The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
I have carried out WP:BEFORE on this article about a Scottish orchestra and added two references to the article (previously unsourced, and tagged as such since 2009). Neither of them is from a reliable published source, however. This orchestra looks run-of-the-mill to me and I do not think it meets WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG. Tacyarg ( talk) 23:55, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:14, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable pizza company, only sourcing in PR sites found. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:46, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Pacific Life. Liz Read! Talk! 05:15, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Short-lived investment company, only one or two RS used, rest is non-notable sources. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:40, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is additional support for a Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:42, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:20, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable finance company, tagged for factual accuracy, unsure of notability. I can't find sourcing in RS. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:36, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable crypto firm, sourcing is largely from blogs and PR sites. The Forbes Crypto appears to be a blog-type posting. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:34, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 05:16, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Sourcing is limited to PR and funding announcements, I don't find anything further in RS we could use to build an article. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:26, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:31, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
If an article on a notable topic severely fails the verifiability or neutral point of view policies, it may be reduced to a stub, or completely deleted by consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion.But given that High King already found sources, I decided to improve the article with respect to it's current state instead. I removed unverifiable information from the article, added some verifiable information from the sources currently present, and generally cleaned up some NPOV issues. I think we can keep based on High King's sources. It would be good to add those into the article to improve it more, because at the moment, we have a really basic "company did money thing" stub right now with one borderline promotional quote that had previously been unattributed close paraphrasing. — siro χ o 03:12, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:32, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable finance company, sourcing is in non-RS or simply funding announcements. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:19, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:28, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was withdrawn. ✗ plicit 07:20, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Article was previously redirected for WP:NTOUR. However, I believe that there may be enough notability that the article can be kept. These are a few sources that go into some detail for the article:
I think there are enough sources that in my opinion, the article is a keep. I won't object if anyone says otherwise. HorrorLover555 ( talk) 18:40, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If you want to Keep this article and you are providing sources, I have no idea why you nominated this article for Deletion. You should consider withdrawing this nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:57, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 07:23, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:54, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The article is crosswiki spam, deleted on many wikis (including at the original site, on Wikipedia in Spanish). No reliable sources. Aníbal (Talk) 20:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd, not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:50, 16 August 2023 (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 07:20, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
I don't think we're meeting WP:GNG here. I'm not seeing WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources. On top of that, all the sources currently listed in the article are not independent of the subject. During a WP:BEFORE I saw some sources, but they turned out to be interviews. Schminnte ( talk • contribs) 20:15, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Despite this result, most participants were open to this article being recreated but a new version must include criteria that show what aspects justifies a film's presence on the list along with some reliable sources discussing this possible genre of movie. Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Largely subjective list with various WP:SYNTH issues. Much of the list is unsourced, and even looking at some of the other sources, I think it's hard to prescribe a political ideology to many films, or that it's "anti-communist", particularly with the breadth of the term "communist". Some of these are historical films that depicted particular communist regimes in a negative light, like The Killing Fields, The Lives of Others, while others are fiction that happen to use communist regimes as the villains, like From Russia with Love and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, but are not necessarily political films that oppose this ideology. I mean, The Death of Stalin was an incredible satire of Soviet leadership, but I wouldn't call it "anti-communist." This list does not have objective enough inclusion criteria to be appropriate for Wikipedia. Reywas92 Talk 22:18, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:38, 16 August 2023 (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 07:22, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Per WP:NSCHOOL, currently under discussion at the Spanish Wikipedia ( es:Wikipedia:Consultas de borrado/Conalep Ing. Bernardo Quintana Arrioja). The first and second sections are a WP:COATRACK of the engineer it is named after, Bernardo Quintana, and of the COVID pandemic, respectively. -- NoonIcarus ( talk) 10:37, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:37, 16 August 2023 (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! 21:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
No demonstration of notability. Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources, either those in the article or elsewhere online - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Run-of-the-mill businessman. Edwardx ( talk) 21:24, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
A completely WP:SYNTH article - there is no actual "rivalry" between Vatreni and Italy, and it is not supported by the sources. SportingFlyer T· C 20:57, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 22:01, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The subject has made at least one appearance for the Equatorial Guinea women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG. I tried using several combinations of her name as well. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:22, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVTROPES and WP:NOTEVERYTHING, an article about a sample or sound bite used in a handful of hip hop songs. Source predominantly used is an answer to a reader submitted question to The A.V. Club, while others reference that KRS-ONE is "socially and politically conscious" and that a song appeared on a soundtrack. Suitable for Genius.com soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:16, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Guatemala women's international footballers. Star Mississippi 21:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The subject has made at least three appearances for the Guatemala women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:15, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The subject has made at least one appearance for the Cuba women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:12, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to 2020 CONCACAF Women's U-20 Championship squads. as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The subject has made at least three appearances for the Cuba women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:10, 16 August 2023 (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! 06:53, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
