![]() |
The result was delete. So many short meaningless and non policy based votes here from users who do not regularly come to AFD. Where have they come from? Regardless votes not engaging with policy are a corded less weight then those that do so the outcome is clear. Spartaz Humbug! 02:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
What is the point of this list? It's not a notable subject or even a proper topic, it's just an indiscriminate list of crap; see WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Richard75 ( talk) 23:44, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
There also does not appear to be a consistent distinction between epithets, purely descriptive terms, popular nicknames, sundry self-assigned designations by authoritarians, and actual official titles.As an AtD, rename the list to List of offices held only by one person and purge the [bleep] like Emperor Norton and other self-aggrandisement (or in the case of Peron and Kim, posthumous-aggrandisement). Cheers, Last1in ( talk) 18:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
"In recent history we have had certain titles that have come to be associated with spe cific people, not with a specific role in an institution. Il Duce (Mussolini), der Führer (Hitler), The Great Helmsman or The Chairman (Mao), El líder máximo (Castro), Vozhd, ‘leader’ (Stalin), Maršal, Serbian for ‘general’ or ‘leader’ (Tito), El caudillo de España, ‘the Chieftain of Spain’ (Franco), Dear Leader (KimJong-il), Coronel (Gaddafi). From the outside it seems each one of these leaderssought out a unique way to be called by this own people."
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! 23:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NTRACK and WP:SPORTSCRIT. Only primary sources provided. LibStar ( talk) 23:29, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The page is entirely original research. Talk page consensus was there was no content justifying a merge or redirect. TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk) 23:06, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nominator has now requested the article be kept. (non-admin closure) Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:34, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Article created likely as part of a WP:UPE campaign, see [ [3]]
A BEFORE doesn't turn up anything of note. BrigadierG ( talk) 22:05, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:49, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Was looking to de-orphan this article and realized its had notability tags since 2016. I couldn't find any sigcov on a WP:BEFORE, and it's an American company so I probably didn't miss any sources in other languages. BuySomeApples ( talk) 21:52, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. I leave Category:Dirty District albums for CfD, if necessary. Star Mississippi 21:49, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
No sufficient in-depth coverage: fails WP:GNG and is possibly original research. Band that made the album is also being nominated for deletion by another user. Sgubaldo ( talk) 21:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related pages (the band's other albums) for the same reasons above:
Sgubaldo ( talk) 22:00, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Consensus is sourcing is insufficient Star Mississippi 21:38, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Article about a short film, not
properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing
WP:NFILM. The only notability claim in evidence here is that the film exists, which isn't automatically enough in the absence of a
WP:GNG-worthy volume of third-party media coverage about the film to externally validate its significance -- but the sourcing consists of two directory entries that aren't support for notability at all, and one short blurb on a
blog that doesn't represent enough coverage to vault this over GNG all by itself.
In fact, I strongly suspect that this was really meant as a
WP:COATRACK for the soundtrack album, since the creator's edit history pertains much more strongly to music (including the band credited with the soundtrack's creation) than it does to film -- but albums aren't "inherently" notable just because they exist either, and still have to be shown to have GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about them, but absolutely none of the sourcing here addresses any potential notability under
WP:NMUSIC either.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt this film, or its soundtrack album, from having to be the subject of quite a bit more media coverage and analysis than this.
Bearcat (
talk)
13:28, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:39, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Add. The film is repeatedly presented as a cult-classic of its genre. See:
etc. There are many other sources. This film seems clearly notable and I will leave it at that.- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Union for Reform Judaism#History. Using sources identified here. Weak consensus appears to be there isn't enough for a standalone Star Mississippi 21:37, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Propose deletion or merging into Union for Reform Judaism, the parent organization. Non-notable arm of a larger movement, has been defunct for 15 years, with no WP:SIGCOV that would justify a stand alone article. In the previous AfD discussion, editors suggested the existence of WP:RS that could enhance the article. I did a WP:BEFORE, finding none of import. Longhornsg ( talk) 17:09, 13 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. If you oppose merging, then please offer what you think should happen with this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:11, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:51, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:BIO: totally lacks any sources about him. Clarityfiend ( talk) 17:40, 13 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!
21:07, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Valley2 city‽ 04:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Not finding anything which would lend to this subject meeting WP:GNG or any other notability criteria. None of the secondary sources actually mention the firm itself, rather they are quotes from the founder about some cases and issues. Let'srun ( talk) 20:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:12, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable television series. Only passing coverage ViperSnake151 Talk 22:37, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
20:53, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Also noting that I consider there to be sufficient participation to delete after 3 weeks; soft deletion doesn't need to come into play. There's two people arguing for deletion and no one has objected in that time frame. It's a weak consensus but it is sufficient for deletion. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:50, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Does not appear to be notable, nothing found in BEFORE. Tagged for notability since 2016. PROD removed with zero improvements. DonaldD23 talk to me 21:42, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Previous PROD, not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:23, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
20:50, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
dubious notability. Can find virtually no coverage by reliable sources, seems to exist only to promote the subject FASTILY 20:24, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. TonyBallioni ( talk) 20:00, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Disputed draftification. Puff piece for yet another entrepreneur. How rarely are they notable. Fails WP:BIO. WP:ROTM businessman doing business. I doubt there to be any point in sending back to draft 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nom withdrawn, see article talk page discussion. (non-admin closure) Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Not notable, fails WP:NCORP. There's a source assessment on the talk page for the sources in the article; I'll put that here too for convenience.
Most of the sources cover the founder of this company rather than providing any in-depth coverage of the company itself; see also WP:ORGDEPTH. Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:20, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:34, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
No indication of being notable. Fails WP:NCORP, WP:SIRS scope_creep Talk 17:32, 20 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. TonyBallioni ( talk) 19:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:BASIC. Sources currently in the article are not independent. A WP:BEFORE search found this piece in the Guardian. Note that it's a blogpost and therefore insufficiently reliable to establish notability; see WP:RSPSS. Claims of his credits are insufficient to establish notability and unsourced; establishing notability requires verifiable evidence.
