Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 02 December 04 >

Purge server cache

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Daniel ( talk) 23:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Johnny Somali

Johnny Somali (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Procedural nomination as a page repeatedly nominated per WP:PROD, and once per G10. Lots of other disruptive edits dismissing the subject's significance or attacking Wikipedia editors, such as this and this.

I don't see the relevance of a random unruly tourist/attention seeker to be added to Wikipedia
—  User:2A02:8070:6483:AB80:503E:D1BC:BC9F:BD8C 14:35, 4 November 2023; deprodded by Kvng ( talk · contribs)

Irrelevancy
—  User:2a02:8070:6483:ab80:6d0d:d27a:9272:3bd1 14:50, 17 November 2023; deprodded by GucciNuzayer ( talk · contribs)

I am nominating this article for speedy deletion under the db-g10 criterion, which pertains to pages that serve primarily as an attack or defamation. This article about "Johnny Somali," who is reportedly known for attacking and harassing Japanese people, violates several fundamental principles of Wikipedia.

The content of this article appears to be crafted with the intent to defame and vilify the Japanese community. The portrayal of events and the language used are not only unencyclopedic but seem to be biased, creating a narrative that is harmful and derogatory. Furthermore, the article’s tone and the way it addresses sensitive issues related to human rights and dignity indicate a lack of respect and an inclination towards mockery. This is not only disrespectful but also diminishes the seriousness of the subject matter, which involves real human suffering and legal consequences.

Besides being offensive, the article lacks substantial encyclopedic value. The subject, "Johnny Somali," does not meet the notability guidelines set forth by Wikipedia. The content seems more focused on sensationalism rather than providing a balanced, informative perspective. It is imperative for Wikipedia to maintain its standards of providing factual, unbiased, and respectful content. Allowing this article to remain would set a concerning precedent and undermine the integrity of Wikipedia as a reliable source of information.

In light of these reasons, I strongly urge the consideration of this nomination for the speedy deletion of the article. It is crucial to address such issues promptly to ensure Wikipedia remains a respectful and trustworthy platform.
—  User:23acewe 07:58, 1 December 2023; incorrectly inserted into the {{ db-g10}} template, and de-tagged by Liz ( talk · contribs)

0 Historic value
—  User:2604:3d09:6688:3e00:85d8:d7fa:e157:b6a3 16:31, 2 December 2023; deprodded by Aspects ( talk · contribs). An IP within the same /64 range repeated the PROD tag several times, and was blocked for edit warring.

– LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 23:54, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Internet, Somalia, Japan, and Arizona. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 23:54, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: The Japanese newspaper sources are RS, but trivial (14, 15, and 18), the South China Morning Post is extensive (11). I also find this on GameRant [1], the Statesman [2] and BBc [3], all providing more than just coverage of his stunts. His entire "thing" is provoking people, so that perhaps explains why coverage is mostly of his arrests, but it gives context. Oaktree b ( talk) 01:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: I'm not sure where the "attempt to defame and vilify Japanese community" comes from when the article just simply describes Somali's actions and reasons for arrest. There's been plenty of worldwide coverage on Somali as mentioned above, as well as other articles stating that Somali's actions have caused the Japanese government to take action on not just him but other YouTubers in Japan causing "public nuisance." I think that's significant enough. lullabying ( talk) 01:17, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. ~ Kvng ( talk) 14:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: irrelevant, unimportant and harmful redirect. There is no importance to the discussion or showcase of this individual who has put his disregard for respect of other cultures on full display. Also he is not a famous figure, very far from it. Among his peers he is practically irrelevant as a streamer except for his short-time conducting public stunts in Japan. There's no reason for Wikipedia to be housing clout chasers, wikipedia is more relevant and prestigious than that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23acewe ( talk • contribs) 07:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: I don't understand how this is vilifying or dehumanizing Johnny Somali or the Japanese community since the article just states his actions, consequences, and subsequent backlash. The article isn't leaning in a direction or is any bias is present.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 21:57, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Twink (home perm)

Twink (home perm) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

@ Espresso Addict: @ MrDemeanour: Article has been tagged as unsourced for over a decade - I did a Google search and the subject does not seem to be notable Chidgk1 ( talk) 17:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Morristown, New Jersey#Education. Daniel ( talk) 23:56, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The Red Oaks School

The Red Oaks School (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails NCORP. Schools are not inherently notable. Everything I found on BEFORE was LOCAL or ROUTINE. Article has been repeatedly re-created from a redirect and, since redirects are costly, deletion is the only course. Chris Troutman ( talk) 17:42, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Daniel ( talk) 21:57, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Saint Philomena College, Puttur

Saint Philomena College, Puttur (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NORG no independent reliable sources and plagued by endless sockpuppetry. Theroadislong ( talk) 19:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

*Delete No significant coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL. LibStar ( talk) 22:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was procedural close‎. There is no need to go to AfD to merge content in situations like this; Wikipedia:Merging#Proposing_a_merge advises that editors can either be bold and merge themselves in uncontroversial cases (likely to include this situation), or alternatively on the talk page. Daniel ( talk) 23:58, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Federación Anarco-Comunista de Argentina

Federación Anarco-Comunista de Argentina (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

For quite a while now, I've been looking around for sources to expand this stub, but I haven't been able to turn up anything more than those already referenced in this article. Most of my sources that reference a "Federación Anarco-Comunista de Argentina" are actually referencing the original name for the Argentine Libertarian Federation, which changed its name in 1955. I can't find anything on this organisation, apparently founded in 2011. Even the two sources cited in this don't go into any further depth, only giving it a passing reference. The Spanish Wikipedia doesn't have a dedicated article on it, instead all of this information (with both sources cited) is included on the larger article Anarquismo en Argentina.

As I can't find any real evidence that this passes notability guidelines, I propose we follow the Spanish Wikipedia's example and merge this article into our article on Anarchism in Argentina. It would be a relatively trivial merger to carry out. Grnrchst ( talk) 20:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:08, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 undeletion of these articles. Daniel ( talk) 23:59, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Mohammad Baghlani

Mohammad Baghlani (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails notability, only played U16 and U17 basketball teams. still achieve nothing in senior level, not sure if they even played pro basketball. Sports2021 ( talk) 18:10, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Sarem Jafari (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Comment The question is does he have the significant coverage to WP:GNG or not. Whether or not he has played for the senior national team or professionally is irrelivant. Alvaldi ( talk) 20:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 20:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:44, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Metropolitan Police Office

Metropolitan Police Office (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced and I cannot find a single source substantiating the existence of this office. Elshad ( talk) 21:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete This article isn't about the current Met. It is about a defunct government department which probably did exist at some point (per Google Scholar results, mainly paywalled), but without any clues as to when and how it was created, or when it ceased to exist (c.1830?). Anyone reading the article would be unable to use it as a launching point for further research as there is zero sourcing. Merging it into Metropolitan Police would just be passing the trash to another page, due to the lack of sourcing. Oblivy ( talk) 03:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
This article isn't about the current Met. Why is this relevant? Actually, the MPO existed from the creation of the Met until 2000. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 11:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
What I was suggesting was that the fact that the Metropolitan Police show up in search results is not necessarily proof there are references to the Metropolitan Police Office. I searched and did not find them. Maybe you did better than I did and could share the results of your search?
Note that the article did not give any dates at the time I made my comment (my reference to c.1830 was because I had done some searches and knew a structural reform was made around that time). You added the claim about 1829-2000 yesterday, without prividing a citation. If there's support for your claim it should be added to the article. Oblivy ( talk) 00:00, 6 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Fails GNG and NORG. Article is unsourced so there is nothing to merge, I don't see this as a particularly good redirect, but if there is a consensus I have no objection to one.  //  Timothy ::  talk  05:25, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Daniel ( talk) 00:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Atlantic Lacrosse Conference

Atlantic Lacrosse Conference (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of in depth secondary sources which are independent of the source. The only source I found which comes even close to qualifying is [ [4]]. Let'srun ( talk) 14:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. Collegiate athletic conferences are presumptively notable, IMO; we have countless articles on less noteworthy subjects. The only reason for concluding that the subject is non-notable would be if it were a hoax, which does not seem to be the case. The issue here is how to find good sources; but notability is not determined by the present state of sources, nor are sources required to be online. The failure of someone's Google searches to uncover material on something that must certainly be documented merely shows that this search strategy is inadequate. One or more editors will have to take the time to figure out where independent sources might be located, and consult them. They may not be online, but there is no deadline for improving articles. Given that we know this conference exists across a number of colleges in several states, and has for multiple years, concluding that there are no independent sources merely because one couldn't locate them online is inadequate to demonstrate a lack of notability P Aculeius ( talk) 12:50, 12 November 2023 (UTC). reply
    Comment: Collegiate athletic conferences conferences in the NCAA may generally be notable, but there is no criteria that says they are presumptively notable, and in this case this "conference" is in a club-level competition with little in the name of coverage due to the level of the competition. Just like your local travel baseball league isn't notable, this conference isn't either. Most of your vote reads like arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. The absence of available sources should not, in my view, ever be twisted around to be seen as proof that sources actually exist. We can only use what is available, not what we imagine might exist in some fantasy world, and this article isn't up to snuff, simply enough. Let'srun ( talk) 14:15, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply
And yet you're setting up a series of straw men. I didn't say that the absence of sources proves that they exist in some fantasy world. Your claim is that sources don't exist because you couldn't find them online. This is precisely the kind of subject that's likely to be documented primarily through college athletic sites and local news that isn't searchable online. It's fairly certain that written or audiovisual confirmation of the conference and its history and membership exist; the only plausible explanation for it not existing would be if this were a hoax, which it's clearly not. A relatively short search revealed that Davidson College's athletic site discusses its Lacrosse program, although some of the other colleges mentioned don't seem to. But that speaks to the quality of their web sites, not the reality of their participation in the league. If I haven't made this point clear yet, sources do not have to be available online. The simple fact that it's a collegiate athletic conference means that sources will exist; a claim that they don't because you couldn't find them online is not credible. P Aculeius ( talk) 18:23, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply
Great, but we need independent, secondary sources. A member school discussing their program is a primary source. WP:ITEXISTS and WP:SOURCESEXIST are not legitimate keep arguments. Let'srun ( talk) 18:53, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply
You've got it backward. "None of these sources are good enough" and "I can't find any sources I consider acceptable" aren't legitimate delete arguments for something that we know exists and that should be notable. You're still fixated on the lack of online sources, as though you hadn't read the guidelines that you keep wikilawyering with. Sources do not have to be available online; articles don't get deleted because their sources aren't good enough; there's no time limit on improving articles. The burden rests with the nominator to show that a topic cannot be documented, and that burden is not satisfied by arguing that there aren't enough online sources that are independent of the subject—particularly when it's obvious that better sources exist, even though they don't seem to be easy to come by over the internet. P Aculeius ( talk) 23:27, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply
Of course offline sources are just as good as online sources, yet it is nowhere near obvious that better sources exist. Let'srun ( talk) 01:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: To address @ Let'srun's concerns for notability of a "club-level conference"; for most schools, the MCLA is the only available option for collegiate level lacrosse, especially for schools along the west coast. More schools participate in MCLA level lacrosse than NCAA DI and DII lacrosse. Yes, the Atlantic Lacrosse Conference is a young conference, so it has a shorter history and fewer online sources than others, but every other MCLA conference has met Wikipedia's notability guidelines. SammySpartan ( talk) 15:17, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply
Just because other conferences have articles doesn't make this one notable. Also, did any of those other articles have AfD discussions? Let'srun ( talk) 01:11, 13 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 23:48, 18 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 23:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 00:43, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Carl Judie

