The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:03, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
A movie that does not appear to actually pass the WP:GNG. It was nominated for deletion back in 2015, but kept due to the argument that the sources found during that AFD (which are now in the article itself) were enough to establish notability. However, actually looking at the sources shows that this is not the case. The Bloody Disgusting and "Dread Central" sources are simply postings of the film's trailer, with no actual coverage or discussion of the film. There are two reviews also listed here, and while I am not sure whether or not Ain't It Cool News is considered a reliable source for movie reviews currently, the Technorati source is most certainly not, as Technorati is an advertising platform, and that "review" is very obviously a poorly written promotional piece. Rotten Tomatoes lists zero professional review for the film, and my own searches did not turn up any significant coverage or reviews in reliable sources. In short, I don't believe this film actually does pass the WP:GNG or WP:NFILM, and it should be brought back to AFD for a re-evaluation. Rorshacma ( talk) 23:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:47, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORG for lack of significant coverage. LibStar ( talk) 22:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to International Junior Hockey League. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 22:34, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable junior sports team that lacks the in-depth coverage in reliable and verifiable sources sources needed to meet WP:GNG. WP:NTEAM does not set any standard for such teams and defers to the general notability standard. No additional sources to establish notability found in a Google search. Alansohn ( talk) 17:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:02, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. I see a consensus to Keep, especially after article improvements. Liz Read! Talk! 03:39, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm not seeing sufficient notability here. No none-routine coverage while he held the press secretary position (not an inherently notable office in itself); all coverage is about him being sacked, for which we get 4x the same press release, one hit piece, and an interview denying said hit piece. Nice gossip but encyclopedic it ain't. (Previously deleted by PROD two years ago, at which point coverage would have been essentially zero) -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 16:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Less Unless (
talk) 19:00, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus ( WP:NPASR). King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:52, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
I created this article, however Wikipedia:Notability (politics) proposes that diplomatic notability should be a person who has "received significant coverage in crafting an international agreement or related to a notable diplomatic event." I consequently no longer believe that there is anything noteworthy about the subject's diplomatic career to necessitate its own article. Uhooep ( talk) 15:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 18:57, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I'm closing this as No consensus. A move discussion can occur on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Online music magazine fails per WP:NCORP and WP:WEBCRIT. Primary references, trivial coverage in fellow magazines, no indication of notability in reliable sources. M.Ashraf333 ( talk) 13:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 18:54, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting and consider your decision in light of the suggestion to retitle and refocus the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:26, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 22:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Aldo Duro (linguist) is notable but I can't find anything about the footballer of this name. I have searched Google News, ProQuest, Google Images and DDG but not found any decent coverage. There is database coverage in places like Transfermarkt and Football Database but this is totally insufficient for WP:SPORTBASIC. If this is deleted, the linguist should be moved to Aldo Duro over the dab page. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 19:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Despite playing in more than a handful of professional games, I was unable to locate any significant coverage. No evidence of WP:SPORTBASIC or WP:GNG based on what I was able to find. My searches only brought up database sites like Football Database and BeSoccer, which do not confer notability. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rakesh Asthana. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 19:49, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Mainly mentions or unreliable sources. Even a WP:BEFORE was unable to locate more in-depth sourcing. CNMall41 ( talk) 18:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:33, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON, only one of the sources is independent (TechCrunch). The rest are all WP:SPS. Was draftified and then undraftified. A search for sources doesn't really show much. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Despite my sympathy for Rhododendrites' reasoning, it is obvious that the consensus here is for "keep". Randykitty ( talk) 14:54, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails GNG and Wikipedia:Notability (video games). The reviews from mobygame are considered unreliable from this, and the 2 sources mentioned in the article are either deleted or unreliable. I went on the wayback machine and tried to find the page for the german article, but the archive only went as far back as 2013. `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 18:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) Shawn Teller ( talk) 02:53, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Every subset of album charts doesn't meet criteria for stand-alone lists. Sources come directly from the publisher just reproducing top 10 lists (no emphasis on #1s or zero actual coverage). There are not independent reliable or significant sourcing. Existence ≠ notability of a topic. Not every chart needs a list of #1s. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 00:23, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'm not a fan of a Merge with