This is not relevant to notability, but we should be aware of it during the discussion: The Twitter/X account @lateralcast, which is ostensibly run by Bodycombe, has previously canvassed followers to prevent article deletion of a different article here. Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 17:25, 20 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. TonyBallioni ( talk) 19:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
apparently located on the Panju Island
the station might have been constructed in the 1860s
The station was mentioned in a train graph published in a BB&CI Magazine dated Dec 1923, implying that the station was in service at least till the mid-1920s, however, there was no mention of the station in a 1937 timetable. The station seems to have been demolished sinceIf we can't even state a single definitive fact about this train station, it certainly should not have an article. Half of the article does not discuss its supposed subject. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 16:06, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. SK3 (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 ( t • c) 11:50, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
I propose that the article on Andrea Jin, a Canadian comedian, be deleted. The subject of this article does not appear to meet the [Notability guidelines for entertainers]( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Entertainers_and_broadcasters), specifically the criteria for comedians.
While Jin is a self proclaimed comedian, the article does not provide reliable secondary sources that discuss her in detail (literally only one paragraph), nor does it demonstrate that she has made significant, recognized contributions to the field of comedy. Only one secondary reference is in English. The only other primary link is to her website which is not considered independent, reliable sources according to Wikipedia's [guidelines]( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources).
From the information presented, it seems that this article may have been created primarily for promotional purposes rather than as an informative entry. Therefore, it may fall under Wikipedia's [guidelines on promotional content and advertising]( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion).
I encourage other editors to contribute to this discussion so we can reach a consensus on the best course of action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.231.121.150 ( talk • contribs)
The result was delete. We generally hold that articles on fictional subjects require substantive coverage that is more than plot detail: as such I do not find the "keep" votes here very strong, and there is consensus to delete. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:50, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Doubt this meets WP:GNG, not every Transformer deserves its own article, see WP:POKEMON. Grandmaster Huon ( talk) 14:46, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Claimed sources have been impeached and keep arguments otherwise don't make a policy based case. Spartaz Humbug! 02:46, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Doubt this meets WP:GNG, not every Transformer deserves its own article, see WP:POKEMON. Grandmaster Huon ( talk) 14:39, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG. Tagged for notability since 2022 DonaldD23 talk to me 13:49, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was Article moved to User space. Editor bypassed this AFD process and moved this article in the midst of an AFD deletion discussion. It would be preferable, in the future, for page creators to come to an AFD and request this outcome but the deed's been done so I'm closing this discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 07:18, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Contested PROD.
My rationale As far as I am aware, we don't split the matches from the season article unless there are issues with the article length for the parent article. Looking at 2023 IFK Norrköping season, I can't see how that would be the case. That article is way shorter than any of the season articles at WP:FA, such as 1994–95 Gillingham F.C. season, so I see no reason for this split. Also, the current content duplicates what is already in the parent article.
Contested with I am asking to keep this page because the acticle contains 30 games, and each game conatains multiple lines, therefore it is a headache to update a single match, while when it is outside the article, we may use subtitles and therefore subsections, which help find the right match easier. Thanks.
The fact that the season contains 30 games is not sufficient for a split imho. Every Premier League team plays 38 league games and several cup games a season and we never split the matches out. I have consulted WP:SIZESPLIT for guidance and, at 20KB, the article 2023 IFK Norrköping season does not meet criteria for a split based on size and I don't see any other valid reason. If consensus is that we do indeed need to split the matches into a separate article then I think that this will have repercussions for most if not all season articles moving forward. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:30, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Wikipedias. ✗ plicit 13:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Unnotable wiki citing only primary sources. That is to say Wikipedia/other Wikimedia projects.
Perhaps this is also considered circular referencing? QuickQuokka [ talk • contribs 13:12, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. TonyBallioni ( talk) 15:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku ( talk) 12:59, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The review notes: "“Time of Death” is powerful stuff and difficult to watch. It’s also impossible not to admire the courage and generosity of all those who agreed to be filmed during such a time. The unifying effect of the stricken may offer the strongest proof of our essential humanity — watching a man apologize for his sins with his final breaths, we eagerly forgive just as we would be forgiven. Still, “Time of Death” is so determined to celebrate the power of a “good” death that it often tidies away the very things that makes bedside vigils so inspiring. The grimmer realities of the dying body are not dealt with — there isn’t an adult diaper in sight — and with the exception of Maria, no voice is raised except in song."
The review notes: "I watched all the episodes consecutively and came away exhausted, but I also came away with a sense of comfort that I still can’t quite describe. It was gratitude, in part, to the subjects and their families for letting the cameras in. “Time of Death” is vital and meaningful television; if you watch, I hope it gives you the same peace and understanding it gave me."
The review notes: "The tone is unobtrusive, although occasionally the voice of an interviewer is present, coaxing the subjects. Executive producers used small crews embedded with the subjects to track these stories, from doctors’ offices and hospitals to homes, all the way to deathbeds. The camera is discreet, cutting away at the very end, giving privacy when taste requires. The families involved are brave in ways not required of ordinary “reality TV” subjects. Even when they appear to be speaking for the camera, the situations are not manipulated. The impact is quite powerful."