Carl Judie (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable WP:NACTOR. In a WP:BEFORE search, all I can find on him is blogs and WP:THESUN. Wikishovel ( talk) 12:30, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

The problem with the three references you've cited is that they're all blog posts, rather than WP:Reliable sources. A hundred blog references like that still wouldn't demonstrate notability: we're looking for coverage in newspapers, books, films, etc, showing how Judie was notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Wikishovel ( talk) 05:09, 27 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:26, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Editors who supported Keeping this article should read up on what RS are as well as the in depth coverage required for SIGCOV. Liz Read! Talk! 06:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Justin Plautz

Justin Plautz (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I was unable to find any WP:SIGCOV. The article fails WP:GNG. Robby.is.on ( talk) 12:19, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • The notability guidelines are always interpreted differently. This article is definitely not a clear candidate for deletion. There is not a tiny attempt of improvement; deletion seems to be the easiest way to handle imperfect articles for some users. The easiest way is not always the best or most reasonable way, though. -- Mojnsen ( talk) 15:42, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 23:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Karl Wolf#Singles (ATD). Daniel ( talk) 00:01, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Carrera (song)

Carrera (song) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Rejected PROD, poorly referenced, non notable song. Jax 0677 ( talk) 22:39, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to The CW Sports. Contention is that there's nothing to merge, if anyone disagrees with this they can rescue content from behind the redirect and merge editorially. Daniel ( talk) 00:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

College Football on The CW

College Football on The CW (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unnecessary split. Can be covered at ACC on The CW (which might also be unnecessary) and The CW Sports. Only one line (about the Arizona Bowl) is different than coverage on The ACC on The CW article. Esolo5002 ( talk) 22:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Jonson (disambiguation)

Jonson (disambiguation) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Jonson (name) exists. Jax 0677 ( talk) 22:43, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Yekaterina Pyatkina

Yekaterina Pyatkina (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject made a half-dozen appearances for the Kazakhstan women's national football team. All that comes up in my searches are passing mentions like 1 and 2. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 22:39, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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. Daniel ( talk) 22:50, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

National Leadership Network for Health and Social Care

National Leadership Network for Health and Social Care (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find any evidence for existence of such a named organisation. There is an NHS Clinical Leaders Network but of course that is a different organisation with a different name.

The provided website does not work, although there is a website here but the name does not include "for Health and Social Care" and makes no mention of previously being the so-called "NHS Modernisation Board".

Hard to find any third-party sources verifiying the existance of this entitity.

Overall unclear if defunct and certainly non-notable and does not warrant article. Elshad ( talk) 22:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Chad international footballers. Daniel ( talk) 22:52, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Noumasseri Djimadoum

Noumasseri Djimadoum (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to List of Chad international footballers. The subject made a single appearance for his respective national team. I am unable to find any coverage at all, nor is there any indication of notability. Fails WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 22:30, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The Reeths-Puffer Marching Band

The Reeths-Puffer Marching Band (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

High school marching bands are not notable and this appears to be no exception with routine local and non-independent or irrelevant sources. Bensci54 and I both redirected the page to be reverted by the creator. Both WikiOriginal-9 and Voorts declined AFD submission, not sure why Timtrent approved it in such a self-promotional and unencylopedically written/sourced form. Reywas92 Talk 22:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Michigan. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 22:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: One has to love nominations with a bit of snark in them 😈. I have a firm personal policy of steadfast neutrality at articles I accepted at AFC. I follow the guidance that a draft must, in my view, have a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. This is an immediate deletion process and I await the community's view. If I was mistaken then I will learn from it If I was not then you will learn from it, But, whatever transpires, I really think you might learn not to be snarky when you nominate something for deletion. 🇺🇦  FiddleTimtrent  FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    I'm not really trying to be snarky, but I don't think there's a single other high school marching band article on Wikipedia for good reason. This is of interest only to participants and clearly fails WP:CLUB and the few independent sources fail WP:AUD. Even without an article for Reeths-Puffer High School, individual student groups at scondary schools are not something we need standalone pages for and virtually never pass AFD. Reywas92 Talk 00:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    It appears that this one is unlikely to pass, too. But that is what AfD is for, and we shall still see what happens. If you weren't trying then snark came naturally. You were not lacking in civility, not exactly, but you get an A+ from me for what must be natural snarkiness. It is the article that you are nominating, not the reviewer. I'm perfectly content to have a mistake demonstrated to me, but I do prefer it to be demonstrated with no edge to the demonstration. 🇺🇦  FiddleTimtrent  FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 09:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: As I noted in declining this at AfC, the only RS providing SIGCOV is the MLive article. I have been unable to find additional RSes via TWL or Google. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 22:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: As someone deeply invested in the marching arts, from drum corps to winter guard, I can say for certain that no high school marching band in the world is notable. There is not enough coverage to sustain a completely independent page from the parent article. I oppose a redirect. Why? I Ask ( talk) 23:01, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: poor-quality promotional article with bad sourcing; band itself is not notable, and the search term seems rather unlikely to me. page creator seems obviously connected to the subject. Darling ☔ ( talk · contribs) 14:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: As one of the people who attempted to redirect this back to the article on the high school, I see no reason this article needs to exist. Bensci54 ( talk) 17:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - the high school I attended 50 years ago won the 1920s version of a national high school band competition so many years in a row, they disbanded the contest and gave them the traveling trophy. The band director at the time was hired away by the University of Michigan where he was director of bands for over 20 years - and they are not notable. And it stands to reason that if the school itself is not notable, than an individual student activity wouldn't be either. 4.37.252.50 ( talk) 21:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Redirect also. JBW ( talk) 21:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Brenton Tarrant

AfDs for this article:
Brenton Tarrant (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is simply a repeat of the information (and wording) in Christchurch mosque shootings. Brenton Tarrant is known for just one action and is neither famous nor noteworthy. It is unlikely that anyone would search for Brenton Tarrant without finding his name on the Christchurch page in which case they would already have all the information that is on this page.

Please note that this is the second time that this article has been nominated for deletion. The first time was before any text had been added. You can see the discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brenton Tarrant.

Since this page is a redundant duplicate then I suggest Delete OrewaTel ( talk) 21:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

@ TarnishedPath: Then see WP:WHENSPLIT. The Christchurch mosque shootings article is currently over the 9,000 words/60 kB prose threshold, [5] suggesting that the article "Probably should be divided or trimmed, although the scope of a topic can sometimes justify the added reading material." Muzilon ( talk) 03:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
See Daveosaurus's comment below. I suggest the facts you highlight make a stronger argument for trimming, not for devoting more time and resources to this individual who's notability is WP:BLP1E. TarnishedPath talk 04:40, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
What material do you propose to remove from the Christchurch article? Muzilon ( talk) 04:58, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Under the heading Christchurch_mosque_shootings#Perpetrator, just a quick review of the first two paragraphs reveals material about his family life growing up that is irrelevant to the shooting and material about a visit to a hospital because of a gun accident that is again irrelevant to the shooting. 50% of those two paragraphs could be trimmed and consolidated into one paragraph. That's just a quick review. However, I don't edit that article so I'll leave that to the good judgement of people that do. TarnishedPath talk 05:37, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I'd suggest those details are probably necessary background, and strengthen the case for WP:SPINOUT. Muzilon ( talk) 23:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Spark (software)

Spark (software) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. There are no independent sources Mdggdj ( talk) 21:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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. Daniel ( talk) 22:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Northern Media Group

Northern Media Group (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a company which appears to own six small radio stations in Northern Ireland. I can't see any reason why it needs its own article above and beyond the articles that deal with the individual stations themselves. Does not appear to meet WP:NCORP. Tagged as unsourced since 2018.

Similar articles which simply list stations owned by a single-market radio owner have been deleted in recent months: [6] [7] [8] Flip Format ( talk) 21:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

JVx (Framework)

JVx (Framework) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. There are no independent sources Mdggdj ( talk) 20:48, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

It's an open source project and I'm one of the developers. Which independent sources do you need for such an article? It's important for open source projects to have a wikipedia page to get more contributors and attention. We can't pay for ad words and if you don't have a big company behind the framework, it's important to get attention.
So, what do we need to keep the article? Rjahn ( talk) 08:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Please, see Wikipedia:Notability (software) Mdggdj ( talk) 10:34, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Figure skating at the 1st Winter Children of Asia International Sports Games

Figure skating at the 1st Winter Children of Asia International Sports Games (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable figure skating event full of an endless sea of red-linked participants... Even the overarching event (the "Winter Children of Asia International Sports Games") doesn't have a Wikipedia page. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The World's Most Beautiful Transsexual Contest

AfDs for this article:
The World's Most Beautiful Transsexual Contest (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not appear to meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of independent WP:SIGCOV. A 2006 AfD closed as no consensus but notability thresholds have changed significantly since then. Let'srun ( talk) 19:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

--  Maddy from Celeste ( WAVEDASH) 21:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Good find, but we'd need one more like that (at least) for it to be a !keep from me. Oaktree b ( talk) 22:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

William Staniforth

AfDs for this article:
William Staniforth (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Biography which does not appear to meet WP:GNG. The are has only three sources. Two of them have incomplete information to ascertain whether they are books or articles about the subject, or merely a listing in some directory. The only linked source is simply a picture of a medallion which does not contribute to notability. I found nothing in Google to determine notability. NOTE: Previously nominated for deletion in 2018. Flibirigit ( talk) 19:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

NOTE: I found a listing for William Staniforth on "The Staniforth Society" web site, but I do not consider this to be an independent third pary, but rather seems to be operated by the same person who created this Wikipedia article. Flibirigit ( talk) 19:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to University of California, Irvine (selectively as per Owen). Daniel ( talk) 22:56, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

University of California, Irvine student housing

University of California, Irvine student housing (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a two-parter. First, with an exception covered in part 2, below, there's no sign of notability of the housing system of the University of California, Irvine, outside of publications by the University of California, Irvine, and statistical data and lists of available apartments from Irvine. There's no more independent notability here than there is for the housing systems of most schools. In addition, the vast majority of the information given isn't encyclopedic anyway. It belongs in the student handbook. Nobody outside the community is going to care which eateries are covered by the student meal plan or that "many Mesa residents find it a treat, worthy of their time, to walk to Pippins and Brandywine just to eat!"