Canadian Albums Chart as that article is two sentences and this article is a full list.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:08, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: because a no consensus close isn't going to be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 17:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Brat TV. Joyous! | Talk 17:33, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. The Hollywood Reporter and Deadline give Mani the barest of passing mentions; all the other references are primary and non-independent. I looked for additional sources and found nothing useful. Cheers, gnu 57 16:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:33, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Article is entirely unsourced, appears to even fail GNG. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yellow Pages (Armenian TV program). Silikonz 💬 16:25, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Randykitty (
talk) 16:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Article is entirely unsourced, appears to even fail GNG. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Made in USSR (Armenian TV program). Silikonz 💬 16:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Randykitty (
talk) 16:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 17:31, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Small local retailer that has received local attention (Hamptons Magazine) and some celebrity-related attention due to its location among the Long Island Hamptons elite. No in-depth sources to denote this as a notable company. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 16:04, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cape Lindsey. Liz Read! Talk! 17:31, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
WP:NPLACE says "Named natural features are often notable, provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist. This includes mountains, lakes, streams, islands, etc. The number of known sources should be considered to ensure there is enough verifiable content for an encyclopedic article. If a Wikipedia article cannot be developed using known sources, information on the feature can instead be included in a more general article on local geography. For example, a river island with no information available except name and location should probably be described in an article on the river."
I suggest that there are no other details to write than the name and location on nautical maps. There isn't much else that could be said; it's a rock off an uninhabited island which is part of an almost entirely uninhabited island chain in Antarctica. JMWt ( talk) 15:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. UPE, extensive sockfarm Drmies ( talk) 18:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
I don't think that WP:ARTIST is satisfied. Most of the coverage in the article is either brief, e.g. [1] just lists his name or not independent e.g. [2]. This source from designboom seems to be the best coverage, but I am unsure if it's reliable and it's just coverage of a single exhibition. SmartSE ( talk) 14:29, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Randykitty (
talk) 14:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Joyous! | Talk 17:21, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable platform that has been unreferenced since 2009. A search shows no useful results. Either it's just referred to in reference to a vehicle using the platform or it's in an unreliable source. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Unanimous consensus that the subject is notable (bar nominator), adequately covered in reliable sources. —Ganesha811 ( talk) 23:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC) (non-admin closure) —Ganesha811 ( talk) 23:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Was drafted but never played in the NFL. Being a college player and a member of the 1969 College All-American Team is not enough to show notability. References seem to be mentions in databases, but would be happy to see a longer ref which meets the GNG. JMWt ( talk) 13:49, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
1. Have won a national award (such as those listed in Template:College Football Awards or the equivalent in another sport), or established a major NCAA Division I record.BeanieFan11 ( talk) 16:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) HeinzMaster ( talk) 22:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Not notable, does not pass GNP HeinzMaster ( talk) 13:40, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. RL0919 ( talk) 17:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to meet WP:SINGER or WP:GNG. Not finding independent coverage or notability for this artist outside of their association with their childhood friend, Lil Xan, which is mostly passing mentions. Sources provided are not considered WP:RS. 5 are to a media company named Lyrical Lemonade (a company/blog that produced videos for the artist and Lil Xan), 1 to an interview on Genius, a passing mention on hiphopdx, and an interview posted on an apparel company's website. The performer's YouTube page also only has 1 video with over 500k views. Hey man im josh ( talk) 13:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
HipHopDX is writing about HIS SONG, they mention $teven Cannon's name only a quantity of 3 less times than they mention Lil Xan.The article is centered around Lil Xan and they mention Cannon once (and not in a positive way).