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Unnecessary disambiguation page per WP:ONEOTHER Lightoil ( talk) 12:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Well, this is embarrassing. 11 years ago I created this article and now I do not know what I was thinking. I can hardly find any information about the subject other than basic genealogical data such as whom she married and to whom she gave birth, so this falls under WP:INVALIDBIO and WP:NOTGENEALOGY. The title is also nonsensical, as noted at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Where to move an article?. In my defense, I was young, very young. Let's get this over with and never speak of it again, please :) Surtsicna ( talk) 11:30, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. I don't love the UPE aspect here, but as the argument for deletion rests on the history, rather than the present state of the article and the state of the sourcing, I don't see how another conclusion is possible. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:42, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Article was written by a globally locked account from a large UPE spam sockfarm. No substantive edits by anyone else, so would be eligible for WP:G5, but it survived a previous AfD discussion (only just), with two of the keep !voters noting that it needs a rewrite. In situations like this I think it is better to delete the spam version per WP:TNT and let someone who is acting in good faith recreate the article if and when they want to. Pinging the folk who !voted in the last discussion: Worldiswide, Siroxo, Citadeol, DareshMohan, Aviram7, Ravensfire, Actualcpscm, and closing admin Liz. Girth Summit (blether) 11:21, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Comments: I just went through the sources in the article in order until 22, then picked a few others to evaluate here as well. I think this is sufficient for making my case for keeping, see below. Table by Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 13:25, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria below, and we have enough for BASIC. Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:09, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creep Talk 11:05, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
"Antimetal" tech,
"Antimetal" AI,
"Antimetal" companyto avoid the many results about "antimetal" in other contexts. signed, Rosguill talk 13:28, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rainbow S.p.A.#Television series. Clear consensus against a standalone article, no rebuttal to a redirect specifically. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:37, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
No indication of being notable. Previously deleted per prod and undelete with the mess left on mainspace. Previous message is still valid. Appears to fail WP:NTV, nothing found in a WP:BEFORE to establish notability which is has been tagged for since 2020 scope_creep Talk 11:01, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 08:13, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
We don't need a separate article for how the seeding worked. This is covered adequately in 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup#Draw, and there is no need for a separate article. Just delete this, or redirect to 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup#Draw if people think this is a plausible search term (I don't personally think it is a sensible search term). Joseph 2302 ( talk) 10:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Survivor: Millennials vs. Gen X. Liz Read! Talk! 21:14, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Notable for winning only Survivor: Millennials vs. Gen X. He also finished 12th in Survivor: Winners at War, but I doubt that makes him also notable. Furthermore, he hosted only one local TV program and no other. I've yet to see his notability outside Survivor. WP:PAGEDECIDE should apply if neither WP:BLP1E nor WP:BIO1E does. Moreover, appearing at least twice on Survivor doesn't make the person notable. George Ho ( talk) 09:35, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Almost forgot: it should be redirected to Survivor: Millennials vs. Gen X or list of Survivor (American TV series) contestants. George Ho ( talk) 09:37, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Do we have a target for redirecting the article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Dusti
*Let's talk!*
10:04, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. TonyBallioni ( talk) 15:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Article about an Artists that does not meet WP:NCREATIVE and WP:GNG. The sources cited are not enough to to satisfy WP:N and are merely passing mentions of the subject. Jamiebuba ( talk) 09:19, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
References
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Dusti
*Let's talk!*
10:04, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Changi Airport MRT station. If people prefer a different target, they can change it boldly. TonyBallioni ( talk) 15:02, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The MRT station in question has not yet been exactly been confirmed by authorities and mostly on speculation per WP:CRYSTAL. The google search to Changi Airport Terminal 5 MRT station mainly brings up the Land Transport Guru pages, which is a user-based transport blog and should not be confused with the Land Transport Authority, which has issued no official confirmation of the station. Henceforth I propose deleting this article until the station has been officially confirmed by the LTA. ZKang123 ( talk) 08:38, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Bit early, but if I would've come across this earlier, I would've closed as snow keep. (non-admin closure) CLYDE TALK TO ME/ STUFF DONE 01:53, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
A minor incident with one fatality (the shooter). WP:NOTNEWS, WP:NEVENT don't appear to be met - coverage is limited to the few days following the incident, which wouldn't even get any coverage if it happened at a less famous company. I recommend redirecting to History of YouTube where this is already mentioned. Perhaps merge a few sentences, as this incident is covered there in just one sentence. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:35, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. SK1 ( withdrawn), no other deletes. (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 ( t • c) 11:50, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
No references Greatder ( talk) 06:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 07:06, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Clearly fails WP:NSINGER. Not notable. A BLP with no references at all. The external links are a self published web page and IMDb which is user generated. Does not meet WP:GNG. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 06:37, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
05:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. I'm closing this as Keep partially due to the lack of a valid and strong deletion rationale. You have to present an argument for why Deletion is the correct resolution for an article with problems instead of regular editing choices. Liz Read! Talk! 06:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
This article has been languishing in the notability issue for three months now, let's bring it to the chopping block. Grandmaster Huon ( talk) 05:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; if no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article. Wikipedia's concept of notability applies this basic standard to avoid indiscriminate inclusion of topics.
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 05:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The subject has made at least one appearance for the Nicaragua women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 04:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 03:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
It seems to fail WP:MUSIC. A Google search confirms the chart position mentioned, but other than that, it seemingly lacks significant coverage. Losipov ( talk) 04:53, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
His voice on tracks like Bittersweet Bundle Of Misery has a slightly out of tune, but intentional, quality about it., [33]
'No Good Time' and 'Bittersweet Bundle of Misery' also contradict the received opinion that Damon was the tunesmith in Blur and Graham was the obscurantist., or [34]
The recent single Bittersweet Bundle of Misery resembles The Archies' Sugar Sugar as much as Blur's Coffee and TV,So NSONG holds up well in this case. — siro χ o 06:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, as I saw coverage unrelated to the album, or
articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album.I am confident we can write a start-class or longer article on this song. Since it doesn't meet either of the exclusionary criteria, and meets other guidelines, I am satisfied the SNG is met. — siro χ o 10:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
the subjectof the article/review/etc: The coverage required by NSONG is
non-trivial treatment and excludes mere mention of the song/single, its musician/band or of its publication, price listings and other non-substantive detail treatment. Even in the best examples, the song is mentioned and perhaps used as an example of a quality of the singer's voice, but that's it. This is not substantive detail treatment, even by the lower standards of NSONG. Actualcpscm ( talk) 10:54, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a disagreement over how
WP:NSONG is to be interpreted with regard to this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
05:06, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we still need to hear from additional editors on varying interpretations of the relevance to
WP:NSONG in the context of this article subject.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:54, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 03:07, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
There are no references and the college no longer exists after merging with two other colleges over 10 years ago to former Edinburgh College.