Second, there used to be an article titled Middle Earth Housing about one housing complex at UCI that received some attention when its buildings were named for places in Tolkien's works. An AFD was created for that article. The outcome was the merger of that article into this one. That was unfortunate because if any aspect of UCI housing is notable, it's specifically the Middle Earth housing. If anything other than deleted, this article should be rid of just about everything not related to Middle Earth housing and then moved to Middle Earth Housing; or else this article should be deleted and that article restored and updated. Largoplazo ( talk) 17:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Follow-up request: If you !vote for "Merge", please clarify whether you mean merge the Middle Earth Housing material into Middle Earth Housing or merging anything useful into University of California, Irvine. Largoplazo ( talk) 10:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:56, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Balti wine

AfDs for this article:
Balti wine (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page appears to completely fail the notability guidelines for companies, and the organisation behind the brand also seems to have vanished, having not been notable in the first place, IMO B800h ( talk) 16:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: There were substantial Keep opinions in the 2007 AfD (and also opinions worth reading on the article Talk page). The original firm seems to have ceased 13-14 years ago ( Companies House), though there were several similarly named subsequent firms. I feel too much was resting on the Manchester Evening News interview with the founder, which would be discounted under the later WP:NCORP standards, and too much was riding on the firm's own claim that their Argentinian wine branding was a market innovation and on expectation of a great future for this distribution / branding start-up. There was also a sponsorship deal [10] but again, such are insufficient for current notability standards. AllyD ( talk) 20:56, 8 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to The Prodigal Son#Theatre. Daniel ( talk) 22:56, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The Prodigal Son (play)

The Prodigal Son (play) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced since 2007. A WP:BEFORE search discovered nothing substantial relating to this play in particular, which doesn't seem to even be the most notable play of the story. Moshe1022 ( talk) 16:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Redirect to The Prodigal Son#Theatre. This play doesn't seem to be notable, but there are other plays that would make a redirect useful. HappyWith ( talk) 18:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I'm supportive of a redirect option as well. Moshe1022 ( talk) 21:25, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Support redirect as well. Kazamzam ( talk) 18:42, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Daniel ( talk) 11:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Ring of Fire (novel)

Ring of Fire (novel) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Kadı Message 14:02, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 11:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Princess Eleonore of Schaumburg-Lippe

Princess Eleonore of Schaumburg-Lippe (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. The only source is her own LinkedIn page. DrKay ( talk) 13:19, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete -- Almost no coverage of her. In fact, I couldn't find anything about the subject from any reliable sources, so she fails WP:GNG. Moshe1022 ( talk) 17:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Delete -- A euro-poppet having a perfectly lovely insignificant career. Bless. But the place for this is Linked-In with 100 million others. MisterWizzy ( talk) 13:38, 8 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Arar, Saudi Arabia. Daniel ( talk) 11:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Prince Abdullah bin Musa'ed Sports City

Prince Abdullah bin Musa'ed Sports City (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No citations. Nexovia ( talk) 12:55, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Draftify - The article was created on 3 December 2023, I think it is possible to turn it into a draft before deletion. Svartner ( talk) 10:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Conker (series). Daniel ( talk) 11:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Conker (character)

Conker (character) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. The only good source were the criticism of its design from Project Spark, but thats it! GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 12:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 11:16, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Brutos Framework

Brutos Framework (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. There are no independent sources Mdggdj ( talk) 12:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Daniel ( talk) 11:16, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Son Sik

Son Sik (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Already been draftified before, and couldnt find any sources Begocc ( talk) 10:32, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was draftify‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Jinan North railway station

Jinan North railway station (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is too WP:CRYSTAL to be useful, all the listed sources are pointing to another station called "Jibei station", none of them are indicating Jinan North as a high speed railway station. The title name was cited by some local medias, finally defined as rumours, to indicate a station of Shiji passenger railway, called Qihe ( on zhwiki), was to be renamed to be so, but when Shiji opened for service, that station remains called Qihe, not Jinan North. Liuxinyu970226 ( talk) 09:42, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

@ Anders-sandholm, Nikki, RobotMichiel1972, Lockal, and Pasleim: ^^ Liuxinyu970226 ( talk) 09:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Diana Zenteno

Diana Zenteno (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject is a Bolivian women's footballer. I was unable to find any in-depth coverage, nor is there any indication of notability. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 08:25, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Weighing up the opinions before and after improvement (as hinted at by Liz), there seems to be a consensus to keep this expanded version of the article. (non-admin closure) Schminnte [ talk to me 18:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Familie Leitner

Familie Leitner (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cites no sources, little non-trivial information can be found online, fails WP:GNG DirtyHarry991 ( talk) 10:48, 18 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:29, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is a very different article than the one that existed at the time of nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: dramatic improvements in both content and sourcing changed this into a viable article. Those who voiced their opinion here on the day of the nomination: please take another look. Owen× ☎ 16:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, as it seems there was a book written about it and several retrospective pieces published.
JoelleJay ( talk) 20:51, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:19, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Herminigildo Ranera

Herminigildo Ranera (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Successful musician, but doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 21:07, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep but needs rewrite and more sources, because the current article reads like it was lifted from a CV. With regard to notability, I would argue that this article can be retained as the subject is significantly notable in the Philippines. Ranera was a NAMCYA winner (which is one of the top music competitions in the country), and was a former conductor of the national orchestra. His current group (UST Symphony Orchestra) is also a resident group of the country's premier cultural institution. --- Tito Pao ( talk) 10:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 05:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep though some sprucing up is needed (such as but not limited to more relevant references as one isn't enough, an infobox template and probably a freely licensed photo). - Ian Lopez @ 16:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 06:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Teddy bear hospital

Teddy bear hospital (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Has been in CAT:NN for over 13 years. Last AfD attracted little response and was no consensus. It reads as promotional, but also I couldn't find sources to confirm it meets WP:N, as an individual place or as a concept. Boleyn ( talk) 20:33, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Not eligible for soft-deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 05:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. While we always welcome new editors, I am more persuaded by established editors who are more familar with Wikipedia's standards for reliable sourcing. Though it is interesting to hear that the Furry world has its own award ceremony. Liz Read! Talk! 08:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Kristi Brooks

Kristi Brooks (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 20:33, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:23, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment - from the award link: "The Ursa Major Awards are Anthropomorphic (a.k.a. Furry) Fandom's equivalents of s-f fandom's Hugo Awards, mystery fandom's Anthony Awards, horror fandom's Bram Stoker Awards, and so forth. The Ursa Majors are administered and presented by the Anthropomorphic Literature and Arts Association (ALAA), an organization dedicated to promoting anthropomorphic literature and arts both within and outside of the fandom." This does not appear to be a notable award supporting notability. The other link above is an archive listing, not a secondary source supporting notability, and may be a different Kristi Brooks who is a painter. Beccaynr ( talk) 23:51, 1 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 05:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: a passing mention by a couple of local newspapers falls short of establishing notability per WP:AUTHOR. The clearly canvassed votes here certainly don't help the case. Owen× ☎ 17:24, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Draftify‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Path of Titans

Path of Titans (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The only significant coverage I could find from a reliable source was from Pocket Gamer, and this is their best article about it - every other one from them is just a short thing about the new updates. All other significant coverage is from random bloggy sites. QuietCicada - Talk 18:58, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 05:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to 2024 California State Senate election#District 9. Liz Read! Talk! 06:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Marisol Rubio

Marisol Rubio (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Highest office is a city council. No national news coverage or really any coverage at all outside of routine campaign/municipal politics stuff. Clearly does not satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NPOL. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 06:43, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Marisol has had multiple news coverage across the Bay Area and, in addition to her two elected positions held to date, she serves in leadership positions across California and the country. I can verify and attest to the accuracy of the information provided on this page to date and ask that it not be removed because there is no justifiable reason to do so. MRC2024 ( talk) 05:49, 30 November Wikipedia.
  • The information on Marisol Rubios Wikipedia page is correct. Marisol Rubio is an elected San Ramon City Council person. She is an active member of the CA Dem Party. She was elected to the water board prior to being elected to city council. Marisol Rubio is a member of SEIU-2015. She is a co-chair/vice chair of the CA Dem Party's Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion committee. Marisol has been in many local news stations reports in the Bay Area. She stood in solidarity with the striking SEIU-UHW workers at Kaiser Permanente Walnut Creek and I witnessed her being interviewed by a reporter that day and saw it on the local news that evening. I serve with Marisol as a delegate to the Contra Costa Labor Council and as an active member of the Dem Party of Contra Costa in California. Please don't remove this page, it is accurate and I attest to the facts shared here.

Amy Scott-Slovick, AD 15 Eboard Member to the CA Dem Party, Associate Member of the Dem Party of CCC, Delegate at the Contra Costa Labor Council.

Nobody is disputing the accuracy of the page. We are discussing whether or not she is notable enough to have a Wikipedia page. Appearing on local news a couple times does not prove notability. Read WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 20:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. What is the suggested Redirect target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

If the result of the discussion was a redirect, the obvious target would be 2024 California State Senate election#District 9. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 20:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. City council is not a level of office that guarantees inclusion in Wikipedia, and unelected candidates in future state legislative elections do not get articles on those grounds either — and simply having a normal level of run of the mill local coverage of local politics in the local media, where such coverage of local politics is merely expected, is not enough to deem her more special than everybody else, because every other city councillor on earth has similar levels of local coverage in his or her local media too. Obviously no prejudice against recreation next November if she wins the state legislature seat, but nothing here is already enough as of right now. Bearcat ( talk) 22:21, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    Argument for maintaining the article about Marisol Rubio in Wikipedia.
    The argument for deletion of Marisol Rubio’s article appears to hinge on Honorable Marisol Rubio only being of interest to local populations.
    I direct your attention to:
    https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Demographics_of_California
    Demographics of California - Wikipedia
    California is the most populated U.S. state, with an estimated population of 38.9 million as of 2023. [1] It has people from a wide variety of ethnic, racial, national, and religious backgrounds. Population California is the most populated sub-national entity in North America.
    And too:
    /info/en/?search=San_Francisco_Bay_Area
    My argument is that in the San Francisco Bay Area being involved to the level that Ms. Rubio is involved is significant.
    Of note she is an up and coming elected progressive woman who champions the environment (Sierra Club) and inclusion (CA Democratic Party JEDI Board- https://cadem.org/standing-committee/diversity-equity-inclusion-committee/) and she is currently running for CA District 9 State Senator seat.
    In California, our state senators represent more people than our elected members to the House of Representatives.
    /info/en/?search=California_State_Senate
    I read a recent post that verified what was in the Wikipedia information about Marisol Rubio and I too can verify that the information is factual. But then I saw from another post that stated that it isn’t whether the information is factual but whether it is notable. As a user of Wikipedia I appreciate being able to search for honest and reliable information. Regarding the maintaining of the article is the question. My position is that the article on Marisol Rubio should be maintained because she is running for CA State Senate to represent just under one million people (my community). I believe this article will be/is of service to our community in getting to know about an outstanding community activist, a woman who is a member of a minority, from the working class who is running for the CA Senate. She is a role model and I do not believe that she nor the work that she has done is "run of the mill". 2601:644:9200:A31B:A48C:8654:95AE:867 ( talk) 01:19, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    Right...I'm sure you, the anonymous user typing out an overly formal essay praising Marisol Rubio, are a totally different person compared to the first commenter, who was also an anonymous user typing out an overly formal essay praising Marisol Rubio. There are over 100 state senate candidates in CA every two years and tens of thousands of city councilors. Giving all of them a Wikipedia page would be ridiculous. And that's even besides the point because, even if your argument was sensible, that's not Wikipedia's current policy, so this page should still be deleted. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 03:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Bearcat's reasoning. Should Rubio win the state senate election, which is almost a year from now, then the article can be recreated as she would pass WP:NPOL. Best, GPL93 ( talk) 15:30, 8 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Nominator is advised that a fuller deletion rationale (rather than simply "Fails WP:GNG") might be more persuasive to participating editors and also demonstrate BEFORE had been done. Liz Read! Talk! 06:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Avery Patterson