Song views ARE NOT an eligibility factor in determining notability.In of themselves, no. Views are however useful in understanding how popular a person may be. As an example, if someone has multiple videos with 100m+ views it's much more likely that they're notable.
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:10, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Seems like a minor handball team. The only RS I see are paragraph-long game reviews in local media. I'm not sure of the status of WP:NTEAMS but the general impression is that sport teams do not have implied notability and have to meet the GNG. There are not enough RS to show notability in my opinion. JMWt ( talk) 11:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 10:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
This article would appear to fail any number of tests for notability including but not limited to WP:ANYBIO and WP:MUSICBIO. WP:BEFORE done, and it would appear to me that Mr Adekule may well be a Nigerian musician to look for and for people to enjoy his music, but as of 14 Feb 2023 this is not yet ready for "articlespace". As always, please do prove me wrong. User:Shirt58 ( talk) 🦘 User:Shirt58 ( talk) 🦘 10:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 10:34, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
WP:1E - notable primarily for a single event of the NatWest/Enron case, rest of article reads like puffery. No sustained media coverage beyond 2010. Lizthegrey ( talk) 09:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:26, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
General failure of WP:BASIC for a WP:BLP. Subject's notability is questionable, with few to no citations for any of their work, especially secondary sources. News sources to support television presence are unable to be found, aside from user submitted sources (IMDB, etc) ( WP:NRV).
Far too many primary or unreliable sources on the page. First citation is link to child's YouTube channel, without any news source. Seventh and tenth citations link to Sean Klitzner's own website, which redirects to YouTube channel. These are not appropriate sources.
Main text of page, sections of which are largely uncited, is entirely about their online content, though the notability of the online content is very questionable ( WP:NWEB, WP:INHERENTWEB). TheRealOj32 ( talk) 05:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:02, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No participation since last relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ❯❯❯
Raydann
(Talk) 07:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
This article is a complete mess. Original research. One citation (somebody's thesis). Issue tags have been hanging for the past decade plus. Propose to merge with the polyamory article or shred entirely. Tdmurlock ( talk) 07:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn. Sources have been found to exist, I just searched for them wrong. Seems like no one has any reason for deleting the article now so closing. (non-admin closure) silvia (BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) ( inquire within) 04:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
The first AfD nomination of this article, made in 2006, had a keep result primarily on the basis of WP:GOOGLEHITS and WP:IKNOWIT. Looking at the page, the references currently listed are almost entirely WP:ABOUTSELF citations, which pose significant and obvious conflict of interest problems. In a WP:BEFORE (excluding self-coverage Google results with '-site:animenewsnetwork.com "anime news network" website'), I was hardly able to find any WP:SIGCOV, with the only particularly notable event being covered by other outlets being that they were acquired by Kadokawa Corporation last year. ( [13] [14]) I'm not sure that this makes them independently notable. Nearly every other hit fails the requirement to "address the topic directly and in detail" when considered as a potential source, nearly always only mentioning them in the context of quoting what someone from the site said about a different topic.