I don't believe it meets WP:GNG
I see Two Options, Deletion or Merge with Edinburgh college 1keyhole ( talk) 04:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'd like more evaluation of the sources found and, hopefully, the decent ones added to the article. I'm reluctant to close as Keep a completely unsourced article. Also consider the nominator's suggestion of a Merge to
Edinburgh College.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
04:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:53, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn. Sources have been found (non-admin closure) Lightoil ( talk) 05:13, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Non Notable producer. Sources are mostly unreliable per WP:KO/RS#UR or primary sources. Could not find more sources in WP:BEFORE search in Korean and English. Lightoil ( talk) 02:39, 20 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! 03:52, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Not notable enough for an article, only source I could find making a passing mention to this school is from Hitavada [40],fails WP:NSCHOOL. Ratnahastin ( talk) 01:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:35, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:32, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Fundamental disagreement over the quality of sources and whether or not they are sufficient. Liz Read! Talk! 02:44, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
It's not as abysmally sourced as the article previously deleted at AfD, but the underlying notability issue has not changed since the last AfD a few years ago. Nowhere near meeting WP:GNG, online coverage of the subject is trivial or else not independent. In principle could be redirected to Martin Shaw as {{ r from child}}, but there's almost no information about Joe Shaw at that page. signed, Rosguill talk 00:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:IAmHuitzilopochtli
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
Joe Shaw Online | ![]() |
? Unclear. Probably reliable? | ![]() |
✘ No |
Digiguide.tv | ![]() |
? | ![]() |
✘ No |
Amazon | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Rotten Tomatoes | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
OpenDMB | ![]() |
? | ![]() |
✘ No |
Gov.uk | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Rotten Tomatoes | ![]() |
? | ![]() |
✘ No |
MyLondon | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
The Mirror ( https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Dad%27s+fame+spoiled+my+childhood+but+being+an+actor+was+all+I+ever...-a062135390) | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✔ Yes |
Brain Sharper | ![]() |
? Clickbait website with unclear journalistic standards. | ![]() |
✘ 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}}. |
IAmHuitzilopochtli ( talk) 00:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
*Delete per above
Salted and then canned meat product (
talk)
03:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
2A00:23EE:2869:12E0:F2:9CDF:8D26:241C ( talk) 21:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting one more time. No response after the first relisting but I hope more editors will be returning to work on Wikipedia at the end of August and provide some source review this week.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:31, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Keep: Passes WP:NACTOR with two significant roles and further sourcing has been added since this was listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23EE:18F0:D42:2CF5:82E5:A6F6:A920 ( talk) 12:26, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable new media performance art piece. Most coverage is primary, and secondary source coverage does not appear to be WP:Sustained. The most significant recognition appears to be as a finalist for the 2015 CREATE festival - it's not even clear whether the work ended up being presented there or not. StereoFolic ( talk) 01:54, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:11, 20 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! 02:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Non notable author. Has a written a book on illustrious grand uncle V. K. Krishna Menon. She does not seem to have achieved any notability for it - the only reference on the page is a Page 3 news on an auction and searching does not provide anything better. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NAUTHOR. Has written 3 books, all of which have received 0 ratings on Goodreads - [45]. Created by an editor with a probable WP:COI who has been editing articles on her family and her uncle. Jupitus Smart 02:07, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Female. Liz Read! Talk! 01:47, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The page does not disambiguate terms which readers may be confused by per our WP:D guideline. I see that it was redirected in 2018, and an IP editor changed it from a redirect on 8-19-23. Lightburst ( talk) 01:46, 20 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! 01:41, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails the requirements of WP:NMUSIC. Clearly WP:SELFPROMOTION of a local cover band by an undeclared WP:COI. PROD notice removed by article's creator without addressing issues. Dan arndt ( talk) 01:27, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable beauty pageant contestant. Despite the wrath of sources, there is a lack of
WP:SIGCOV here. Article was originally created by an SPI who only ever edited the article for this subject.