Avery Patterson (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 06:08, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Jason "Singer" Smith

Jason "Singer" Smith (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Over 20 years ago, he was involved in an altercation in Kyrgyzstan with Tommy Caldwell (who would become one of America's most notable climbers); however, Smith achieved little notability beyond that incident, and there is no proper SIGCOV on him in any quality RS (either national-RS or in climbing-RS per WP:NCLIMBER). Can't see this BLP surviving on Wikipedia long-term? Aszx5000 ( talk) 13:25, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

The best I found looking through the interweb and the climbing mags is this interesting... memoir. That said, not much value is lost if this stub is deleted.
No prejudice to creation if someone else manages to locate some obscure sources. Ca talk to me! 07:24, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

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! 05:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

1973 Lancashire County Council election

1973 Lancashire County Council election (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested draftification. This article was moved from article space to draft space by User: Significa liberdade saying that more sources were needed. It was moved back to article space without adding sources. There is only one source, The Elections Centre of Plymouth University, which is a reliable primary source. Robert McClenon ( talk) 04:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Kesho Naik

Kesho Naik (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be an hoax. Fictional character from the named book in the article. Am unable to find any other source that mentions it in the slightest. Fermiboson ( talk) 03:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Support: Sources it cites say it is fictional (maybe accidental, not a hoax?) but I don’t know if the character is notable or not. Mrfoogles ( talk) 05:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. I see a consensus to Keep and more importantly, no support for Deletion or even Redirection. Liz Read! Talk! 08:39, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Dubai Capitals

Dubai Capitals (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There are not enough independent citations to warrant a standalone article. Fails WP:NSPORT. Consider a deletion or redirect it to International League T20. Charlie ( talk) 02:48, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

*Delete per nom. DJ InstaMalik ( talk) 08:07, 25 November 2023 (UTC) A possible WP:SPA that solely participated in numerous AfD nominations I recently initiated, which raises significant doubts from the outset. - Charlie ( talk) 07:54, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. If you are suggesting a Redirect closure, please provide a link to a target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Lipogenesis. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Lipoexpediency

Lipoexpediency (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lipoexpediency is not a commonly-used term. Lipoexpediency is not even an uncommonly-used term. It originated as a clever turn-of-phrase in the title of a decade-old journal article and has been used only a small handful of times since, either in reference to that article or by members of the team that coined it. Marchantiophyta ( talk) 02:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 11:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

K21OC-D

AfDs for this article:
K21OC-D (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another HC2/Innovate station with little notability to speak of, and seemingly no known programming that isn't carriage of national (or international, in the case of Multimedios Televisión) services. It's been tagged for notability issues since 2014, and while it technically survived an AfD earlier this year, said AfD was the failed bulk nomination of 140 HC2/Innovate stations. I can't see any indication that this comes anywhere near meeting the GNG. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:46, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 02:30, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was draftify‎. Daniel ( talk) 11:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Anais da Associação Brasileira de Química

Anais da Associação Brasileira de Química (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced since its creation in 2007; can't seem to find anything via WP:BEFORE (though someone else might be able to) other than this, which this article may have been copied from or it just mirrors this article. Waddles  🗩  🖉 02:19, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Boston College–Harvard men's basketball rivalry

Boston College–Harvard men's basketball rivalry (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

None of the sources in the article mention any rivalry between these schools, and a BEFORE check came up empty regarding WP:SIGCOV for this to meet the WP:NRIVALRY. Let'srun ( talk) 02:18, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Panama women's international footballers. Liz Read! Talk! 08:41, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Kathiuska Domínguez

Kathiuska Domínguez (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to List of Panama women's international footballers. I found plenty of passing mentions in my searches ( 1, 2, 3), but nothing that might indicate notability. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 02:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Morocco women's international footballers. Liz Read! Talk! 08:41, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Soumia Hady

Soumia Hady (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to List of Morocco women's international footballers. All I can find on the subject are passing mentions like 1, 2, and 3. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 02:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Fidorah Namuesh

Fidorah Namuesh (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject seemingly made a single appearance for the Papua New Guinea women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient coverage to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All that came up in searches were passing mentions like 1, 2, and 3. JTtheOG ( talk) 01:55, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:46, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Alisa – Folge deinem Herzen

Alisa – Folge deinem Herzen (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreferenced and undeveloped since 2011 with almost no content. Terasail [✉️] 01:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

I've added several of these refs to the article.-- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count) 02:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I mean, the german article has 2 deadlinks, 1 webarchive link that might aswell be dead, a webarchive link to a german page I can't read/translate and 2 short quotenmeter links which are written by the same person which doesn't scream notable. Terasail [✉️] 02:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The refs I added have working links. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count) 02:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Riyaz Khan#Early and personal life. Discounted the two IP keeps that geolocate to the same area as sockpuppet IPs of the checkuser-blocked article creator. Most of the other participants converged on redirect as the appropriate solution for now. RL0919 ( talk) 14:02, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Shariq Hassan

AfDs for this article:
Shariq Hassan (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR. Is the main antagonist of Pencil and has no other notability. He was the winner of the reality show BB Jodigal but that doesn't add much. WP:TOOEARLY, please redirect to Pencil (film). He also played the lead in the 5 episode YouTube series Kaalam Neram Kadhal. Is that notable? I smell COI because the article said his unreleased film "received an average reception from critics". [23].

Has a similar notability to Draft:Tharshan Thiyagarajah. This source talks about his lack of roles since Bigg Boss [24]. DareshMohan ( talk) 19:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 ( talk) 21:49, 18 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 25 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 00:12, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Redirect, ToF counts as one source so no matter how in-depth and substantial any of those pieces are they still do not amount to GNG. This is even ignoring the tabloid quality of the ToF articles.
JoelleJay ( talk) 20:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I'm sorry but what is "ToF"?- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:04, 4 December 2023 (UTC)? (did you mean The Times of India? if so, only one 2 articles from this periodical are cited on the page, one addressing directly and in-depth the career of Shariq Hassan, the second clearly there only for verification of his presence in the cast of a future film.) reply
This was addressing the claim above that Coverage by the Times of India, on multiple occasions, is more than enough to establish notability per WP:NACTOR. JoelleJay ( talk) 06:24, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
OK, thanks, it's generally abbreviated as TOI rather than ToF, though. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:02, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Mushy Yank: @ DJ InstaMalik: @ JoelleJay: Would you support a redirect to his father Riyaz Khan#Early and personal life with a sentence about him? Clearly Wikipedia:TOOSOON. DareshMohan ( talk) 03:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Yes, that works for me! (but not strongly opposed to keep) - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:30, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. I hope some editors can spend time improving this article and adding new sources to it. Liz Read! Talk! 07:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Direct care

Direct care (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The term "direct care" could mean almost anything in the English language e.g. "I am taking direct care of my dog", "The painting was placed under direct care of the museum". With regards to its meaning in the NHS, I could only find a single reputable source here, and even so that does not justify an article.

Essentially this is an incredibly vague term, which perhaps has a specific niche meaning in the NHS, but certainly not enough to warrant an article.

The article is essentially saying "direct care is the direct care of a patient in the NHS".

Most of the rest is just tangential information about nursing, audit etc.

None of the cited sources are about the term itself.

One of the worst articles on Wikipedia. Elshad ( talk) 11:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 00:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. consensus is that topic meets our notability guidelines for professors, if just barely 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:45, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Bryan Yipp

Bryan Yipp (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. Fails NPROF, unless being a Canada Research Chair qualifies? Jprg1966 (talk) 01:21, 17 November 2023 (UTC) reply

There are a total of 1,993 Canada Research Chairs. Some commenters opined in these AfDs that only tier 1 Canada Research Chairs should count towards WP:PROF#C5. See Canada Research Chair#Types of chairs: tier 1 chairs are for senior academics and constitute 38% of Canada Research Chairs. The remaining 62% are tier 2 chairs for promising junior academics with potential, such as Bryan Yipp. [35] -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count) 02:14, 17 November 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep. He is an assistant professor and tier 2 CRC. Whatever one thinks about tier 1 CRCs, that definitely doesn't count for WP:PROF#C5, which is only for above-full-professor level appointments. That said, he seems to be the go-to expert on NETosis (two first-author papers with 4-digit citation counts on Google Scholar, seemingly the top-cited two works on that subject), so I think he passes WP:PROF#C1. — David Eppstein ( talk) 17:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply
  • weak keep. I agree with David, while a CRC Tier 2 is an early career award and does not count towards NPROF, I think with his strong expertise on a niche field, three publications with 1000+ citations each and a healthy h-index of 23, he passes the NPROF#1 -- not by much since he is still early career but there is enough for a pass. -- hroest 15:53, 20 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 10:21, 25 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment: I don't really see any reason to get in the way of a delete on this article, which is a one-sentence stub that would be eligible for G5 deletion if this AfD hadn't been opened instead. I realize that isn't exactly an argument for deletion, which is why this isn't a !vote, but I think it's context to keep in mind, given that no one has advanced a strong keep argument. -- asilvering ( talk) 22:40, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply
    It is incorrect that this article would be eligible for G5 deletion. G5 is only for articles created by already-indef-blocked (or banned) editors evading their block. This article was created in March 2017; the SPI that banned SwisterTwister was not initiated until December 2017. — David Eppstein ( talk) 20:55, 2 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    Ah, my bad. Disregard, then. -- asilvering ( talk) 00:24, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 00:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 00:04, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

1881 Randolph–Macon Yellow Jackets football team

1881 Randolph–Macon Yellow Jackets football team (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG as no WP:SIGCOV has been found in independent, reliable sources with in-depth discussion of this team. The article was created in 2016 as a micro-stub with no substantive content. More than seven years later, the only content that has been added is an unsourced schedule chart reciting that the team lost two games on unspecified dates and at unspecified locations. (As an additional nail in the coffin, it appears from this source that this was a season of association football (i.e., soccer) rather than gridiron football as the article asserts.) Cbl62 ( talk) 23:45, 2 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete Per nom. WP:BEFORE turned up nothing substantial to pass WP:GNG. Moshe1022 ( talk) 16:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2023_December_3&oldid=1189290303"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 02 December 04 >

Purge server cache

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Daniel ( talk) 23:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Johnny Somali

Johnny Somali (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Procedural nomination as a page repeatedly nominated per WP:PROD, and once per G10. Lots of other disruptive edits dismissing the subject's significance or attacking Wikipedia editors, such as this and this.

