![]() |
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
unrelated references and statuses not found in rhesus. Redivy ( talk) 22:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
23:57, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
This education program appears to have a very regional focus, only in a specific region in Australia, that does not meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria. According to my online research, there are not enough reliable, independent sources, WP:NRV, that cover this program in detail. Chiserc ( talk) 23:55, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 00:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Demon Slayer
This article is about an unreleased movie. It exists in both draft space and article space. Maybe some editors think that creating both an article and a draft prevents moving the article into draft space. Articles on unreleased movies only satisfy film notability criteria if production itself has been notable. There is nothing in this article about production. The articles are mostly about the schedule for theatrical release of the film including a world tour of theatrical viewings. Do the sources refer to production or contribute to film notability? No. A check of the references shows that they are mostly just announcements of dates of release.
Reference Number | Reference | Comments | Independent | Significant | Reliable | Secondary |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | www.cbr.com/demon-slayer-hashira-training-arc-info/ | Appears tp be a fanzine | Sort of | Yes | Probably | No |
2 | deadline.com | Announcement of broadcast release date | No | No | Yes | No |
3 | Yahoo.com | Announcement of theatrical release date | No | No | Probably | No |
4 | www.crunchyroll.com | Another announcement of the date of release | No | No | Probably | No |
5 | kimetsu.com | Announcement in Japanese of world tour screening | No | No | Probably | No |
The draft is all right because it is a draft, and can be updated after the film is released and reviewed. The current article should be deleted. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:33, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
23:51, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR applies. ✗ plicit 00:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Previous declined prod. Whilst it has some notable alumni, could not find significant coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL. LibStar ( talk) 22:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:14, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
23:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Per improvements made and sources identified Star Mississippi 01:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
This got caught up in my cleanup of promotional articles and likely sockpuppetry, but after a second look I saw that this article had a longer history so I've restored and sent it here for review. Fails WP:SPORTBASIC, the only sources are a local blog, WP:ROUTINE injury report, and a fanzine. WP:BEFORE showed nothing that would contribute to notability. The Wordsmith Talk to me 18:09, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Hereford FC Matchday Announcer since 2002 🎤according to his own website, [1] making him not independent of the subject. Your second source is a local news source, which isn't necessarily disqualifying but it is a routine injury report. Neither of them are sufficient to demonstrate notability. As far as pre-internet sources, sure they might exist and might give WP:SIGCOV. But we don't have enough sources available to satisfy WP:SPORTBASIC and give us the presumption of notability and existence of sources. The Wordsmith Talk to me 20:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
23:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
No sources establishing notability, and seems to have been written by the school itself from various IP address accounts. Beland ( talk) 23:44, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:26, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable television show that fails both WP:GNG and WP:NTV, and has been tagged as being unreferenced for over eleven years. Aspects ( talk) 14:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
23:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Poorly sourced BLP footballer. The closest thing to WP:SIGCOV that I came across was a couple sentences of coverage here, as well as this transactional announcement. JTtheOG ( talk) 23:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Regardless of whether it should have been draftified or not, consensus is clear among established editors. Star Mississippi 02:01, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Article was moved to draft space by an experienced editor, then moved back to article space by another editor. The subject doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG, it's difficult to find sources online because there is a better known glass artist of the same name. Current sources are of questionable quality (one is on a gallery website, another is an interview). The two inline citations were to Apple Music and Spotify, suggesting the article is here to promote the artist. Sionk ( talk) 23:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails
WP:NPOL as the mayor of a city municipality of under 400k people. There is no evidence of
WP:SIGCOV contributing to
WP:GNG.
JTtheOG (
talk)
22:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Naga Wrestling Championship per Nom and as a viable ATD Star Mississippi 02:01, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Brief BLP of the winner of a very small state wrestling championship, sourced only to local/regional press. Redirecting to Naga Wrestling Championship would be a decent ATD. Mccapra ( talk) 22:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Detailed list spun out of another article last year, but almost entirely unsourced. Nobody at NPP has wanted to mark it as patrolled, and I suppose it would be possible to go through all the claims in all the fields in the table and look for sources, but nobody has volunteered to do that. Meanwhile we have an effectively unsourced article in mainspace, which doesn’t seem satisfactory. Not sure what to do with it so bringing here for consensus. Mccapra ( talk) 21:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Delete unless massively improved. An effectively unsourced list is not acceptable in mainspace, especially without any evidence that it meets WP:NLIST. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:49, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Non notable RL competition. Fails WP:GNG. J Mo 101 ( talk) 20:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Journalist whose career doesn't appear to be notable enough for Wikipedia. Roles at Vogue significant, but I don't think enough. Very few internal links. Hard to find external references. Seaweed ( talk) 20:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Rugby League Conference. RL0919 ( talk) 21:21, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Very minor amateur RL league which only existed briefly. Fails WP:GNG as no significant coverage exists. J Mo 101 ( talk) 20:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. RL0919 ( talk) 21:25, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON for a director with no feature films in their filmography. The award received by Food on the Road is not notable. Sources one and three are about the film 'E Valayam' and two is the short film directed by the subject. Unable to find anything on WP:Before. Looks like the career and Personal life sections are original research. Fails GNG. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 20:01, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 00:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the WP:LISTN and goes against WP:TG to boot as a list page. Let'srun ( talk) 19:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Notability of lists is based on the group; (2) all the transactions, news, etc. that make up these teams are very widely covered; (3) there are independent websites that track all CFL teams' rosters, e.g. TSN and footballdb; (4) your citation of WP:TG notes that
Templates should not be used to create lists of links to other articles when a category, list page, or "See also" section list can perform the same function– there is nothing else that can perform this function; and (5) if all else fails, then I think we should WP:IAR keep this as it is immensely useful to both readers and editors. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 20:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:52, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the WP:LISTN, is merely a long list of non notable people while fails the GNG. Let'srun ( talk) 19:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. RL0919 ( talk) 21:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
A list and topic that I do not believe passes the WP:GNG or WP:NLIST. I've done some searches, and I can find no evidence that the topic of fictional brewers or breweries have been discussed in reliable sources as an actual topic or as a group or set. (Though I did learn that there is a real-life brewery named the "Fiction Beer Company"). The sources included in this article are only on a couple of the specific entries, not on the topic as a whole, and most of them are either non-reliable, or barely mention the actual beer brewing. Rorshacma ( talk) 18:46, 31 January 2024 (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. Harley Poe does not appear to make sense as an ATD as band members went on to other blue-linked bands, but editors may create one at their discetion. Star Mississippi 02:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Unsourced since 2013 and I can't find enough significant coverage that would show they need their own article. The only point in their favour (as far as I can tell, anyway) is that they released albums on Tooth & Nail Records, a significant indie label, but I'm not sure that's enough. Suntooooth, it/he ( talk/ contribs) 06:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
06:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
18:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 02:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Could not find indepth coverage either in google news or books. Mainly 1 line mentions, like getting support from the Chicago Bears. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar ( talk) 05:32, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
06:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