Let'srun (
talk)
00:58, 6 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!*
01:25, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If there is more coverage that is not apparent in the article, please provide it in this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:37, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails the notability guideline; WP:GNG ( WP:AUTHOR). Most sources are primary, with a direct connection to the subject, or exclusively local. A search of WP:RS sources doesn't find much beyond Mattison's personal websites (her author website, her Spotify, etc). The article was created by a WP:SPA. GuardianH ( talk) 19:13, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: location (
link)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:50, 5 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!*
01:18, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. It's stil not apparent to me that a few book reviews justify keeping the article of their author.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was draftify. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Subject is not yet notable as a nominee to a political position. Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Let'srun ( talk) 00:24, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was draftify and salt. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:30, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Deleted in 2021: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miraheze. The sources are slightly better now as content is no longer entirely sourced to Miraheze sites, but the subject still doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NWEB. The Website Planet blog post is not independent from the site (as required under WP:WEBCRIT), as it's based on the statements of the founder. Other references are mostly about individual wikis, to which WP:INHERITWEB applies. My WP:BEFORE didn't reveal anything more. — Alalch E. 11:48, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
16:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This got lost in the process so manually relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CLYDE
TALK TO ME/
STUFF DONE
00:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was delete. So many short meaningless and non policy based votes here from users who do not regularly come to AFD. Where have they come from? Regardless votes not engaging with policy are a corded less weight then those that do so the outcome is clear. Spartaz Humbug! 02:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
What is the point of this list? It's not a notable subject or even a proper topic, it's just an indiscriminate list of crap; see WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Richard75 ( talk) 23:44, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
There also does not appear to be a consistent distinction between epithets, purely descriptive terms, popular nicknames, sundry self-assigned designations by authoritarians, and actual official titles.As an AtD, rename the list to List of offices held only by one person and purge the [bleep] like Emperor Norton and other self-aggrandisement (or in the case of Peron and Kim, posthumous-aggrandisement). Cheers, Last1in ( talk) 18:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
"In recent history we have had certain titles that have come to be associated with spe cific people, not with a specific role in an institution. Il Duce (Mussolini), der Führer (Hitler), The Great Helmsman or The Chairman (Mao), El líder máximo (Castro), Vozhd, ‘leader’ (Stalin), Maršal, Serbian for ‘general’ or ‘leader’ (Tito), El caudillo de España, ‘the Chieftain of Spain’ (Franco), Dear Leader (KimJong-il), Coronel (Gaddafi). From the outside it seems each one of these leaderssought out a unique way to be called by this own people."
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! 23:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NTRACK and WP:SPORTSCRIT. Only primary sources provided. LibStar ( talk) 23:29, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The page is entirely original research. Talk page consensus was there was no content justifying a merge or redirect. TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk) 23:06, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nominator has now requested the article be kept. (non-admin closure) Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:34, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Article created likely as part of a WP:UPE campaign, see [ [3]]
A BEFORE doesn't turn up anything of note. BrigadierG ( talk) 22:05, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:49, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Was looking to de-orphan this article and realized its had notability tags since 2016. I couldn't find any sigcov on a WP:BEFORE, and it's an American company so I probably didn't miss any sources in other languages. BuySomeApples ( talk) 21:52, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. I leave Category:Dirty District albums for CfD, if necessary. Star Mississippi 21:49, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
No sufficient in-depth coverage: fails WP:GNG and is possibly original research. Band that made the album is also being nominated for deletion by another user. Sgubaldo ( talk) 21:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related pages (the band's other albums) for the same reasons above:
Sgubaldo ( talk) 22:00, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Consensus is sourcing is insufficient Star Mississippi 21:38, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Article about a short film, not
properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing
WP:NFILM. The only notability claim in evidence here is that the film exists, which isn't automatically enough in the absence of a
WP:GNG-worthy volume of third-party media coverage about the film to externally validate its significance -- but the sourcing consists of two directory entries that aren't support for notability at all, and one short blurb on a
blog that doesn't represent enough coverage to vault this over GNG all by itself.
In fact, I strongly suspect that this was really meant as a
WP:COATRACK for the soundtrack album, since the creator's edit history pertains much more strongly to music (including the band credited with the soundtrack's creation) than it does to film -- but albums aren't "inherently" notable just because they exist either, and still have to be shown to have GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about them, but absolutely none of the sourcing here addresses any potential notability under
WP:NMUSIC either.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt this film, or its soundtrack album, from having to be the subject of quite a bit more media coverage and analysis than this.
Bearcat (
talk)
13:28, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:39, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Add. The film is repeatedly presented as a cult-classic of its genre. See:
etc. There are many other sources. This film seems clearly notable and I will leave it at that.- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Union for Reform Judaism#History. Using sources identified here. Weak consensus appears to be there isn't enough for a standalone Star Mississippi 21:37, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Propose deletion or merging into Union for Reform Judaism, the parent organization. Non-notable arm of a larger movement, has been defunct for 15 years, with no WP:SIGCOV that would justify a stand alone article. In the previous AfD discussion, editors suggested the existence of WP:RS that could enhance the article. I did a WP:BEFORE, finding none of import. Longhornsg ( talk) 17:09, 13 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. If you oppose merging, then please offer what you think should happen with this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:11, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:51, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:BIO: totally lacks any sources about him. Clarityfiend ( talk) 17:40, 13 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!
21:07, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Valley2 city‽ 04:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Not finding anything which would lend to this subject meeting WP:GNG or any other notability criteria. None of the secondary sources actually mention the firm itself, rather they are quotes from the founder about some cases and issues. Let'srun ( talk) 20:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:12, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable television series. Only passing coverage ViperSnake151 Talk 22:37, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
20:53, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Also noting that I consider there to be sufficient participation to delete after 3 weeks; soft deletion doesn't need to come into play. There's two people arguing for deletion and no one has objected in that time frame. It's a weak consensus but it is sufficient for deletion. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:50, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Does not appear to be notable, nothing found in BEFORE. Tagged for notability since 2016. PROD removed with zero improvements. DonaldD23 talk to me 21:42, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Previous PROD, not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:23, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
20:50, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
dubious notability. Can find virtually no coverage by reliable sources, seems to exist only to promote the subject FASTILY 20:24, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. TonyBallioni ( talk) 20:00, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Disputed draftification. Puff piece for yet another entrepreneur. How rarely are they notable. Fails WP:BIO. WP:ROTM businessman doing business. I doubt there to be any point in sending back to draft 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nom withdrawn, see article talk page discussion. (non-admin closure) Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Not notable, fails WP:NCORP. There's a source assessment on the talk page for the sources in the article; I'll put that here too for convenience.
Most of the sources cover the founder of this company rather than providing any in-depth coverage of the company itself; see also WP:ORGDEPTH. Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:20, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 21:34, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
No indication of being notable. Fails WP:NCORP, WP:SIRS scope_creep Talk 17:32, 20 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. TonyBallioni ( talk) 19:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:BASIC. Sources currently in the article are not independent. A WP:BEFORE search found this piece in the Guardian. Note that it's a blogpost and therefore insufficiently reliable to establish notability; see WP:RSPSS. Claims of his credits are insufficient to establish notability and unsourced; establishing notability requires verifiable evidence.