If further sources evidencing notability are found, I'll readily close this discussion if the consensus leads there, but as it stands I'm not sure this is worth its own article (though perhaps it can be merged into Kadokawa Corporation). silvia (BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) ( inquire within) 07:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Bashundhara Kings. Liz Read! Talk! 07:02, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Not meeting WP:GNG. Less than two years of existence with routine coverage here and there. Hitro talk 07:15, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of wars involving Vietnam#Republic. Liz Read! Talk! 06:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Don't see why this should be a separate stand-alone list, seeing as List of wars involving Vietnam is already subdivided by period/predecessor state, making this one mostly redundant. Created at AfC and accepted by User:PK650. Paul_012 ( talk) 06:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:23, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
A house, a barn, a corral, and Parson Spring are all that comprise this spot, which was copied into GNIS from a state highway map. GHits are deep into clickbait range, and the only possibly information book hits was for Barnes's place names book, and since an excerpt was not provided I'm inclined to call this a false hit. Mangoe ( talk) 05:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 05:07, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Spam for non notable future film. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Refbombed with routine announcements, reproduced PR, a listing and local interest puff. Constructed by an SPA and a bunch of Guernsey IPs. duffbeerforme ( talk) 04:33, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
:* Keep the film is notable. It has been covered by the likes of
Deadline Hollwood. Moreover, it has received wider interest than mere "routine announcements", with proof in articles in which it was name-dropped in
independent, third-party reliable sources, such as
Media Play News and
frompage2screen. Further, all sources are international media / news outlets. I don't think any of the sources can be reasonably described as "local interest puff". I don't see any local news outlet reporting being cited. I do however agree that the references section could be cleaned - perhaps it is worth removing regurgitated news pieces that are spin-outs from the initial Deadline Hollywood article. One could argue that a film with the likes of
Paterson Joseph and
César Award-nominated
Marc Duret is inherently notable. Thanks @
Duffbeerforme for raising. Very best regards.
The result was delete. czar 17:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSCHOOL. A search in Japanese, English and Arabic came up with no reliable sources. The only source provided is its own website. LibStar ( talk) 04:24, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'd like to see one or two more specific opinions than "per nom".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
A search in Japanese, English and Arabic came up with no reliable sources.– Here's an article from Arab News. According to WP:RSP, there is consensus that Arab News is a usable source for topics unrelated to the Saudi Arabian government. – small jars
t
c
19:23, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. UtherSRG (talk) 12:44, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
WP:ROUTINE coverage fails
WP:CORPDEPTH. Article fails
WP:NCORP. Sources do not meet
WP:SIGCOV from RS.
FreeEncyclo (
talk) 04:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC) bad faith nomination by sock.
Akevsharma (
talk) 12:38, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
* Delete: Subject fails
WP:CORPDEPTH and
WP:GNG, as nominator also mentioned it. ---
👑Misterrrrr👑 (
talk) 06:13, 15 February 2023 (UTC) blocked as a sock.
Akevsharma (
talk) 14:21, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Ukraine Yellow Kitchen Photo. There's consensus that this shouldn't be a stand-alone article, and there's no consensus for outright deletion, so that leaves merge as the result. If there are concerns about the photo's notability, they should be raised in another AfD. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Article is mostly (entirely, actually) about his death, which is already covered extensively as part of the attack on the residential building by the Russian forces. Unfortunate event, for sure, but the article should be about the boxing coach, whose career is not covered at all and we can't be sure it was relevant at all. Bedivere ( talk) 02:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
the article should be about the boxing coach..career is not covered...there is no policy that I'm aware of that someone has to be primarily notable for their job, people can be notable for their death, or for a video they made of their family before their death, or their kitchen. It's unusual, but not a policy based reason to delete.
in a nutshell: If an article on a notable subject can be improved through normal editing, do not put it through a deletion discussion.I agree strongly. CT55555( talk) 03:53, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to consider Merger to
Ukraine Yellow Kitchen Photo.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:38, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Sorry to relist again but I'm not seeing a consensus except for a majority of editors who think some part of this event/photo/person is notable. That is why I suggested considering a Merge. I wish I could wave my hand and bundle all three articles into one AFD but that is not possible at this point.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Garuda3 ( talk) 23:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
NN school UtherSRG (talk) 02:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:26, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there have been no other participants to this discussion since the first relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Only apparent coverage is one article in a regional newspaper; mostly this is apparently just a WP:PROMO piece for a not-actually-notable "entrepreneur". Julietdeltalima (talk) 02:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to African wild dog#Threats. (and please no copyright violations). Liz Read! Talk! 03:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
No significant coverage to meet WP:ORG. LibStar ( talk) 01:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:09, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSPORTS. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 00:22, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 01:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) LibStar ( talk) 23:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:AUTHOR, searches in gnews and Australian website trove did not yield significant coverage. LibStar ( talk) 00:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:03, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
A movie that does not appear to actually pass the WP:GNG. It was nominated for deletion back in 2015, but kept due to the argument that the sources found during that AFD (which are now in the article itself) were enough to establish notability. However, actually looking at the sources shows that this is not the case. The Bloody Disgusting and "Dread Central" sources are simply postings of the film's trailer, with no actual coverage or discussion of the film. There are two reviews also listed here, and while I am not sure whether or not Ain't It Cool News is considered a reliable source for movie reviews currently, the Technorati source is most certainly not, as Technorati is an advertising platform, and that "review" is very obviously a poorly written promotional piece. Rotten Tomatoes lists zero professional review for the film, and my own searches did not turn up any significant coverage or reviews in reliable sources. In short, I don't believe this film actually does pass the WP:GNG or WP:NFILM, and it should be brought back to AFD for a re-evaluation. Rorshacma ( talk) 23:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:47, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORG for lack of significant coverage. LibStar ( talk) 22:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to International Junior Hockey League. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 22:34, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable junior sports team that lacks the in-depth coverage in reliable and verifiable sources sources needed to meet WP:GNG. WP:NTEAM does not set any standard for such teams and defers to the general notability standard. No additional sources to establish notability found in a Google search. Alansohn ( talk) 17:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:02, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. I see a consensus to Keep, especially after article improvements. Liz Read! Talk! 03:39, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm not seeing sufficient notability here. No none-routine coverage while he held the press secretary position (not an inherently notable office in itself); all coverage is about him being sacked, for which we get 4x the same press release, one hit piece, and an interview denying said hit piece. Nice gossip but encyclopedic it ain't. (Previously deleted by PROD two years ago, at which point coverage would have been essentially zero) -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 16:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Less Unless (
talk) 19:00, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus ( WP:NPASR). King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:52, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
I created this article, however Wikipedia:Notability (politics) proposes that diplomatic notability should be a person who has "received significant coverage in crafting an international agreement or related to a notable diplomatic event." I consequently no longer believe that there is anything noteworthy about the subject's diplomatic career to necessitate its own article. Uhooep ( talk) 15:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 18:57, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. I'm closing this as No consensus. A move discussion can occur on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Online music magazine fails per WP:NCORP and WP:WEBCRIT. Primary references, trivial coverage in fellow magazines, no indication of notability in reliable sources. M.Ashraf333 ( talk) 13:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 18:54, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting and consider your decision in light of the suggestion to retitle and refocus the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:26, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 22:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Aldo Duro (linguist) is notable but I can't find anything about the footballer of this name. I have searched Google News, ProQuest, Google Images and DDG but not found any decent coverage. There is database coverage in places like Transfermarkt and Football Database but this is totally insufficient for WP:SPORTBASIC. If this is deleted, the linguist should be moved to Aldo Duro over the dab page. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 19:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Despite playing in more than a handful of professional games, I was unable to locate any significant coverage. No evidence of WP:SPORTBASIC or WP:GNG based on what I was able to find. My searches only brought up database sites like Football Database and BeSoccer, which do not confer notability. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Rakesh Asthana. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 19:49, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Mainly mentions or unreliable sources. Even a WP:BEFORE was unable to locate more in-depth sourcing. CNMall41 ( talk) 18:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:33, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON, only one of the sources is independent (TechCrunch). The rest are all WP:SPS. Was draftified and then undraftified. A search for sources doesn't really show much. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Despite my sympathy for Rhododendrites' reasoning, it is obvious that the consensus here is for "keep". Randykitty ( talk) 14:54, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails GNG and Wikipedia:Notability (video games). The reviews from mobygame are considered unreliable from this, and the 2 sources mentioned in the article are either deleted or unreliable. I went on the wayback machine and tried to find the page for the german article, but the archive only went as far back as 2013. `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 18:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) Shawn Teller ( talk) 02:53, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Every subset of album charts doesn't meet criteria for stand-alone lists. Sources come directly from the publisher just reproducing top 10 lists (no emphasis on #1s or zero actual coverage). There are not independent reliable or significant sourcing. Existence ≠ notability of a topic. Not every chart needs a list of #1s. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 00:23, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'm not a fan of a Merge with
Canadian Albums Chart as that article is two sentences and this article is a full list.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:08, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: because a no consensus close isn't going to be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 17:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Brat TV. Joyous! | Talk 17:33, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. The Hollywood Reporter and Deadline give Mani the barest of passing mentions; all the other references are primary and non-independent. I looked for additional sources and found nothing useful. Cheers, gnu 57 16:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:33, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Article is entirely unsourced, appears to even fail GNG. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yellow Pages (Armenian TV program). Silikonz 💬 16:25, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Randykitty (
talk) 16:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Article is entirely unsourced, appears to even fail GNG. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Made in USSR (Armenian TV program). Silikonz 💬 16:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Randykitty (
talk) 16:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 17:31, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Small local retailer that has received local attention (Hamptons Magazine) and some celebrity-related attention due to its location among the Long Island Hamptons elite. No in-depth sources to denote this as a notable company. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 16:04, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cape Lindsey. Liz Read! Talk! 17:31, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
WP:NPLACE says "Named natural features are often notable, provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist. This includes mountains, lakes, streams, islands, etc. The number of known sources should be considered to ensure there is enough verifiable content for an encyclopedic article. If a Wikipedia article cannot be developed using known sources, information on the feature can instead be included in a more general article on local geography. For example, a river island with no information available except name and location should probably be described in an article on the river."
I suggest that there are no other details to write than the name and location on nautical maps. There isn't much else that could be said; it's a rock off an uninhabited island which is part of an almost entirely uninhabited island chain in Antarctica. JMWt ( talk) 15:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. UPE, extensive sockfarm Drmies ( talk) 18:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
I don't think that WP:ARTIST is satisfied. Most of the coverage in the article is either brief, e.g. [1] just lists his name or not independent e.g. [2]. This source from designboom seems to be the best coverage, but I am unsure if it's reliable and it's just coverage of a single exhibition. SmartSE ( talk) 14:29, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Randykitty (
talk) 14:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Joyous! | Talk 17:21, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable platform that has been unreferenced since 2009. A search shows no useful results. Either it's just referred to in reference to a vehicle using the platform or it's in an unreliable source. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Unanimous consensus that the subject is notable (bar nominator), adequately covered in reliable sources. —Ganesha811 ( talk) 23:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC) (non-admin closure) —Ganesha811 ( talk) 23:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Was drafted but never played in the NFL. Being a college player and a member of the 1969 College All-American Team is not enough to show notability. References seem to be mentions in databases, but would be happy to see a longer ref which meets the GNG. JMWt ( talk) 13:49, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
1. Have won a national award (such as those listed in Template:College Football Awards or the equivalent in another sport), or established a major NCAA Division I record.BeanieFan11 ( talk) 16:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) HeinzMaster ( talk) 22:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Not notable, does not pass GNP HeinzMaster ( talk) 13:40, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. RL0919 ( talk) 17:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to meet WP:SINGER or WP:GNG. Not finding independent coverage or notability for this artist outside of their association with their childhood friend, Lil Xan, which is mostly passing mentions. Sources provided are not considered WP:RS. 5 are to a media company named Lyrical Lemonade (a company/blog that produced videos for the artist and Lil Xan), 1 to an interview on Genius, a passing mention on hiphopdx, and an interview posted on an apparel company's website. The performer's YouTube page also only has 1 video with over 500k views. Hey man im josh ( talk) 13:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
HipHopDX is writing about HIS SONG, they mention $teven Cannon's name only a quantity of 3 less times than they mention Lil Xan.The article is centered around Lil Xan and they mention Cannon once (and not in a positive way).