17:51, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Not all !votes here made strong policy-based arguments, but the added material does appear to be significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. — Ganesha811 ( talk) 16:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Appears to fail WP:GNG. Uhooep ( talk) 00:24, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to get an assessment on recent contributions to the article
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
05:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final Relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
17:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Characters of the Street Fighter series. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:58, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
A large part of this character's reception is strictly about how professional players regarded her in Street Fighter V...and not even specifically in articles for her. While gameplay can be a factor for a character's notability, it doesn't show an overarching importance beyond the game itself, or any impact towards it. Other mentions are trivial, not really establishing any importance or examination. Kung Fu Man ( talk) 04:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
17:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Notability tag removed and I do not see the issue addressed so coming here to get consensus. Fails WP:NFILM. Classic example of notability based on announcements and press releases. Announced in 2017, official title in 2022, filming began in September 2023 and an announcement of release for August 2024. References show it is filming but nothing showing it is substantially complete and per NFILM, we have seen many films delayed so nothing to tell this is actually going to be released in August. Many references are unreliable or churnalism so fails WP:GNG as well. Would recommend draftify but previous film related draftified articles are simply moved back to mainspace shortly thereafter and we wind up right back here so not sure if it is an acceptable WP:ATD. CNMall41 ( talk) 20:23, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Delete or Draftify. This is another case of a movie article created way ahead of undecided release date and not even reached post-production stage. Too early to have an article in namespace. RangersRus ( talk) 03:13, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Redirect or Merge to Cop Universe as film is still under production and a part of that franchise that is still not covered under post-production. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 18:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Delete - as per nomination. Krishna Dahal ( talk) 04:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Keep - deleting/draftifying major Indian films such as this only gives ammunition to socks to create more of a mess, as we've seen countless times before. The film is currently filming, just like major Hollywood films as Venom 3 or MI:8 (both of which were also delayed many times). The article, of course, can be improved with better referencing so tags should stay. Krimuk2.0 ( talk) 09:01, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While numerically there appears to be a majority for 'keep' here, a number of the keep opinions express arguments which aren't particularly strong in policy. A couple also suggest draft or merge/redirect as alternatives. Relisting to establish a clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk)
09:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed,
Rosguill
talk
17:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:53, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG. The best example of coverage cited thus far is this coverage in Latvian, but it does not make a case for GNG in itself; I was unable to find additional independent coverage other than interviews, database entries, and trivial mentions in match writeups, having searched in English/Latvian and also Russian. signed, Rosguill talk 16:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG. Coverage is limited to affiliated press, and even then is light on biographical detail. I was unable to find additional coverage searching online and on Newspapers.com signed, Rosguill talk 16:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Delete – I am unable to find sufficient coverage of the subject to meet GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG, and we don't appear to have an SNG for Taekwondo or general martial arts, so it's not clear whether a silver medal at the European Games should establish notability. Coverage online in English and Azerbaijani is limited to brief mentions in writeups of Azerbaijani athletes' performance, but does not have significant biographical coverage of the subject. signed, Rosguill talk 16:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was draftify. ✗ plicit 00:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet
WP:GNG, although this is hampered by the relative inaccessibility of Burmese sources. Still, we have virtually nothing to go on here: the one secondary source cited
is a blog of dubious reliability and further refers to Naang Naang not as a women but as a female-fronted shan rock group
. signed,
Rosguill
talk
16:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Drafty for now – While she may be notable, there is a lack of sources due to being a Shan language singer. The time of her popularity predates the media era, making information only available in printed newspapers. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any online sources in very few Shan language media, a situation comparable to the lack of media in the Tibet region. Despite this, I have alerted this AfD to editors in the Shan Wikipedia. Therefore, I opt to vote for the draft rather than deletion. 1.47.14.130 ( talk) 19:38, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable politician, fails WP:NPOL. Routine coverage of plea by the subject on the Uniform Civil Code in India and other slams to other notable subject like Kangana Ranaut, see [5] and Arvind Kejriwal, see [6] -- QuadriSyedSahab( T · C 15:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Ganesha811 ( talk) 16:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Do we need another list of winners when many of these articles about races taking place there have their own list or is part of it, thus making this completely unnecessary. Many others are not necessary to the most ardent fans such as feeder series. Unnecessary WP:FANCRUFT list that is only good for the most obsessive motorsport fans, also WP:LC and WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Also, not notable enough to pass WP:LISTN. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 15:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge and redirect to Crawley Town F.C. as the most sensible option from the replies. The history is preserved so relevant content can be copied over.. David Gerard ( talk) 18:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. Single event news. scope_creep Talk 14:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Per WP:V, "Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. Additionally, quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by inline citations." In application of this core policy, this AfD must be closed as "delete" irrespective of any local consensus to the contrary. As has been pointed out, this unsourced content has been challenged by being tagged as needing sources since 2010. 14 years is far more than enough time to sources. Because this has not been done, not even during this AfD, the content must now be deleted. This does not prevent a sourced recreation of the article. Sandstein 16:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't establish that this meets WP:N. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, and unreferenced for longer, so hopefully we can get this resolved. Boleyn ( talk) 13:23, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
14:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus lean towards keep. SIGCOV is met. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 05:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Successful but I wasn't sure it was enough to meet WP:PROF or WP:GNG. Has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, so hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 13:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 14:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
non-notable, promotional, running mentions only User4edits ( talk) 13:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) asilvering ( talk) 03:38, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
It's borderline, but I couldn't find sources to be sure it meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 13:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 14:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Non notable business. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Nothing clearing WP:CORPDEPTH. Massively bombarded with routine announcements, regurgitated PR, listings and trivial "best" type pieces. duffbeerforme ( talk) 12:22, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:44, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:06, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Potentially fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. References are atrocious. Been on WP since 2011 and never been effectively references. Currently satisfies WP:V. scope_creep Talk 11:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 14:12, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Successful career, but I couldn't establish he meets notability as an author or an actor. Boleyn ( talk) 12:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Emma Bonino. Editors interested in merging sourced material from this page's edit history to Emma Bonino are encouraged to do so. (non-admin closure) asilvering ( talk) 03:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
It exists and there are some sources, but not the level of independent, reliable sources to show it meets WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Has been in CAT:NN for 14 years.
1st AfD closed as no consensus due to low participation. Given how long this has been in CAT:NN I think we really need to decide what the consensus is here. Boleyn ( talk) 12:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Check to see if enough time has passed since previous nominations before renominating, and I'm not sure this shouldn't apply just because the previous outcome was no consensus.
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Previously a contested PROD; this list is an bloated WP:EXAMPLEFARM full of unsourced examples that have been left unaddressed since 2017.
Legendary sportspeople will somehow retire and their numbers will be retired, inevitably. So are going to be surprised at all by their inclusion on this list?
WP:LC, WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:LISTN also applies.