The whole article is written mostly with primary sources (personal website, blog). Generally, the online sources did not pass WP:GNG as an notable person and/or as an architect. There is minimal independent press coverage for his work. Chiserc ( talk) 17:47, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:42, 16 August 2023 (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 07:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Does not meet the WP:GNG nor WP:NCOLLATH as a former collegiate gymnast. Let'srun ( talk) 15:57, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 17:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:41, 16 August 2023 (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 07:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
The place is not notable enough to be included in Wikipedia, and besides that, the mentioned source is also not notable. Saurabh Saha 16:23, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:35, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:23, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Dictionary definition preserved from deletion ages ago for spurious reasons. Solemn1 ( talk) 16:08, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting not eligible for Soft Deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:35, 16 August 2023 (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 07:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails notability, never achieved anything anywhere, he may get a wild card to participate in Paris 2024 but that didn't happened yet. also whoever created the article used lots of fake references to makes it look better. most of Persian references are referring to his brother Amin Ahmadian who is a national team player. Sports2021 ( talk) 15:00, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:20, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. No coverage provided to indicate Brecklin is notable now, but there is a path wherein he could be, rendering this helpful. Star Mississippi 21:32, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails GNG. Article was deprodded with the reason being "deprod, coverage looks signiticant". The only independent sourcing is routine contract coverage from the Yorkshire Post and Manchester Evening News. I couldn't find any sigcov of him. Dougal18 ( talk) 14:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:37, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, if this is an example of TOOSOON, would draftifying be appropriate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
I wouldn‘t be opposed to draftifying. Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:20, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was Merge to Theresia Gouw and Jennifer Fonstad.. Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Too promotional and does not appear to meet notability guidelines. Has been declined for speedy deletion multiple times. BangJan1999 18:51, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:30, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Does not pass WP:NORG. Zero non-promotional references. Maintenance tag since 2013. No significant coverage on Google at all. Qcne (talk) 18:34, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Remember that sources don't need to be in an article to contribute to establishing notability; see WP:NEXIST. (non-admin closure) Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't pass WP:GNG. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri ( ✍️) 17:46, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:21, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Notability not proven. Insufficient RS. Article seems more like a resume rather than an encyclopedic overview. BEFORE found little discussion of this author in mainstream sources, mostly blogs and niche websites. Just Another Cringy Username ( talk) 17:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. RL0919 ( talk) 17:09, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable artist. Does not have coverage under WP:GNG or WP:NARTIST. Recreated after draftification — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 17:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Cleanup can continue outside of this discussion. Star Mississippi 21:24, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
WP:OR WP:SYNTH, full of generalisations and out-of-context quote mining of contradictory definitions. Already removed a lot of bogus sources that were nothing more than googling for a term and then citing whatever comes up, ignoring context, disregarding inconsistencies in an uncritical pursuit of confirming one's own beliefs. Most additions were done by now-blocked User:Madreterra (blocked for.... "persistent addition of unsourced content)". My prod was deprodded by Necrothesp, who thought it needs to go for a full AfD, so here it is. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 16:37, 16 August 2023 (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. Note: This page is listed as "2nd nomination", but that appears to be due to an error in creating the discussion; there is no Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Azeez Issa Adesiji and I found no evidence of a previous AfD or proposed deletion nomination. RL0919 ( talk) 16:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
I think this page should be deleted because it is not notable enough. Also, I think this page should be deleted because it is an orphan, I can't find any links using https://edwardbetts.com/find_link/Azeez_Issa_Adesiji. History6042 ( talk) 16:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. now that Delete outcome has been struck. A discussion of a possible Merge can occur on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 02:20, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Meets GNG, but could be merged into the symphony of the night, doubt that an individual game mechanic deserves its own article. Grandmaster Huon ( talk) 15:47, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Initial participants disagreed about the standard of notability to apply, and there was no further participation after two relists. RL0919 ( talk) 16:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable landscape park stub with no references, even the Polish version has only 2 references with none of them being independent and one of the references doesn't even work. Fails WP:GNG Crainsaw ( talk) 11:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Dusti
*Let's talk!* 15:19, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Earl of Morton. Liz Read! Talk! 05:18, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Scottish landowner and nobleman who fails WP:GNG, with no claim to fame. The sources which cover the 22nd earl are either not secondary, not independent, not reliable, and/or fail to provide significant coverage. This earl also never sat in the House of Lords due to inheriting his title post-1999.