This is not relevant to notability, but we should be aware of it during the discussion: The Twitter/X account @lateralcast, which is ostensibly run by Bodycombe, has previously canvassed followers to prevent article deletion of a different article here. Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 17:25, 20 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. TonyBallioni ( talk) 19:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
apparently located on the Panju Island
the station might have been constructed in the 1860s
The station was mentioned in a train graph published in a BB&CI Magazine dated Dec 1923, implying that the station was in service at least till the mid-1920s, however, there was no mention of the station in a 1937 timetable. The station seems to have been demolished sinceIf we can't even state a single definitive fact about this train station, it certainly should not have an article. Half of the article does not discuss its supposed subject. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 16:06, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. SK3 (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 ( t • c) 11:50, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
I propose that the article on Andrea Jin, a Canadian comedian, be deleted. The subject of this article does not appear to meet the [Notability guidelines for entertainers]( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Entertainers_and_broadcasters), specifically the criteria for comedians.
While Jin is a self proclaimed comedian, the article does not provide reliable secondary sources that discuss her in detail (literally only one paragraph), nor does it demonstrate that she has made significant, recognized contributions to the field of comedy. Only one secondary reference is in English. The only other primary link is to her website which is not considered independent, reliable sources according to Wikipedia's [guidelines]( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources).
From the information presented, it seems that this article may have been created primarily for promotional purposes rather than as an informative entry. Therefore, it may fall under Wikipedia's [guidelines on promotional content and advertising]( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion).
I encourage other editors to contribute to this discussion so we can reach a consensus on the best course of action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.231.121.150 ( talk • contribs)
The result was delete. We generally hold that articles on fictional subjects require substantive coverage that is more than plot detail: as such I do not find the "keep" votes here very strong, and there is consensus to delete. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:50, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Doubt this meets WP:GNG, not every Transformer deserves its own article, see WP:POKEMON. Grandmaster Huon ( talk) 14:46, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Claimed sources have been impeached and keep arguments otherwise don't make a policy based case. Spartaz Humbug! 02:46, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Doubt this meets WP:GNG, not every Transformer deserves its own article, see WP:POKEMON. Grandmaster Huon ( talk) 14:39, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG. Tagged for notability since 2022 DonaldD23 talk to me 13:49, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was Article moved to User space. Editor bypassed this AFD process and moved this article in the midst of an AFD deletion discussion. It would be preferable, in the future, for page creators to come to an AFD and request this outcome but the deed's been done so I'm closing this discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 07:18, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Contested PROD.
My rationale As far as I am aware, we don't split the matches from the season article unless there are issues with the article length for the parent article. Looking at 2023 IFK Norrköping season, I can't see how that would be the case. That article is way shorter than any of the season articles at WP:FA, such as 1994–95 Gillingham F.C. season, so I see no reason for this split. Also, the current content duplicates what is already in the parent article.
Contested with I am asking to keep this page because the acticle contains 30 games, and each game conatains multiple lines, therefore it is a headache to update a single match, while when it is outside the article, we may use subtitles and therefore subsections, which help find the right match easier. Thanks.
The fact that the season contains 30 games is not sufficient for a split imho. Every Premier League team plays 38 league games and several cup games a season and we never split the matches out. I have consulted WP:SIZESPLIT for guidance and, at 20KB, the article 2023 IFK Norrköping season does not meet criteria for a split based on size and I don't see any other valid reason. If consensus is that we do indeed need to split the matches into a separate article then I think that this will have repercussions for most if not all season articles moving forward. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:30, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Wikipedias. ✗ plicit 13:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Unnotable wiki citing only primary sources. That is to say Wikipedia/other Wikimedia projects.
Perhaps this is also considered circular referencing? QuickQuokka [ talk • contribs 13:12, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. TonyBallioni ( talk) 15:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku ( talk) 12:59, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The review notes: "“Time of Death” is powerful stuff and difficult to watch. It’s also impossible not to admire the courage and generosity of all those who agreed to be filmed during such a time. The unifying effect of the stricken may offer the strongest proof of our essential humanity — watching a man apologize for his sins with his final breaths, we eagerly forgive just as we would be forgiven. Still, “Time of Death” is so determined to celebrate the power of a “good” death that it often tidies away the very things that makes bedside vigils so inspiring. The grimmer realities of the dying body are not dealt with — there isn’t an adult diaper in sight — and with the exception of Maria, no voice is raised except in song."
The review notes: "I watched all the episodes consecutively and came away exhausted, but I also came away with a sense of comfort that I still can’t quite describe. It was gratitude, in part, to the subjects and their families for letting the cameras in. “Time of Death” is vital and meaningful television; if you watch, I hope it gives you the same peace and understanding it gave me."
The review notes: "The tone is unobtrusive, although occasionally the voice of an interviewer is present, coaxing the subjects. Executive producers used small crews embedded with the subjects to track these stories, from doctors’ offices and hospitals to homes, all the way to deathbeds. The camera is discreet, cutting away at the very end, giving privacy when taste requires. The families involved are brave in ways not required of ordinary “reality TV” subjects. Even when they appear to be speaking for the camera, the situations are not manipulated. The impact is quite powerful."
