The result was keep. The Keep arguments are weak here but they are the consensus and I see no support for Deletion other than the proposal by the nominator. Editors are encouraged to help improve this article so it meets Wikipedia's standards for articles on political parties. Liz Read! Talk! 22:24, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Unrepresented minor political party lacking "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" required by WP:ORGCRIT. Has has no secondary sources since creation nearly two decades ago. AusLondonder ( talk) 10:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:31, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Only primary sources provided. A search for sources did not yield coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL. LibStar ( talk) 23:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Lee Navigation. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 02:36, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Inferior duplicate of a more complete template already transcludef at River Lea. No need for a standalone list. RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk) 13:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 07:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of notability under GNG or SNG. A defunct local football club. North8000 ( talk) 14:35, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 03:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 16:13, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Yes, the closure was reverted and the changes to the article as well. This was not a good discussion for an NAC closure as opinion is divided.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
It is notable that F.C. has left discernible footprints on Google, as evidenced by available information. Their players were acknowledged as Soccer Stars of the Year. It should be noted that not every country enjoyed international coverage during their era, unlike the extensive coverage available today. DIV IN E 05:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:47, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Delete: as non-notable. Only one published work as per this source. Nirva20 ( talk) 23:20, 12 March 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 12:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPROF. The only possible claim of notability is via the Atlantis theory. But it barely seems influential enough to satisfy NPROF#1, as he is not a professional historian and the Antiquity article has only 19 citations according to the Google Scholar. It is also somewhat dubious whether his theory really motivated the excavations, since it is not discussed in the peer-reviewed articles, Refs. 7-9. In Wikipedia, his theory is covered by Atlantis location hypotheses#Andalusia, which seems like WP:DUE coverage. Jähmefyysikko ( talk) 16:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:31, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO, WP:CREATIVE, WP:BIO or WP:GNG. I can find only passing mentions of him in reliable English and Hindi sources, nearly always in connection with his notable son Himesh Reshammiya. I did find this quote from him in a RS book, but that's effectively a WP:Primary source. He's worked with some notable people on some notable films, but on Wikipedia notability is not inherited. We could redirect to Himesh Reshammiya as an ATD, but I'm bringing it to AFD for discussion. Wikishovel ( talk) 11:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 16:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist, as there is an unbolded Keep vote in these comments, I don't think Soft Deletion is appropriate. It would be helpful to get a response from the article creator
User:ArjunKR92 and a review of the sources brought up in this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:14, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. Sometimes reslitings can prompt a consensus as editors discuss the fate of an article. Just a note, do not strike out any "votes"/arguments unless the editor is a confirmed sockpuppet of a block-evading editor. Being an inexperienced editor, especially inexperienced with commenting at AFDs, doesn't warrant having ones opinion struck. Liz Read! Talk! 17:46, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP: GNG and WP: SIGCOV. There were questionable sources cited and they neither say why the article is notable. Otuọcha ( talk) 09:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Vandalism from Otuọcha ( talk · contribs). Administrators have been informed. -- BobVillars ( talk) 09:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 17:04, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Opinion is divided so let's try one more relist so this doesn't need to close as No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:04, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
In 2012, Forbes considered her one of the 20 most influential young African women.And looking at this source from Forbes, there were none like that. All the Best! Otuọcha ( talk) 01:58, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
one of the 20 most influential young African women.
Extended content
|
---|
Yswara, a luxury tea company based in Johannesburg, South Africa, was launched in 2012. Its founder and CEO, Swaady Martin-Leke, a national of Côte d’Ivoire, hand-selects the tea from the various African countries, to incorporate into her company’s collection of 23 varieties of tea. This curator of precious African teas wants to make her offering a prestigious product through educating customers on the quality and benefits of African teas, by creating an experience that includes African tea rituals, African-made tea paraphernalia and elegant packaging. Martin-Leke sources Yswara’s tea from South Africa, Malawi, Rwanda and Kenya with plans to source from Burundi, Cameroon, Madagascar, Malawi, Rwanda and Zimbabwe. All her staff are women and the suppliers must be 75% female-owned or managed. Martin-Leke is already shipping her luxury tea around the world via her online store and online partners like africacandy.com. |
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:08, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
As it stands - this article makes no sense. The College is described as closing in 2019 - but as offering courses. It is not listed as a College in the local district website (Hapur). Can't find contemporary online references. Newhaven lad ( talk) 17:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:58, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:52, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Case of WP:BLP1E: "Being in the news does not in itself mean that someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article". Per BLP1E we should avoid having articles on individuals that reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event. Also relevant is WP:SUSPECT: "For individuals who are not public figures...editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed or is accused of having committed a crime, unless a conviction has been secured." AusLondonder ( talk) 17:14, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Criticism of Facebook#Downtime and outages. This is how I've decided to close this discussion as an ATD. What I would recommend is to follow the suggestion mentioned several times here to create a Meta services outages article and then content from this article-turned-redirect can be Merged there. I think that is a better use of editor time than to contest this AFD closure. Liz Read! Talk! 22:37, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
