![]() |
The result was delete. Joyous! Noise! 22:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO. Did some WP:BEFORE digging and came up with no sources, across Google, Wikipedia Library, and Yahoo, only found copies of Wikipedia, unreliable sources, and obituaries. Tails Wx 22:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Joyous! Noise! 22:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Likely fails WP:BIO. He's known solely for a single TEDx talk he gave, and the article reads like a PR piece. Firestar464 ( talk) 22:00, 1 March 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. Joyous! Noise! 22:48, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Pay-TV series doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG - coverage consists of largely WP:ROUTINE sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle 21:23, 1 March 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. Joyous! Noise! 22:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Pay-TV series doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG - coverage consists of largely WP:ROUTINE sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle 21:21, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete – WP:CSD#G3. Draft deleted as well. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 🐱 10:41, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The only source in the article is clearly a joke. Ymblanter ( talk) 20:09, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 18:10, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable failed startup. There are some articles about winning bakeoffs and getting funding, but they didn't do anything notable and shut down. Sure, those articles might mean they meet WP:GNG, but the company doesn't mean WP:CORP in any substantive way. Mikeblas ( talk) 20:00, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Redirect to the Tech Crunch 50 article, I'm not showing lasting notabilty for the startup company being discussed.
Oaktree b (
talk)
16:27, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Dhirendra Krishna Shastri#Bageshwar Dham Sarkar. Liz Read! Talk! 18:09, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Bageshwar Dham Sarkar
This stub article is about a Hindu temple. None of the references are about the temple, but they are all about its leader, a popular charismatic figure named Dhirendra Krishna Shastri, who is already the subject of an article. A previous editor nominated this stub for A7, which was declined, and then proposed its deletion, but the PROD was removed by an IP editor. There is no significant coverage of the temple.
Number | Reference | Remarks | Independent | Significant | Reliable | Secondary |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | NDTV.COM | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | Yes? | Yes |
2 | hindustantimes.com | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | Yes? | Yes |
3 | Theprint.in | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | Yes? | Yes |
4 | hindi.thequint.com | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | Yes? | Yes |
5 | timesnownews.com/india | Not about the temple but its leader | ? | Not about the temple | ? | Yes |
6 | indiatoday.in | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | ? | Yes |
7 | theprint.in | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | ? | Yes |
This stub can either be deleted, or redirected to Dhirendra Krishna Shastri. Robert McClenon ( talk) 17:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Joyous! Noise! 22:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable royalty. Only mentioned in passing in the sources given in the article. No other sourcing found, not meeting GNG. Oaktree b ( talk) 16:38, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Luis Pescetti. Liz Read! Talk! 07:29, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
No claims of significance made, no sources. Would be eligible for CSD A7, except it's a book. I checked es wikipedia but same deal, no sourcing over there either, just a stub. Lizthegrey ( talk) 05:29, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
13:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
16:37, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 06:14, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Can't find significant coverage from reliable source in a google search. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙♂️ Let's Talk ! 11:31, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
16:36, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. It appears that sources found during this discussion and recent improvements to the article indicate notability and justify keeping this article. Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Article creator admitted a COI without being specific, and much of the content came from Alypeters, a blocked paid editor. On top of that, the article is really totally promotional with very poor sourcing (like, Medium--that's not OK). Drmies ( talk) 03:39, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While it might seem like there is a consensus to Keep this article, I've grown to have skepticism for accounts whose first edit is at an AFD and we have several brand new, but articulate, editors. So, I'm relisting to get more participation here. Of course, this AFD can be closed at any time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
08:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject, see also WP:GNGfrom WP:BASIC, and
A person who does not meet these additional criteria may still be notable under Wikipedia:Notabilityfrom WP:BIO#Additional criteria. If we choose to take the most specific criterion, say, WP:CREATIVE, then
The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or techniqueshould apply since she is the author of Snowflake. Which criterion do you think should be applied here and what do you think is missing for meeting that criterion? Lizthegrey ( talk) 05:46, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
The article notes: "Serene’s first claim to fame was as a renowned computer scientist and hacker who in 2016 created Snowflake, an open-source software project to circumvent internet censorship. ... Like coding, her music was largely self-taught. She started playing the piano at age 5. She attended Carnegie Mellon University and got her computer science degree in three years and went to work for Google. She earned enough to buy her first piano - a Steinway Model O. She left Google and started her professional music career only five years ago, with two of those interrupted by the pandemic. ... Serene’s collaborations include her role as composer for Kanye West’s Opera, premiered at Lincoln Center & Art Basel, as well as pianist and technologist with Blue Man Group’s founder, bringing futuristic innovations at the intersection of music and technology while also highlighting her own audiovisual synesthesia."
