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! 23:35, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Per
WP:NOTNEWS. The allegations that a coup was being planned are seemingly only backed by Mali's government ("Mali's military government says
", by Al Jazeera, and "Mali's military junta says
", by France 24), and even in the contrary it seems that the coup remained as a plot and didn't translate into action, without transcendence after two months. I also should bring into question the credibility of a military junta that itself came from a
coup d'état.
NoonIcarus (
talk)
23:43, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Star Mississippi 01:46, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Disputed speedy (G14). Page disambiguates one article plus a section of another article (referring to match wagons), but there is dispute on the page history over whether the distinction is actually a difference. That should determine whether to delete/redirect; I am taking it here to resolve the speedy dispute and get outside opinions. ChromaNebula (talk) 21:07, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Idler flatcars are also used to mount one kind of coupler on one end and another kind on the other end. This is called a barrier vehicle or match wagon.The only real target is barrier vehicle, match wagon should just redirect there. MB 01:40, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:21, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
23:40, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Eagle Township, Boone County, Indiana. Viable AtD as it's mentioned there. No clear reason against a redirect. Star Mississippi 01:47, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
This is almost impossible to search due to the name being shared with the residence of a serial killer. Maps and aerials, however, show that this is surely nothing more than a non-notable McManor development (like McMansions but smaller) from the early 1990s. Mangoe ( talk) 23:31, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. There appears to be a rough consensus at the RFC, although that doesn't help in this scenario as as Elmidae pointed out, there's no redirect target that exists. This can be handled editorially at the close of the RFC and revisited if needed, but I do not see a strong consensus to maintain this as a standalone nor to remove the material. Star Mississippi 01:59, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Failure GNG: It will take 76 years for this solar eclipse to occur. At the same time, it only occurs in the waters near Antarctica, and it is a partial solar eclipse, so it has no scientific value. Q28 ( talk) 22:12, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting in light of
Wikipedia talk:Notability (events)#Eclipse RfC but feel free to close if this RFC looks decisive.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:10, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 22:27, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Relies on a single source. Person is not notable and should be deleted DavidEfraim ( talk) 15:15, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:04, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Looking for more feedback here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 13:08, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
This is the first case of over 100 year old violation of not news guidelines. However since the main coverage we have is from contemporary news reports, I still think that issue applies. I do not believe we have actual grounds to justify this article, and no actual claim to notability. Dieing in a plain crash is all we have, and that does not make someone notable. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 19:55, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for another week based on editor request.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:54, 7 July 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! 06:02, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:NACADEMIC (see, e.g., [9]). – Ploni ( talk) 18:31, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:53, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 14:44, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
No reliabler sources provided to pass WP:NCORP or WP:GNG Bash7oven ( talk) 17:46, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:50, 7 July 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 11:37, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Insufficient coverage (nothing came up on Wikipedia Library or newspapers.com), and the book awards cited don't appear notable enough to satisfy WP:NAUTHOR. – Ploni ( talk) 16:29, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:41, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. TigerShark ( talk) 02:39, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Was deleted in 2018 due to a WP:GNG/ N:FOOTBALL failure. She still fails GNG due to a lack of significant coverage about her. Dougal18 ( talk) 14:21, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Keep as Daily Record and Edinburgh Evening News articles appear to satisfy GNG. Crowsus ( talk) 19:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Comments more detailed than "Passes
WP:GNG" or "Fails
WP:GNG" would be appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
What, do you think every source needs to be analysed?as a closer, it would be infinitely helpful as @ Liz also pointed out. The volume of sports debates is exhausting, poor quality votes help no one even if one of you is by default "right" Star Mississippi 02:04, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of solar eclipses in the 21st century. No consensus to delete. Consensus to either keep or redirect. Also factoring current clear consensus at RFC. TigerShark ( talk) 02:55, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Failure GNG: It will take 72 years for this solar eclipse to occur. At the same time, it only occurs in the waters near Antarctica, and it is a partial solar eclipse, so it has no scientific value. Q28 ( talk) 14:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Ovinus ( talk) 22:01, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting given
Wikipedia talk:Notability (events)#Eclipse RfC.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:35, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was merge to Micro miniature. Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
No independent sources found. Some of the references are to subject's own site; others are blogs or unreliable. The Hindu article is an interview in a city supplement, Tribune is a passing mention among awardee list and the award's notability is not established. (rationale copied from my PROD) Hemantha ( talk) 13:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 20:41, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet WP:GNG; the only coverage available appears to be from the NBA itself, barring some mere-mentions in newspapers that I found on ProQuest. Would have met the old NBASKET standard that all top-tier players, coaches and referees are notable, but as that is no longer in force, here we are at AFD. signed, Rosguill talk 20:12, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Reading through all of these varied opinions, I'm going to close this discussion with a simple Delete, no Salt. If this article gets recreated again in main space, please tag it for CSD G4. Ideally, any supporters of this article will read this AFD closure and work on a new article in Draft space, submitting it for AFC review.
However, if my decision today leads to a 4th AFD within a year with a similar outcome, I'd then suggest Salting the main space page. Liz Read! Talk! 20:40, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Recreation of article deleted via two different AfD discussions. Propose deletion and creation protection. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" 19:56, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability." Three Formula Scout articles do not prove the subject meets the GNG. The coverage here still essentially amounts to WP:ROUTINE announcements as well. HumanBodyPiloter5 ( talk) 01:44, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 20:33, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Not enough reliable independent sourcing exists to assert notability of this particular type of wave energy converter. PianoDan ( talk) 19:44, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete. Page was deleted in October 2006 as A7, without its AfD ever having been closed properly. (non-admin closure) jp× g 19:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
non-notable band.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting so that this can be closed properly.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
jp×
g
19:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect, the article was redirected years ago and has been stable. No prejudice against bold recreation. Legoktm ( talk) 19:01, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I was wrong about the last one -- THIS is actually the longest-running deletion discussion in Wikipedia history.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
jp×
g
19:06, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 20:31, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
First AfD ended in no consensus. Not seeing sufficient depth of coverage for meeting notability criteria. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:16, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep as per rough consensus. (non-admin closure) Kj cheetham ( talk) 19:34, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Deprodded with the rationale that it is "pretty notable in the UK", I was unable to find any reliable sources showing this. Fails notability guidelines; the sole source on the article mentions the subject only in passing. Waxworker ( talk) 17:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Stifle ( talk) 10:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
There's a lecture series in the subject's honor thanks to a grant donated by his wife, but otherwise I'm not able to find any significant coverage of the subject, having searched DuckDuckGo, Google Scholar, and Proquest for several variations of the subject's name. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG. signed, Rosguill talk 17:38, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Arbitrarily0 (
talk)
17:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete G11 by User:Athaenara. (non-admin closure) Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:07, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
Looks like promotion, not enough reliable sources Renvoy ( talk) 17:20, 7 July 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! 20:28, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
The subject does not seem to meet GNG (The best think I could find was this snippet [15]), and the article is is need of some WP:TNT for not adhering to WP:FRINGE and other NPOV issues stemming from the fact it's based on non-independent sources. Femke ( talk) 16:33, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 10:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG and list fails WP:LISTN. There isn't WP:SIGCOV to cite much of the statements here, and much of the list is WP:OR. Following the precedent at other similar articles for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yale University in popular culture, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johns Hopkins University in popular culture, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tulane University in popular culture, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanford University in popular culture. Jontesta ( talk) 15:42, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 18:58, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
I was going to redirect this to Steven Williams but I decided to send it to AfD instead. The character is already covered in the article for Steven Williams and is not individually notable. Bruxton ( talk) 15:06, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. as a valid AtD. G13 can solve this if sourcing doesn't come to fruition. Star Mississippi 02:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Relatively common shooting, some regional coverage, "armed man shot by police". WP:MILL no evidence that it will be WP:LASTING. Bruxton ( talk) 14:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 01:22, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, tagged for notability, no change in notability since. No significant coverage, no evidence of multiple/significant roles or any musical significance. Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 07:23, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:35, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further discussion may be useful to reach consensus. Suggest review of the sources provided, which do not seem sufficient for notability, being lightweight celebrity/beauty articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
TigerShark (
talk)
14:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 18:57, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Is this person really notable enough for an article? I see that she's now senior lecturer at UNSW https://research.unsw.edu.au/people/ms-sushmita-ruj But Google doesn't show up much else in independent sources, and the citations are thin. Laterthanyouthink ( talk) 13:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
A topic is presumed to merit an article if [it meets] the criteria outlined in a subject-specific notability guideline (SNG) listed in the box on the right; the pertinent such guideline for present purposes is Wikipedia:Notability (academics), of which the first criterion is met as argued above. XOR'easter ( talk) 15:27, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. I'm reading Delete here but not a Strong Delete as comments are framed in phrases like "I do not believe meets NPOL", "may not be notable" and "doesn't not appear to be". No penalty against trying to create a new Draft version of this article that would better meeting current notability standards. Liz Read! Talk! 18:56, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Career civil servant who I do not believe meets NPOL. He is not a GNG pass either, perhaps owing to his career be largely pre-internet. Opinion is divided as to whether state-level commissioners in Nigeria are generally notable but I don’t think this one is. Mccapra ( talk) 06:33, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Weak delete may be notable as politician though. -- Bash7oven ( talk) 17:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels.. This is the policy. I didn't make it up. I’m not making a vote because it will still be neglected by the closing admin (as seen in this AfD). In all, I guess there alot of Nigerian politician on this encyclopaedia (according to Mccapra.). Best, R E A D I N G Talk to the Beans? 05:47, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:42, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:06, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Definitely lacks reliable independent media coverage needed for private companies. WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. 11 years since the Notability tag appeared, and no improvements so far Bash7oven ( talk) 12:08, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously deleted via
WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Coldplay discography. ✗ plicit 13:31, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
I would like to nominate this article for deletion because as with most Coldplay EPs, Live from Spotify London is not a very notable release: Its details can be boiled down to a text on their discography page, it has not appeared on any country's national music chart, it has not been certified gold or higher in at least one country and it has not won or been nominated for a major music award. GustavoCza ( talk • contribs) 11:56, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Coldplay discography. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🙃 ( ICE-T • ICE CUBE) 12:00, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
I would like to nominate this article for deletion because as with most Coldplay EPs, Live in Madrid is not a very notable release: Its details can be boiled down to a text on their discography page, it has not appeared on any country's national music chart, it has not been certified gold or higher in at least one country and it has not won or been nominated for a major music award. GustavoCza ( talk • contribs) 11:52, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Coldplay discography. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🙃 ( ICE-T • ICE CUBE) 11:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
I would like to nominate this article for deletion because as with most Coldplay EPs, Remixes is not a very notable release: Its details can be boiled down to a text on their discography page, it has not appeared on any country's national music chart, it has not been certified gold or higher in at least one country and it has not won or been nominated for a major music award. GustavoCza ( talk • contribs) 11:45, 7 July 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 12:12, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
I would like to nominate this article for deletion because as with most Coldplay EPs, Mince Spies is not a very notable release: Its details can be boiled down to a text on their discography page, it has not appeared on any country's national music chart, it has not been certified gold or higher in at least one country and it has not won or been nominated for a major music award. GustavoCza ( talk • contribs) 11:31, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete at the request of the sole contributor (criterion G7). XOR'easter ( talk) 17:09, 7 July 2022 (UTC) ( non-admin closure)
Not notable as a politician (vice mayor of Calamba). No RS. Fails WP:ANYBIO Morpho achilles ( talk) 09:52, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Consensus to delete. Dissenting views mentioned WP:LISTED, but that alone does not establish notability. No sufficiently strong sources seem to have been provided which enable consensus to keep. TigerShark ( talk) 02:31, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Does not fit WP:NCORP or WP:GNG. No RS provided here. Morpho achilles ( talk) 09:50, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Client: Kingfish Zeeland). Ovinus ( talk) 18:13, 9 July 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 12:10, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable author. Only promtional coverage is this launch. Otherwise, his conpiracy theory book received no "genuine review". I can't find anything about him on worldcat so seems like a run-of-the-mill author. Amon Stutzman ( talk) 09:09, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:09, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
An article on this subject was deleted in 2010 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vicente-Ignacio Soria de Veyra with the rationale “ On this face of it this is a highly detailed, very well sourced article. However once you get into the nit-gritty it's not sourced at all (not at wikipedia standards). All of the sources are either self-published, non-notable blogs or directory lists. There are a couple of sources that might be considered reliable but the coverage of the subject is trivia.” That rationale still stands. Since 2010 the subject has had one solo exhibition but if we’re looking for in depth coverage in RIS this recreation doesn’t offer it. Mccapra ( talk) 06:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously deleted
at AFD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:29, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Modussiccandi (
talk)
08:44, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:01, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable game that doesn't cite any refs, can't find any sources except for maybe a mention here. IMO doesn't meet GNG and should be deleted. VickKiang ( talk) 07:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:08, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Chandigarh women's football team
Non-notable sports team that does not satisfy general notability. This was first created in article space but moved into draft space by User:Spiderone after being tagged as relying on primary sources. This copy was then created in article space, so that it cannot be moved into draft space, but still is not ready for article space. A check of the references shows that they are all primary sources, and mostly refer to the subjunior team winning its championship, and are not significant coverage. Junior and subjunior sports have very seldom been considered notable, even before the revision of the sports notability guidelines.
Reference Number | Reference | Comments | Independent | Significant | Reliable | Secondary |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | www.the-aiff.com | Page about the association in the web site for Indian football | No | Yes | Yes | No |
2 | www.rsssf.com | List of champions that doesn’t list them | No | No | Yes | No |
3 | www.the-aiff.com | Page about the Indian football association listing subjunior champions | No | No | Yes | No |
4 | www.the-aiff.com | Indian football association page that appears to be a directory to other pages | No | No | Yes | No |
5 | footballcounter.com | Article about subjunior championship | Yes | No | Yes | No |
6 | khelnow.com | A passing mention of subjunior championship | Yes | No | Yes | No |
Neither the article nor the references establish notability. Robert McClenon ( talk) 04:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Article relies two weak sources both are just stats about the player. Article does not detail any reason for notability nothing about his training, awards won, personal life etc. Additionally a google search WP:GOOGLETEST does not offer any additional information or sources to establish WP:GNG or WP:SNG. Fails WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE. Attempted to speedy delete by NPP Reading Beans as per WP:A7 but was reverted. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 03:20, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of National Rugby League referees. Liz Read! Talk! 03:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Article relies on weak sources, one the subject is briefly mentioned, another is an about page with some stats. Article does not detail any reason for notability and is mostly about games he was a referee for. Nothing about his training, awards won, etc. Additionally a google search does not offer any additional information or sources to establish WP:GNG or WP:SNG. Fails WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE. Attempted to speedy delete as per WP:A7 but was reverted. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 03:12, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was merge to Eric B. Vogel. Liz Read! Talk! 02:25, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable game with only three refs, the first one is potentially reliable, but the editor is also a prominent contributor to BGG ( https://boardgamegeek.com/blog/1/boardgamegeek-news), which according to the Wikiproject Board Games is an unreliable blog. The second ref is not independent, and the third one is too unreliable. Upon a search, I could not find any awards or reliable refs covering this, hence listing this at AfD as there are not multiple reliable independent sources. Thanks! VickKiang ( talk) 23:10, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
This AfD discussion includes a proposal for merger to
Eric B. Vogel, and a notice of the proposed merger was posted to that page on June 25. As such, this AfD discussion may need to be extended or
relisted to incorporate input from that page. Thanks,
Kevin McE (
talk)
14:43, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
03:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:VickKiang
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://www.rollthedice.nl/ | Indepedent. | ? The source is a board game association, but doesn't seem to have editorial policies. | The source covers the subject in detail. | ? Unknown |
http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/keirat/txt/A/Armorica.html | ? It's indepedent (?) but sponsored ("Many thanks to Vainglorious Games for sending us a review copy!") | Self-published blog, dated design, not reliable. | The source covers the subject in detail. | ✘ No |
https://rivcoach.wordpress.com/2010/09/25/review-armorica-by-vainglorius-games/ | It's indepedent probably, but the site's deleted. | Deleted self-published site on Wordpress | ? The article could not be opened (as "rivcoach.wordpress.com is no longer available"). | ✘ No |
https://www.jedisjeux.net/jeux-de-societe/ | The subject is indepedent. | An association that seems reliable enough, but somehow Google translate doesn't work well, and as I can't read French, I am not sure whether there's an editorial policy. But it's all right and probably reliable. | The article discusses the subject in detail. | ✔ Yes |
http://detafelplakt.skynetblogs.be/archive/2010/07/20/kleine-dingen.html | The subject is indepedent presumably, though it can't be accessed on my laptop. | Blog, also couldn't be opened on my laptop. | ? Ref couldn't be accessed for me, but it's unreliable as it's a self-published blog. | ✘ No |
http://spotlightongames.com/list/nights/a.html#armorica | The subject is indepedent. | Self-published, no editorial policies. | Short, but in-depth enough. | ✘ No |
https://www.dicetower.com/game/67285/armorica | The subject is indepedent. | YouTube channel turned into webpage, marginally reliable for mundane coverage, including gameplay, release date, publisher..., generally unreliable for subjective reviews, and doesn't contribute to GNG as it's routine. | Long review. | ✘ No |
http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/bring_gauls_and_romans_together_in_armorica/ | The subject is indepedent. | ? It seems to have about section and an editor, but the author now posts on BGG, which isn't reliable. | Fairly long article. | ? Unknown |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
The other refs, including BGG link and the publisher's link, are clearly unreliable. VickKiang ( talk) 22:28, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Lots of comments but only one editor advocating a Merge and redirect. Other opinions?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:53, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to 2022 Georgia lieutenant gubernatorial election#Democratic primary. TigerShark ( talk) 02:49, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a person notable only as a non-winning candidate for political office. As always, candidates do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates per se -- the notability test for politicians is holding a notable political office, not just running for one, and a candidate must demonstrate either that he already had preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten him an article anyway (i.e.
Cynthia Nixon), or a credible reason why his candidacy can be seen as much, much more nationally significant than other people's candidacies such that people would still be looking for information about it
a decade from now even if he loses. But this demonstrates neither of those things, and is referenced to a mix of
primary sources that are not support for notability at all and purely
run of the mill local campaign coverage of the type that every candidate in every election always gets, thus not marking him out as more special than everybody else.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation in November if he wins, but nothing here is already enough to earn him a Wikipedia article today.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:19, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
03:06, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:50, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:46, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. There really isn't much to these relations, no agreements, no embassies, no significant trade. The relations seem to be limited Ministerial interaction and a Spanish company building a road in East Timor. LibStar ( talk) 01:59, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:47, 7 July 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! 03:47, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Mainly being a nominee as an Ambassador. I don't think this is notable. R E A D I N G Talk to the Beans? 01:50, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Just because you have never heard of the two countries, actually (not one), does not mean the ambassadors are not notable. He is as notable as the other ambassadors on this page as well as as notable as the ambassadors appointed by the Trump administration, all of whom have pages on both counts. You also treat nomination as if it is not the first step to confirmation. The fact that he has not yet been confirmed has nothing to do with notability guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isaiahlaitinen99 ( talk • contribs) 20:38, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) NemesisAT ( talk) 13:33, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Actor does not meet WP:NACTOR, let alone WP:BASIC. Need to prove it meets these, not just invoke them. Additionally, three of the four references WP:NOTRS. I would also support converting this to a draft. But it definitely should not be in mainspace as it stands. Amaury • 17:35, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:09, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:43, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I don't think a 3rd relisting would induce more participation here so I'm closing this AFD as "No consensus". Liz Read! Talk! 00:45, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
None of the references shown here demonstrate independent in-depth coverage-- the second one appears to be to the subject's own personal website. No evidence of any awards won, no notable credits, lots of evidence he exists and was interviewed once but I don't see a viable notability claim here. A loose necktie ( talk) 19:14, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:16, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:42, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 00:41, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Article relies on a single source, and is only linked to by one other article which is a list of football players. Additionally a google search does not offer any additional information or sources to establish WP:GNG or WP:SNG. Fails WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE. Attempted to speedy delete as per WP:A7 but was reverted. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 00:32, 7 July 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! 23:35, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Per
WP:NOTNEWS. The allegations that a coup was being planned are seemingly only backed by Mali's government ("Mali's military government says
", by Al Jazeera, and "Mali's military junta says
", by France 24), and even in the contrary it seems that the coup remained as a plot and didn't translate into action, without transcendence after two months. I also should bring into question the credibility of a military junta that itself came from a
coup d'état.