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Unnecessary disambiguation page per WP:ONEOTHER Lightoil ( talk) 12:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Well, this is embarrassing. 11 years ago I created this article and now I do not know what I was thinking. I can hardly find any information about the subject other than basic genealogical data such as whom she married and to whom she gave birth, so this falls under WP:INVALIDBIO and WP:NOTGENEALOGY. The title is also nonsensical, as noted at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Where to move an article?. In my defense, I was young, very young. Let's get this over with and never speak of it again, please :) Surtsicna ( talk) 11:30, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. I don't love the UPE aspect here, but as the argument for deletion rests on the history, rather than the present state of the article and the state of the sourcing, I don't see how another conclusion is possible. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:42, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Article was written by a globally locked account from a large UPE spam sockfarm. No substantive edits by anyone else, so would be eligible for WP:G5, but it survived a previous AfD discussion (only just), with two of the keep !voters noting that it needs a rewrite. In situations like this I think it is better to delete the spam version per WP:TNT and let someone who is acting in good faith recreate the article if and when they want to. Pinging the folk who !voted in the last discussion: Worldiswide, Siroxo, Citadeol, DareshMohan, Aviram7, Ravensfire, Actualcpscm, and closing admin Liz. Girth Summit (blether) 11:21, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Comments: I just went through the sources in the article in order until 22, then picked a few others to evaluate here as well. I think this is sufficient for making my case for keeping, see below. Table by Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 13:25, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria below, and we have enough for BASIC. Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 19:09, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creep Talk 11:05, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
"Antimetal" tech,
"Antimetal" AI,
"Antimetal" companyto avoid the many results about "antimetal" in other contexts. signed, Rosguill talk 13:28, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rainbow S.p.A.#Television series. Clear consensus against a standalone article, no rebuttal to a redirect specifically. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:37, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
No indication of being notable. Previously deleted per prod and undelete with the mess left on mainspace. Previous message is still valid. Appears to fail WP:NTV, nothing found in a WP:BEFORE to establish notability which is has been tagged for since 2020 scope_creep Talk 11:01, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 08:13, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
We don't need a separate article for how the seeding worked. This is covered adequately in 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup#Draw, and there is no need for a separate article. Just delete this, or redirect to 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup#Draw if people think this is a plausible search term (I don't personally think it is a sensible search term). Joseph 2302 ( talk) 10:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Survivor: Millennials vs. Gen X. Liz Read! Talk! 21:14, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Notable for winning only Survivor: Millennials vs. Gen X. He also finished 12th in Survivor: Winners at War, but I doubt that makes him also notable. Furthermore, he hosted only one local TV program and no other. I've yet to see his notability outside Survivor. WP:PAGEDECIDE should apply if neither WP:BLP1E nor WP:BIO1E does. Moreover, appearing at least twice on Survivor doesn't make the person notable. George Ho ( talk) 09:35, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Almost forgot: it should be redirected to Survivor: Millennials vs. Gen X or list of Survivor (American TV series) contestants. George Ho ( talk) 09:37, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Do we have a target for redirecting the article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Dusti
*Let's talk!*
10:04, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. TonyBallioni ( talk) 15:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Article about an Artists that does not meet WP:NCREATIVE and WP:GNG. The sources cited are not enough to to satisfy WP:N and are merely passing mentions of the subject. Jamiebuba ( talk) 09:19, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
References
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Dusti
*Let's talk!*
10:04, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Changi Airport MRT station. If people prefer a different target, they can change it boldly. TonyBallioni ( talk) 15:02, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The MRT station in question has not yet been exactly been confirmed by authorities and mostly on speculation per WP:CRYSTAL. The google search to Changi Airport Terminal 5 MRT station mainly brings up the Land Transport Guru pages, which is a user-based transport blog and should not be confused with the Land Transport Authority, which has issued no official confirmation of the station. Henceforth I propose deleting this article until the station has been officially confirmed by the LTA. ZKang123 ( talk) 08:38, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Bit early, but if I would've come across this earlier, I would've closed as snow keep. (non-admin closure) CLYDE TALK TO ME/ STUFF DONE 01:53, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
A minor incident with one fatality (the shooter). WP:NOTNEWS, WP:NEVENT don't appear to be met - coverage is limited to the few days following the incident, which wouldn't even get any coverage if it happened at a less famous company. I recommend redirecting to History of YouTube where this is already mentioned. Perhaps merge a few sentences, as this incident is covered there in just one sentence. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:35, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. SK1 ( withdrawn), no other deletes. (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 ( t • c) 11:50, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
No references Greatder ( talk) 06:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 07:06, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Clearly fails WP:NSINGER. Not notable. A BLP with no references at all. The external links are a self published web page and IMDb which is user generated. Does not meet WP:GNG. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 06:37, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
05:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. I'm closing this as Keep partially due to the lack of a valid and strong deletion rationale. You have to present an argument for why Deletion is the correct resolution for an article with problems instead of regular editing choices. Liz Read! Talk! 06:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
This article has been languishing in the notability issue for three months now, let's bring it to the chopping block. Grandmaster Huon ( talk) 05:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; if no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article. Wikipedia's concept of notability applies this basic standard to avoid indiscriminate inclusion of topics.
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 05:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The subject has made at least one appearance for the Nicaragua women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 04:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 03:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
It seems to fail WP:MUSIC. A Google search confirms the chart position mentioned, but other than that, it seemingly lacks significant coverage. Losipov ( talk) 04:53, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
His voice on tracks like Bittersweet Bundle Of Misery has a slightly out of tune, but intentional, quality about it., [33]
'No Good Time' and 'Bittersweet Bundle of Misery' also contradict the received opinion that Damon was the tunesmith in Blur and Graham was the obscurantist., or [34]
The recent single Bittersweet Bundle of Misery resembles The Archies' Sugar Sugar as much as Blur's Coffee and TV,So NSONG holds up well in this case. — siro χ o 06:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, as I saw coverage unrelated to the album, or
articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album.I am confident we can write a start-class or longer article on this song. Since it doesn't meet either of the exclusionary criteria, and meets other guidelines, I am satisfied the SNG is met. — siro χ o 10:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
the subjectof the article/review/etc: The coverage required by NSONG is
non-trivial treatment and excludes mere mention of the song/single, its musician/band or of its publication, price listings and other non-substantive detail treatment. Even in the best examples, the song is mentioned and perhaps used as an example of a quality of the singer's voice, but that's it. This is not substantive detail treatment, even by the lower standards of NSONG. Actualcpscm ( talk) 10:54, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a disagreement over how
WP:NSONG is to be interpreted with regard to this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
05:06, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we still need to hear from additional editors on varying interpretations of the relevance to
WP:NSONG in the context of this article subject.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:54, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 03:07, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
There are no references and the college no longer exists after merging with two other colleges over 10 years ago to former Edinburgh College.