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:Pilaz
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
" The Scotsman". The Scotsman. Retrieved 3 August 2023. | 1x passing mention. This obituary is about the father. Not SIGCOV. | ✘ No | ||
Mosley, Charles, ed. (2003). Burke’s Peerage, Baronetage & Knightage. Burke's Peerage. ISBN 978-0-9711966-2-9. | WP:TERTIARY source (it's a reference work), does not meet the GNG requirement of being a secondary source. Also not significant coverage, routine genealogical information (DOB, married to, children). | ✘ No | ||
" 'Lady' in need of better luck". henleystandard.co.uk. Retrieved 15 July 2021. | 1x passing mention. Not SIGCOV. | ✘ No | ||
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
Possible redirect target: Earl of Morton. Pilaz ( talk) 13:13, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on redirecting to
Earl of Morton as proposed?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Dusti
*Let's talk!* 15:15, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Descendants (2015 film)#Prequel spin-off. RL0919 ( talk) 16:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Can't find any significant coverage that satisfies WP:GNG; article's only citations are primary sources, WP:IMDB and a TV Guide listing (reliable but not SIGCOV). Pamzeis ( talk) 15:14, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Earl of Cavan. Other subjects can be discussed separately on their respective merits. Star Mississippi 21:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Nobleman of the peerage of Ireland with no significant coverage. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTGENEALOGY. Earls are not inherently notable. Possible redirect target: Earl of Cavan. Pilaz ( talk) 14:58, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. RL0919 ( talk) 16:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:41, 16 August 2023 (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. RL0919 ( talk) 16:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:39, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. I'm concerned with the language used here in the Keep opinions ("seems to meet", "appears to pass") which shows a lack of precision and confidence about the sourcing in the article but it doesn't worry me enough to relist this discussion unless the nominator objects to this closure. This closure is also influenced by the fact that there wasn't strong support for Deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:54, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tagged for notability since 2010. No indication of notability. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:38, 16 August 2023 (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. RL0919 ( talk) 16:19, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. The reason for deletion in the original nomination was not clearly related to our policies. However, since at least one contributor believed the subject is not notable, I am not treating this as a "speedy keep". That said, a majority of participants did not agree with either reason for deletion. Regarding the concerns expressed by User:Belfasty in the nomination, if there are legal issues about the existence or content of the article, please follow the advice given at Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects: 'If you have a genuine legal concern, tell us about it by emailing info-en-q@wikimedia.org with "Legal concern" in the subject line, and giving the exact URL of the article, and what you think is wrong.' RL0919 ( talk) 16:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
This page and the content of it may be used, along with the personal details contained within, to harass and committ criminal offences, some which could be classed as serious crime, against the named subject of this page. The continuation of this page, and the content within, can create risks including risks against the life of the individual named. A Police report to support the deletion is available if required, I need an email address to send that too just. Belfasty ( talk) 14:10, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
the nominator failed to give intelligible grounds for content deletion, which is clearly the case here, as no Wikipedia policy-based grounds have been given. No objection to another editor nominating this in future if they actually invoke some relevant Wikipedia policies/guidelines. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 16:34, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete, per comments below and WP:G5 ( Amansharma111) Girth Summit (blether) 12:31, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
WP:BLP of an entrepreneur, not
properly referenced as passing notability criteria for businesspeople. The attempted notability claim here is an unreferenced list of various awards, but not every award that exists on earth is an automatic notability clincher -- the extent to which any award constitutes a notability claim depends on the notability of the award, meaning that the award itself also has to be able to pass GNG on reliable source coverage about the award as well.
But other than the bulletpointed award list, the only other content here is of the "he is a person who exists" variety, and that isn't referenced to GNG-worthy citations either: two of the four footnotes are duplicated repetition of his own
self-published press release on two different press release distribution platforms, one is a short blurb on a
WordPress blog, and one is a glancing namecheck of his existence in coverage about somebody else.
Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have much, much better sourcing than this.
Bearcat (
talk) 13:30, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. Liz Read! Talk! 06:55, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
I don't think the idea of a list of B&B characters is inherently a bad idea. However, the overwhelming size of the list (
WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE) along with the lack of verification and reliable sources (
WP:V) for many of the characters listed is of concern to me. I think an ideal way of doing this type of list would be similar to how
List of The Simpsons characters handles it, but to get there would require a massive undertaking. I think a better idea would be to just start from scratch per
WP:TNT.
I did post my concerns on the talk page of this article but didn't get a response after about a week. Cheerio,
⛵ WaltClipper -(
talk) 12:44, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. No clear reason to delete first so I have not done so. Star Mississippi 21:17, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the WP:GNG as a failed judicial nominee. Is seemingly a case of WP:BLP1E. Redirecting to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies seems wise here. Let'srun ( talk) 12:28, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. RL0919 ( talk) 16:56, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
GNIS permastub from a removed listing. Whereas Mount Pleasant Township is a real census area, there appears to have never been any town called Mount Pleasant; only a lone post office. Passenger pigeon ( talk) 08:08, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:55, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creep Talk 08:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Keep, delete, redirect, merge this way, merge that way – this had no shortage of differing opinions, but not any consensus for one of them. RL0919 ( talk) 17:08, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Plot summary unnecessarily split from Black Canary where I suggest this should be merged as a SOFTDELETE option. As a stand-alone article, this fails WP:GNG. Primarily just fictional character biography and a list of media appearances. Reception consists of "IGN rated her its 81st-greatest all-time comic book hero. She was number 26 on Comics Buyer's Guide's "100 Sexiest Women in Comics" list." which just confirms this as niche WP:FANCRUFTy character with no real-world impact. Black Canary is probably notable (probably - the reception at that article is as bad as here), but we certainly don't need two subarticles about her comic variants. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:37, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, Delete, Redirect Merge, I still see no consensus among participants.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:50, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Therianthropy. Liz Read! Talk! 05:19, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia already has a page for this at therianthropy. However, I am nominating this for AfD rather than simply redirecting it because I cannot find mention of this term in the slightest outside of a TVTropes page, meaning it violates WP:NOTNEO as likely just a neologism someone made up one day. It merits a discussion on whether the term is actually a relevant one, and if it is a separate topic rather than a complete overlap. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 06:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
I cannot find mention of this term in the slightest outside of a TVTropes pagecomes about. There are non-TVTropes sources which use the term already in the article. The usual Google Books and Google Scholar searches provide numerous hits, including the Lexical Semantics for Terminology and the The Routledge Companion to Literature and Disability. So no, this is not a neologism made up by users of TVTropes or Wikipedia editors. I did not check if this is notable in it's own right or a WP:CONTENTFORK of therianthropy, but as the nominator stated, that would not be a deletion discussion then. Daranios ( talk) 07:15, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There won't be a Speedy Keep here but there are clearly those editors arguing that sources validate this article while others believe it should be Redirected or Merged. At least there is agreement on a Redirect/Merge target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:45, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. RL0919 ( talk) 16:58, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
I'm proposing we delete this. The last time this was discussed was 8 years ago, and at that time there was no consensus. But I don't see where there's sustained notability for this topic appropriate for an article. Rockstone Send me a message! 03:47, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:12, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This should have been mentioned in nomination statement but the previous AFD was
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meitiv family.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:07, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Somali–Kenyan conflict. Liz Read! Talk! 05:21, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
There seems to be no sufficient verifiable sources proving that this incident ever happened. The only source cited states that around 30 Kenyan soldiers were killed in a border skirmsh, that's it. Overall this article doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG standards. I've done a WP:BEFORE check and couldn't find anything conclusive.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is support for a Merge. Also, please remember to sign & date your AFD nomination statements.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was Move to Dark Beast (Marvel Comics) and redirect to Beast (Marvel Comics). This is one of the more complicated closures I've handled but this seems to be the consensus view. Liz Read! Talk! 16:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Minor comic book character, plot summary with next to no reception outside the "In 2018, CBR.com ranked Dark Beast 16th in their "Age Of Apocalypse: The 30 Strongest Characters In Marvel's Coolest Alternate World" list." listicle. WP:FANCRUFT that fails WP:GNG. Perhaps redirect to Beast (Marvel Comics)? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:43, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Sorry to relist when there hasn't been much commentary since the last relisting but there are several different proposals floating around in this discussion and none of them have a majority of participating editors supporting any specific one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:02, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to A. James Clark School of Engineering. This article requires some Merging as the subject isn't currently mentioned at the target article. Liz Read! Talk! 16:42, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
BEFORE shows no independent SIGCOV; been tagged for notability for >3yrs. AviationFreak 💬 05:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Redirect after selectively merging to A. James Clark School of Engineering. This article is obviously written by the center's director if you bother to do a bit of Google search. Graywalls ( talk) 05:50, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:18, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Article about a preacher that does not satisfy WP:GNG or even WP:ANYBIO. Sources are basically the routine PR for his "Kingdom Coin". No WP:SIGCOV on or for the subject. Jamiebuba ( talk) 03:32, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be appreciated if those editors advocating Keep offer sources, in the article or ones found, that supply
WP:SIGCOV. Just saying that the subject "is notable" is not very persuasive.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:37, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:siroxo
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
FireClan [26] | not about subject | ✘ No | ||
Nobelie [27] | heavily sources facebook with almost no analysis thereof | not about subject | ✘ No | |
punch
[28] (listed twice) |
This is almost entirely quoted from web press copy. | [29] | ✘ No | |
guardian.ng [30] | This has no credited author, just an "Editor" byline, which seems to be paid content. It references the same press copy. | no credited author and no editorial practices | ~ very little about subject | ✘ No |
gistmania [31] | ~ seems to rely heavily on subject, eg Apostle Joel Ogebe grew up in northern Nigeria where he had his own fair share of the challenges of humanity. | seems to be a forum, while they claim a modicum editorial pratices [32], I am not even sure they do fact-checking. I don't think it can be considered generally reliable, and given the dependence on the subject this article would be no more reliable than the site | ~ | ✘ No |
The New Man [33] | seems to be paid content | [34] | ✘ No | |
Independent.ng [35] | relies almost entirely on web press copy | very little about subject | ✘ No | |
Crypto News BTC [36] | WP:NCRYPTO, web press copy | ✘ No | ||
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
The result was redirect to Winnipeg–Churchill train. Liz Read! Talk! 03:47, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Insignificant railroad flag stop. Literally just a post along the tracks with no significant coverage to establish notability. – dlthewave ☎ 03:37, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Winnipeg–Churchill train. Liz Read! Talk! 03:45, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Insignificant railroad flag stop. Literally just a post along the tracks with no significant coverage to establish notability. – dlthewave ☎ 03:37, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Winnipeg–Churchill train. Liz Read! Talk! 03:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Insignificant railroad flag stop. Literally just a post along the tracks with no significant coverage to establish notability. – dlthewave ☎ 03:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Bane in other media. Liz Read! Talk! 03:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails to meet either criteria of WP:NFILMCHAR. If not deleted, I think this article can also be merged to the "Film" section of Bane in other media. WuTang94 ( talk) 03:27, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
There just isn't enough here to justify a separate article here.which means he's non-notable. If he's notable, there's enough for an article--that's the definition of notable. So which is it? Jclemens ( talk) 22:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 02:42, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Delete It seems that all of this is covered in the main article. These should clearly be combined. I see no reason at all why these have remained separate for so long. PickleG13 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:25, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. Liz Read! Talk! 02:41, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Subject lacks sustained secondary coverage to meet any notability guideline. Falls into WP:BLP1E. I have no issues with a redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. Let'srun ( talk) 02:13, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. CSD G5. I'm closing this as a speedy delete CSD G5 despite the opinion to Keep this article as it just quotes policy without emphasizing what specific content in this article is relevant to notability criterion. Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable film person, sourcing is largely cast lists/projects worked on, nothing for notability found. Oaktree b ( talk) 19:54, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 01:02, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:08, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. Liz Read! Talk! 01:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Subject does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NPOL as a failed judicial nominee. A redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies seems reasonable. Let'srun ( talk) 02:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Does not appear to be any more notable since the last deletion discussion. BangJan1999 01:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
I have carried out WP:BEFORE on this article about a Scottish orchestra and added two references to the article (previously unsourced, and tagged as such since 2009). Neither of them is from a reliable published source, however. This orchestra looks run-of-the-mill to me and I do not think it meets WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG. Tacyarg ( talk) 23:55, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:14, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable pizza company, only sourcing in PR sites found. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:46, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Pacific Life. Liz Read! Talk! 05:15, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Short-lived investment company, only one or two RS used, rest is non-notable sources. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:40, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is additional support for a Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:42, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:20, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable finance company, tagged for factual accuracy, unsure of notability. I can't find sourcing in RS. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:36, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable crypto firm, sourcing is largely from blogs and PR sites. The Forbes Crypto appears to be a blog-type posting. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:34, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 05:16, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Sourcing is limited to PR and funding announcements, I don't find anything further in RS we could use to build an article. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:26, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:31, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
If an article on a notable topic severely fails the verifiability or neutral point of view policies, it may be reduced to a stub, or completely deleted by consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion.But given that High King already found sources, I decided to improve the article with respect to it's current state instead. I removed unverifiable information from the article, added some verifiable information from the sources currently present, and generally cleaned up some NPOV issues. I think we can keep based on High King's sources. It would be good to add those into the article to improve it more, because at the moment, we have a really basic "company did money thing" stub right now with one borderline promotional quote that had previously been unattributed close paraphrasing. — siro χ o 03:12, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:32, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable finance company, sourcing is in non-RS or simply funding announcements. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:19, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:28, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was withdrawn. ✗ plicit 07:20, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Article was previously redirected for WP:NTOUR. However, I believe that there may be enough notability that the article can be kept. These are a few sources that go into some detail for the article:
I think there are enough sources that in my opinion, the article is a keep. I won't object if anyone says otherwise. HorrorLover555 ( talk) 18:40, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If you want to Keep this article and you are providing sources, I have no idea why you nominated this article for Deletion. You should consider withdrawing this nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:57, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 07:23, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:54, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The article is crosswiki spam, deleted on many wikis (including at the original site, on Wikipedia in Spanish). No reliable sources. Aníbal (Talk) 20:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd, not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:50, 16 August 2023 (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 07:20, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
I don't think we're meeting WP:GNG here. I'm not seeing WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources. On top of that, all the sources currently listed in the article are not independent of the subject. During a WP:BEFORE I saw some sources, but they turned out to be interviews. Schminnte ( talk • contribs) 20:15, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Despite this result, most participants were open to this article being recreated but a new version must include criteria that show what aspects justifies a film's presence on the list along with some reliable sources discussing this possible genre of movie. Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Largely subjective list with various WP:SYNTH issues. Much of the list is unsourced, and even looking at some of the other sources, I think it's hard to prescribe a political ideology to many films, or that it's "anti-communist", particularly with the breadth of the term "communist". Some of these are historical films that depicted particular communist regimes in a negative light, like The Killing Fields, The Lives of Others, while others are fiction that happen to use communist regimes as the villains, like From Russia with Love and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, but are not necessarily political films that oppose this ideology. I mean, The Death of Stalin was an incredible satire of Soviet leadership, but I wouldn't call it "anti-communist." This list does not have objective enough inclusion criteria to be appropriate for Wikipedia. Reywas92 Talk 22:18, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:38, 16 August 2023 (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 07:22, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Per WP:NSCHOOL, currently under discussion at the Spanish Wikipedia ( es:Wikipedia:Consultas de borrado/Conalep Ing. Bernardo Quintana Arrioja). The first and second sections are a WP:COATRACK of the engineer it is named after, Bernardo Quintana, and of the COVID pandemic, respectively. -- NoonIcarus ( talk) 10:37, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:37, 16 August 2023 (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! 21:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
No demonstration of notability. Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources, either those in the article or elsewhere online - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Run-of-the-mill businessman. Edwardx ( talk) 21:24, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