Song views ARE NOT an eligibility factor in determining notability.In of themselves, no. Views are however useful in understanding how popular a person may be. As an example, if someone has multiple videos with 100m+ views it's much more likely that they're notable.
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:10, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Seems like a minor handball team. The only RS I see are paragraph-long game reviews in local media. I'm not sure of the status of WP:NTEAMS but the general impression is that sport teams do not have implied notability and have to meet the GNG. There are not enough RS to show notability in my opinion. JMWt ( talk) 11:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 10:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
This article would appear to fail any number of tests for notability including but not limited to WP:ANYBIO and WP:MUSICBIO. WP:BEFORE done, and it would appear to me that Mr Adekule may well be a Nigerian musician to look for and for people to enjoy his music, but as of 14 Feb 2023 this is not yet ready for "articlespace". As always, please do prove me wrong. User:Shirt58 ( talk) 🦘 User:Shirt58 ( talk) 🦘 10:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 10:34, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
WP:1E - notable primarily for a single event of the NatWest/Enron case, rest of article reads like puffery. No sustained media coverage beyond 2010. Lizthegrey ( talk) 09:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:26, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
General failure of WP:BASIC for a WP:BLP. Subject's notability is questionable, with few to no citations for any of their work, especially secondary sources. News sources to support television presence are unable to be found, aside from user submitted sources (IMDB, etc) ( WP:NRV).
Far too many primary or unreliable sources on the page. First citation is link to child's YouTube channel, without any news source. Seventh and tenth citations link to Sean Klitzner's own website, which redirects to YouTube channel. These are not appropriate sources.
Main text of page, sections of which are largely uncited, is entirely about their online content, though the notability of the online content is very questionable ( WP:NWEB, WP:INHERENTWEB). TheRealOj32 ( talk) 05:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:02, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No participation since last relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ❯❯❯
Raydann
(Talk) 07:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
This article is a complete mess. Original research. One citation (somebody's thesis). Issue tags have been hanging for the past decade plus. Propose to merge with the polyamory article or shred entirely. Tdmurlock ( talk) 07:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn. Sources have been found to exist, I just searched for them wrong. Seems like no one has any reason for deleting the article now so closing. (non-admin closure) silvia (BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) ( inquire within) 04:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
The first AfD nomination of this article, made in 2006, had a keep result primarily on the basis of WP:GOOGLEHITS and WP:IKNOWIT. Looking at the page, the references currently listed are almost entirely WP:ABOUTSELF citations, which pose significant and obvious conflict of interest problems. In a WP:BEFORE (excluding self-coverage Google results with '-site:animenewsnetwork.com "anime news network" website'), I was hardly able to find any WP:SIGCOV, with the only particularly notable event being covered by other outlets being that they were acquired by Kadokawa Corporation last year. ( [13] [14]) I'm not sure that this makes them independently notable. Nearly every other hit fails the requirement to "address the topic directly and in detail" when considered as a potential source, nearly always only mentioning them in the context of quoting what someone from the site said about a different topic.