I don't see the relevance of a random unruly tourist/attention seeker to be added to Wikipedia
—  User:2A02:8070:6483:AB80:503E:D1BC:BC9F:BD8C 14:35, 4 November 2023; deprodded by Kvng ( talk · contribs)

Irrelevancy
—  User:2a02:8070:6483:ab80:6d0d:d27a:9272:3bd1 14:50, 17 November 2023; deprodded by GucciNuzayer ( talk · contribs)

I am nominating this article for speedy deletion under the db-g10 criterion, which pertains to pages that serve primarily as an attack or defamation. This article about "Johnny Somali," who is reportedly known for attacking and harassing Japanese people, violates several fundamental principles of Wikipedia.

The content of this article appears to be crafted with the intent to defame and vilify the Japanese community. The portrayal of events and the language used are not only unencyclopedic but seem to be biased, creating a narrative that is harmful and derogatory. Furthermore, the article’s tone and the way it addresses sensitive issues related to human rights and dignity indicate a lack of respect and an inclination towards mockery. This is not only disrespectful but also diminishes the seriousness of the subject matter, which involves real human suffering and legal consequences.

Besides being offensive, the article lacks substantial encyclopedic value. The subject, "Johnny Somali," does not meet the notability guidelines set forth by Wikipedia. The content seems more focused on sensationalism rather than providing a balanced, informative perspective. It is imperative for Wikipedia to maintain its standards of providing factual, unbiased, and respectful content. Allowing this article to remain would set a concerning precedent and undermine the integrity of Wikipedia as a reliable source of information.

In light of these reasons, I strongly urge the consideration of this nomination for the speedy deletion of the article. It is crucial to address such issues promptly to ensure Wikipedia remains a respectful and trustworthy platform.
—  User:23acewe 07:58, 1 December 2023; incorrectly inserted into the {{ db-g10}} template, and de-tagged by Liz ( talk · contribs)

0 Historic value
—  User:2604:3d09:6688:3e00:85d8:d7fa:e157:b6a3 16:31, 2 December 2023; deprodded by Aspects ( talk · contribs). An IP within the same /64 range repeated the PROD tag several times, and was blocked for edit warring.

– LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 23:54, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Internet, Somalia, Japan, and Arizona. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 23:54, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: The Japanese newspaper sources are RS, but trivial (14, 15, and 18), the South China Morning Post is extensive (11). I also find this on GameRant [1], the Statesman [2] and BBc [3], all providing more than just coverage of his stunts. His entire "thing" is provoking people, so that perhaps explains why coverage is mostly of his arrests, but it gives context. Oaktree b ( talk) 01:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: I'm not sure where the "attempt to defame and vilify Japanese community" comes from when the article just simply describes Somali's actions and reasons for arrest. There's been plenty of worldwide coverage on Somali as mentioned above, as well as other articles stating that Somali's actions have caused the Japanese government to take action on not just him but other YouTubers in Japan causing "public nuisance." I think that's significant enough. lullabying ( talk) 01:17, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. ~ Kvng ( talk) 14:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: irrelevant, unimportant and harmful redirect. There is no importance to the discussion or showcase of this individual who has put his disregard for respect of other cultures on full display. Also he is not a famous figure, very far from it. Among his peers he is practically irrelevant as a streamer except for his short-time conducting public stunts in Japan. There's no reason for Wikipedia to be housing clout chasers, wikipedia is more relevant and prestigious than that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23acewe ( talk • contribs) 07:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: I don't understand how this is vilifying or dehumanizing Johnny Somali or the Japanese community since the article just states his actions, consequences, and subsequent backlash. The article isn't leaning in a direction or is any bias is present.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 21:57, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Twink (home perm)

Twink (home perm) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

@ Espresso Addict: @ MrDemeanour: Article has been tagged as unsourced for over a decade - I did a Google search and the subject does not seem to be notable Chidgk1 ( talk) 17:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Morristown, New Jersey#Education. Daniel ( talk) 23:56, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The Red Oaks School

The Red Oaks School (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails NCORP. Schools are not inherently notable. Everything I found on BEFORE was LOCAL or ROUTINE. Article has been repeatedly re-created from a redirect and, since redirects are costly, deletion is the only course. Chris Troutman ( talk) 17:42, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Daniel ( talk) 21:57, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Saint Philomena College, Puttur

Saint Philomena College, Puttur (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NORG no independent reliable sources and plagued by endless sockpuppetry. Theroadislong ( talk) 19:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

*Delete No significant coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL. LibStar ( talk) 22:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was procedural close‎. There is no need to go to AfD to merge content in situations like this; Wikipedia:Merging#Proposing_a_merge advises that editors can either be bold and merge themselves in uncontroversial cases (likely to include this situation), or alternatively on the talk page. Daniel ( talk) 23:58, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Federación Anarco-Comunista de Argentina

Federación Anarco-Comunista de Argentina (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

For quite a while now, I've been looking around for sources to expand this stub, but I haven't been able to turn up anything more than those already referenced in this article. Most of my sources that reference a "Federación Anarco-Comunista de Argentina" are actually referencing the original name for the Argentine Libertarian Federation, which changed its name in 1955. I can't find anything on this organisation, apparently founded in 2011. Even the two sources cited in this don't go into any further depth, only giving it a passing reference. The Spanish Wikipedia doesn't have a dedicated article on it, instead all of this information (with both sources cited) is included on the larger article Anarquismo en Argentina.

As I can't find any real evidence that this passes notability guidelines, I propose we follow the Spanish Wikipedia's example and merge this article into our article on Anarchism in Argentina. It would be a relatively trivial merger to carry out. Grnrchst ( talk) 20:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:08, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 undeletion of these articles. Daniel ( talk) 23:59, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Mohammad Baghlani

Mohammad Baghlani (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails notability, only played U16 and U17 basketball teams. still achieve nothing in senior level, not sure if they even played pro basketball. Sports2021 ( talk) 18:10, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Sarem Jafari (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Comment The question is does he have the significant coverage to WP:GNG or not. Whether or not he has played for the senior national team or professionally is irrelivant. Alvaldi ( talk) 20:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 20:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:44, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Metropolitan Police Office

Metropolitan Police Office (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced and I cannot find a single source substantiating the existence of this office. Elshad ( talk) 21:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete This article isn't about the current Met. It is about a defunct government department which probably did exist at some point (per Google Scholar results, mainly paywalled), but without any clues as to when and how it was created, or when it ceased to exist (c.1830?). Anyone reading the article would be unable to use it as a launching point for further research as there is zero sourcing. Merging it into Metropolitan Police would just be passing the trash to another page, due to the lack of sourcing. Oblivy ( talk) 03:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
This article isn't about the current Met. Why is this relevant? Actually, the MPO existed from the creation of the Met until 2000. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 11:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
What I was suggesting was that the fact that the Metropolitan Police show up in search results is not necessarily proof there are references to the Metropolitan Police Office. I searched and did not find them. Maybe you did better than I did and could share the results of your search?
Note that the article did not give any dates at the time I made my comment (my reference to c.1830 was because I had done some searches and knew a structural reform was made around that time). You added the claim about 1829-2000 yesterday, without prividing a citation. If there's support for your claim it should be added to the article. Oblivy ( talk) 00:00, 6 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Fails GNG and NORG. Article is unsourced so there is nothing to merge, I don't see this as a particularly good redirect, but if there is a consensus I have no objection to one.  //  Timothy ::  talk  05:25, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Daniel ( talk) 00:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Atlantic Lacrosse Conference

Atlantic Lacrosse Conference (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of in depth secondary sources which are independent of the source. The only source I found which comes even close to qualifying is [ [4]]. Let'srun ( talk) 14:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. Collegiate athletic conferences are presumptively notable, IMO; we have countless articles on less noteworthy subjects. The only reason for concluding that the subject is non-notable would be if it were a hoax, which does not seem to be the case. The issue here is how to find good sources; but notability is not determined by the present state of sources, nor are sources required to be online. The failure of someone's Google searches to uncover material on something that must certainly be documented merely shows that this search strategy is inadequate. One or more editors will have to take the time to figure out where independent sources might be located, and consult them. They may not be online, but there is no deadline for improving articles. Given that we know this conference exists across a number of colleges in several states, and has for multiple years, concluding that there are no independent sources merely because one couldn't locate them online is inadequate to demonstrate a lack of notability P Aculeius ( talk) 12:50, 12 November 2023 (UTC). reply
    Comment: Collegiate athletic conferences conferences in the NCAA may generally be notable, but there is no criteria that says they are presumptively notable, and in this case this "conference" is in a club-level competition with little in the name of coverage due to the level of the competition. Just like your local travel baseball league isn't notable, this conference isn't either. Most of your vote reads like arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. The absence of available sources should not, in my view, ever be twisted around to be seen as proof that sources actually exist. We can only use what is available, not what we imagine might exist in some fantasy world, and this article isn't up to snuff, simply enough. Let'srun ( talk) 14:15, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply
And yet you're setting up a series of straw men. I didn't say that the absence of sources proves that they exist in some fantasy world. Your claim is that sources don't exist because you couldn't find them online. This is precisely the kind of subject that's likely to be documented primarily through college athletic sites and local news that isn't searchable online. It's fairly certain that written or audiovisual confirmation of the conference and its history and membership exist; the only plausible explanation for it not existing would be if this were a hoax, which it's clearly not. A relatively short search revealed that Davidson College's athletic site discusses its Lacrosse program, although some of the other colleges mentioned don't seem to. But that speaks to the quality of their web sites, not the reality of their participation in the league. If I haven't made this point clear yet, sources do not have to be available online. The simple fact that it's a collegiate athletic conference means that sources will exist; a claim that they don't because you couldn't find them online is not credible. P Aculeius ( talk) 18:23, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply
Great, but we need independent, secondary sources. A member school discussing their program is a primary source. WP:ITEXISTS and WP:SOURCESEXIST are not legitimate keep arguments. Let'srun ( talk) 18:53, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply
You've got it backward. "None of these sources are good enough" and "I can't find any sources I consider acceptable" aren't legitimate delete arguments for something that we know exists and that should be notable. You're still fixated on the lack of online sources, as though you hadn't read the guidelines that you keep wikilawyering with. Sources do not have to be available online; articles don't get deleted because their sources aren't good enough; there's no time limit on improving articles. The burden rests with the nominator to show that a topic cannot be documented, and that burden is not satisfied by arguing that there aren't enough online sources that are independent of the subject—particularly when it's obvious that better sources exist, even though they don't seem to be easy to come by over the internet. P Aculeius ( talk) 23:27, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply
Of course offline sources are just as good as online sources, yet it is nowhere near obvious that better sources exist. Let'srun ( talk) 01:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: To address @ Let'srun's concerns for notability of a "club-level conference"; for most schools, the MCLA is the only available option for collegiate level lacrosse, especially for schools along the west coast. More schools participate in MCLA level lacrosse than NCAA DI and DII lacrosse. Yes, the Atlantic Lacrosse Conference is a young conference, so it has a shorter history and fewer online sources than others, but every other MCLA conference has met Wikipedia's notability guidelines. SammySpartan ( talk) 15:17, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply
Just because other conferences have articles doesn't make this one notable. Also, did any of those other articles have AfD discussions? Let'srun ( talk) 01:11, 13 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 23:48, 18 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 23:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 00:43, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Carl Judie