NoonIcarus (
talk)
23:43, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Star Mississippi 01:46, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Disputed speedy (G14). Page disambiguates one article plus a section of another article (referring to match wagons), but there is dispute on the page history over whether the distinction is actually a difference. That should determine whether to delete/redirect; I am taking it here to resolve the speedy dispute and get outside opinions. ChromaNebula (talk) 21:07, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Idler flatcars are also used to mount one kind of coupler on one end and another kind on the other end. This is called a barrier vehicle or match wagon.The only real target is barrier vehicle, match wagon should just redirect there. MB 01:40, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:21, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
23:40, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Eagle Township, Boone County, Indiana. Viable AtD as it's mentioned there. No clear reason against a redirect. Star Mississippi 01:47, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
This is almost impossible to search due to the name being shared with the residence of a serial killer. Maps and aerials, however, show that this is surely nothing more than a non-notable McManor development (like McMansions but smaller) from the early 1990s. Mangoe ( talk) 23:31, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. There appears to be a rough consensus at the RFC, although that doesn't help in this scenario as as Elmidae pointed out, there's no redirect target that exists. This can be handled editorially at the close of the RFC and revisited if needed, but I do not see a strong consensus to maintain this as a standalone nor to remove the material. Star Mississippi 01:59, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Failure GNG: It will take 76 years for this solar eclipse to occur. At the same time, it only occurs in the waters near Antarctica, and it is a partial solar eclipse, so it has no scientific value. Q28 ( talk) 22:12, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting in light of
Wikipedia talk:Notability (events)#Eclipse RfC but feel free to close if this RFC looks decisive.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:10, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 22:27, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Relies on a single source. Person is not notable and should be deleted DavidEfraim ( talk) 15:15, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:04, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Looking for more feedback here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 13:08, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
This is the first case of over 100 year old violation of not news guidelines. However since the main coverage we have is from contemporary news reports, I still think that issue applies. I do not believe we have actual grounds to justify this article, and no actual claim to notability. Dieing in a plain crash is all we have, and that does not make someone notable. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 19:55, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for another week based on editor request.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:54, 7 July 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! 06:02, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:NACADEMIC (see, e.g., [9]). – Ploni ( talk) 18:31, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:53, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Star Mississippi 14:44, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
No reliabler sources provided to pass WP:NCORP or WP:GNG Bash7oven ( talk) 17:46, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:50, 7 July 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 11:37, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Insufficient coverage (nothing came up on Wikipedia Library or newspapers.com), and the book awards cited don't appear notable enough to satisfy WP:NAUTHOR. – Ploni ( talk) 16:29, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:41, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. TigerShark ( talk) 02:39, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Was deleted in 2018 due to a WP:GNG/ N:FOOTBALL failure. She still fails GNG due to a lack of significant coverage about her. Dougal18 ( talk) 14:21, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Keep as Daily Record and Edinburgh Evening News articles appear to satisfy GNG. Crowsus ( talk) 19:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Comments more detailed than "Passes
WP:GNG" or "Fails
WP:GNG" would be appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
What, do you think every source needs to be analysed?as a closer, it would be infinitely helpful as @ Liz also pointed out. The volume of sports debates is exhausting, poor quality votes help no one even if one of you is by default "right" Star Mississippi 02:04, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of solar eclipses in the 21st century. No consensus to delete. Consensus to either keep or redirect. Also factoring current clear consensus at RFC. TigerShark ( talk) 02:55, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Failure GNG: It will take 72 years for this solar eclipse to occur. At the same time, it only occurs in the waters near Antarctica, and it is a partial solar eclipse, so it has no scientific value. Q28 ( talk) 14:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Ovinus ( talk) 22:01, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting given
Wikipedia talk:Notability (events)#Eclipse RfC.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:35, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was merge to Micro miniature. Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
No independent sources found. Some of the references are to subject's own site; others are blogs or unreliable. The Hindu article is an interview in a city supplement, Tribune is a passing mention among awardee list and the award's notability is not established. (rationale copied from my PROD) Hemantha ( talk) 13:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 20:41, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet WP:GNG; the only coverage available appears to be from the NBA itself, barring some mere-mentions in newspapers that I found on ProQuest. Would have met the old NBASKET standard that all top-tier players, coaches and referees are notable, but as that is no longer in force, here we are at AFD. signed, Rosguill talk 20:12, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Reading through all of these varied opinions, I'm going to close this discussion with a simple Delete, no Salt. If this article gets recreated again in main space, please tag it for CSD G4. Ideally, any supporters of this article will read this AFD closure and work on a new article in Draft space, submitting it for AFC review.
However, if my decision today leads to a 4th AFD within a year with a similar outcome, I'd then suggest Salting the main space page. Liz Read! Talk! 20:40, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Recreation of article deleted via two different AfD discussions. Propose deletion and creation protection. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" 19:56, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability." Three Formula Scout articles do not prove the subject meets the GNG. The coverage here still essentially amounts to WP:ROUTINE announcements as well. HumanBodyPiloter5 ( talk) 01:44, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 20:33, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Not enough reliable independent sourcing exists to assert notability of this particular type of wave energy converter. PianoDan ( talk) 19:44, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was Speedy delete. Page was deleted in October 2006 as A7, without its AfD ever having been closed properly. (non-admin closure) jp× g 19:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
non-notable band.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting so that this can be closed properly.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
jp×
g
19:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect, the article was redirected years ago and has been stable. No prejudice against bold recreation. Legoktm ( talk) 19:01, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I was wrong about the last one -- THIS is actually the longest-running deletion discussion in Wikipedia history.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
jp×
g
19:06, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 20:31, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
First AfD ended in no consensus. Not seeing sufficient depth of coverage for meeting notability criteria. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:16, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep as per rough consensus. (non-admin closure) Kj cheetham ( talk) 19:34, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Deprodded with the rationale that it is "pretty notable in the UK", I was unable to find any reliable sources showing this. Fails notability guidelines; the sole source on the article mentions the subject only in passing. Waxworker ( talk) 17:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Stifle ( talk) 10:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
There's a lecture series in the subject's honor thanks to a grant donated by his wife, but otherwise I'm not able to find any significant coverage of the subject, having searched DuckDuckGo, Google Scholar, and Proquest for several variations of the subject's name. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG. signed, Rosguill talk 17:38, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Arbitrarily0 (
talk)
17:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete G11 by User:Athaenara. (non-admin closure) Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:07, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
Looks like promotion, not enough reliable sources Renvoy ( talk) 17:20, 7 July 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! 20:28, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
The subject does not seem to meet GNG (The best think I could find was this snippet [15]), and the article is is need of some WP:TNT for not adhering to WP:FRINGE and other NPOV issues stemming from the fact it's based on non-independent sources. Femke ( talk) 16:33, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Stifle ( talk) 10:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG and list fails WP:LISTN. There isn't WP:SIGCOV to cite much of the statements here, and much of the list is WP:OR. Following the precedent at other similar articles for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yale University in popular culture, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johns Hopkins University in popular culture, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tulane University in popular culture, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanford University in popular culture. Jontesta ( talk) 15:42, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 18:58, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
I was going to redirect this to Steven Williams but I decided to send it to AfD instead. The character is already covered in the article for Steven Williams and is not individually notable. Bruxton ( talk) 15:06, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. as a valid AtD. G13 can solve this if sourcing doesn't come to fruition. Star Mississippi 02:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Relatively common shooting, some regional coverage, "armed man shot by police". WP:MILL no evidence that it will be WP:LASTING. Bruxton ( talk) 14:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 01:22, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, tagged for notability, no change in notability since. No significant coverage, no evidence of multiple/significant roles or any musical significance. Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 07:23, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:35, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further discussion may be useful to reach consensus. Suggest review of the sources provided, which do not seem sufficient for notability, being lightweight celebrity/beauty articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
TigerShark (
talk)
14:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 18:57, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Is this person really notable enough for an article? I see that she's now senior lecturer at UNSW https://research.unsw.edu.au/people/ms-sushmita-ruj But Google doesn't show up much else in independent sources, and the citations are thin. Laterthanyouthink ( talk) 13:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
A topic is presumed to merit an article if [it meets] the criteria outlined in a subject-specific notability guideline (SNG) listed in the box on the right; the pertinent such guideline for present purposes is Wikipedia:Notability (academics), of which the first criterion is met as argued above. XOR'easter ( talk) 15:27, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. I'm reading Delete here but not a Strong Delete as comments are framed in phrases like "I do not believe meets NPOL", "may not be notable" and "doesn't not appear to be". No penalty against trying to create a new Draft version of this article that would better meeting current notability standards. Liz Read! Talk! 18:56, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Career civil servant who I do not believe meets NPOL. He is not a GNG pass either, perhaps owing to his career be largely pre-internet. Opinion is divided as to whether state-level commissioners in Nigeria are generally notable but I don’t think this one is. Mccapra ( talk) 06:33, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Weak delete may be notable as politician though. -- Bash7oven ( talk) 17:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels.. This is the policy. I didn't make it up. I’m not making a vote because it will still be neglected by the closing admin (as seen in this AfD). In all, I guess there alot of Nigerian politician on this encyclopaedia (according to Mccapra.). Best, R E A D I N G Talk to the Beans? 05:47, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:42, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:06, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Definitely lacks reliable independent media coverage needed for private companies. WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. 11 years since the Notability tag appeared, and no improvements so far Bash7oven ( talk) 12:08, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously deleted via
WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Coldplay discography. ✗ plicit 13:31, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
I would like to nominate this article for deletion because as with most Coldplay EPs, Live from Spotify London is not a very notable release: Its details can be boiled down to a text on their discography page, it has not appeared on any country's national music chart, it has not been certified gold or higher in at least one country and it has not won or been nominated for a major music award. GustavoCza ( talk • contribs) 11:56, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Coldplay discography. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🙃 ( ICE-T • ICE CUBE) 12:00, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
I would like to nominate this article for deletion because as with most Coldplay EPs, Live in Madrid is not a very notable release: Its details can be boiled down to a text on their discography page, it has not appeared on any country's national music chart, it has not been certified gold or higher in at least one country and it has not won or been nominated for a major music award. GustavoCza ( talk • contribs) 11:52, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Coldplay discography. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🙃 ( ICE-T • ICE CUBE) 11:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
I would like to nominate this article for deletion because as with most Coldplay EPs, Remixes is not a very notable release: Its details can be boiled down to a text on their discography page, it has not appeared on any country's national music chart, it has not been certified gold or higher in at least one country and it has not won or been nominated for a major music award. GustavoCza ( talk • contribs) 11:45, 7 July 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 12:12, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
I would like to nominate this article for deletion because as with most Coldplay EPs, Mince Spies is not a very notable release: Its details can be boiled down to a text on their discography page, it has not appeared on any country's national music chart, it has not been certified gold or higher in at least one country and it has not won or been nominated for a major music award. GustavoCza ( talk • contribs) 11:31, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete at the request of the sole contributor (criterion G7). XOR'easter ( talk) 17:09, 7 July 2022 (UTC) ( non-admin closure)
Not notable as a politician (vice mayor of Calamba). No RS. Fails WP:ANYBIO Morpho achilles ( talk) 09:52, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Consensus to delete. Dissenting views mentioned WP:LISTED, but that alone does not establish notability. No sufficiently strong sources seem to have been provided which enable consensus to keep. TigerShark ( talk) 02:31, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Does not fit WP:NCORP or WP:GNG. No RS provided here. Morpho achilles ( talk) 09:50, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Client: Kingfish Zeeland). Ovinus ( talk) 18:13, 9 July 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 12:10, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable author. Only promtional coverage is this launch. Otherwise, his conpiracy theory book received no "genuine review". I can't find anything about him on worldcat so seems like a run-of-the-mill author. Amon Stutzman ( talk) 09:09, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:09, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
An article on this subject was deleted in 2010 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vicente-Ignacio Soria de Veyra with the rationale “ On this face of it this is a highly detailed, very well sourced article. However once you get into the nit-gritty it's not sourced at all (not at wikipedia standards). All of the sources are either self-published, non-notable blogs or directory lists. There are a couple of sources that might be considered reliable but the coverage of the subject is trivia.” That rationale still stands. Since 2010 the subject has had one solo exhibition but if we’re looking for in depth coverage in RIS this recreation doesn’t offer it. Mccapra ( talk) 06:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously deleted
at AFD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:29, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Modussiccandi (
talk)
08:44, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:01, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable game that doesn't cite any refs, can't find any sources except for maybe a mention here. IMO doesn't meet GNG and should be deleted. VickKiang ( talk) 07:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:08, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Chandigarh women's football team
Non-notable sports team that does not satisfy general notability. This was first created in article space but moved into draft space by User:Spiderone after being tagged as relying on primary sources. This copy was then created in article space, so that it cannot be moved into draft space, but still is not ready for article space. A check of the references shows that they are all primary sources, and mostly refer to the subjunior team winning its championship, and are not significant coverage. Junior and subjunior sports have very seldom been considered notable, even before the revision of the sports notability guidelines.
Reference Number | Reference | Comments | Independent | Significant | Reliable | Secondary |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | www.the-aiff.com | Page about the association in the web site for Indian football | No | Yes | Yes | No |
2 | www.rsssf.com | List of champions that doesn’t list them | No | No | Yes | No |
3 | www.the-aiff.com | Page about the Indian football association listing subjunior champions | No | No | Yes | No |
4 | www.the-aiff.com | Indian football association page that appears to be a directory to other pages | No | No | Yes | No |
5 | footballcounter.com | Article about subjunior championship | Yes | No | Yes | No |
6 | khelnow.com | A passing mention of subjunior championship | Yes | No | Yes | No |
Neither the article nor the references establish notability. Robert McClenon ( talk) 04:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Article relies two weak sources both are just stats about the player. Article does not detail any reason for notability nothing about his training, awards won, personal life etc. Additionally a google search WP:GOOGLETEST does not offer any additional information or sources to establish WP:GNG or WP:SNG. Fails WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE. Attempted to speedy delete by NPP Reading Beans as per WP:A7 but was reverted. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 03:20, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of National Rugby League referees. Liz Read! Talk! 03:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Article relies on weak sources, one the subject is briefly mentioned, another is an about page with some stats. Article does not detail any reason for notability and is mostly about games he was a referee for. Nothing about his training, awards won, etc. Additionally a google search does not offer any additional information or sources to establish WP:GNG or WP:SNG. Fails WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE. Attempted to speedy delete as per WP:A7 but was reverted. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 03:12, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was merge to Eric B. Vogel. Liz Read! Talk! 02:25, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable game with only three refs, the first one is potentially reliable, but the editor is also a prominent contributor to BGG ( https://boardgamegeek.com/blog/1/boardgamegeek-news), which according to the Wikiproject Board Games is an unreliable blog. The second ref is not independent, and the third one is too unreliable. Upon a search, I could not find any awards or reliable refs covering this, hence listing this at AfD as there are not multiple reliable independent sources. Thanks! VickKiang ( talk) 23:10, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
This AfD discussion includes a proposal for merger to
Eric B. Vogel, and a notice of the proposed merger was posted to that page on June 25. As such, this AfD discussion may need to be extended or
relisted to incorporate input from that page. Thanks,
Kevin McE (
talk)
14:43, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
03:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:VickKiang
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://www.rollthedice.nl/ | Indepedent. | ? The source is a board game association, but doesn't seem to have editorial policies. | The source covers the subject in detail. | ? Unknown |
http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/keirat/txt/A/Armorica.html | ? It's indepedent (?) but sponsored ("Many thanks to Vainglorious Games for sending us a review copy!") | Self-published blog, dated design, not reliable. | The source covers the subject in detail. | ✘ No |
https://rivcoach.wordpress.com/2010/09/25/review-armorica-by-vainglorius-games/ | It's indepedent probably, but the site's deleted. | Deleted self-published site on Wordpress | ? The article could not be opened (as "rivcoach.wordpress.com is no longer available"). | ✘ No |
https://www.jedisjeux.net/jeux-de-societe/ | The subject is indepedent. | An association that seems reliable enough, but somehow Google translate doesn't work well, and as I can't read French, I am not sure whether there's an editorial policy. But it's all right and probably reliable. | The article discusses the subject in detail. | ✔ Yes |
http://detafelplakt.skynetblogs.be/archive/2010/07/20/kleine-dingen.html | The subject is indepedent presumably, though it can't be accessed on my laptop. | Blog, also couldn't be opened on my laptop. | ? Ref couldn't be accessed for me, but it's unreliable as it's a self-published blog. | ✘ No |
http://spotlightongames.com/list/nights/a.html#armorica | The subject is indepedent. | Self-published, no editorial policies. | Short, but in-depth enough. | ✘ No |
https://www.dicetower.com/game/67285/armorica | The subject is indepedent. | YouTube channel turned into webpage, marginally reliable for mundane coverage, including gameplay, release date, publisher..., generally unreliable for subjective reviews, and doesn't contribute to GNG as it's routine. | Long review. | ✘ No |
http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/bring_gauls_and_romans_together_in_armorica/ | The subject is indepedent. | ? It seems to have about section and an editor, but the author now posts on BGG, which isn't reliable. | Fairly long article. | ? Unknown |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
The other refs, including BGG link and the publisher's link, are clearly unreliable. VickKiang ( talk) 22:28, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Lots of comments but only one editor advocating a Merge and redirect. Other opinions?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:53, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was redirect to 2022 Georgia lieutenant gubernatorial election#Democratic primary. TigerShark ( talk) 02:49, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a person notable only as a non-winning candidate for political office. As always, candidates do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates per se -- the notability test for politicians is holding a notable political office, not just running for one, and a candidate must demonstrate either that he already had preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten him an article anyway (i.e.
Cynthia Nixon), or a credible reason why his candidacy can be seen as much, much more nationally significant than other people's candidacies such that people would still be looking for information about it
a decade from now even if he loses. But this demonstrates neither of those things, and is referenced to a mix of
primary sources that are not support for notability at all and purely
run of the mill local campaign coverage of the type that every candidate in every election always gets, thus not marking him out as more special than everybody else.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation in November if he wins, but nothing here is already enough to earn him a Wikipedia article today.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:19, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
03:06, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:50, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:46, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. There really isn't much to these relations, no agreements, no embassies, no significant trade. The relations seem to be limited Ministerial interaction and a Spanish company building a road in East Timor. LibStar ( talk) 01:59, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:47, 7 July 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! 03:47, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Mainly being a nominee as an Ambassador. I don't think this is notable. R E A D I N G Talk to the Beans? 01:50, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Just because you have never heard of the two countries, actually (not one), does not mean the ambassadors are not notable. He is as notable as the other ambassadors on this page as well as as notable as the ambassadors appointed by the Trump administration, all of whom have pages on both counts. You also treat nomination as if it is not the first step to confirmation. The fact that he has not yet been confirmed has nothing to do with notability guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isaiahlaitinen99 ( talk • contribs) 20:38, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) NemesisAT ( talk) 13:33, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Actor does not meet WP:NACTOR, let alone WP:BASIC. Need to prove it meets these, not just invoke them. Additionally, three of the four references WP:NOTRS. I would also support converting this to a draft. But it definitely should not be in mainspace as it stands. Amaury • 17:35, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:09, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:43, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I don't think a 3rd relisting would induce more participation here so I'm closing this AFD as "No consensus". Liz Read! Talk! 00:45, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
None of the references shown here demonstrate independent in-depth coverage-- the second one appears to be to the subject's own personal website. No evidence of any awards won, no notable credits, lots of evidence he exists and was interviewed once but I don't see a viable notability claim here. A loose necktie ( talk) 19:14, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
22:16, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:42, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 00:41, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Article relies on a single source, and is only linked to by one other article which is a list of football players. Additionally a google search does not offer any additional information or sources to establish WP:GNG or WP:SNG. Fails WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE. Attempted to speedy delete as per WP:A7 but was reverted. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 00:32, 7 July 2022 (UTC)