If further sources evidencing notability are found, I'll readily close this discussion if the consensus leads there, but as it stands I'm not sure this is worth its own article (though perhaps it can be merged into Kadokawa Corporation). silvia (BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) ( inquire within) 07:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Bashundhara Kings. Liz Read! Talk! 07:02, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Not meeting WP:GNG. Less than two years of existence with routine coverage here and there. Hitro talk 07:15, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of wars involving Vietnam#Republic. Liz Read! Talk! 06:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Don't see why this should be a separate stand-alone list, seeing as List of wars involving Vietnam is already subdivided by period/predecessor state, making this one mostly redundant. Created at AfC and accepted by User:PK650. Paul_012 ( talk) 06:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:23, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
A house, a barn, a corral, and Parson Spring are all that comprise this spot, which was copied into GNIS from a state highway map. GHits are deep into clickbait range, and the only possibly information book hits was for Barnes's place names book, and since an excerpt was not provided I'm inclined to call this a false hit. Mangoe ( talk) 05:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 05:07, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Spam for non notable future film. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Refbombed with routine announcements, reproduced PR, a listing and local interest puff. Constructed by an SPA and a bunch of Guernsey IPs. duffbeerforme ( talk) 04:33, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
:* Keep the film is notable. It has been covered by the likes of
Deadline Hollwood. Moreover, it has received wider interest than mere "routine announcements", with proof in articles in which it was name-dropped in
independent, third-party reliable sources, such as
Media Play News and
frompage2screen. Further, all sources are international media / news outlets. I don't think any of the sources can be reasonably described as "local interest puff". I don't see any local news outlet reporting being cited. I do however agree that the references section could be cleaned - perhaps it is worth removing regurgitated news pieces that are spin-outs from the initial Deadline Hollywood article. One could argue that a film with the likes of
Paterson Joseph and
César Award-nominated
Marc Duret is inherently notable. Thanks @
Duffbeerforme for raising. Very best regards.
The result was delete. czar 17:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSCHOOL. A search in Japanese, English and Arabic came up with no reliable sources. The only source provided is its own website. LibStar ( talk) 04:24, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'd like to see one or two more specific opinions than "per nom".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
A search in Japanese, English and Arabic came up with no reliable sources.– Here's an article from Arab News. According to WP:RSP, there is consensus that Arab News is a usable source for topics unrelated to the Saudi Arabian government. – small jars
t
c
19:23, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. UtherSRG (talk) 12:44, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
WP:ROUTINE coverage fails
WP:CORPDEPTH. Article fails
WP:NCORP. Sources do not meet
WP:SIGCOV from RS.
FreeEncyclo (
talk) 04:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC) bad faith nomination by sock.
Akevsharma (
talk) 12:38, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
* Delete: Subject fails
WP:CORPDEPTH and
WP:GNG, as nominator also mentioned it. ---
👑Misterrrrr👑 (
talk) 06:13, 15 February 2023 (UTC) blocked as a sock.
Akevsharma (
talk) 14:21, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Ukraine Yellow Kitchen Photo. There's consensus that this shouldn't be a stand-alone article, and there's no consensus for outright deletion, so that leaves merge as the result. If there are concerns about the photo's notability, they should be raised in another AfD. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Article is mostly (entirely, actually) about his death, which is already covered extensively as part of the attack on the residential building by the Russian forces. Unfortunate event, for sure, but the article should be about the boxing coach, whose career is not covered at all and we can't be sure it was relevant at all. Bedivere ( talk) 02:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
the article should be about the boxing coach..career is not covered...there is no policy that I'm aware of that someone has to be primarily notable for their job, people can be notable for their death, or for a video they made of their family before their death, or their kitchen. It's unusual, but not a policy based reason to delete.
in a nutshell: If an article on a notable subject can be improved through normal editing, do not put it through a deletion discussion.I agree strongly. CT55555( talk) 03:53, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to consider Merger to
Ukraine Yellow Kitchen Photo.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:38, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Sorry to relist again but I'm not seeing a consensus except for a majority of editors who think some part of this event/photo/person is notable. That is why I suggested considering a Merge. I wish I could wave my hand and bundle all three articles into one AFD but that is not possible at this point.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Garuda3 ( talk) 23:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
NN school UtherSRG (talk) 02:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:26, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there have been no other participants to this discussion since the first relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Only apparent coverage is one article in a regional newspaper; mostly this is apparently just a WP:PROMO piece for a not-actually-notable "entrepreneur". Julietdeltalima (talk) 02:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to African wild dog#Threats. (and please no copyright violations). Liz Read! Talk! 03:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
No significant coverage to meet WP:ORG. LibStar ( talk) 01:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:09, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSPORTS. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 00:22, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 01:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) LibStar ( talk) 23:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:AUTHOR, searches in gnews and Australian website trove did not yield significant coverage. LibStar ( talk) 00:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)