Carl Judie (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable WP:NACTOR. In a WP:BEFORE search, all I can find on him is blogs and WP:THESUN. Wikishovel ( talk) 12:30, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

The problem with the three references you've cited is that they're all blog posts, rather than WP:Reliable sources. A hundred blog references like that still wouldn't demonstrate notability: we're looking for coverage in newspapers, books, films, etc, showing how Judie was notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Wikishovel ( talk) 05:09, 27 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:26, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Editors who supported Keeping this article should read up on what RS are as well as the in depth coverage required for SIGCOV. Liz Read! Talk! 06:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Justin Plautz

Justin Plautz (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I was unable to find any WP:SIGCOV. The article fails WP:GNG. Robby.is.on ( talk) 12:19, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • The notability guidelines are always interpreted differently. This article is definitely not a clear candidate for deletion. There is not a tiny attempt of improvement; deletion seems to be the easiest way to handle imperfect articles for some users. The easiest way is not always the best or most reasonable way, though. -- Mojnsen ( talk) 15:42, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 23:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Karl Wolf#Singles (ATD). Daniel ( talk) 00:01, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Carrera (song)

Carrera (song) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Rejected PROD, poorly referenced, non notable song. Jax 0677 ( talk) 22:39, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to The CW Sports. Contention is that there's nothing to merge, if anyone disagrees with this they can rescue content from behind the redirect and merge editorially. Daniel ( talk) 00:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

College Football on The CW

College Football on The CW (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unnecessary split. Can be covered at ACC on The CW (which might also be unnecessary) and The CW Sports. Only one line (about the Arizona Bowl) is different than coverage on The ACC on The CW article. Esolo5002 ( talk) 22:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Jonson (disambiguation)

Jonson (disambiguation) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Jonson (name) exists. Jax 0677 ( talk) 22:43, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Yekaterina Pyatkina

Yekaterina Pyatkina (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject made a half-dozen appearances for the Kazakhstan women's national football team. All that comes up in my searches are passing mentions like 1 and 2. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 22:39, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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. Daniel ( talk) 22:50, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

National Leadership Network for Health and Social Care

National Leadership Network for Health and Social Care (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find any evidence for existence of such a named organisation. There is an NHS Clinical Leaders Network but of course that is a different organisation with a different name.

The provided website does not work, although there is a website here but the name does not include "for Health and Social Care" and makes no mention of previously being the so-called "NHS Modernisation Board".

Hard to find any third-party sources verifiying the existance of this entitity.

Overall unclear if defunct and certainly non-notable and does not warrant article. Elshad ( talk) 22:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Chad international footballers. Daniel ( talk) 22:52, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Noumasseri Djimadoum

Noumasseri Djimadoum (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to List of Chad international footballers. The subject made a single appearance for his respective national team. I am unable to find any coverage at all, nor is there any indication of notability. Fails WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 22:30, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The Reeths-Puffer Marching Band

The Reeths-Puffer Marching Band (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

High school marching bands are not notable and this appears to be no exception with routine local and non-independent or irrelevant sources. Bensci54 and I both redirected the page to be reverted by the creator. Both WikiOriginal-9 and Voorts declined AFD submission, not sure why Timtrent approved it in such a self-promotional and unencylopedically written/sourced form. Reywas92 Talk 22:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Michigan. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 22:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: One has to love nominations with a bit of snark in them 😈. I have a firm personal policy of steadfast neutrality at articles I accepted at AFC. I follow the guidance that a draft must, in my view, have a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. This is an immediate deletion process and I await the community's view. If I was mistaken then I will learn from it If I was not then you will learn from it, But, whatever transpires, I really think you might learn not to be snarky when you nominate something for deletion. 🇺🇦  FiddleTimtrent  FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    I'm not really trying to be snarky, but I don't think there's a single other high school marching band article on Wikipedia for good reason. This is of interest only to participants and clearly fails WP:CLUB and the few independent sources fail WP:AUD. Even without an article for Reeths-Puffer High School, individual student groups at scondary schools are not something we need standalone pages for and virtually never pass AFD. Reywas92 Talk 00:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    It appears that this one is unlikely to pass, too. But that is what AfD is for, and we shall still see what happens. If you weren't trying then snark came naturally. You were not lacking in civility, not exactly, but you get an A+ from me for what must be natural snarkiness. It is the article that you are nominating, not the reviewer. I'm perfectly content to have a mistake demonstrated to me, but I do prefer it to be demonstrated with no edge to the demonstration. 🇺🇦  FiddleTimtrent  FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 09:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: As I noted in declining this at AfC, the only RS providing SIGCOV is the MLive article. I have been unable to find additional RSes via TWL or Google. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 22:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: As someone deeply invested in the marching arts, from drum corps to winter guard, I can say for certain that no high school marching band in the world is notable. There is not enough coverage to sustain a completely independent page from the parent article. I oppose a redirect. Why? I Ask ( talk) 23:01, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: poor-quality promotional article with bad sourcing; band itself is not notable, and the search term seems rather unlikely to me. page creator seems obviously connected to the subject. Darling ☔ ( talk · contribs) 14:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: As one of the people who attempted to redirect this back to the article on the high school, I see no reason this article needs to exist. Bensci54 ( talk) 17:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - the high school I attended 50 years ago won the 1920s version of a national high school band competition so many years in a row, they disbanded the contest and gave them the traveling trophy. The band director at the time was hired away by the University of Michigan where he was director of bands for over 20 years - and they are not notable. And it stands to reason that if the school itself is not notable, than an individual student activity wouldn't be either. 4.37.252.50 ( talk) 21:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Redirect also. JBW ( talk) 21:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Brenton Tarrant

AfDs for this article:
Brenton Tarrant (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is simply a repeat of the information (and wording) in Christchurch mosque shootings. Brenton Tarrant is known for just one action and is neither famous nor noteworthy. It is unlikely that anyone would search for Brenton Tarrant without finding his name on the Christchurch page in which case they would already have all the information that is on this page.

Please note that this is the second time that this article has been nominated for deletion. The first time was before any text had been added. You can see the discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brenton Tarrant.

Since this page is a redundant duplicate then I suggest Delete OrewaTel ( talk) 21:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

@ TarnishedPath: Then see WP:WHENSPLIT. The Christchurch mosque shootings article is currently over the 9,000 words/60 kB prose threshold, [5] suggesting that the article "Probably should be divided or trimmed, although the scope of a topic can sometimes justify the added reading material." Muzilon ( talk) 03:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
See Daveosaurus's comment below. I suggest the facts you highlight make a stronger argument for trimming, not for devoting more time and resources to this individual who's notability is WP:BLP1E. TarnishedPath talk 04:40, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
What material do you propose to remove from the Christchurch article? Muzilon ( talk) 04:58, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Under the heading Christchurch_mosque_shootings#Perpetrator, just a quick review of the first two paragraphs reveals material about his family life growing up that is irrelevant to the shooting and material about a visit to a hospital because of a gun accident that is again irrelevant to the shooting. 50% of those two paragraphs could be trimmed and consolidated into one paragraph. That's just a quick review. However, I don't edit that article so I'll leave that to the good judgement of people that do. TarnishedPath talk 05:37, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I'd suggest those details are probably necessary background, and strengthen the case for WP:SPINOUT. Muzilon ( talk) 23:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Spark (software)

Spark (software) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. There are no independent sources Mdggdj ( talk) 21:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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. Daniel ( talk) 22:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Northern Media Group

Northern Media Group (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a company which appears to own six small radio stations in Northern Ireland. I can't see any reason why it needs its own article above and beyond the articles that deal with the individual stations themselves. Does not appear to meet WP:NCORP. Tagged as unsourced since 2018.

Similar articles which simply list stations owned by a single-market radio owner have been deleted in recent months: [6] [7] [8] Flip Format ( talk) 21:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

JVx (Framework)

JVx (Framework) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. There are no independent sources Mdggdj ( talk) 20:48, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

It's an open source project and I'm one of the developers. Which independent sources do you need for such an article? It's important for open source projects to have a wikipedia page to get more contributors and attention. We can't pay for ad words and if you don't have a big company behind the framework, it's important to get attention.
So, what do we need to keep the article? Rjahn ( talk) 08:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Please, see Wikipedia:Notability (software) Mdggdj ( talk) 10:34, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Figure skating at the 1st Winter Children of Asia International Sports Games

Figure skating at the 1st Winter Children of Asia International Sports Games (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable figure skating event full of an endless sea of red-linked participants... Even the overarching event (the "Winter Children of Asia International Sports Games") doesn't have a Wikipedia page. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The World's Most Beautiful Transsexual Contest

AfDs for this article:
The World's Most Beautiful Transsexual Contest (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not appear to meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of independent WP:SIGCOV. A 2006 AfD closed as no consensus but notability thresholds have changed significantly since then. Let'srun ( talk) 19:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

--  Maddy from Celeste ( WAVEDASH) 21:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Good find, but we'd need one more like that (at least) for it to be a !keep from me. Oaktree b ( talk) 22:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

William Staniforth

AfDs for this article:
William Staniforth (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Biography which does not appear to meet WP:GNG. The are has only three sources. Two of them have incomplete information to ascertain whether they are books or articles about the subject, or merely a listing in some directory. The only linked source is simply a picture of a medallion which does not contribute to notability. I found nothing in Google to determine notability. NOTE: Previously nominated for deletion in 2018. Flibirigit ( talk) 19:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

NOTE: I found a listing for William Staniforth on "The Staniforth Society" web site, but I do not consider this to be an independent third pary, but rather seems to be operated by the same person who created this Wikipedia article. Flibirigit ( talk) 19:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to University of California, Irvine (selectively as per Owen). Daniel ( talk) 22:56, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

University of California, Irvine student housing

University of California, Irvine student housing (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a two-parter. First, with an exception covered in part 2, below, there's no sign of notability of the housing system of the University of California, Irvine, outside of publications by the University of California, Irvine, and statistical data and lists of available apartments from Irvine. There's no more independent notability here than there is for the housing systems of most schools. In addition, the vast majority of the information given isn't encyclopedic anyway. It belongs in the student handbook. Nobody outside the community is going to care which eateries are covered by the student meal plan or that "many Mesa residents find it a treat, worthy of their time, to walk to Pippins and Brandywine just to eat!"