The review notes: "On Sunday night, the pianist Serene sat before her instrument in a dimly lit room, ready to perform the most recent installment of Fever’s Candlelight Concert series online. ... After opening with Ravel and Chopin, Serene performed the aria from the Goldberg Variations. She worked the keys with an Apollonian restraint, her two hands playing together as if in casual conversation. A pairing of sonatas by Beethoven followed—op. 31, no. 8, “Pathétique,” composed early in his career, and op. 111, no. 32, ... Serene urged that we consider Beethoven a master of improvisation—a designation not commonly given to classical composers. But she drove the point home with swinging tempos and athletic trills, positing Beethoven as a classical antecedent to jazz. Then came Liszt and Gershwin, and the concert concluded with a heartening round of “Rhapsody in Blue.” ... Unsurprisingly, Serene performed a spectacle to match. Watching Serene play is like watching Jackson Pollock paint; she lifts her hands high and strikes the keys with intention, producing an ordered and harmonious spattering of notes. Her next performance with Fever will be streaming on May 24."
The article notes: "... says Serene, Snowstorm’s lead developer. (She only goes by her first name for security reasons.) ... Serene hadn’t expected to be spending this much time building upon Snowflake. After releasing the original prototype early 2016 as part of a fellowship with the Open Technology Fund, she left the technology world to focus on working as a concert pianist. ... To that end, Serene is trying to build a business around Snowstorm, raising $1 million from 1517 Fund, Tyler Cowen of Emergent Ventures, and a group of private angel investors."
I consider sources one and two to be substantial, while source three is not but can be combined with the other two sources to help demonstrate notability. Cunard ( talk) 09:15, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Allowing more time to discuss the presented sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
16:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
In combination with the other sources listed above, Serene clearly meets Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says, "multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability".
The result was delete. The consensus is to Delete this article. If an editor would like to work on it in Draft space and submit it to WP:AFC for review, contact me. But a direct move back to main space will likely result in CSD G4 speedy deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 18:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
No evidence found of any notability. He is quoted in a press release [5], the second source is a Linkedin page, and nothing better was found online [6], nothing in Gnews, an extremely passing mention here and a publication here. Fram ( talk) 15:39, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. This article was speedy deleted as a CSD G4 so I'm closing this discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 20:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable religious person. As far as I can tell from a search on Google there are no independent reliable sources in English for this person. There is an article on Bengali Wikipedia about this person: bn:সন্তদাস কাঠিয়াবাবা, but the sources cited are just as awful as the English-language Wikipedia article on him. This suggests to me that finding reliable sources about him is just as unachievable in Bengali as it is in English. By the way the article has a collection of redirects from its page moves: Santadasji Kathiababa, Santa Das Kathiababa, Santa Dasji Kathiababa. Please can these be deleted too. -- Toddy1 (talk) 15:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. If an editor would like to work on this article in Draft space, contact me. Liz Read! Talk! 18:01, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:NFOOTY is no longer a valid SNG, so GNG must be met. It needs several refs from independent, reliable, secondary sources to pass WP:GNG. Was moved to draft in hopes of improvement, but immediately returned to mainspace. Coverage is simply routine sports coverage. Onel5969 TT me 15:01, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 15:42, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Apart from the opening sentence, this article reads like an essay on photographing the police or a coat rack on which to hang opinions on police conduct which consists largely of original research. Nothing here is encyclopaedic ( WP:SOAP point 2), and if there is a coherent subject here, no reliable sources are cited to establish its notability. This belongs on someone's blog somewhere, not in an encyclopaedia. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:56, 1 March 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! 17:31, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Completely unsourced original research which is better covered on other articles. EggsAndCakey ( talk) 14:07, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Liz Read! Talk! 04:48, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:CRISTAL applies here. D.Lazard ( talk) 14:05, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Garuda3 ( talk) 00:01, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. Randykitty ( talk) 14:04, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Here are the author affiliations: "QU Qing-hui; ZHANG Xin-yang; Editorial Department of "Northwest Pharmaceutical Journal", School of Pharmacy, Xi’an Jiaotong University; AVIC Xi’an Flight Automatic Control Research Institute".
The abstract notes: "Objective To study the high-download papers(download frequency ≥1000) of "China Pharmacy" and the correlation between the download frequency and the citation frequency, so as to provide reference for improving the academic quality and influence of the journal. Methods The annual distribution, number of authors, co-authors, organization type distribution, regional distribution, funding status, and downloads of highdownload papers in "China Pharmacy" from 2000 to 2021 were carried out using China HowNet’s "Chinese Academic Journals(Online Edition)"."
Here are the author affiliations: "FEI Xiao-fan, REN Xue-song, LI Kai-lan, et al. (Department of Pharmacy, First University Hospital, West China University of Medical Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China)".
The abstract notes (bolding added for emphasis): "Objective:To realize the quality of the ethics of the randomized controlled trials in Chinese Pharmacy from 1990 to 2000.Methods:It was checked over page-by-page the control trials of clinical therapeutic studies in Chinese Pharmacy from 1990 to 2000 to identify strictly randomized controlled tests(RCT)and controlled clinical tests(CCT)according to the criteria of the handbook of Cochrane collaboration in 1997.Result: A trial of 63 articles on clinical trials was published in 66 issues covered 11 volumes of the Chinese Pharmacy,among which,there were 1 issues of RCT. Conclusion; There still exist many problems and urge the clinical workers to adopt RCT and blind trial as more as possible and guarantee RCTs to be precise as it demands"
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 15:40, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable actor that fails WP:NACTOR with no significant roles. There is only one source for this article with a mere sentence that refers to the actor. No other reliable sources to be found. Jauerback dude?/ dude. 13:51, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. We have very weak nomination, a weak deletion argument, a weak keep argument, a strong keep argument (in the form of point refutation) and a strong delete argument. I find no consensus, and a third relist is inadvisable. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Not notable. Hoponpop69 ( talk) 05:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
08:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Eddie891
Talk
Work
13:01, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:00, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:BIO or WP:AUTHOR in its current form and I am unable to find any better sources that are not circular references back to Wikipedia. It reads like a resume, and the only two current sources are a Geocities site and a Blogspot blog; neither appear to be reliable sources per WP:RS. If those two sources are disqualified then it's an entirely unsourced biography of a (presumably) living person. Based on the text as written, it still appears to fail WP:AUTHOR as there is no evidence that this author's work is particularly well-known or important to the field (two awards that lack their own pages; no evidence that it was "the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews"). Page has been tagged since 2011 as needing help. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco ( talk) 06:32, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 06:59, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Article cites no sources, and the tag has been there for over seven years. According to the article, it's not an official position but just a conventional an honorary title. In addition, I found no google results for any combination of Peru + leader of the opposition, so it doesn't even seem as though it is a conventional title, but is merely a fictional title. Estar8806 ( talk) 05:27, 1 March 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. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:09, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:PRODUCER , WP:FILMMAKER and WP:GNG AShiv1212 ( talk) 04:59, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of OL Reign players. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Unable to find a single GNG-passing source. JTtheOG ( talk) 04:42, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 21:38, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Ambassadors are not inherently notable. 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. That doesn't appear to be the case here. Uhooep ( talk) 20:16, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
03:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
04:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. More opinions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:31, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. This one was a close call, and neither side of the debate on the sources really seems to have convinced the other of anything, but opinion since the article was expanded on 8 March looks to have shifted towards a consensus to keep. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 🐱 12:07, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Not notable and doesn't pass GNG HeinzMaster ( talk) 01:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
if the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. I believe there is enough non-trivial mentions along with the one GNG-passing source to allow for an article on this subject. Frank Anchor 17:31, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
is an interview with some independent coverage. In my opinion there is enough independent coverage here. Frank Anchor 23:36, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shawn Teller (
talk)
01:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:08, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to The Game discography. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 🐱 12:28, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Cites zero sources, no appearance of independent notability. QuietHere ( talk) 13:27, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Randykitty (
talk)
14:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
01:20, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. More opinions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:08, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) Shawn Teller ( talk) 01:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE. It is just a random listing of centre and right-wing governments in Latin America, with no clear context of what would tie them all together as a unity. There used to be a "Background" section, that I removed because it had no actual relation with the article (it was focused solely on Brazil, and discussed a perceived cultural hegemony of the left in the 1980s and 1990s).
The leaders of the Pink Tide have the common project of the " Patria Grande" (basically, a reenactment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics but in South and Central America), but there is no right-wing analog project that unites the right-wing presidents in a similar way. As it can be seen in each individual entry, those leaders stayed focused on their own domestic contexts, and none mentions other countries.
To make things worse, there are no clear temporal boundaries, so anyone can be included. And the distinction at the list between "center-right" and "right" seems original research: who can measure the "degree of right" to classify things this way and not another? Cambalachero ( talk) 17:46, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
17:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
01:17, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. More opinions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:07, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Keep. It is a notable thing, and the translated version of the name is notable and found in reliable sources. You can see that most easily by going to https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onda_conservadora and searching the citations for "conservadora" and you'll see the following https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/internacional-39459751 as well as eight other sources using the exact phrase. CT55555( talk) 02:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect as proposed by Gidonb. This proposal has remained essentially uncontested since it has been made. I'll leave the actual redirecting to interested editors. Sandstein 20:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Not notable. Lacks coverage. WP:SIGCOV Kstern ( talk) 01:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:
Keep. Seems to easily pass
WP:NGEO, which has a low bar, all that is needed is verifiable information beyond simple statistics
verifiable information beyond simple statistics. In addition, the units also meet the high bar of significant coverage in WP:NEXIST many times over. Of course, one could argue that for all recognized geographical units (with the exception of statistically designated areas and other loosely defined areas) this is the case and that the bar was set low so we would not waste time with needless discussions about notability.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided between those advocating Keep and those seeking a Redirect. And if you prefer a Redirect, please be kind to the discussion closer and specify what the redirect target should be for each article that is nominated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:10, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Waalhaven, as a port area, is a bit of an exception in the nomination. It's the only item that should move with the infobox (i.e. smerge). District will be no longer needed for Feijenoord's target ( Feijenoord is already a redirect here). gidonb ( talk) 13:14, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:05, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Not enough in-depth coverage about him to meet WP:GNG, and does not meet WP:POL, being a small-town mayor and a deputy AG. Onel5969 TT me 13:07, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
KEEP Small town mayor, deputy attorney general, appointments secretary to me is noteworthy. Appointments secretary is the important noteworthy job here. It has existed in statute since the creation of the state, and is responsible for the naming of commissions, boards, job, commissioners, and judges. For example, NYS just went through a failed chief judge nomination, appointments is where this played out. The governor chose a lieutenant governor, that is the appointments office. The governor brought in Kathyrn Garcia, that is an appointment. This area as a historian is a hole in nys history. We know who the deputy mayors are, the commissioners, but the not the patronage political people who make the government function. In addition to that, there are other NYS civil servants that I have found via wikipedia that have helped my own research. They are lesser figures than this person. With that, I only created this because like other pages I created there was a historical hole on something i was researching. To delete, is to remove valuable information for future historians interested in Eliot Spitzer, or New York's first african american governor, or its first female, and the type of people they chose to work in their government. In addition to this, New York state does not that have that many towns that have a mayor. As a small town mayor, whose father was a mayor, who was appointed to be chair of the local SUNY college council you allow a local town to research their own history better. Joco179 ( talk) 14:11, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Enos733 (
talk)
16:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Delete. Mack is more accomplished than I could hope to be, however, accomplishments do not equal notability aka existence ≠ notability. There are two claims to notability here. Local politician and state government. Local politicians are not automatically notable, nor are they not automatically not notable. Reasons a local politician could be notable are unusual longevity in service (see Robert L. Butler, Margaret Doud, or Hilmar Moore), an atypical level of coverage and fame (see a pre-Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman), or qualifying under another criteria in relation to their local political role (see Betty Loren-Maltese and Rita Crundwell as WP:CRIME). Nothing about Mack's local roles with either Cortland, New York government or Democratic politics meets this standard. His state positions are by and large either civil service positions with run of the mill coverage or non-notable appointments. Executive Deputy Attorney General is a civil service position. Civil servants and mid-level "pleasure of the officeholder" appointments are not notable. They may not be automatically not notable, so let's review the record. Few of the appointments are even the top political appointee (assistant/deputy secretaries, university trustees, etc.). Also, there is a lot masking the lack of notability. He was "part of a team that helped appoint Delgado," and he "was able to secure a settlement in favor of New Yorker's." The phrase "Mack worked on appointing people to the" is a description of the job and nothing about Mack in particular. There is a lot of filler in this article to buff it out. This article should be deleted.-- Mpen320 ( talk) 04:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. More opinions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:03, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Genese Davis. Redirecting as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 03:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
This novel does not seem to meet Wikipedia's standards for book notability. Specifically, the guidelines say a book is notable if "The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself," and while there was some fleeting coverage in RSes of the author ( Genese Davis) around the time of publication- mainly interviews by video gaming outlets focusing on the gaming angle of her writing- I cannot find any non-self-published reviews of the novel itself, suggesting the book's notability, apart from its author, is quite limited at best.
The article was created by an editor, Ericd83, with a probable COI- their talk page shows they tried multiple times over the course of about five years to create or have created an article about the author (and the article mentions a trailer directed by an "Eric Davis")- and was originally inappropriately promotional in tone, with too much detail on the plot, and inappropriate sourcing. These issues have been mostly fixed, but the article still doesn't really make a case for why the book is notable.
I would have merged this article into its author's article, but it doesn't really have any useful content that isn't already there (eg links to interviews), as it's mostly a plot summary. My understanding is that the article needs to go through the AfD process as it was PRODed and then de-PRODed before- though the de-PRODing was potentially inappropriate, having been done by the article's creator, who argued that it shouldn't be deleted because it's a "big deal in the gaming community" that has had an "incredible reception." Yspaddadenpenkawr ( talk) 03:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to consider Merge suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
05:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
03:59, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. This is the third AFD on this subject and they have all closed as No consensus. Maybe it's time to take a break from nominating this article for a while and see how the article develops. Liz Read! Talk! 03:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
A Pakistani YouTuber, having no substantial coverage in the RS. Saqib ( talk) 08:56, 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!
08:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
WJ94 (
talk)
10:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. More opinions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
03:58, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. The article is mainly based on 3 references from the same source in March 2012. No evidence of ongoing notable relations like significant trade, migration, agreements or state visits. LibStar ( talk) 01:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
This article should be merged ( WP:BLAR) with Sicilian Defence, Dragon Variation since the article is somewhat short. Also, the openings are similar enough. Mast303 ( talk) 00:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
arguments that would support deletion, userfying or redirectioninstead. They are making an argument that supports
an alternative action such as moving or merging, meaning that this should be speedy closed as keep. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 14:34, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Otago representative cricketers. (non-admin closure) Shawn Teller ( talk) 01:41, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
No reliable non-database sources and does not pass WP:NCRICK. I am happy to be proven wrong, but I cannot find any. – Popo Dameron talk 00:16, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was delete. Joyous! Noise! 22:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO. Did some WP:BEFORE digging and came up with no sources, across Google, Wikipedia Library, and Yahoo, only found copies of Wikipedia, unreliable sources, and obituaries. Tails Wx 22:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Joyous! Noise! 22:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Likely fails WP:BIO. He's known solely for a single TEDx talk he gave, and the article reads like a PR piece. Firestar464 ( talk) 22:00, 1 March 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. Joyous! Noise! 22:48, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Pay-TV series doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG - coverage consists of largely WP:ROUTINE sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle 21:23, 1 March 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. Joyous! Noise! 22:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Pay-TV series doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG - coverage consists of largely WP:ROUTINE sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle 21:21, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete – WP:CSD#G3. Draft deleted as well. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 🐱 10:41, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The only source in the article is clearly a joke. Ymblanter ( talk) 20:09, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 18:10, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable failed startup. There are some articles about winning bakeoffs and getting funding, but they didn't do anything notable and shut down. Sure, those articles might mean they meet WP:GNG, but the company doesn't mean WP:CORP in any substantive way. Mikeblas ( talk) 20:00, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Redirect to the Tech Crunch 50 article, I'm not showing lasting notabilty for the startup company being discussed.
Oaktree b (
talk)
16:27, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Dhirendra Krishna Shastri#Bageshwar Dham Sarkar. Liz Read! Talk! 18:09, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Bageshwar Dham Sarkar
This stub article is about a Hindu temple. None of the references are about the temple, but they are all about its leader, a popular charismatic figure named Dhirendra Krishna Shastri, who is already the subject of an article. A previous editor nominated this stub for A7, which was declined, and then proposed its deletion, but the PROD was removed by an IP editor. There is no significant coverage of the temple.
Number | Reference | Remarks | Independent | Significant | Reliable | Secondary |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | NDTV.COM | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | Yes? | Yes |
2 | hindustantimes.com | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | Yes? | Yes |
3 | Theprint.in | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | Yes? | Yes |
4 | hindi.thequint.com | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | Yes? | Yes |
5 | timesnownews.com/india | Not about the temple but its leader | ? | Not about the temple | ? | Yes |
6 | indiatoday.in | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | ? | Yes |
7 | theprint.in | Not about the temple but its leader | Y | Not about the temple | ? | Yes |
This stub can either be deleted, or redirected to Dhirendra Krishna Shastri. Robert McClenon ( talk) 17:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Joyous! Noise! 22:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable royalty. Only mentioned in passing in the sources given in the article. No other sourcing found, not meeting GNG. Oaktree b ( talk) 16:38, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Luis Pescetti. Liz Read! Talk! 07:29, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
No claims of significance made, no sources. Would be eligible for CSD A7, except it's a book. I checked es wikipedia but same deal, no sourcing over there either, just a stub. Lizthegrey ( talk) 05:29, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
13:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
16:37, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 06:14, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Can't find significant coverage from reliable source in a google search. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙♂️ Let's Talk ! 11:31, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
16:36, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. It appears that sources found during this discussion and recent improvements to the article indicate notability and justify keeping this article. Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Article creator admitted a COI without being specific, and much of the content came from Alypeters, a blocked paid editor. On top of that, the article is really totally promotional with very poor sourcing (like, Medium--that's not OK). Drmies ( talk) 03:39, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While it might seem like there is a consensus to Keep this article, I've grown to have skepticism for accounts whose first edit is at an AFD and we have several brand new, but articulate, editors. So, I'm relisting to get more participation here. Of course, this AFD can be closed at any time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
08:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject, see also WP:GNGfrom WP:BASIC, and
A person who does not meet these additional criteria may still be notable under Wikipedia:Notabilityfrom WP:BIO#Additional criteria. If we choose to take the most specific criterion, say, WP:CREATIVE, then
The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or techniqueshould apply since she is the author of Snowflake. Which criterion do you think should be applied here and what do you think is missing for meeting that criterion? Lizthegrey ( talk) 05:46, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
The article notes: "Serene’s first claim to fame was as a renowned computer scientist and hacker who in 2016 created Snowflake, an open-source software project to circumvent internet censorship. ... Like coding, her music was largely self-taught. She started playing the piano at age 5. She attended Carnegie Mellon University and got her computer science degree in three years and went to work for Google. She earned enough to buy her first piano - a Steinway Model O. She left Google and started her professional music career only five years ago, with two of those interrupted by the pandemic. ... Serene’s collaborations include her role as composer for Kanye West’s Opera, premiered at Lincoln Center & Art Basel, as well as pianist and technologist with Blue Man Group’s founder, bringing futuristic innovations at the intersection of music and technology while also highlighting her own audiovisual synesthesia."
The review notes: "On Sunday night, the pianist Serene sat before her instrument in a dimly lit room, ready to perform the most recent installment of Fever’s Candlelight Concert series online. ... After opening with Ravel and Chopin, Serene performed the aria from the Goldberg Variations. She worked the keys with an Apollonian restraint, her two hands playing together as if in casual conversation. A pairing of sonatas by Beethoven followed—op. 31, no. 8, “Pathétique,” composed early in his career, and op. 111, no. 32, ... Serene urged that we consider Beethoven a master of improvisation—a designation not commonly given to classical composers. But she drove the point home with swinging tempos and athletic trills, positing Beethoven as a classical antecedent to jazz. Then came Liszt and Gershwin, and the concert concluded with a heartening round of “Rhapsody in Blue.” ... Unsurprisingly, Serene performed a spectacle to match. Watching Serene play is like watching Jackson Pollock paint; she lifts her hands high and strikes the keys with intention, producing an ordered and harmonious spattering of notes. Her next performance with Fever will be streaming on May 24."
The article notes: "... says Serene, Snowstorm’s lead developer. (She only goes by her first name for security reasons.) ... Serene hadn’t expected to be spending this much time building upon Snowflake. After releasing the original prototype early 2016 as part of a fellowship with the Open Technology Fund, she left the technology world to focus on working as a concert pianist. ... To that end, Serene is trying to build a business around Snowstorm, raising $1 million from 1517 Fund, Tyler Cowen of Emergent Ventures, and a group of private angel investors."
I consider sources one and two to be substantial, while source three is not but can be combined with the other two sources to help demonstrate notability. Cunard ( talk) 09:15, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Allowing more time to discuss the presented sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
16:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
In combination with the other sources listed above, Serene clearly meets Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says, "multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability".
The result was delete. The consensus is to Delete this article. If an editor would like to work on it in Draft space and submit it to WP:AFC for review, contact me. But a direct move back to main space will likely result in CSD G4 speedy deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 18:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
No evidence found of any notability. He is quoted in a press release [5], the second source is a Linkedin page, and nothing better was found online [6], nothing in Gnews, an extremely passing mention here and a publication here. Fram ( talk) 15:39, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete. This article was speedy deleted as a CSD G4 so I'm closing this discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 20:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable religious person. As far as I can tell from a search on Google there are no independent reliable sources in English for this person. There is an article on Bengali Wikipedia about this person: bn:সন্তদাস কাঠিয়াবাবা, but the sources cited are just as awful as the English-language Wikipedia article on him. This suggests to me that finding reliable sources about him is just as unachievable in Bengali as it is in English. By the way the article has a collection of redirects from its page moves: Santadasji Kathiababa, Santa Das Kathiababa, Santa Dasji Kathiababa. Please can these be deleted too. -- Toddy1 (talk) 15:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. If an editor would like to work on this article in Draft space, contact me. Liz Read! Talk! 18:01, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:NFOOTY is no longer a valid SNG, so GNG must be met. It needs several refs from independent, reliable, secondary sources to pass WP:GNG. Was moved to draft in hopes of improvement, but immediately returned to mainspace. Coverage is simply routine sports coverage. Onel5969 TT me 15:01, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 15:42, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Apart from the opening sentence, this article reads like an essay on photographing the police or a coat rack on which to hang opinions on police conduct which consists largely of original research. Nothing here is encyclopaedic ( WP:SOAP point 2), and if there is a coherent subject here, no reliable sources are cited to establish its notability. This belongs on someone's blog somewhere, not in an encyclopaedia. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:56, 1 March 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! 17:31, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Completely unsourced original research which is better covered on other articles. EggsAndCakey ( talk) 14:07, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Liz Read! Talk! 04:48, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:CRISTAL applies here. D.Lazard ( talk) 14:05, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Garuda3 ( talk) 00:01, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. Randykitty ( talk) 14:04, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Here are the author affiliations: "QU Qing-hui; ZHANG Xin-yang; Editorial Department of "Northwest Pharmaceutical Journal", School of Pharmacy, Xi’an Jiaotong University; AVIC Xi’an Flight Automatic Control Research Institute".
The abstract notes: "Objective To study the high-download papers(download frequency ≥1000) of "China Pharmacy" and the correlation between the download frequency and the citation frequency, so as to provide reference for improving the academic quality and influence of the journal. Methods The annual distribution, number of authors, co-authors, organization type distribution, regional distribution, funding status, and downloads of highdownload papers in "China Pharmacy" from 2000 to 2021 were carried out using China HowNet’s "Chinese Academic Journals(Online Edition)"."
Here are the author affiliations: "FEI Xiao-fan, REN Xue-song, LI Kai-lan, et al. (Department of Pharmacy, First University Hospital, West China University of Medical Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China)".
The abstract notes (bolding added for emphasis): "Objective:To realize the quality of the ethics of the randomized controlled trials in Chinese Pharmacy from 1990 to 2000.Methods:It was checked over page-by-page the control trials of clinical therapeutic studies in Chinese Pharmacy from 1990 to 2000 to identify strictly randomized controlled tests(RCT)and controlled clinical tests(CCT)according to the criteria of the handbook of Cochrane collaboration in 1997.Result: A trial of 63 articles on clinical trials was published in 66 issues covered 11 volumes of the Chinese Pharmacy,among which,there were 1 issues of RCT. Conclusion; There still exist many problems and urge the clinical workers to adopt RCT and blind trial as more as possible and guarantee RCTs to be precise as it demands"
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 15:40, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable actor that fails WP:NACTOR with no significant roles. There is only one source for this article with a mere sentence that refers to the actor. No other reliable sources to be found. Jauerback dude?/ dude. 13:51, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. We have very weak nomination, a weak deletion argument, a weak keep argument, a strong keep argument (in the form of point refutation) and a strong delete argument. I find no consensus, and a third relist is inadvisable. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Not notable. Hoponpop69 ( talk) 05:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
08:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Eddie891
Talk
Work
13:01, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:00, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:BIO or WP:AUTHOR in its current form and I am unable to find any better sources that are not circular references back to Wikipedia. It reads like a resume, and the only two current sources are a Geocities site and a Blogspot blog; neither appear to be reliable sources per WP:RS. If those two sources are disqualified then it's an entirely unsourced biography of a (presumably) living person. Based on the text as written, it still appears to fail WP:AUTHOR as there is no evidence that this author's work is particularly well-known or important to the field (two awards that lack their own pages; no evidence that it was "the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews"). Page has been tagged since 2011 as needing help. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco ( talk) 06:32, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 06:59, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Article cites no sources, and the tag has been there for over seven years. According to the article, it's not an official position but just a conventional an honorary title. In addition, I found no google results for any combination of Peru + leader of the opposition, so it doesn't even seem as though it is a conventional title, but is merely a fictional title. Estar8806 ( talk) 05:27, 1 March 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. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:09, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:PRODUCER , WP:FILMMAKER and WP:GNG AShiv1212 ( talk) 04:59, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of OL Reign players. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Unable to find a single GNG-passing source. JTtheOG ( talk) 04:42, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 21:38, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Ambassadors are not inherently notable. 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. That doesn't appear to be the case here. Uhooep ( talk) 20:16, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
03:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
04:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. More opinions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:31, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. This one was a close call, and neither side of the debate on the sources really seems to have convinced the other of anything, but opinion since the article was expanded on 8 March looks to have shifted towards a consensus to keep. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 🐱 12:07, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Not notable and doesn't pass GNG HeinzMaster ( talk) 01:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
if the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. I believe there is enough non-trivial mentions along with the one GNG-passing source to allow for an article on this subject. Frank Anchor 17:31, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
is an interview with some independent coverage. In my opinion there is enough independent coverage here. Frank Anchor 23:36, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shawn Teller (
talk)
01:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:08, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to The Game discography. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 🐱 12:28, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Cites zero sources, no appearance of independent notability. QuietHere ( talk) 13:27, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Randykitty (
talk)
14:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
01:20, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. More opinions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:08, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) Shawn Teller ( talk) 01:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE. It is just a random listing of centre and right-wing governments in Latin America, with no clear context of what would tie them all together as a unity. There used to be a "Background" section, that I removed because it had no actual relation with the article (it was focused solely on Brazil, and discussed a perceived cultural hegemony of the left in the 1980s and 1990s).
The leaders of the Pink Tide have the common project of the " Patria Grande" (basically, a reenactment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics but in South and Central America), but there is no right-wing analog project that unites the right-wing presidents in a similar way. As it can be seen in each individual entry, those leaders stayed focused on their own domestic contexts, and none mentions other countries.
To make things worse, there are no clear temporal boundaries, so anyone can be included. And the distinction at the list between "center-right" and "right" seems original research: who can measure the "degree of right" to classify things this way and not another? Cambalachero ( talk) 17:46, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
17:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
01:17, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. More opinions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:07, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Keep. It is a notable thing, and the translated version of the name is notable and found in reliable sources. You can see that most easily by going to https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onda_conservadora and searching the citations for "conservadora" and you'll see the following https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/internacional-39459751 as well as eight other sources using the exact phrase. CT55555( talk) 02:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect as proposed by Gidonb. This proposal has remained essentially uncontested since it has been made. I'll leave the actual redirecting to interested editors. Sandstein 20:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Not notable. Lacks coverage. WP:SIGCOV Kstern ( talk) 01:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:
Keep. Seems to easily pass
WP:NGEO, which has a low bar, all that is needed is verifiable information beyond simple statistics
verifiable information beyond simple statistics. In addition, the units also meet the high bar of significant coverage in WP:NEXIST many times over. Of course, one could argue that for all recognized geographical units (with the exception of statistically designated areas and other loosely defined areas) this is the case and that the bar was set low so we would not waste time with needless discussions about notability.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided between those advocating Keep and those seeking a Redirect. And if you prefer a Redirect, please be kind to the discussion closer and specify what the redirect target should be for each article that is nominated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:10, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Waalhaven, as a port area, is a bit of an exception in the nomination. It's the only item that should move with the infobox (i.e. smerge). District will be no longer needed for Feijenoord's target ( Feijenoord is already a redirect here). gidonb ( talk) 13:14, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:05, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Not enough in-depth coverage about him to meet WP:GNG, and does not meet WP:POL, being a small-town mayor and a deputy AG. Onel5969 TT me 13:07, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
KEEP Small town mayor, deputy attorney general, appointments secretary to me is noteworthy. Appointments secretary is the important noteworthy job here. It has existed in statute since the creation of the state, and is responsible for the naming of commissions, boards, job, commissioners, and judges. For example, NYS just went through a failed chief judge nomination, appointments is where this played out. The governor chose a lieutenant governor, that is the appointments office. The governor brought in Kathyrn Garcia, that is an appointment. This area as a historian is a hole in nys history. We know who the deputy mayors are, the commissioners, but the not the patronage political people who make the government function. In addition to that, there are other NYS civil servants that I have found via wikipedia that have helped my own research. They are lesser figures than this person. With that, I only created this because like other pages I created there was a historical hole on something i was researching. To delete, is to remove valuable information for future historians interested in Eliot Spitzer, or New York's first african american governor, or its first female, and the type of people they chose to work in their government. In addition to this, New York state does not that have that many towns that have a mayor. As a small town mayor, whose father was a mayor, who was appointed to be chair of the local SUNY college council you allow a local town to research their own history better. Joco179 ( talk) 14:11, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Enos733 (
talk)
16:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Delete. Mack is more accomplished than I could hope to be, however, accomplishments do not equal notability aka existence ≠ notability. There are two claims to notability here. Local politician and state government. Local politicians are not automatically notable, nor are they not automatically not notable. Reasons a local politician could be notable are unusual longevity in service (see Robert L. Butler, Margaret Doud, or Hilmar Moore), an atypical level of coverage and fame (see a pre-Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman), or qualifying under another criteria in relation to their local political role (see Betty Loren-Maltese and Rita Crundwell as WP:CRIME). Nothing about Mack's local roles with either Cortland, New York government or Democratic politics meets this standard. His state positions are by and large either civil service positions with run of the mill coverage or non-notable appointments. Executive Deputy Attorney General is a civil service position. Civil servants and mid-level "pleasure of the officeholder" appointments are not notable. They may not be automatically not notable, so let's review the record. Few of the appointments are even the top political appointee (assistant/deputy secretaries, university trustees, etc.). Also, there is a lot masking the lack of notability. He was "part of a team that helped appoint Delgado," and he "was able to secure a settlement in favor of New Yorker's." The phrase "Mack worked on appointing people to the" is a description of the job and nothing about Mack in particular. There is a lot of filler in this article to buff it out. This article should be deleted.-- Mpen320 ( talk) 04:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. More opinions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
04:03, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Genese Davis. Redirecting as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 03:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
This novel does not seem to meet Wikipedia's standards for book notability. Specifically, the guidelines say a book is notable if "The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself," and while there was some fleeting coverage in RSes of the author ( Genese Davis) around the time of publication- mainly interviews by video gaming outlets focusing on the gaming angle of her writing- I cannot find any non-self-published reviews of the novel itself, suggesting the book's notability, apart from its author, is quite limited at best.
The article was created by an editor, Ericd83, with a probable COI- their talk page shows they tried multiple times over the course of about five years to create or have created an article about the author (and the article mentions a trailer directed by an "Eric Davis")- and was originally inappropriately promotional in tone, with too much detail on the plot, and inappropriate sourcing. These issues have been mostly fixed, but the article still doesn't really make a case for why the book is notable.
I would have merged this article into its author's article, but it doesn't really have any useful content that isn't already there (eg links to interviews), as it's mostly a plot summary. My understanding is that the article needs to go through the AfD process as it was PRODed and then de-PRODed before- though the de-PRODing was potentially inappropriate, having been done by the article's creator, who argued that it shouldn't be deleted because it's a "big deal in the gaming community" that has had an "incredible reception." Yspaddadenpenkawr ( talk) 03:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to consider Merge suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
05:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
03:59, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. This is the third AFD on this subject and they have all closed as No consensus. Maybe it's time to take a break from nominating this article for a while and see how the article develops. Liz Read! Talk! 03:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
A Pakistani YouTuber, having no substantial coverage in the RS. Saqib ( talk) 08:56, 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!
08:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
WJ94 (
talk)
10:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. More opinions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk)
03:58, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. The article is mainly based on 3 references from the same source in March 2012. No evidence of ongoing notable relations like significant trade, migration, agreements or state visits. LibStar ( talk) 01:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
This article should be merged ( WP:BLAR) with Sicilian Defence, Dragon Variation since the article is somewhat short. Also, the openings are similar enough. Mast303 ( talk) 00:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
arguments that would support deletion, userfying or redirectioninstead. They are making an argument that supports
an alternative action such as moving or merging, meaning that this should be speedy closed as keep. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 14:34, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Otago representative cricketers. (non-admin closure) Shawn Teller ( talk) 01:41, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
No reliable non-database sources and does not pass WP:NCRICK. I am happy to be proven wrong, but I cannot find any. – Popo Dameron talk 00:16, 1 March 2023 (UTC)