A completely WP:SYNTH article - there is no actual "rivalry" between Vatreni and Italy, and it is not supported by the sources. SportingFlyer T· C 20:57, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 22:01, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The subject has made at least one appearance for the Equatorial Guinea women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG. I tried using several combinations of her name as well. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:22, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVTROPES and WP:NOTEVERYTHING, an article about a sample or sound bite used in a handful of hip hop songs. Source predominantly used is an answer to a reader submitted question to The A.V. Club, while others reference that KRS-ONE is "socially and politically conscious" and that a song appeared on a soundtrack. Suitable for Genius.com soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:16, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Guatemala women's international footballers. Star Mississippi 21:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The subject has made at least three appearances for the Guatemala women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:15, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The subject has made at least one appearance for the Cuba women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:12, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to 2020 CONCACAF Women's U-20 Championship squads. as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The subject has made at least three appearances for the Cuba women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:10, 16 August 2023 (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! 06:53, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
The whole article is written mostly with primary sources (personal website, blog). Generally, the online sources did not pass WP:GNG as an notable person and/or as an architect. There is minimal independent press coverage for his work. Chiserc ( talk) 17:47, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:42, 16 August 2023 (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 07:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Does not meet the WP:GNG nor WP:NCOLLATH as a former collegiate gymnast. Let'srun ( talk) 15:57, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 17:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:41, 16 August 2023 (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 07:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
The place is not notable enough to be included in Wikipedia, and besides that, the mentioned source is also not notable. Saurabh Saha 16:23, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:35, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:23, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Dictionary definition preserved from deletion ages ago for spurious reasons. Solemn1 ( talk) 16:08, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting not eligible for Soft Deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:35, 16 August 2023 (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 07:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails notability, never achieved anything anywhere, he may get a wild card to participate in Paris 2024 but that didn't happened yet. also whoever created the article used lots of fake references to makes it look better. most of Persian references are referring to his brother Amin Ahmadian who is a national team player. Sports2021 ( talk) 15:00, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:20, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. No coverage provided to indicate Brecklin is notable now, but there is a path wherein he could be, rendering this helpful. Star Mississippi 21:32, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails GNG. Article was deprodded with the reason being "deprod, coverage looks signiticant". The only independent sourcing is routine contract coverage from the Yorkshire Post and Manchester Evening News. I couldn't find any sigcov of him. Dougal18 ( talk) 14:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:37, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, if this is an example of TOOSOON, would draftifying be appropriate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
I wouldn‘t be opposed to draftifying. Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:20, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was Merge to Theresia Gouw and Jennifer Fonstad.. Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Too promotional and does not appear to meet notability guidelines. Has been declined for speedy deletion multiple times. BangJan1999 18:51, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:30, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Does not pass WP:NORG. Zero non-promotional references. Maintenance tag since 2013. No significant coverage on Google at all. Qcne (talk) 18:34, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Remember that sources don't need to be in an article to contribute to establishing notability; see WP:NEXIST. (non-admin closure) Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't pass WP:GNG. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri ( ✍️) 17:46, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:21, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Notability not proven. Insufficient RS. Article seems more like a resume rather than an encyclopedic overview. BEFORE found little discussion of this author in mainstream sources, mostly blogs and niche websites. Just Another Cringy Username ( talk) 17:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. RL0919 ( talk) 17:09, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable artist. Does not have coverage under WP:GNG or WP:NARTIST. Recreated after draftification — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 17:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Cleanup can continue outside of this discussion. Star Mississippi 21:24, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
WP:OR WP:SYNTH, full of generalisations and out-of-context quote mining of contradictory definitions. Already removed a lot of bogus sources that were nothing more than googling for a term and then citing whatever comes up, ignoring context, disregarding inconsistencies in an uncritical pursuit of confirming one's own beliefs. Most additions were done by now-blocked User:Madreterra (blocked for.... "persistent addition of unsourced content)". My prod was deprodded by Necrothesp, who thought it needs to go for a full AfD, so here it is. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw ( talk) 16:37, 16 August 2023 (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. Note: This page is listed as "2nd nomination", but that appears to be due to an error in creating the discussion; there is no Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Azeez Issa Adesiji and I found no evidence of a previous AfD or proposed deletion nomination. RL0919 ( talk) 16:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
I think this page should be deleted because it is not notable enough. Also, I think this page should be deleted because it is an orphan, I can't find any links using https://edwardbetts.com/find_link/Azeez_Issa_Adesiji. History6042 ( talk) 16:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. now that Delete outcome has been struck. A discussion of a possible Merge can occur on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 02:20, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Meets GNG, but could be merged into the symphony of the night, doubt that an individual game mechanic deserves its own article. Grandmaster Huon ( talk) 15:47, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Initial participants disagreed about the standard of notability to apply, and there was no further participation after two relists. RL0919 ( talk) 16:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable landscape park stub with no references, even the Polish version has only 2 references with none of them being independent and one of the references doesn't even work. Fails WP:GNG Crainsaw ( talk) 11:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Dusti
*Let's talk!* 15:19, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Earl of Morton. Liz Read! Talk! 05:18, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Scottish landowner and nobleman who fails WP:GNG, with no claim to fame. The sources which cover the 22nd earl are either not secondary, not independent, not reliable, and/or fail to provide significant coverage. This earl also never sat in the House of Lords due to inheriting his title post-1999.
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:Pilaz
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
" The Scotsman". The Scotsman. Retrieved 3 August 2023. | 1x passing mention. This obituary is about the father. Not SIGCOV. | ✘ No | ||
Mosley, Charles, ed. (2003). Burke’s Peerage, Baronetage & Knightage. Burke's Peerage. ISBN 978-0-9711966-2-9. | WP:TERTIARY source (it's a reference work), does not meet the GNG requirement of being a secondary source. Also not significant coverage, routine genealogical information (DOB, married to, children). | ✘ No | ||
" 'Lady' in need of better luck". henleystandard.co.uk. Retrieved 15 July 2021. | 1x passing mention. Not SIGCOV. | ✘ No | ||
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
Possible redirect target: Earl of Morton. Pilaz ( talk) 13:13, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on redirecting to
Earl of Morton as proposed?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Dusti
*Let's talk!* 15:15, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Descendants (2015 film)#Prequel spin-off. RL0919 ( talk) 16:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Can't find any significant coverage that satisfies WP:GNG; article's only citations are primary sources, WP:IMDB and a TV Guide listing (reliable but not SIGCOV). Pamzeis ( talk) 15:14, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Earl of Cavan. Other subjects can be discussed separately on their respective merits. Star Mississippi 21:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Nobleman of the peerage of Ireland with no significant coverage. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTGENEALOGY. Earls are not inherently notable. Possible redirect target: Earl of Cavan. Pilaz ( talk) 14:58, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. RL0919 ( talk) 16:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:41, 16 August 2023 (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. RL0919 ( talk) 16:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:39, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. I'm concerned with the language used here in the Keep opinions ("seems to meet", "appears to pass") which shows a lack of precision and confidence about the sourcing in the article but it doesn't worry me enough to relist this discussion unless the nominator objects to this closure. This closure is also influenced by the fact that there wasn't strong support for Deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:54, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tagged for notability since 2010. No indication of notability. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:38, 16 August 2023 (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. RL0919 ( talk) 16:19, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. The reason for deletion in the original nomination was not clearly related to our policies. However, since at least one contributor believed the subject is not notable, I am not treating this as a "speedy keep". That said, a majority of participants did not agree with either reason for deletion. Regarding the concerns expressed by User:Belfasty in the nomination, if there are legal issues about the existence or content of the article, please follow the advice given at Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects: 'If you have a genuine legal concern, tell us about it by emailing info-en-q@wikimedia.org with "Legal concern" in the subject line, and giving the exact URL of the article, and what you think is wrong.' RL0919 ( talk) 16:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
This page and the content of it may be used, along with the personal details contained within, to harass and committ criminal offences, some which could be classed as serious crime, against the named subject of this page. The continuation of this page, and the content within, can create risks including risks against the life of the individual named. A Police report to support the deletion is available if required, I need an email address to send that too just. Belfasty ( talk) 14:10, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
the nominator failed to give intelligible grounds for content deletion, which is clearly the case here, as no Wikipedia policy-based grounds have been given. No objection to another editor nominating this in future if they actually invoke some relevant Wikipedia policies/guidelines. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 16:34, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete, per comments below and WP:G5 ( Amansharma111) Girth Summit (blether) 12:31, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
WP:BLP of an entrepreneur, not
properly referenced as passing notability criteria for businesspeople. The attempted notability claim here is an unreferenced list of various awards, but not every award that exists on earth is an automatic notability clincher -- the extent to which any award constitutes a notability claim depends on the notability of the award, meaning that the award itself also has to be able to pass GNG on reliable source coverage about the award as well.
But other than the bulletpointed award list, the only other content here is of the "he is a person who exists" variety, and that isn't referenced to GNG-worthy citations either: two of the four footnotes are duplicated repetition of his own
self-published press release on two different press release distribution platforms, one is a short blurb on a
WordPress blog, and one is a glancing namecheck of his existence in coverage about somebody else.
Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have much, much better sourcing than this.
Bearcat (
talk) 13:30, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. Liz Read! Talk! 06:55, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
I don't think the idea of a list of B&B characters is inherently a bad idea. However, the overwhelming size of the list (
WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE) along with the lack of verification and reliable sources (
WP:V) for many of the characters listed is of concern to me. I think an ideal way of doing this type of list would be similar to how
List of The Simpsons characters handles it, but to get there would require a massive undertaking. I think a better idea would be to just start from scratch per
WP:TNT.
I did post my concerns on the talk page of this article but didn't get a response after about a week. Cheerio,
⛵ WaltClipper -(
talk) 12:44, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. No clear reason to delete first so I have not done so. Star Mississippi 21:17, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the WP:GNG as a failed judicial nominee. Is seemingly a case of WP:BLP1E. Redirecting to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies seems wise here. Let'srun ( talk) 12:28, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. RL0919 ( talk) 16:56, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
GNIS permastub from a removed listing. Whereas Mount Pleasant Township is a real census area, there appears to have never been any town called Mount Pleasant; only a lone post office. Passenger pigeon ( talk) 08:08, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:55, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creep Talk 08:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Keep, delete, redirect, merge this way, merge that way – this had no shortage of differing opinions, but not any consensus for one of them. RL0919 ( talk) 17:08, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Plot summary unnecessarily split from Black Canary where I suggest this should be merged as a SOFTDELETE option. As a stand-alone article, this fails WP:GNG. Primarily just fictional character biography and a list of media appearances. Reception consists of "IGN rated her its 81st-greatest all-time comic book hero. She was number 26 on Comics Buyer's Guide's "100 Sexiest Women in Comics" list." which just confirms this as niche WP:FANCRUFTy character with no real-world impact. Black Canary is probably notable (probably - the reception at that article is as bad as here), but we certainly don't need two subarticles about her comic variants. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:37, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, Delete, Redirect Merge, I still see no consensus among participants.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:50, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Therianthropy. Liz Read! Talk! 05:19, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia already has a page for this at therianthropy. However, I am nominating this for AfD rather than simply redirecting it because I cannot find mention of this term in the slightest outside of a TVTropes page, meaning it violates WP:NOTNEO as likely just a neologism someone made up one day. It merits a discussion on whether the term is actually a relevant one, and if it is a separate topic rather than a complete overlap. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 06:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
I cannot find mention of this term in the slightest outside of a TVTropes pagecomes about. There are non-TVTropes sources which use the term already in the article. The usual Google Books and Google Scholar searches provide numerous hits, including the Lexical Semantics for Terminology and the The Routledge Companion to Literature and Disability. So no, this is not a neologism made up by users of TVTropes or Wikipedia editors. I did not check if this is notable in it's own right or a WP:CONTENTFORK of therianthropy, but as the nominator stated, that would not be a deletion discussion then. Daranios ( talk) 07:15, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There won't be a Speedy Keep here but there are clearly those editors arguing that sources validate this article while others believe it should be Redirected or Merged. At least there is agreement on a Redirect/Merge target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:45, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. RL0919 ( talk) 16:58, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
I'm proposing we delete this. The last time this was discussed was 8 years ago, and at that time there was no consensus. But I don't see where there's sustained notability for this topic appropriate for an article. Rockstone Send me a message! 03:47, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:12, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This should have been mentioned in nomination statement but the previous AFD was
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meitiv family.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:07, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Somali–Kenyan conflict. Liz Read! Talk! 05:21, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
There seems to be no sufficient verifiable sources proving that this incident ever happened. The only source cited states that around 30 Kenyan soldiers were killed in a border skirmsh, that's it. Overall this article doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG standards. I've done a WP:BEFORE check and couldn't find anything conclusive.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is support for a Merge. Also, please remember to sign & date your AFD nomination statements.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was Move to Dark Beast (Marvel Comics) and redirect to Beast (Marvel Comics). This is one of the more complicated closures I've handled but this seems to be the consensus view. Liz Read! Talk! 16:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Minor comic book character, plot summary with next to no reception outside the "In 2018, CBR.com ranked Dark Beast 16th in their "Age Of Apocalypse: The 30 Strongest Characters In Marvel's Coolest Alternate World" list." listicle. WP:FANCRUFT that fails WP:GNG. Perhaps redirect to Beast (Marvel Comics)? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:43, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Sorry to relist when there hasn't been much commentary since the last relisting but there are several different proposals floating around in this discussion and none of them have a majority of participating editors supporting any specific one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:02, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to A. James Clark School of Engineering. This article requires some Merging as the subject isn't currently mentioned at the target article. Liz Read! Talk! 16:42, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
BEFORE shows no independent SIGCOV; been tagged for notability for >3yrs. AviationFreak 💬 05:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Redirect after selectively merging to A. James Clark School of Engineering. This article is obviously written by the center's director if you bother to do a bit of Google search. Graywalls ( talk) 05:50, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:18, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Article about a preacher that does not satisfy WP:GNG or even WP:ANYBIO. Sources are basically the routine PR for his "Kingdom Coin". No WP:SIGCOV on or for the subject. Jamiebuba ( talk) 03:32, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be appreciated if those editors advocating Keep offer sources, in the article or ones found, that supply
WP:SIGCOV. Just saying that the subject "is notable" is not very persuasive.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:37, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:siroxo
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
FireClan [26] | not about subject | ✘ No | ||
Nobelie [27] | heavily sources facebook with almost no analysis thereof | not about subject | ✘ No | |
punch
[28] (listed twice) |
This is almost entirely quoted from web press copy. | [29] | ✘ No | |
guardian.ng [30] | This has no credited author, just an "Editor" byline, which seems to be paid content. It references the same press copy. | no credited author and no editorial practices | ~ very little about subject | ✘ No |
gistmania [31] | ~ seems to rely heavily on subject, eg Apostle Joel Ogebe grew up in northern Nigeria where he had his own fair share of the challenges of humanity. | seems to be a forum, while they claim a modicum editorial pratices [32], I am not even sure they do fact-checking. I don't think it can be considered generally reliable, and given the dependence on the subject this article would be no more reliable than the site | ~ | ✘ No |
The New Man [33] | seems to be paid content | [34] | ✘ No | |
Independent.ng [35] | relies almost entirely on web press copy | very little about subject | ✘ No | |
Crypto News BTC [36] | WP:NCRYPTO, web press copy | ✘ No | ||
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
The result was redirect to Winnipeg–Churchill train. Liz Read! Talk! 03:47, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Insignificant railroad flag stop. Literally just a post along the tracks with no significant coverage to establish notability. – dlthewave ☎ 03:37, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Winnipeg–Churchill train. Liz Read! Talk! 03:45, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Insignificant railroad flag stop. Literally just a post along the tracks with no significant coverage to establish notability. – dlthewave ☎ 03:37, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Winnipeg–Churchill train. Liz Read! Talk! 03:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Insignificant railroad flag stop. Literally just a post along the tracks with no significant coverage to establish notability. – dlthewave ☎ 03:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Bane in other media. Liz Read! Talk! 03:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails to meet either criteria of WP:NFILMCHAR. If not deleted, I think this article can also be merged to the "Film" section of Bane in other media. WuTang94 ( talk) 03:27, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
There just isn't enough here to justify a separate article here.which means he's non-notable. If he's notable, there's enough for an article--that's the definition of notable. So which is it? Jclemens ( talk) 22:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 02:42, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Delete It seems that all of this is covered in the main article. These should clearly be combined. I see no reason at all why these have remained separate for so long. PickleG13 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:25, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. Liz Read! Talk! 02:41, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Subject lacks sustained secondary coverage to meet any notability guideline. Falls into WP:BLP1E. I have no issues with a redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. Let'srun ( talk) 02:13, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. CSD G5. I'm closing this as a speedy delete CSD G5 despite the opinion to Keep this article as it just quotes policy without emphasizing what specific content in this article is relevant to notability criterion. Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable film person, sourcing is largely cast lists/projects worked on, nothing for notability found. Oaktree b ( talk) 19:54, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 01:02, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:08, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. Liz Read! Talk! 01:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Subject does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NPOL as a failed judicial nominee. A redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies seems reasonable. Let'srun ( talk) 02:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Does not appear to be any more notable since the last deletion discussion. BangJan1999 01:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)