Second, there used to be an article titled Middle Earth Housing about one housing complex at UCI that received some attention when its buildings were named for places in Tolkien's works. An AFD was created for that article. The outcome was the merger of that article into this one. That was unfortunate because if any aspect of UCI housing is notable, it's specifically the Middle Earth housing. If anything other than deleted, this article should be rid of just about everything not related to Middle Earth housing and then moved to Middle Earth Housing; or else this article should be deleted and that article restored and updated. Largoplazo ( talk) 17:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Follow-up request: If you !vote for "Merge", please clarify whether you mean merge the Middle Earth Housing material into Middle Earth Housing or merging anything useful into University of California, Irvine. Largoplazo ( talk) 10:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:56, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Balti wine

AfDs for this article:
Balti wine (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page appears to completely fail the notability guidelines for companies, and the organisation behind the brand also seems to have vanished, having not been notable in the first place, IMO B800h ( talk) 16:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: There were substantial Keep opinions in the 2007 AfD (and also opinions worth reading on the article Talk page). The original firm seems to have ceased 13-14 years ago ( Companies House), though there were several similarly named subsequent firms. I feel too much was resting on the Manchester Evening News interview with the founder, which would be discounted under the later WP:NCORP standards, and too much was riding on the firm's own claim that their Argentinian wine branding was a market innovation and on expectation of a great future for this distribution / branding start-up. There was also a sponsorship deal [10] but again, such are insufficient for current notability standards. AllyD ( talk) 20:56, 8 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to The Prodigal Son#Theatre. Daniel ( talk) 22:56, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The Prodigal Son (play)

The Prodigal Son (play) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced since 2007. A WP:BEFORE search discovered nothing substantial relating to this play in particular, which doesn't seem to even be the most notable play of the story. Moshe1022 ( talk) 16:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Redirect to The Prodigal Son#Theatre. This play doesn't seem to be notable, but there are other plays that would make a redirect useful. HappyWith ( talk) 18:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I'm supportive of a redirect option as well. Moshe1022 ( talk) 21:25, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Support redirect as well. Kazamzam ( talk) 18:42, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Daniel ( talk) 11:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Ring of Fire (novel)

Ring of Fire (novel) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Kadı Message 14:02, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 11:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Princess Eleonore of Schaumburg-Lippe

Princess Eleonore of Schaumburg-Lippe (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. The only source is her own LinkedIn page. DrKay ( talk) 13:19, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete -- Almost no coverage of her. In fact, I couldn't find anything about the subject from any reliable sources, so she fails WP:GNG. Moshe1022 ( talk) 17:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Delete -- A euro-poppet having a perfectly lovely insignificant career. Bless. But the place for this is Linked-In with 100 million others. MisterWizzy ( talk) 13:38, 8 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Arar, Saudi Arabia. Daniel ( talk) 11:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Prince Abdullah bin Musa'ed Sports City

Prince Abdullah bin Musa'ed Sports City (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No citations. Nexovia ( talk) 12:55, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Draftify - The article was created on 3 December 2023, I think it is possible to turn it into a draft before deletion. Svartner ( talk) 10:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Conker (series). Daniel ( talk) 11:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Conker (character)

Conker (character) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. The only good source were the criticism of its design from Project Spark, but thats it! GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 12:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 11:16, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Brutos Framework

Brutos Framework (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. There are no independent sources Mdggdj ( talk) 12:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Daniel ( talk) 11:16, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Son Sik

Son Sik (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Already been draftified before, and couldnt find any sources Begocc ( talk) 10:32, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was draftify‎. Daniel ( talk) 22:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Jinan North railway station

Jinan North railway station (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is too WP:CRYSTAL to be useful, all the listed sources are pointing to another station called "Jibei station", none of them are indicating Jinan North as a high speed railway station. The title name was cited by some local medias, finally defined as rumours, to indicate a station of Shiji passenger railway, called Qihe ( on zhwiki), was to be renamed to be so, but when Shiji opened for service, that station remains called Qihe, not Jinan North. Liuxinyu970226 ( talk) 09:42, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

@ Anders-sandholm, Nikki, RobotMichiel1972, Lockal, and Pasleim: ^^ Liuxinyu970226 ( talk) 09:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Diana Zenteno

Diana Zenteno (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject is a Bolivian women's footballer. I was unable to find any in-depth coverage, nor is there any indication of notability. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 08:25, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Weighing up the opinions before and after improvement (as hinted at by Liz), there seems to be a consensus to keep this expanded version of the article. (non-admin closure) Schminnte [ talk to me 18:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Familie Leitner

Familie Leitner (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cites no sources, little non-trivial information can be found online, fails WP:GNG DirtyHarry991 ( talk) 10:48, 18 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:29, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is a very different article than the one that existed at the time of nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: dramatic improvements in both content and sourcing changed this into a viable article. Those who voiced their opinion here on the day of the nomination: please take another look. Owen× ☎ 16:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, as it seems there was a book written about it and several retrospective pieces published.
JoelleJay ( talk) 20:51, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:19, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Herminigildo Ranera

Herminigildo Ranera (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Successful musician, but doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 21:07, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep but needs rewrite and more sources, because the current article reads like it was lifted from a CV. With regard to notability, I would argue that this article can be retained as the subject is significantly notable in the Philippines. Ranera was a NAMCYA winner (which is one of the top music competitions in the country), and was a former conductor of the national orchestra. His current group (UST Symphony Orchestra) is also a resident group of the country's premier cultural institution. --- Tito Pao ( talk) 10:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 05:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep though some sprucing up is needed (such as but not limited to more relevant references as one isn't enough, an infobox template and probably a freely licensed photo). - Ian Lopez @ 16:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 06:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Teddy bear hospital

Teddy bear hospital (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Has been in CAT:NN for over 13 years. Last AfD attracted little response and was no consensus. It reads as promotional, but also I couldn't find sources to confirm it meets WP:N, as an individual place or as a concept. Boleyn ( talk) 20:33, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Not eligible for soft-deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 05:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. While we always welcome new editors, I am more persuaded by established editors who are more familar with Wikipedia's standards for reliable sourcing. Though it is interesting to hear that the Furry world has its own award ceremony. Liz Read! Talk! 08:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Kristi Brooks

Kristi Brooks (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 20:33, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:23, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment - from the award link: "The Ursa Major Awards are Anthropomorphic (a.k.a. Furry) Fandom's equivalents of s-f fandom's Hugo Awards, mystery fandom's Anthony Awards, horror fandom's Bram Stoker Awards, and so forth. The Ursa Majors are administered and presented by the Anthropomorphic Literature and Arts Association (ALAA), an organization dedicated to promoting anthropomorphic literature and arts both within and outside of the fandom." This does not appear to be a notable award supporting notability. The other link above is an archive listing, not a secondary source supporting notability, and may be a different Kristi Brooks who is a painter. Beccaynr ( talk) 23:51, 1 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 05:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: a passing mention by a couple of local newspapers falls short of establishing notability per WP:AUTHOR. The clearly canvassed votes here certainly don't help the case. Owen× ☎ 17:24, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Draftify‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Path of Titans

Path of Titans (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The only significant coverage I could find from a reliable source was from Pocket Gamer, and this is their best article about it - every other one from them is just a short thing about the new updates. All other significant coverage is from random bloggy sites. QuietCicada - Talk 18:58, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 05:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to 2024 California State Senate election#District 9. Liz Read! Talk! 06:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Marisol Rubio

Marisol Rubio (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Highest office is a city council. No national news coverage or really any coverage at all outside of routine campaign/municipal politics stuff. Clearly does not satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NPOL. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 06:43, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Marisol has had multiple news coverage across the Bay Area and, in addition to her two elected positions held to date, she serves in leadership positions across California and the country. I can verify and attest to the accuracy of the information provided on this page to date and ask that it not be removed because there is no justifiable reason to do so. MRC2024 ( talk) 05:49, 30 November Wikipedia.
  • The information on Marisol Rubios Wikipedia page is correct. Marisol Rubio is an elected San Ramon City Council person. She is an active member of the CA Dem Party. She was elected to the water board prior to being elected to city council. Marisol Rubio is a member of SEIU-2015. She is a co-chair/vice chair of the CA Dem Party's Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion committee. Marisol has been in many local news stations reports in the Bay Area. She stood in solidarity with the striking SEIU-UHW workers at Kaiser Permanente Walnut Creek and I witnessed her being interviewed by a reporter that day and saw it on the local news that evening. I serve with Marisol as a delegate to the Contra Costa Labor Council and as an active member of the Dem Party of Contra Costa in California. Please don't remove this page, it is accurate and I attest to the facts shared here.

Amy Scott-Slovick, AD 15 Eboard Member to the CA Dem Party, Associate Member of the Dem Party of CCC, Delegate at the Contra Costa Labor Council.

Nobody is disputing the accuracy of the page. We are discussing whether or not she is notable enough to have a Wikipedia page. Appearing on local news a couple times does not prove notability. Read WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 20:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. What is the suggested Redirect target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

If the result of the discussion was a redirect, the obvious target would be 2024 California State Senate election#District 9. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 20:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. City council is not a level of office that guarantees inclusion in Wikipedia, and unelected candidates in future state legislative elections do not get articles on those grounds either — and simply having a normal level of run of the mill local coverage of local politics in the local media, where such coverage of local politics is merely expected, is not enough to deem her more special than everybody else, because every other city councillor on earth has similar levels of local coverage in his or her local media too. Obviously no prejudice against recreation next November if she wins the state legislature seat, but nothing here is already enough as of right now. Bearcat ( talk) 22:21, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    Argument for maintaining the article about Marisol Rubio in Wikipedia.
    The argument for deletion of Marisol Rubio’s article appears to hinge on Honorable Marisol Rubio only being of interest to local populations.
    I direct your attention to:
    https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Demographics_of_California
    Demographics of California - Wikipedia
    California is the most populated U.S. state, with an estimated population of 38.9 million as of 2023. [1] It has people from a wide variety of ethnic, racial, national, and religious backgrounds. Population California is the most populated sub-national entity in North America.
    And too:
    /info/en/?search=San_Francisco_Bay_Area
    My argument is that in the San Francisco Bay Area being involved to the level that Ms. Rubio is involved is significant.
    Of note she is an up and coming elected progressive woman who champions the environment (Sierra Club) and inclusion (CA Democratic Party JEDI Board- https://cadem.org/standing-committee/diversity-equity-inclusion-committee/) and she is currently running for CA District 9 State Senator seat.
    In California, our state senators represent more people than our elected members to the House of Representatives.
    /info/en/?search=California_State_Senate
    I read a recent post that verified what was in the Wikipedia information about Marisol Rubio and I too can verify that the information is factual. But then I saw from another post that stated that it isn’t whether the information is factual but whether it is notable. As a user of Wikipedia I appreciate being able to search for honest and reliable information. Regarding the maintaining of the article is the question. My position is that the article on Marisol Rubio should be maintained because she is running for CA State Senate to represent just under one million people (my community). I believe this article will be/is of service to our community in getting to know about an outstanding community activist, a woman who is a member of a minority, from the working class who is running for the CA Senate. She is a role model and I do not believe that she nor the work that she has done is "run of the mill". 2601:644:9200:A31B:A48C:8654:95AE:867 ( talk) 01:19, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    Right...I'm sure you, the anonymous user typing out an overly formal essay praising Marisol Rubio, are a totally different person compared to the first commenter, who was also an anonymous user typing out an overly formal essay praising Marisol Rubio. There are over 100 state senate candidates in CA every two years and tens of thousands of city councilors. Giving all of them a Wikipedia page would be ridiculous. And that's even besides the point because, even if your argument was sensible, that's not Wikipedia's current policy, so this page should still be deleted. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 03:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Bearcat's reasoning. Should Rubio win the state senate election, which is almost a year from now, then the article can be recreated as she would pass WP:NPOL. Best, GPL93 ( talk) 15:30, 8 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Nominator is advised that a fuller deletion rationale (rather than simply "Fails WP:GNG") might be more persuasive to participating editors and also demonstrate BEFORE had been done. Liz Read! Talk! 06:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Avery Patterson