We got list of their inclusion to their halls of fame for their favourite sportspeople, most of those listed, so why should we need a WP:FANCRUFT list of examples for the most diehard fans? SpacedFarmer ( talk) 11:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
The Hollywood Reporter article used as a ref doesn't seem to mention Tremendum. I can't find enough WP:SIGCOV to meet WP:NCORP. BuySomeApples ( talk) 03:48, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
03:50, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
11:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. No clear consensus after 3 weeks of discussions and relistings. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 05:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
BLP of an Austrian football referee, unimproved since tagging for notability three months ago. Between the unsourced sections there is a lot of routine coverage in match reports and primary sources with nothing to support notability. Mccapra ( talk) 04:31, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Specific assessment of the available sources would probably be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
NotAGenious (
talk)
05:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
11:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR applies. ✗ plicit 11:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
They don't appear to meet WP:NBAND or WP:GNG. There is some coverage, but I am not sure it is significant enough. It was found non-notable and deleted at AfD in 2006, when our standards for inclusion were considerably lower. Boleyn ( talk) 09:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
06:54, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
11:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 11:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Notability not shown, indicated, no reliable sources. Speedy delete? BoraVoro ( talk) 10:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 11:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't establish that this meets WP:N, or a good WP:ATD. The manufacturer is also non-notable. Boleyn ( talk) 09:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 00:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Assistant prof with some early career awards, don't see how WP:NPROF is met. Unless I'm missing something, I don't think WP:GNG is met either. WP:TOOSOON at best. Kj cheetham ( talk) 09:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:37, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails to establish notability under WP:GNG. Even ignoring his recent work (a channel with 4.5m subscribers failing to get 100k views per video, and his last upload was 5 months ago), the article made it clear for almost 2 years that there's a lack of secondary sources in the article, and the lack of a biography, personal life, or even the bare minimum acknowledgement of his pedophilia scandal indicates that there's very few reputable secondary sources covering him, thus failing the notability guideline. Redolta 📱 Contribs 09:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Antauro Humala. Consensus for redirect, as GNG and SIGCOV not met and a need of stand alone article is not justified. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 05:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NORG. Coverage for this nascent political party seems to be all about Antauro Humala and not about the political party itself. scope_creep Talk 16:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Natg 19 (
talk)
02:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
08:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 02:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Delete This page has been flagged for notability for a decade, and I still don't believe that it has been established. I would like to see this page improved and am going to try to make some edits myself, but it has too many deep issues at the moment. PickleG13 ( talk) 23:49, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
05:00, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
08:42, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. — Ganesha811 ( talk) 16:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of this meeting WP:NBIO. A priest who died in a high-profile crash. Pl Wikipedia article is a bit longer but also has nothing suggesting notability (just an obituary). A posthumous award of Order of Polonia Restituta, likely mass-awarded to everyone who died in said tragic event (~90 people) is not enough. WP:ATD-R would be to redirect this to List of casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
08:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Qualifies ANYBIO amd BASIC. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 03:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of this meeting WP:NBIO. Non-notable minor bureaucrat/politician (Undersecretary of State in the Office of the President of the Republic of Poland) who died in a high-profile crash. Pl Wikipedia article is a bit longer but also has nothing suggesting notability (obits, plus minor coverage related to a minor scandal he was involved in shortly before his death). A posthumous award of Order of Polonia Restituta, likely mass-awarded to everyone who died in said tragic event (~90 people) is not enough. WP:ATD-R would be to redirect this to List of casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Subjects of encyclopedia articles must satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements. Wikipedia is not the place to memorialize deceased friends, relatives, acquaintances, or others who do not meet such requirements.But this person easily meets WP:ANYBIO#1 for the Polish and Portuguese state honors, and also meets WP:NBASIC, so NOTMEMORIAL is not violated. On top of that, I think there's substantial enough coverage that an article can be written about him in a standalone fashion, so I see no need to redirect or merge. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
08:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was draftify. Moved to draft per consensus. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 05:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Not a thing, just [Alpinism] by a different name. Article is also mostly composed of random quotes - not really encyclopedic. Article even states "The specialists may talk of pyreneism, himalaism, andenism, it refers to the same action of climbing mountains by their faces, by their ridges or by combining both." LegalSmeagolian ( talk) 20:33, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
08:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. While this isn't a G5, there is no one arguing in favor of its retention. Star Mississippi 14:50, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Honorary consulates typically aren’t notable, and this one seems to be no exception. It’s brand-new, and the coverage is either official or from Servare et Manere, the outfit of the consul himself, Marek Sobola. (Incidentally, both of those articles deserve scrutiny for rampant self-promotion.) Biruitorul Talk 07:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Romania has nine honorary consulates in Spain, eight in Britain, five in Italy and three in Sweden. It’s a pretty routine thing. It’s not going to have many in Czechia or Slovakia because there isn’t a large diaspora there. Notability is demonstrated via multiple independent sources, which has yet to happen. — Biruitorul Talk 18:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
2024-01 ✍️ create
The result was merge to Anica. I don't see any coherent, P&G-based objection to the proposed merger. Owen× ☎ 00:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
PROD removed. This name fails WP:NNAME and WP:GNG. Hardly any information or reliable sources found online. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk) 00:11, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:54, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are a lot of options being put forward here, and I'm not seeing a consensus yet. Also, as a courtesy note, there is no need to bold the word "reply" each time one replies to someone else; the line indentation serves the purpose of indicating which comments were being replied to.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
04:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Characters of the Tekken series#Lei Wulong. ✗ plicit 11:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Outside of one good reference, which is used in a quote box no less, the rest of the sources are honestly terrible, and I haven't been able to find anything else for the character. Even checking sources like Scholar just brings up a few small mentions but nothing with meat on them. This fails notability unfortunately. Kung Fu Man ( talk) 04:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. SIGCOV established. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 02:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails GNG and NGEO, no sources showing this meets WP:N with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth from WP:IS WP:RS. BEFORE found listings and name mentions in mill news, nothing meeting WP:SIGCOV for the subject. // Timothy :: talk 06:16, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion on the sources presented in this discussion in light of
WP:SIGCOV would be helpful in attaining a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
03:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. In AfD for three weeks and two relists. No consensus or helpful comments. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 02:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Appears to be a non-notable band that does not meet relevant notability guidelines ( WP:BAND). Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
NotAGenious (
talk)
18:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion around the extent that this article's subject is covered by extant sources would be helpful in attaining a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
03:19, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Lily (film). Discussion about renaming the target, if needed, can continue on the target's Talk page. Owen× ☎ 00:09, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Not yet notable per WP:FILMMAKER. A WP:BEFORE search for his name in English and Telugu only turns up routine coverage of the film, which claims to be the first children's film released nationally in India. Wikishovel ( talk) 11:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
18:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The film article presently exists at
Lily (film); more discussion around whether or not the proposed redirect is reasonable would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
03:18, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Discussion about a possible merger can continue on the article's Talk page. Owen× ☎ 00:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Include the two ships to Bordelais. BinaryBrainBug ( talk) 18:18, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
If there has been more than one ship with the same name, create a ship index page for the generic ship name.Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion on
policies and guidelines as they pertain to keeping this an independent SIA or merging it to a broader page would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
03:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 19:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Article has no references, with few non-primary sources when googling this topic (one of which being this article), therefore does not meet WP:NOTABILITY with the article providing little value even ignoring this. SoThisIsPeter ( talk) 15:27, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion on the extent of coverage by extant sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
03:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Unopposed after 3 weeks. Sandstein 19:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Last AfD over a year ago was no consensus. Relisting to gain some sort of consensus. Fails WP:NLIST. LibStar ( talk) 23:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:33, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
02:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Complex/ Rational 14:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Article reads like an advertisement. There are many parts of it that are uncited as well. Also, article is an orphan, and nothing links to Dominic Joshua Ngene as well, which is what the article should be titled anyway. Relativity 02:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Dr. Joshua’s entrepreneurial spirit ignited during his early career, where he gained invaluable experience within established financial institutionsand
With a storied career that has reshaped the investment landscape and enriched the lives of many, Dr. Joshua continues to chart new territories in fintech innovation and philanthropy) for every single section, and should have been tagged for G11. So I would vote Speedy Delete (it can still be tagged as G11, though I won't do it here since not all opinions in this AfD are for speedy deletion). VickKiang (talk) 02:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Per consensus, SIGCOV and notability present. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 02:47, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Potentially notable but as a
WP:BLP currently fails
WP:SIGCOV. The refs in the first two ref blocks are all Hunter Biden. Mostly passing mentions.
scope_creep
Talk
16:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
02:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete without prejudice to the creation of a list on this topic with a more consistent inclusion criterion. Owen× ☎ 00:01, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Essentially a WP:OR collection of " buildings which are likely to be considered odd, strange or weird to the average observer. " Fram ( talk) 16:05, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
"Selection criteria (also known as inclusion criteria or membership criteria) should be unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources. Avoid original or arbitrary criteria that would synthesize a list that is not plainly verifiable in reliable sources.". While, yes, you can point to a source and say "omg, this dude called this building weird! it goes on the list!", the very nature of such a tortured, artificial way that this list is trying to maintain inclusion criteria speaks to its fuzzy nature of exactly what should be on it. Most any sort of object is going to have unusual examples. We could just as easily come up with List of unusual cars, or animals, or sports, or just about anything. But none of these would be good lists. 35.139.154.158 ( talk) 15:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
"Selection criteria [...] should be unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources."(emphasis mine). 35.139.154.158 ( talk) 18:10, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
03:52, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The title aside, it would be nice to reach a consensus about whether the article meets our policies and guidelines for lists.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
01:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Sandstein 19:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
The referencing is mainly about the corporation with passing mentions only of Gillespie. One contains no mention of him at all. Those offering significant coverage are repetitive and not reliable sources. If he truly passes WP:BIO references must be found to verify that. Since none are here it appears to be a puff piece about him, bloated by the corporation's material. While a certain amount of corporate information is needed to illustrate any personal notability, I see insufficient to verify any and far too much about the corporation for this to be a biography. Fails WP:BIO and WP:V 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC).
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
01:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 16:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails to meet WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. She has not played any significant roles. The provided sources consist mainly of gossip and interviews. I couldn't find any GNG-worthy sources in BEFORE search. – DreamRimmer ( talk) 11:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk)
13:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
01:01, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 23:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
The only independent sourcing are a few sources mentioning the win of Botha (and of the four sources in the article, one is a Wordpress blog about Mandela day, and one is the Italian Athletics Federation, not an independent source but responsible for sending athletes to the championships), no actual coverage of the event as a whole, no WP:SUSTAINED coverage either. Fram ( talk) 11:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk)
13:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
01:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
written by someone paid to attend by IAAF– This is false, per the article:
His accommodation was paid for by the Colombian athletics federation.. He was of course allowed to attend by the IAAF, just as with any event held on private property, journalists can't simply trespass without permission. But he was never paid by the IAAF. The Colombian Athletics Federation had no role in organizing the World Youth Championships (much less the javelin throw) and the source is thus independent.
seems to be coverage of Botha rather than the event– This is incorrect, the article covers the other competitors in the event in addition to Botha. Of course, the article is focused on the winner, as nearly all sports competition coverage does. But the event as a whole is covered.
The travel and entrance fees of IAAF media affiliates to the event would of course be covered "courtesy the IAAF"– This isn't what I was responding to, I was responding to the assertion above that the News24 article was
written by someone paid to attend by IAAF. This is plainly false, and it was not stated in the article. Of course, the press does not have to pay for a ticket because they have a press pass, this is how media works at nearly all major events from concerts to festivals to sporting events. There is no evidence, however, that de Villier's travel was covered by World Athletics, and for what it's worth I would be very surprised to learn that is the case based on what I know about world athletics championships. Either way, being granted a press pass as a journalist in no way constitutes being "paid to attend by the IAAF", otherwise we would have to consider all press pass coverage invalid for Wikipedia. Based on the LinkedIn profile you linked, it seems like de Villers only briefly contracted for World Athletics and was never employed by them, and his work for them started after the 2015 World Youth Championships. I think that his work for News24 in relation to this subject is independent.
The CAF/RFEA is not independent of the athletes it sponsors– This would be true if the athletes that CAF/RFEA sponsors were hand-picked by the organizations based on the personal biases of administration officials. This isn't how it works in athletics, the purpose of Royal Spanish Athletics Federation (for example) is simply to promote and govern the sport of athletics in Spain. They would not be independent in matters relating to the organization itself, but they are independent of the subject when the subject is "boys' javelin throw at the 2017 World Youth Championships" because they had no role in organizing that event and no stake in its success.
Paul Botha, spiesgooier van die Hoërskool Rustenburg, en Werner Visser, diskusgooier van die Hoërskool Zwartkop in Pretoria, is verantwoordelik vir dié twee goue medaljes.
Botha het die spies met sy tweede gooi 78.49 m ver geslinger om die goud met die beste poging van sy loopbaan tot dusver te verower. Die ander Suid-Afrikaner in die eindronde van die spiesgooi, Hercules van Vuuren van die Bethlehem Voortrekker Hoërskool, moes met die vyfde plek tevrede wees. Hy het die spies 76.04 m ver laat grondvat.
Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability. This list of competitors provides a clear navigational aid to the athletics coverage on Wikipedia – as noted above, the original reason I created it was to provide a backlink from Manu Quijera to the competition that was a major part of his career, and event result list articles are the established practice on Wikipedia to do so. In addition, the redlink list is useful for others who may want to create new articles in the future.
IAAF member federations are part of the IAAF– This isn't true, according to the "member federations" page, World Athletics federations are merely "affiliated with" and not part of the larger organization. I think the question we should be asking when it comes to independence is, does the author or publisher have any role in organizing the event? In the case of this source, one of the 11 used in the article, I think the answer is "no": "SA javelin duo impress". News24. Retrieved 2024-01-16.
"their athletes", as the athletes are not employed by the governing organizations) compete in. To make this two-degree leap is like saying that Elvis Presley wouldn't be an independent source on Kevin Bacon, because they are two degrees apart.
"main source of coverage"for Manu Quijera, but it does represent one major starting point in his career, so it would be very useful to have a backlink from the event back to his page along with all of the other athlete pages.
. The purposes of World Athletics include to:Members are not some random association from a particular country, they are required to be the sole national governing body for athletics in their country and are responsible for all athletes therein. Members are obligated to
1.1.1. encourage and support the development, organisation and delivery of Athletics
worldwide through its Area Associations and Member Federations (Article 4.1(g)
of the Constitution); and,
1.1.2. support and assist Area Associations and Member Federations to promote and
develop Athletics (Article 4.1(h) of the Constitution).
1.2. The Member Federations are the Members of World Athletics (Article 6.1 of the
Constitution) and as such, they enjoy rights and have obligations to World Athletics under the Constitution (Articles 8 and 9 of the Constitution).
"compete in at least one International Competition or one Area Championships in the period between meetings of Ordinary Congress”and to
organise in each calendar year at least one national senior championships. Member Federations are not independent of the IAAF.The purpose of the accommodations link was to demonstrate the type of form used by the press for receiving accreditation and accommodation. They use the same boilerplate form for all IAAF competitions, I didn't bother to track down the exact one. And anyway, we know de Villiers' accommodations were paid for by the LOC for the games, which is as close as you can get to the org actually running the event. JoelleJay ( talk) 03:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Team sites and governing sports bodies are not considered independent of their players. I don't think that applies to this article, because the subject of the article is not the players, it is the competition "Boys' javelin throw at the 2015 World Youth Championships". NSPORT doesn't say anything about member federations not being independent with respect to competitions, and I don't think that view is at odds with Wikipedia guidelines, let alone intractably so.
highest authorityin the IAAF, in fact they are often at odds with World Athletics i.e. in the case of Russian Athletics Federation. For a similar situation with World Aquatics, a U.S. court found that
"a reasonable trier of fact could find FINA and its member federations are separate economic actors", i.e. if member federations are separate economic actors, then it would stand to reason they are financially independent.
Team sites and governing sports bodies are not considered independent of their playersis in reference to players representing a specific athletics team as opposed to athletes competing independently that happen to reside in the same country as some World Athletics member federation. I think that I do understand the guidelines, I am trying to interpret them as objectively as I can.
a reasonable trier of fact could find FINA and its member federations are separate economic actors. So, I would agree that World Athletics member federations are financially independent from each other for the purposes of Wikipedia.
we know de Villiers was accommodated by the event organizer– To be clear, the article in question only says,
"Ockert attended the IAAF World Youth Championships courtesy of the IAAF. His accommodation was paid for by the Colombian athletics federation."That seems to say he was not accommodated by the IAAF but by the Colombian Athletics Federation instead. Also, I am not sure what this "accommodation" means, and I couldn't find any Wikipedia policies or guidelines saying that if a journalist is "accommodated" then his coverage is automatically deemed non-independent.
Original reporting– I don't think this is original as the results are widely reported, 2.
News reports– I don't think this list is a news report but an encylopedic record of competition results surrounded by context. I don't think the World Youth Championships are covered in a "routine" way, it only happens once every two years and the coverage is more often focused on the details of the specific events with commentary rather than using generic boilerplate. 3
Who's who– The subjects are covered in order of importance to the overall topic, with the medallists discussed most often and the other competitors being given less coverage. 4.
Celebrity gossip and diary– Not applicable to this article.
The result was Speedily deleted under WP:A7 Mach61 ( talk) 01:02, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Autobiography, no secondary sources found to establish notability. Thriftycat Talk • Contribs 00:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:04, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Beyond confirmation it exists, I don't see any significant coverage of the position and none found either in my searches. This has been tagged since 2008, with little to no improvements made. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please address the offline sources mentioned above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
00:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
unrelated references and statuses not found in rhesus. Redivy ( talk) 22:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
23:57, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
This education program appears to have a very regional focus, only in a specific region in Australia, that does not meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria. According to my online research, there are not enough reliable, independent sources, WP:NRV, that cover this program in detail. Chiserc ( talk) 23:55, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 00:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Demon Slayer
This article is about an unreleased movie. It exists in both draft space and article space. Maybe some editors think that creating both an article and a draft prevents moving the article into draft space. Articles on unreleased movies only satisfy film notability criteria if production itself has been notable. There is nothing in this article about production. The articles are mostly about the schedule for theatrical release of the film including a world tour of theatrical viewings. Do the sources refer to production or contribute to film notability? No. A check of the references shows that they are mostly just announcements of dates of release.
Reference Number | Reference | Comments | Independent | Significant | Reliable | Secondary |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | www.cbr.com/demon-slayer-hashira-training-arc-info/ | Appears tp be a fanzine | Sort of | Yes | Probably | No |
2 | deadline.com | Announcement of broadcast release date | No | No | Yes | No |
3 | Yahoo.com | Announcement of theatrical release date | No | No | Probably | No |
4 | www.crunchyroll.com | Another announcement of the date of release | No | No | Probably | No |
5 | kimetsu.com | Announcement in Japanese of world tour screening | No | No | Probably | No |
The draft is all right because it is a draft, and can be updated after the film is released and reviewed. The current article should be deleted. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:33, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
23:51, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR applies. ✗ plicit 00:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Previous declined prod. Whilst it has some notable alumni, could not find significant coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL. LibStar ( talk) 22:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:14, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
23:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Per improvements made and sources identified Star Mississippi 01:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
This got caught up in my cleanup of promotional articles and likely sockpuppetry, but after a second look I saw that this article had a longer history so I've restored and sent it here for review. Fails WP:SPORTBASIC, the only sources are a local blog, WP:ROUTINE injury report, and a fanzine. WP:BEFORE showed nothing that would contribute to notability. The Wordsmith Talk to me 18:09, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Hereford FC Matchday Announcer since 2002 🎤according to his own website, [1] making him not independent of the subject. Your second source is a local news source, which isn't necessarily disqualifying but it is a routine injury report. Neither of them are sufficient to demonstrate notability. As far as pre-internet sources, sure they might exist and might give WP:SIGCOV. But we don't have enough sources available to satisfy WP:SPORTBASIC and give us the presumption of notability and existence of sources. The Wordsmith Talk to me 20:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
23:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
No sources establishing notability, and seems to have been written by the school itself from various IP address accounts. Beland ( talk) 23:44, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:26, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable television show that fails both WP:GNG and WP:NTV, and has been tagged as being unreferenced for over eleven years. Aspects ( talk) 14:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
23:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Poorly sourced BLP footballer. The closest thing to WP:SIGCOV that I came across was a couple sentences of coverage here, as well as this transactional announcement. JTtheOG ( talk) 23:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Regardless of whether it should have been draftified or not, consensus is clear among established editors. Star Mississippi 02:01, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Article was moved to draft space by an experienced editor, then moved back to article space by another editor. The subject doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG, it's difficult to find sources online because there is a better known glass artist of the same name. Current sources are of questionable quality (one is on a gallery website, another is an interview). The two inline citations were to Apple Music and Spotify, suggesting the article is here to promote the artist. Sionk ( talk) 23:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails
WP:NPOL as the mayor of a city municipality of under 400k people. There is no evidence of
WP:SIGCOV contributing to
WP:GNG.
JTtheOG (
talk)
22:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Naga Wrestling Championship per Nom and as a viable ATD Star Mississippi 02:01, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Brief BLP of the winner of a very small state wrestling championship, sourced only to local/regional press. Redirecting to Naga Wrestling Championship would be a decent ATD. Mccapra ( talk) 22:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Detailed list spun out of another article last year, but almost entirely unsourced. Nobody at NPP has wanted to mark it as patrolled, and I suppose it would be possible to go through all the claims in all the fields in the table and look for sources, but nobody has volunteered to do that. Meanwhile we have an effectively unsourced article in mainspace, which doesn’t seem satisfactory. Not sure what to do with it so bringing here for consensus. Mccapra ( talk) 21:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Delete unless massively improved. An effectively unsourced list is not acceptable in mainspace, especially without any evidence that it meets WP:NLIST. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:49, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Non notable RL competition. Fails WP:GNG. J Mo 101 ( talk) 20:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Journalist whose career doesn't appear to be notable enough for Wikipedia. Roles at Vogue significant, but I don't think enough. Very few internal links. Hard to find external references. Seaweed ( talk) 20:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Rugby League Conference. RL0919 ( talk) 21:21, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Very minor amateur RL league which only existed briefly. Fails WP:GNG as no significant coverage exists. J Mo 101 ( talk) 20:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. RL0919 ( talk) 21:25, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON for a director with no feature films in their filmography. The award received by Food on the Road is not notable. Sources one and three are about the film 'E Valayam' and two is the short film directed by the subject. Unable to find anything on WP:Before. Looks like the career and Personal life sections are original research. Fails GNG. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 20:01, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 00:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the WP:LISTN and goes against WP:TG to boot as a list page. Let'srun ( talk) 19:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Notability of lists is based on the group; (2) all the transactions, news, etc. that make up these teams are very widely covered; (3) there are independent websites that track all CFL teams' rosters, e.g. TSN and footballdb; (4) your citation of WP:TG notes that
Templates should not be used to create lists of links to other articles when a category, list page, or "See also" section list can perform the same function– there is nothing else that can perform this function; and (5) if all else fails, then I think we should WP:IAR keep this as it is immensely useful to both readers and editors. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 20:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:52, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the WP:LISTN, is merely a long list of non notable people while fails the GNG. Let'srun ( talk) 19:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. RL0919 ( talk) 21:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
A list and topic that I do not believe passes the WP:GNG or WP:NLIST. I've done some searches, and I can find no evidence that the topic of fictional brewers or breweries have been discussed in reliable sources as an actual topic or as a group or set. (Though I did learn that there is a real-life brewery named the "Fiction Beer Company"). The sources included in this article are only on a couple of the specific entries, not on the topic as a whole, and most of them are either non-reliable, or barely mention the actual beer brewing. Rorshacma ( talk) 18:46, 31 January 2024 (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. Harley Poe does not appear to make sense as an ATD as band members went on to other blue-linked bands, but editors may create one at their discetion. Star Mississippi 02:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Unsourced since 2013 and I can't find enough significant coverage that would show they need their own article. The only point in their favour (as far as I can tell, anyway) is that they released albums on Tooth & Nail Records, a significant indie label, but I'm not sure that's enough. Suntooooth, it/he ( talk/ contribs) 06:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
06:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
18:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 02:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Could not find indepth coverage either in google news or books. Mainly 1 line mentions, like getting support from the Chicago Bears. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar ( talk) 05:32, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
06:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
17:51, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Not all !votes here made strong policy-based arguments, but the added material does appear to be significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. — Ganesha811 ( talk) 16:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Appears to fail WP:GNG. Uhooep ( talk) 00:24, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to get an assessment on recent contributions to the article
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
05:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final Relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
17:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Characters of the Street Fighter series. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:58, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
A large part of this character's reception is strictly about how professional players regarded her in Street Fighter V...and not even specifically in articles for her. While gameplay can be a factor for a character's notability, it doesn't show an overarching importance beyond the game itself, or any impact towards it. Other mentions are trivial, not really establishing any importance or examination. Kung Fu Man ( talk) 04:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
17:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Notability tag removed and I do not see the issue addressed so coming here to get consensus. Fails WP:NFILM. Classic example of notability based on announcements and press releases. Announced in 2017, official title in 2022, filming began in September 2023 and an announcement of release for August 2024. References show it is filming but nothing showing it is substantially complete and per NFILM, we have seen many films delayed so nothing to tell this is actually going to be released in August. Many references are unreliable or churnalism so fails WP:GNG as well. Would recommend draftify but previous film related draftified articles are simply moved back to mainspace shortly thereafter and we wind up right back here so not sure if it is an acceptable WP:ATD. CNMall41 ( talk) 20:23, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Delete or Draftify. This is another case of a movie article created way ahead of undecided release date and not even reached post-production stage. Too early to have an article in namespace. RangersRus ( talk) 03:13, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Redirect or Merge to Cop Universe as film is still under production and a part of that franchise that is still not covered under post-production. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 18:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Delete - as per nomination. Krishna Dahal ( talk) 04:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Keep - deleting/draftifying major Indian films such as this only gives ammunition to socks to create more of a mess, as we've seen countless times before. The film is currently filming, just like major Hollywood films as Venom 3 or MI:8 (both of which were also delayed many times). The article, of course, can be improved with better referencing so tags should stay. Krimuk2.0 ( talk) 09:01, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While numerically there appears to be a majority for 'keep' here, a number of the keep opinions express arguments which aren't particularly strong in policy. A couple also suggest draft or merge/redirect as alternatives. Relisting to establish a clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk)
09:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed,
Rosguill
talk
17:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:53, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG. The best example of coverage cited thus far is this coverage in Latvian, but it does not make a case for GNG in itself; I was unable to find additional independent coverage other than interviews, database entries, and trivial mentions in match writeups, having searched in English/Latvian and also Russian. signed, Rosguill talk 16:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG. Coverage is limited to affiliated press, and even then is light on biographical detail. I was unable to find additional coverage searching online and on Newspapers.com signed, Rosguill talk 16:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Delete – I am unable to find sufficient coverage of the subject to meet GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG, and we don't appear to have an SNG for Taekwondo or general martial arts, so it's not clear whether a silver medal at the European Games should establish notability. Coverage online in English and Azerbaijani is limited to brief mentions in writeups of Azerbaijani athletes' performance, but does not have significant biographical coverage of the subject. signed, Rosguill talk 16:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was draftify. ✗ plicit 00:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet
WP:GNG, although this is hampered by the relative inaccessibility of Burmese sources. Still, we have virtually nothing to go on here: the one secondary source cited
is a blog of dubious reliability and further refers to Naang Naang not as a women but as a female-fronted shan rock group
. signed,
Rosguill
talk
16:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Drafty for now – While she may be notable, there is a lack of sources due to being a Shan language singer. The time of her popularity predates the media era, making information only available in printed newspapers. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any online sources in very few Shan language media, a situation comparable to the lack of media in the Tibet region. Despite this, I have alerted this AfD to editors in the Shan Wikipedia. Therefore, I opt to vote for the draft rather than deletion. 1.47.14.130 ( talk) 19:38, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable politician, fails WP:NPOL. Routine coverage of plea by the subject on the Uniform Civil Code in India and other slams to other notable subject like Kangana Ranaut, see [5] and Arvind Kejriwal, see [6] -- QuadriSyedSahab( T · C 15:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. — Ganesha811 ( talk) 16:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Do we need another list of winners when many of these articles about races taking place there have their own list or is part of it, thus making this completely unnecessary. Many others are not necessary to the most ardent fans such as feeder series. Unnecessary WP:FANCRUFT list that is only good for the most obsessive motorsport fans, also WP:LC and WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Also, not notable enough to pass WP:LISTN. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 15:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge and redirect to Crawley Town F.C. as the most sensible option from the replies. The history is preserved so relevant content can be copied over.. David Gerard ( talk) 18:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. Single event news. scope_creep Talk 14:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Per WP:V, "Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. Additionally, quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by inline citations." In application of this core policy, this AfD must be closed as "delete" irrespective of any local consensus to the contrary. As has been pointed out, this unsourced content has been challenged by being tagged as needing sources since 2010. 14 years is far more than enough time to sources. Because this has not been done, not even during this AfD, the content must now be deleted. This does not prevent a sourced recreation of the article. Sandstein 16:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't establish that this meets WP:N. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, and unreferenced for longer, so hopefully we can get this resolved. Boleyn ( talk) 13:23, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
14:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Consensus lean towards keep. SIGCOV is met. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 05:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Successful but I wasn't sure it was enough to meet WP:PROF or WP:GNG. Has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, so hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 13:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 14:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
non-notable, promotional, running mentions only User4edits ( talk) 13:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) asilvering ( talk) 03:38, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
It's borderline, but I couldn't find sources to be sure it meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 13:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 14:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Non notable business. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Nothing clearing WP:CORPDEPTH. Massively bombarded with routine announcements, regurgitated PR, listings and trivial "best" type pieces. duffbeerforme ( talk) 12:22, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:44, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:06, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Potentially fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. References are atrocious. Been on WP since 2011 and never been effectively references. Currently satisfies WP:V. scope_creep Talk 11:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
12:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 14:12, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Successful career, but I couldn't establish he meets notability as an author or an actor. Boleyn ( talk) 12:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Emma Bonino. Editors interested in merging sourced material from this page's edit history to Emma Bonino are encouraged to do so. (non-admin closure) asilvering ( talk) 03:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
It exists and there are some sources, but not the level of independent, reliable sources to show it meets WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Has been in CAT:NN for 14 years.
1st AfD closed as no consensus due to low participation. Given how long this has been in CAT:NN I think we really need to decide what the consensus is here. Boleyn ( talk) 12:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Check to see if enough time has passed since previous nominations before renominating, and I'm not sure this shouldn't apply just because the previous outcome was no consensus.
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Previously a contested PROD; this list is an bloated WP:EXAMPLEFARM full of unsourced examples that have been left unaddressed since 2017.
Legendary sportspeople will somehow retire and their numbers will be retired, inevitably. So are going to be surprised at all by their inclusion on this list?
WP:LC, WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:LISTN also applies.
We got list of their inclusion to their halls of fame for their favourite sportspeople, most of those listed, so why should we need a WP:FANCRUFT list of examples for the most diehard fans? SpacedFarmer ( talk) 11:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
The Hollywood Reporter article used as a ref doesn't seem to mention Tremendum. I can't find enough WP:SIGCOV to meet WP:NCORP. BuySomeApples ( talk) 03:48, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
03:50, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
11:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. No clear consensus after 3 weeks of discussions and relistings. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 05:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
BLP of an Austrian football referee, unimproved since tagging for notability three months ago. Between the unsourced sections there is a lot of routine coverage in match reports and primary sources with nothing to support notability. Mccapra ( talk) 04:31, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Specific assessment of the available sources would probably be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
NotAGenious (
talk)
05:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
11:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR applies. ✗ plicit 11:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
They don't appear to meet WP:NBAND or WP:GNG. There is some coverage, but I am not sure it is significant enough. It was found non-notable and deleted at AfD in 2006, when our standards for inclusion were considerably lower. Boleyn ( talk) 09:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
06:54, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
11:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 11:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Notability not shown, indicated, no reliable sources. Speedy delete? BoraVoro ( talk) 10:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ✗ plicit 11:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't establish that this meets WP:N, or a good WP:ATD. The manufacturer is also non-notable. Boleyn ( talk) 09:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 00:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Assistant prof with some early career awards, don't see how WP:NPROF is met. Unless I'm missing something, I don't think WP:GNG is met either. WP:TOOSOON at best. Kj cheetham ( talk) 09:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:37, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails to establish notability under WP:GNG. Even ignoring his recent work (a channel with 4.5m subscribers failing to get 100k views per video, and his last upload was 5 months ago), the article made it clear for almost 2 years that there's a lack of secondary sources in the article, and the lack of a biography, personal life, or even the bare minimum acknowledgement of his pedophilia scandal indicates that there's very few reputable secondary sources covering him, thus failing the notability guideline. Redolta 📱 Contribs 09:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Antauro Humala. Consensus for redirect, as GNG and SIGCOV not met and a need of stand alone article is not justified. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 05:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NORG. Coverage for this nascent political party seems to be all about Antauro Humala and not about the political party itself. scope_creep Talk 16:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Natg 19 (
talk)
02:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
08:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 02:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Delete This page has been flagged for notability for a decade, and I still don't believe that it has been established. I would like to see this page improved and am going to try to make some edits myself, but it has too many deep issues at the moment. PickleG13 ( talk) 23:49, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
05:00, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
08:42, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. — Ganesha811 ( talk) 16:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of this meeting WP:NBIO. A priest who died in a high-profile crash. Pl Wikipedia article is a bit longer but also has nothing suggesting notability (just an obituary). A posthumous award of Order of Polonia Restituta, likely mass-awarded to everyone who died in said tragic event (~90 people) is not enough. WP:ATD-R would be to redirect this to List of casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
08:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Qualifies ANYBIO amd BASIC. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 03:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of this meeting WP:NBIO. Non-notable minor bureaucrat/politician (Undersecretary of State in the Office of the President of the Republic of Poland) who died in a high-profile crash. Pl Wikipedia article is a bit longer but also has nothing suggesting notability (obits, plus minor coverage related to a minor scandal he was involved in shortly before his death). A posthumous award of Order of Polonia Restituta, likely mass-awarded to everyone who died in said tragic event (~90 people) is not enough. WP:ATD-R would be to redirect this to List of casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Subjects of encyclopedia articles must satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements. Wikipedia is not the place to memorialize deceased friends, relatives, acquaintances, or others who do not meet such requirements.But this person easily meets WP:ANYBIO#1 for the Polish and Portuguese state honors, and also meets WP:NBASIC, so NOTMEMORIAL is not violated. On top of that, I think there's substantial enough coverage that an article can be written about him in a standalone fashion, so I see no need to redirect or merge. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
08:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was draftify. Moved to draft per consensus. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 05:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Not a thing, just [Alpinism] by a different name. Article is also mostly composed of random quotes - not really encyclopedic. Article even states "The specialists may talk of pyreneism, himalaism, andenism, it refers to the same action of climbing mountains by their faces, by their ridges or by combining both." LegalSmeagolian ( talk) 20:33, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
08:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. While this isn't a G5, there is no one arguing in favor of its retention. Star Mississippi 14:50, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Honorary consulates typically aren’t notable, and this one seems to be no exception. It’s brand-new, and the coverage is either official or from Servare et Manere, the outfit of the consul himself, Marek Sobola. (Incidentally, both of those articles deserve scrutiny for rampant self-promotion.) Biruitorul Talk 07:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Romania has nine honorary consulates in Spain, eight in Britain, five in Italy and three in Sweden. It’s a pretty routine thing. It’s not going to have many in Czechia or Slovakia because there isn’t a large diaspora there. Notability is demonstrated via multiple independent sources, which has yet to happen. — Biruitorul Talk 18:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
2024-01 ✍️ create
The result was merge to Anica. I don't see any coherent, P&G-based objection to the proposed merger. Owen× ☎ 00:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
PROD removed. This name fails WP:NNAME and WP:GNG. Hardly any information or reliable sources found online. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk) 00:11, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:54, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are a lot of options being put forward here, and I'm not seeing a consensus yet. Also, as a courtesy note, there is no need to bold the word "reply" each time one replies to someone else; the line indentation serves the purpose of indicating which comments were being replied to.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
04:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Characters of the Tekken series#Lei Wulong. ✗ plicit 11:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Outside of one good reference, which is used in a quote box no less, the rest of the sources are honestly terrible, and I haven't been able to find anything else for the character. Even checking sources like Scholar just brings up a few small mentions but nothing with meat on them. This fails notability unfortunately. Kung Fu Man ( talk) 04:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. SIGCOV established. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 02:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails GNG and NGEO, no sources showing this meets WP:N with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth from WP:IS WP:RS. BEFORE found listings and name mentions in mill news, nothing meeting WP:SIGCOV for the subject. // Timothy :: talk 06:16, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion on the sources presented in this discussion in light of
WP:SIGCOV would be helpful in attaining a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
03:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. In AfD for three weeks and two relists. No consensus or helpful comments. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 02:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Appears to be a non-notable band that does not meet relevant notability guidelines ( WP:BAND). Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
NotAGenious (
talk)
18:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion around the extent that this article's subject is covered by extant sources would be helpful in attaining a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
03:19, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Lily (film). Discussion about renaming the target, if needed, can continue on the target's Talk page. Owen× ☎ 00:09, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Not yet notable per WP:FILMMAKER. A WP:BEFORE search for his name in English and Telugu only turns up routine coverage of the film, which claims to be the first children's film released nationally in India. Wikishovel ( talk) 11:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
18:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The film article presently exists at
Lily (film); more discussion around whether or not the proposed redirect is reasonable would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
03:18, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Discussion about a possible merger can continue on the article's Talk page. Owen× ☎ 00:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Include the two ships to Bordelais. BinaryBrainBug ( talk) 18:18, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
If there has been more than one ship with the same name, create a ship index page for the generic ship name.Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion on
policies and guidelines as they pertain to keeping this an independent SIA or merging it to a broader page would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
03:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 19:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Article has no references, with few non-primary sources when googling this topic (one of which being this article), therefore does not meet WP:NOTABILITY with the article providing little value even ignoring this. SoThisIsPeter ( talk) 15:27, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion on the extent of coverage by extant sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
03:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Unopposed after 3 weeks. Sandstein 19:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Last AfD over a year ago was no consensus. Relisting to gain some sort of consensus. Fails WP:NLIST. LibStar ( talk) 23:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:33, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
02:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Complex/ Rational 14:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Article reads like an advertisement. There are many parts of it that are uncited as well. Also, article is an orphan, and nothing links to Dominic Joshua Ngene as well, which is what the article should be titled anyway. Relativity 02:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Dr. Joshua’s entrepreneurial spirit ignited during his early career, where he gained invaluable experience within established financial institutionsand
With a storied career that has reshaped the investment landscape and enriched the lives of many, Dr. Joshua continues to chart new territories in fintech innovation and philanthropy) for every single section, and should have been tagged for G11. So I would vote Speedy Delete (it can still be tagged as G11, though I won't do it here since not all opinions in this AfD are for speedy deletion). VickKiang (talk) 02:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Per consensus, SIGCOV and notability present. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 02:47, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Potentially notable but as a
WP:BLP currently fails
WP:SIGCOV. The refs in the first two ref blocks are all Hunter Biden. Mostly passing mentions.
scope_creep
Talk
16:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
78.26 (
spin me /
revolutions)
02:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete without prejudice to the creation of a list on this topic with a more consistent inclusion criterion. Owen× ☎ 00:01, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Essentially a WP:OR collection of " buildings which are likely to be considered odd, strange or weird to the average observer. " Fram ( talk) 16:05, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
"Selection criteria (also known as inclusion criteria or membership criteria) should be unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources. Avoid original or arbitrary criteria that would synthesize a list that is not plainly verifiable in reliable sources.". While, yes, you can point to a source and say "omg, this dude called this building weird! it goes on the list!", the very nature of such a tortured, artificial way that this list is trying to maintain inclusion criteria speaks to its fuzzy nature of exactly what should be on it. Most any sort of object is going to have unusual examples. We could just as easily come up with List of unusual cars, or animals, or sports, or just about anything. But none of these would be good lists. 35.139.154.158 ( talk) 15:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
"Selection criteria [...] should be unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources."(emphasis mine). 35.139.154.158 ( talk) 18:10, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Wordsmith
Talk to me
03:52, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The title aside, it would be nice to reach a consensus about whether the article meets our policies and guidelines for lists.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
01:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Sandstein 19:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
The referencing is mainly about the corporation with passing mentions only of Gillespie. One contains no mention of him at all. Those offering significant coverage are repetitive and not reliable sources. If he truly passes WP:BIO references must be found to verify that. Since none are here it appears to be a puff piece about him, bloated by the corporation's material. While a certain amount of corporate information is needed to illustrate any personal notability, I see insufficient to verify any and far too much about the corporation for this to be a biography. Fails WP:BIO and WP:V 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC).
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
01:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Sandstein 16:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Fails to meet WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. She has not played any significant roles. The provided sources consist mainly of gossip and interviews. I couldn't find any GNG-worthy sources in BEFORE search. – DreamRimmer ( talk) 11:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk)
13:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
01:01, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 23:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
The only independent sourcing are a few sources mentioning the win of Botha (and of the four sources in the article, one is a Wordpress blog about Mandela day, and one is the Italian Athletics Federation, not an independent source but responsible for sending athletes to the championships), no actual coverage of the event as a whole, no WP:SUSTAINED coverage either. Fram ( talk) 11:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk)
13:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
01:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
written by someone paid to attend by IAAF– This is false, per the article:
His accommodation was paid for by the Colombian athletics federation.. He was of course allowed to attend by the IAAF, just as with any event held on private property, journalists can't simply trespass without permission. But he was never paid by the IAAF. The Colombian Athletics Federation had no role in organizing the World Youth Championships (much less the javelin throw) and the source is thus independent.
seems to be coverage of Botha rather than the event– This is incorrect, the article covers the other competitors in the event in addition to Botha. Of course, the article is focused on the winner, as nearly all sports competition coverage does. But the event as a whole is covered.
The travel and entrance fees of IAAF media affiliates to the event would of course be covered "courtesy the IAAF"– This isn't what I was responding to, I was responding to the assertion above that the News24 article was
written by someone paid to attend by IAAF. This is plainly false, and it was not stated in the article. Of course, the press does not have to pay for a ticket because they have a press pass, this is how media works at nearly all major events from concerts to festivals to sporting events. There is no evidence, however, that de Villier's travel was covered by World Athletics, and for what it's worth I would be very surprised to learn that is the case based on what I know about world athletics championships. Either way, being granted a press pass as a journalist in no way constitutes being "paid to attend by the IAAF", otherwise we would have to consider all press pass coverage invalid for Wikipedia. Based on the LinkedIn profile you linked, it seems like de Villers only briefly contracted for World Athletics and was never employed by them, and his work for them started after the 2015 World Youth Championships. I think that his work for News24 in relation to this subject is independent.
The CAF/RFEA is not independent of the athletes it sponsors– This would be true if the athletes that CAF/RFEA sponsors were hand-picked by the organizations based on the personal biases of administration officials. This isn't how it works in athletics, the purpose of Royal Spanish Athletics Federation (for example) is simply to promote and govern the sport of athletics in Spain. They would not be independent in matters relating to the organization itself, but they are independent of the subject when the subject is "boys' javelin throw at the 2017 World Youth Championships" because they had no role in organizing that event and no stake in its success.
Paul Botha, spiesgooier van die Hoërskool Rustenburg, en Werner Visser, diskusgooier van die Hoërskool Zwartkop in Pretoria, is verantwoordelik vir dié twee goue medaljes.
Botha het die spies met sy tweede gooi 78.49 m ver geslinger om die goud met die beste poging van sy loopbaan tot dusver te verower. Die ander Suid-Afrikaner in die eindronde van die spiesgooi, Hercules van Vuuren van die Bethlehem Voortrekker Hoërskool, moes met die vyfde plek tevrede wees. Hy het die spies 76.04 m ver laat grondvat.
Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability. This list of competitors provides a clear navigational aid to the athletics coverage on Wikipedia – as noted above, the original reason I created it was to provide a backlink from Manu Quijera to the competition that was a major part of his career, and event result list articles are the established practice on Wikipedia to do so. In addition, the redlink list is useful for others who may want to create new articles in the future.
IAAF member federations are part of the IAAF– This isn't true, according to the "member federations" page, World Athletics federations are merely "affiliated with" and not part of the larger organization. I think the question we should be asking when it comes to independence is, does the author or publisher have any role in organizing the event? In the case of this source, one of the 11 used in the article, I think the answer is "no": "SA javelin duo impress". News24. Retrieved 2024-01-16.
"their athletes", as the athletes are not employed by the governing organizations) compete in. To make this two-degree leap is like saying that Elvis Presley wouldn't be an independent source on Kevin Bacon, because they are two degrees apart.
"main source of coverage"for Manu Quijera, but it does represent one major starting point in his career, so it would be very useful to have a backlink from the event back to his page along with all of the other athlete pages.
. The purposes of World Athletics include to:Members are not some random association from a particular country, they are required to be the sole national governing body for athletics in their country and are responsible for all athletes therein. Members are obligated to
1.1.1. encourage and support the development, organisation and delivery of Athletics
worldwide through its Area Associations and Member Federations (Article 4.1(g)
of the Constitution); and,
1.1.2. support and assist Area Associations and Member Federations to promote and
develop Athletics (Article 4.1(h) of the Constitution).
1.2. The Member Federations are the Members of World Athletics (Article 6.1 of the
Constitution) and as such, they enjoy rights and have obligations to World Athletics under the Constitution (Articles 8 and 9 of the Constitution).
"compete in at least one International Competition or one Area Championships in the period between meetings of Ordinary Congress”and to
organise in each calendar year at least one national senior championships. Member Federations are not independent of the IAAF.The purpose of the accommodations link was to demonstrate the type of form used by the press for receiving accreditation and accommodation. They use the same boilerplate form for all IAAF competitions, I didn't bother to track down the exact one. And anyway, we know de Villiers' accommodations were paid for by the LOC for the games, which is as close as you can get to the org actually running the event. JoelleJay ( talk) 03:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Team sites and governing sports bodies are not considered independent of their players. I don't think that applies to this article, because the subject of the article is not the players, it is the competition "Boys' javelin throw at the 2015 World Youth Championships". NSPORT doesn't say anything about member federations not being independent with respect to competitions, and I don't think that view is at odds with Wikipedia guidelines, let alone intractably so.
highest authorityin the IAAF, in fact they are often at odds with World Athletics i.e. in the case of Russian Athletics Federation. For a similar situation with World Aquatics, a U.S. court found that
"a reasonable trier of fact could find FINA and its member federations are separate economic actors", i.e. if member federations are separate economic actors, then it would stand to reason they are financially independent.
Team sites and governing sports bodies are not considered independent of their playersis in reference to players representing a specific athletics team as opposed to athletes competing independently that happen to reside in the same country as some World Athletics member federation. I think that I do understand the guidelines, I am trying to interpret them as objectively as I can.
a reasonable trier of fact could find FINA and its member federations are separate economic actors. So, I would agree that World Athletics member federations are financially independent from each other for the purposes of Wikipedia.
we know de Villiers was accommodated by the event organizer– To be clear, the article in question only says,
"Ockert attended the IAAF World Youth Championships courtesy of the IAAF. His accommodation was paid for by the Colombian athletics federation."That seems to say he was not accommodated by the IAAF but by the Colombian Athletics Federation instead. Also, I am not sure what this "accommodation" means, and I couldn't find any Wikipedia policies or guidelines saying that if a journalist is "accommodated" then his coverage is automatically deemed non-independent.
Original reporting– I don't think this is original as the results are widely reported, 2.
News reports– I don't think this list is a news report but an encylopedic record of competition results surrounded by context. I don't think the World Youth Championships are covered in a "routine" way, it only happens once every two years and the coverage is more often focused on the details of the specific events with commentary rather than using generic boilerplate. 3
Who's who– The subjects are covered in order of importance to the overall topic, with the medallists discussed most often and the other competitors being given less coverage. 4.
Celebrity gossip and diary– Not applicable to this article.
The result was Speedily deleted under WP:A7 Mach61 ( talk) 01:02, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Autobiography, no secondary sources found to establish notability. Thriftycat Talk • Contribs 00:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:04, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Beyond confirmation it exists, I don't see any significant coverage of the position and none found either in my searches. This has been tagged since 2008, with little to no improvements made. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please address the offline sources mentioned above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
00:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)