I don't believe it meets WP:GNG
I see Two Options, Deletion or Merge with Edinburgh college 1keyhole ( talk) 04:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'd like more evaluation of the sources found and, hopefully, the decent ones added to the article. I'm reluctant to close as Keep a completely unsourced article. Also consider the nominator's suggestion of a Merge to
Edinburgh College.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
04:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:53, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn. Sources have been found (non-admin closure) Lightoil ( talk) 05:13, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Non Notable producer. Sources are mostly unreliable per WP:KO/RS#UR or primary sources. Could not find more sources in WP:BEFORE search in Korean and English. Lightoil ( talk) 02:39, 20 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! 03:52, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Not notable enough for an article, only source I could find making a passing mention to this school is from Hitavada [40],fails WP:NSCHOOL. Ratnahastin ( talk) 01:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:35, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:32, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Fundamental disagreement over the quality of sources and whether or not they are sufficient. Liz Read! Talk! 02:44, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
It's not as abysmally sourced as the article previously deleted at AfD, but the underlying notability issue has not changed since the last AfD a few years ago. Nowhere near meeting WP:GNG, online coverage of the subject is trivial or else not independent. In principle could be redirected to Martin Shaw as {{ r from child}}, but there's almost no information about Joe Shaw at that page. signed, Rosguill talk 00:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:IAmHuitzilopochtli
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
Joe Shaw Online | ![]() |
? Unclear. Probably reliable? | ![]() |
✘ No |
Digiguide.tv | ![]() |
? | ![]() |
✘ No |
Amazon | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Rotten Tomatoes | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
OpenDMB | ![]() |
? | ![]() |
✘ No |
Gov.uk | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Rotten Tomatoes | ![]() |
? | ![]() |
✘ No |
MyLondon | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
The Mirror ( https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Dad%27s+fame+spoiled+my+childhood+but+being+an+actor+was+all+I+ever...-a062135390) | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✔ Yes |
Brain Sharper | ![]() |
? Clickbait website with unclear journalistic standards. | ![]() |
✘ 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}}. |
IAmHuitzilopochtli ( talk) 00:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
*Delete per above
Salted and then canned meat product (
talk)
03:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
2A00:23EE:2869:12E0:F2:9CDF:8D26:241C ( talk) 21:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting one more time. No response after the first relisting but I hope more editors will be returning to work on Wikipedia at the end of August and provide some source review this week.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:31, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Keep: Passes WP:NACTOR with two significant roles and further sourcing has been added since this was listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23EE:18F0:D42:2CF5:82E5:A6F6:A920 ( talk) 12:26, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable new media performance art piece. Most coverage is primary, and secondary source coverage does not appear to be WP:Sustained. The most significant recognition appears to be as a finalist for the 2015 CREATE festival - it's not even clear whether the work ended up being presented there or not. StereoFolic ( talk) 01:54, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:11, 20 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! 02:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Non notable author. Has a written a book on illustrious grand uncle V. K. Krishna Menon. She does not seem to have achieved any notability for it - the only reference on the page is a Page 3 news on an auction and searching does not provide anything better. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NAUTHOR. Has written 3 books, all of which have received 0 ratings on Goodreads - [45]. Created by an editor with a probable WP:COI who has been editing articles on her family and her uncle. Jupitus Smart 02:07, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Female. Liz Read! Talk! 01:47, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
The page does not disambiguate terms which readers may be confused by per our WP:D guideline. I see that it was redirected in 2018, and an IP editor changed it from a redirect on 8-19-23. Lightburst ( talk) 01:46, 20 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! 01:41, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails the requirements of WP:NMUSIC. Clearly WP:SELFPROMOTION of a local cover band by an undeclared WP:COI. PROD notice removed by article's creator without addressing issues. Dan arndt ( talk) 01:27, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable beauty pageant contestant. Despite the wrath of sources, there is a lack of
WP:SIGCOV here. Article was originally created by an SPI who only ever edited the article for this subject.
Let'srun (
talk)
00:58, 6 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!*
01:25, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If there is more coverage that is not apparent in the article, please provide it in this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:37, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fails the notability guideline; WP:GNG ( WP:AUTHOR). Most sources are primary, with a direct connection to the subject, or exclusively local. A search of WP:RS sources doesn't find much beyond Mattison's personal websites (her author website, her Spotify, etc). The article was created by a WP:SPA. GuardianH ( talk) 19:13, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: location (
link)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:50, 5 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!*
01:18, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. It's stil not apparent to me that a few book reviews justify keeping the article of their author.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was draftify. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Subject is not yet notable as a nominee to a political position. Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Let'srun ( talk) 00:24, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was draftify and salt. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:30, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Deleted in 2021: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miraheze. The sources are slightly better now as content is no longer entirely sourced to Miraheze sites, but the subject still doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NWEB. The Website Planet blog post is not independent from the site (as required under WP:WEBCRIT), as it's based on the statements of the founder. Other references are mostly about individual wikis, to which WP:INHERITWEB applies. My WP:BEFORE didn't reveal anything more. — Alalch E. 11:48, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
16:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This got lost in the process so manually relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CLYDE
TALK TO ME/
STUFF DONE
00:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)