Avery Patterson (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 06:08, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Jason "Singer" Smith

Jason "Singer" Smith (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Over 20 years ago, he was involved in an altercation in Kyrgyzstan with Tommy Caldwell (who would become one of America's most notable climbers); however, Smith achieved little notability beyond that incident, and there is no proper SIGCOV on him in any quality RS (either national-RS or in climbing-RS per WP:NCLIMBER). Can't see this BLP surviving on Wikipedia long-term? Aszx5000 ( talk) 13:25, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

The best I found looking through the interweb and the climbing mags is this interesting... memoir. That said, not much value is lost if this stub is deleted.
No prejudice to creation if someone else manages to locate some obscure sources. Ca talk to me! 07:24, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

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! 05:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

1973 Lancashire County Council election

1973 Lancashire County Council election (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested draftification. This article was moved from article space to draft space by User: Significa liberdade saying that more sources were needed. It was moved back to article space without adding sources. There is only one source, The Elections Centre of Plymouth University, which is a reliable primary source. Robert McClenon ( talk) 04:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Kesho Naik

Kesho Naik (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be an hoax. Fictional character from the named book in the article. Am unable to find any other source that mentions it in the slightest. Fermiboson ( talk) 03:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Support: Sources it cites say it is fictional (maybe accidental, not a hoax?) but I don’t know if the character is notable or not. Mrfoogles ( talk) 05:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. I see a consensus to Keep and more importantly, no support for Deletion or even Redirection. Liz Read! Talk! 08:39, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Dubai Capitals

Dubai Capitals (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There are not enough independent citations to warrant a standalone article. Fails WP:NSPORT. Consider a deletion or redirect it to International League T20. Charlie ( talk) 02:48, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

*Delete per nom. DJ InstaMalik ( talk) 08:07, 25 November 2023 (UTC) A possible WP:SPA that solely participated in numerous AfD nominations I recently initiated, which raises significant doubts from the outset. - Charlie ( talk) 07:54, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. If you are suggesting a Redirect closure, please provide a link to a target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Lipogenesis. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Lipoexpediency

Lipoexpediency (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lipoexpediency is not a commonly-used term. Lipoexpediency is not even an uncommonly-used term. It originated as a clever turn-of-phrase in the title of a decade-old journal article and has been used only a small handful of times since, either in reference to that article or by members of the team that coined it. Marchantiophyta ( talk) 02:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 11:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

K21OC-D

AfDs for this article:
K21OC-D (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another HC2/Innovate station with little notability to speak of, and seemingly no known programming that isn't carriage of national (or international, in the case of Multimedios Televisión) services. It's been tagged for notability issues since 2014, and while it technically survived an AfD earlier this year, said AfD was the failed bulk nomination of 140 HC2/Innovate stations. I can't see any indication that this comes anywhere near meeting the GNG. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:46, 26 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 02:30, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was draftify‎. Daniel ( talk) 11:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Anais da Associação Brasileira de Química

Anais da Associação Brasileira de Química (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced since its creation in 2007; can't seem to find anything via WP:BEFORE (though someone else might be able to) other than this, which this article may have been copied from or it just mirrors this article. Waddles  🗩  🖉 02:19, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Boston College–Harvard men's basketball rivalry

Boston College–Harvard men's basketball rivalry (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

None of the sources in the article mention any rivalry between these schools, and a BEFORE check came up empty regarding WP:SIGCOV for this to meet the WP:NRIVALRY. Let'srun ( talk) 02:18, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Panama women's international footballers. Liz Read! Talk! 08:41, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Kathiuska Domínguez

Kathiuska Domínguez (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to List of Panama women's international footballers. I found plenty of passing mentions in my searches ( 1, 2, 3), but nothing that might indicate notability. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 02:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Morocco women's international footballers. Liz Read! Talk! 08:41, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Soumia Hady

Soumia Hady (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to List of Morocco women's international footballers. All I can find on the subject are passing mentions like 1, 2, and 3. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 02:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Fidorah Namuesh

Fidorah Namuesh (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject seemingly made a single appearance for the Papua New Guinea women's national football team. I am unable to find sufficient coverage to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All that came up in searches were passing mentions like 1, 2, and 3. JTtheOG ( talk) 01:55, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:46, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Alisa – Folge deinem Herzen

Alisa – Folge deinem Herzen (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreferenced and undeveloped since 2011 with almost no content. Terasail [✉️] 01:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

I've added several of these refs to the article.-- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count) 02:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I mean, the german article has 2 deadlinks, 1 webarchive link that might aswell be dead, a webarchive link to a german page I can't read/translate and 2 short quotenmeter links which are written by the same person which doesn't scream notable. Terasail [✉️] 02:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The refs I added have working links. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count) 02:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Riyaz Khan#Early and personal life. Discounted the two IP keeps that geolocate to the same area as sockpuppet IPs of the checkuser-blocked article creator. Most of the other participants converged on redirect as the appropriate solution for now. RL0919 ( talk) 14:02, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Shariq Hassan

AfDs for this article:
Shariq Hassan (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR. Is the main antagonist of Pencil and has no other notability. He was the winner of the reality show BB Jodigal but that doesn't add much. WP:TOOEARLY, please redirect to Pencil (film). He also played the lead in the 5 episode YouTube series Kaalam Neram Kadhal. Is that notable? I smell COI because the article said his unreleased film "received an average reception from critics". [23].

Has a similar notability to Draft:Tharshan Thiyagarajah. This source talks about his lack of roles since Bigg Boss [24]. DareshMohan ( talk) 19:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 ( talk) 21:49, 18 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 25 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 00:12, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Redirect, ToF counts as one source so no matter how in-depth and substantial any of those pieces are they still do not amount to GNG. This is even ignoring the tabloid quality of the ToF articles.
JoelleJay ( talk) 20:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I'm sorry but what is "ToF"?- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:04, 4 December 2023 (UTC)? (did you mean The Times of India? if so, only one 2 articles from this periodical are cited on the page, one addressing directly and in-depth the career of Shariq Hassan, the second clearly there only for verification of his presence in the cast of a future film.) reply
This was addressing the claim above that Coverage by the Times of India, on multiple occasions, is more than enough to establish notability per WP:NACTOR. JoelleJay ( talk) 06:24, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
OK, thanks, it's generally abbreviated as TOI rather than ToF, though. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:02, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Mushy Yank: @ DJ InstaMalik: @ JoelleJay: Would you support a redirect to his father Riyaz Khan#Early and personal life with a sentence about him? Clearly Wikipedia:TOOSOON. DareshMohan ( talk) 03:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Yes, that works for me! (but not strongly opposed to keep) - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:30, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. I hope some editors can spend time improving this article and adding new sources to it. Liz Read! Talk! 07:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Direct care

Direct care (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The term "direct care" could mean almost anything in the English language e.g. "I am taking direct care of my dog", "The painting was placed under direct care of the museum". With regards to its meaning in the NHS, I could only find a single reputable source here, and even so that does not justify an article.

Essentially this is an incredibly vague term, which perhaps has a specific niche meaning in the NHS, but certainly not enough to warrant an article.

The article is essentially saying "direct care is the direct care of a patient in the NHS".

Most of the rest is just tangential information about nursing, audit etc.

None of the cited sources are about the term itself.

One of the worst articles on Wikipedia. Elshad ( talk) 11:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 00:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. consensus is that topic meets our notability guidelines for professors, if just barely 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:45, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Bryan Yipp

Bryan Yipp (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. Fails NPROF, unless being a Canada Research Chair qualifies? Jprg1966 (talk) 01:21, 17 November 2023 (UTC) reply

There are a total of 1,993 Canada Research Chairs. Some commenters opined in these AfDs that only tier 1 Canada Research Chairs should count towards WP:PROF#C5. See Canada Research Chair#Types of chairs: tier 1 chairs are for senior academics and constitute 38% of Canada Research Chairs. The remaining 62% are tier 2 chairs for promising junior academics with potential, such as Bryan Yipp. [35] -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count) 02:14, 17 November 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep. He is an assistant professor and tier 2 CRC. Whatever one thinks about tier 1 CRCs, that definitely doesn't count for WP:PROF#C5, which is only for above-full-professor level appointments. That said, he seems to be the go-to expert on NETosis (two first-author papers with 4-digit citation counts on Google Scholar, seemingly the top-cited two works on that subject), so I think he passes WP:PROF#C1. — David Eppstein ( talk) 17:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply
  • weak keep. I agree with David, while a CRC Tier 2 is an early career award and does not count towards NPROF, I think with his strong expertise on a niche field, three publications with 1000+ citations each and a healthy h-index of 23, he passes the NPROF#1 -- not by much since he is still early career but there is enough for a pass. -- hroest 15:53, 20 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 10:21, 25 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment: I don't really see any reason to get in the way of a delete on this article, which is a one-sentence stub that would be eligible for G5 deletion if this AfD hadn't been opened instead. I realize that isn't exactly an argument for deletion, which is why this isn't a !vote, but I think it's context to keep in mind, given that no one has advanced a strong keep argument. -- asilvering ( talk) 22:40, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply
    It is incorrect that this article would be eligible for G5 deletion. G5 is only for articles created by already-indef-blocked (or banned) editors evading their block. This article was created in March 2017; the SPI that banned SwisterTwister was not initiated until December 2017. — David Eppstein ( talk) 20:55, 2 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    Ah, my bad. Disregard, then. -- asilvering ( talk) 00:24, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 00:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Daniel ( talk) 00:04, 10 December 2023 (UTC) reply

1881 Randolph–Macon Yellow Jackets football team

1881 Randolph–Macon Yellow Jackets football team (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG as no WP:SIGCOV has been found in independent, reliable sources with in-depth discussion of this team. The article was created in 2016 as a micro-stub with no substantive content. More than seven years later, the only content that has been added is an unsourced schedule chart reciting that the team lost two games on unspecified dates and at unspecified locations. (As an additional nail in the coffin, it appears from this source that this was a season of association football (i.e., soccer) rather than gridiron football as the article asserts.) Cbl62 ( talk) 23:45, 2 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete Per nom. WP:BEFORE turned up nothing substantial to pass WP:GNG. Moshe1022 ( talk) 16:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2023_December_3&oldid=1189290303"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE