ORG, however nothing even close to a notability pass for a business or other organisation is present.
GEOnet Names Server is an unreliable source. The Iranian census counts people according to a local reference point, in this case a farm/research centre, meaning that this is not a legally-recognised populated place as such. The co-ordinates provided in the article (the source of which is not known)
point to a random field on the outskirts of Urmia.
Together with this article I am also nominating the following articles, all of which are Iranian "village" articles apparently created by Carlossuarez46, all of which include the words Mazraeh-ye, which apparently means "the farm of". These all appear to be potentially farms, often ones belonging to someone identified by name or to a numbered location, and as such are unlikely to be real villages. In some cases Carlossuarez46 appears to have realised that this is what they actually were and then redirected them to names that they made up by removing the "Mazraeh-ye" part of the name, but this hardly made things better. In a lot of cases, the articles have co-ordinates added to them apparently based on GEOnet Names Server data or GeoNames data, both of which are unreliable.
WP:BEFORE sampling even of the more promising of these articles (e.g.,
Dashtok-e Olya, Yazd) failed to turn up any significant coverage needed for a
WP:GNG pass or evidence of legal recognition such as is needed for a
WP:GEOLAND#1 pass.
Bundling is justified per
WP:BUNDLE as these are spam/hoax articles created by the same author according to the same template.
Now that I've got AWB approval I plan to template all the articles in the list, but it may take me a day or two to do it so please have patience.
PS- you might think that 130 articles is a lot, but please remember that Carlossuarez46 was creating these articles at a rate of up to 100 or more per day so in reality this is still only dealing with their articles at a fraction of the rate they were created at. Deletion has to keep pace with mass-creation, otherwise we are allowing mass-creators to establish a fait accompli. Similarly WP:BEFORE as to be proportionate to the original work that was done to confirm the notability of the article that was created, which in this case was zero, otherwise again we are simply permitting a fait-accompli. FOARP ( talk) 14:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 15:00, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Local amateur football league that appears to exist way below the defined part of the English football league system as far as I can tell. This is in no way different to Furness Premier Football League, Mid-Somerset Football League and Guildford and Woking Alliance League all of which were deleted for failing WP:GNG and not meeting the rule of thumb outlined at WP:FOOTYN, in fact it's 6 tiers lower than where it would need to be to be presumed notable.
Google News contains a few hits all of which are single passing mentions of the league. ProQuest has a few results roundups and a few trivial mentions in local papers. I couldn't find anything useful on BNA. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:21, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Maynooth University#Publications. While there is no need to merge, nor consensus for this to remain as an article, there's no reason not to redirect it to where it's mentioned in case a reader is looking for information. Star Mississippi 01:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
As part of cleaning up efforts to bring the article in line with our writing guide (prior version here), I've looked into this journal more closely and... I just can't find any indication of notability. It's not indexed in any selective databases, and there's no substantial coverage that I can find per WP:GNG.
I could be convinced of merging to Maynooth University, but it's already mentioned Maynooth University#Publications and that might be sufficient. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 16:48, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 09:43, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 14:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 14:11, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Local amateur football league that appears to exist outside of the English football league system as far as I can tell. This is in no way different to Furness Premier Football League, Mid-Somerset Football League and Guildford and Woking Alliance League all of which were deleted for failing WP:GNG and not meeting the rule of thumb outlined at WP:FOOTYN.
I've tried multiple searches under variations of the name and found this Google News search to be the best but its two trivial mentions. Likewise in ProQuest. BNA also only contains trivial local coverage. A results roundup in a small fraction of a column on one page of the Staines & Ashford News is hardly worthy of a Wikipedia article. I mean the local school fête and Easter egg hunt would take up a similar amount of space in such a paper and we'd never dream of writing an article about those! Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was merge to Zdravko Ponoš. Star Mississippi 01:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Serbia Centre is not notable as a movement at the moment, I'd say it fails WP:GNG considering little amount of information about the movement currently exists. Reliable sources regarding the movement exist, although they only cover two announcements that Zdravko Ponoš made regarding the movement (this can be seen at his own page). Considering that it was created less than a month ago, I think that it is too early for this movement to get its own page. It can be re-created when it gets more media coverage, and national attention, and when it certainly gets more notable around the public. Vacant0 ( talk) 09:47, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 13:32, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
North America
1000 14:07, 14 August 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 13:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
No reliable sources with more than passing coverage found. Most sources are either deprecated (Sputnik), or very questionable (like Al Manar, owned by the Hezbollah, or Pars Today, a state-owned Iranian website). Some WP:SPS as well, but nothing reliable. BilletsMauves €500 12:57, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:LISTN and WP:NOT. Seems obvious why we don't maintain WP:FANCRUFT lists such as this. Anyway, no independent sources outside wide ranging databases discuss this non-defining intersection of cricketer and league. wjemather please leave a message... 10:49, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Solely notable for appearing in Forbes Africa (not the real Forbes or a subsidiary) 30 Under 30. No significant coverage save for interviews. Reading Beans ( talk) 09:10, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 10:39, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:19, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable singer with lack of coverage in WP:Independent sources. Of two sources cited, one is a link to her IMDB. A Google search shows that the sources that discuss her are mostly paid ones. Fails both WP:GNG and WP:SINGER.-- Umakant Bhalerao ( talk) 09:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:21, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Practically unknown communist organization, absent from the sources. It ran in the Italian general elections in 2001 in Tuscany, with poor results. It doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG. Scia Della Cometa ( talk) 09:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus on where to merge this content. Suggest continuing the discussion at the Talk page as there's no case made for deleting, nor for a standalone. Star Mississippi 01:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable. Article lacks any refs, and my BEFORE search lacks any RS meeting GNG. Apparently, it's so obscure, that no one rated it on BGG, where it also lacks refs. As there're no refs, IMO this should be deleted. Possible PROD candidate, but BOZ, Piotrus, or Guinness323 frequently find older magazines covering niche, obscure games, so I'm taking to AfD instead. Many thanks! VickKiang ( talk) 01:38, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Merge to Guidon Games until old paper-only sources can be found. There are undoubtedly hobby press reviews from 1972, but I have not been able to uncover any of them on line. Guinness323 ( talk) 05:40, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
mentioned 3 timesisn't SIGCOV- it needs to have at least one quite lengthy paragraph. As it only is "mentioned", IMO the coverage of the first one is trivial. Besides, how long is the
Panzerfaust #52article (is it a capsule review)? I'm also unconvinced that this should be kept based on that
[all] of the other wargames that Gygax worked on as part of the Wargaming with Miniatures Series have articles, saying others have articles isn't a great keep rationale IMO. Even if these are significant, could you please add the refs and transclude in talk page to show that they're long enough and are RS? VickKiang ( talk) 09:17, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I see support for "Delete" as well as "Merge" but more than one merge target mentioned.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:23, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Comr Melody Idoghor
(talk) 08:42, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was merge to The Order of the Stick. I see a consensus that this article should not be left as is. In terms of the outcome, merges have both a numerical and a policy-based advantage. -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 17:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
It does not appear that there is enough independent coverage of the characters themselves to provide notability for a separate article on the characters. The main article on the comic can provide coverage of the key characters. HenryCrun15 ( talk) 23:11, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
concentrates on the characters. It contains a brief list of them in one paragraph, and then another paragraph with one to two sentences of coverage each on the main hero and the main villain. The fist "lesser source" does not appear to be a reliable source, and the second one seems to be little more than a bunch of passing mentions. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:39, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Comr Melody Idoghor
(talk) 08:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Star Mississippi 01:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, WP:NGYMNASTICS and WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 20:13, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Keep the article doesn’t fail WP:NGYMNASTICS as Murayama meets the criteria Won an individual gold medal, in the junior division, at an elite international competition, particularly 3 individual medals at the 2017 Junior Asian Championships. WP:GNG is also met as the FIG link describes the gymnast’s information directly & in details, & FIG is a reliable source & independent of the gymnast himself. NguyenDuyAnh1995 ( talk) 18:21, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:47, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:52, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Comr Melody Idoghor
(talk) 08:23, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Most of the sources are adult industry publicity, and the few that aren't give trivial coverage 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 ( talk) 19:34, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:31, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Comr Melody Idoghor
(talk) 08:23, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Aside from the fact that a substantial majority of discussion participants !voted to keep (leaving no possible interpretation of the outcome as a consensus to delete), there is certainly no question or assertion that this article is a hoax, or indeed that the subject of this article is not, in fact, one of the leading athletes in the history of his country. As a project, we must have some sensitivity to the fact that there will be subjects from minority groups in smaller countries for whom sources in English will be sparse or less accessible than for subjects in large English-speaking countries. I would encourage editors researching this article to look for transcripts or recordings of Tuvaluan radio broadcasts on the subject.
BD2412
T 18:28, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Doesn't meet GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT even with the sources presented last AfD, per source assess table below (does not include the database sources).
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Comr Melody Idoghor
(talk) 08:21, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
"Individual events in these championships must contain either several heats or extended fields" is a criteria and both medals were won in events with less than eight entrants, ie no heats/qualification. Therefore Tinilau fails WP:NATH as well.") above. That qualifier is only present for NATH#1, but is not present for NATH#2, which is the criterion he meets. NATH#2 explicitly mentions that
"prestigious small field meets"qualify for meeting that criterion (emphasis mine). House Blaster talk 01:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of 24 characters. Clear consensus not to retain a standalone article. As there is a redirect target and this is a plausible search term, redirecting as WP:ATD. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 05:03, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
In-universe fictography more appropriate for a 24 wiki than WP. See maintenance tags for specific objections. Just Another Cringy Username ( talk) 07:34, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 04:01, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Local restaurant in Finland. I see nothing stated in the article that would indicate why it is notable. It appears to be a direct translation of an Finnish WP article, without verification of the sources. One is a deadlink, and the other says the restaurant is currently closed - not reflected in the article. Does not meet WP:NORG, lack of in-depth independent coverage. MB 03:33, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:27, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:53, 14 August 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! 03:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:50, 14 August 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! 03:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
This article should be deleted because it is about a military standard of little impact outside of military purchasing specifications. It has been tagged for notability for a couple of years with no improvements to suggest it has encyclopediac value here. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. There are military standards for everything armed forces buy, and few of them are notable outside of their baliwick. This standard is obscure outside of those working in manufacture of wire or in military purchasing. Wtshymanski ( talk) 02:46, 14 August 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! 03:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:46, 14 August 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! 03:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:43, 14 August 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! 03:56, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 02:41, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:55, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
This has been unreferenced since 2010 and I'm unable to find reliable sources that discuss it in any significant way. ... discospinster talk 02:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Environmental policy in China. Seek help with revision deletion of copyrighted content. Liz Read! Talk! 01:20, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Essay-like piece that is duplicative of environmental policy in China. Amigao ( talk) 01:23, 14 August 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! 01:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 00:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)