recentism. fails a ten year test and probably a one year test as well. ltb d l ( talk) 17:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
relies on other news reports as primary sources. That is exactly why it does apply. And as you say, the article is built on primary sources, which is why it does not meet GNG either. Sources should be secondary for notability. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 23:31, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Okay, it's a week later and we need to see more of a consensus. Right now we have editors arguing for Delete, Redirect/Merge (but with different target articles suggested) and Wait which I'm assuming is actually a Keep argument. This article was created fast and AFD'd fast, has the passage of time clarified the situation any?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 21:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Sourcing currently in the article is one forum (MSE) thread, two blog-posts, one youtube video from a math popularizer, and one page that is hosted on a university website but is of unclear authorship, which describes this notation as "so young that one could conceive of it as still gestating in the womb and "new and as-yet-unaccepted by the general mathematics community". Google Scholar finds no hits for the topic (searching for both the title of the article and "'triangle notation' logarithm"). The PROD rationale "Does not appear to meet WP:GNG. No significant coverage found." certainly describes this sourcing; it was reverted by Kvng, while adding one of the two blog posts, which doesn't suggest the presence of sources of appropriate quality. Maybe some day someone will write some RS about this subject. JBL ( talk) 21:05, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. I think that some editors new to the English Wikipedia need to read up on SIGCOV and notability standards on this project. Also, next time, focus on sources, not each other. Bickering with others never persuades other editors that you are presenting a strong argument. It's a distraction from what you are trying to achieve. Liz Read! Talk! 07:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails GNG. Secondary sources lack significant coverage and fail to provide substantial information about the individual beyond routine mentions or mere references to their name. (fails WP:SIGCOV) It is evident that the examples of source citations in the article also fails the requirements. Moreover, the facts presented in the article, including the individual's activities, positions held, and awards received, do not pass the criterias of WP:NBLP guidelines and also, even with a little research, it becomes clear that these facts are not significant. Sura Shukurlu ( talk) 19:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Sufficient sourcing to meet GNG. Though searches such as "Elxan Bəşirov" or "Elkhan Bashirov pdf" don't yield many results? -- Jasulan.T TT me 14:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
The person's name is included only as a participant and is not of significance that would make this article encyclopedic. Redivy ( talk) 23:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:54, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
I don't see WP:NBUSINESS satisfied. Paradoctor ( talk) 20:01, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:59, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. after sources added. Looks like it could use some pruning though. Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Former Disneyland attraction. WP:GNG is very weak. Sourcing is 90% Youtube, with one footnote to a passing mention in a news story and another mention in "The Disneyland Encyclopedia". Per WP:ATD-R, I suggest redirecting this to Tomorrowland (Disney Parks). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
asilvering (
talk) 20:37, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. after improvements have been made to the article. Liz Read! Talk! 22:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG. DonaldD23 talk to me 13:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: with reminder to avoid personal attacks against the nom, thank you.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
asilvering (
talk) 20:37, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:56, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a preparatory school, and not found sources to add. The existing references are to the school's website. I cannot see three independent, reliable, secondary refs, and so don't think the school meets WP:GNG, WP:NCORP or WP:NSCHOOL. Tacyarg ( talk) 21:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 00:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP, all citations to otherwise reliable sources read more like press releases or advertising than actual reporting. AlexandraAVX ( talk) 17:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 22:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 21:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Just a suburban development built around 1960. Searching is pretty hopeless given commonality of the name. Mangoe ( talk) 20:26, 12 March 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. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 20:58, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 20:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. The question is not whether the proposal suggested in the article was made but whether the content of the article can be verified through reliable sources. If those reliable sources are located in the future, this article can be reconsidered but right now, it appears that the sourcing doesn't support the claims of the article. Liz Read! Talk! 19:26, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Most of the relevant information on the Order-State of Burgundy is either not cited or comes from discussion board. The main citations are to discussion boards which are not considered Reliable sources and violate policies of No original research and Verifiability. Their are no reliable sources fo information I can find on it online for the topic. It appears to be related more to an online game " Hearts of Iron" Myotus ( talk) 19:31, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 19:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORGCRIT, current sources are either WP:PRIMARY or do not provide WP:SIGCOV. A BEFORE also doesn't help but turn out profiles, etc. NAN and Guardian Nigeria pieces are obviously press releases. Also, generally fails WP:GNG. Thus, non-notable entity. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 18:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Beyoncé#2022–present: Trilogy Project. as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 18:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
This is just a WP:CATEGORY-like article that will list the three albums of the trilogy. There is nothing in this article that is not already covered in the other two. ℛonherry ☘ 18:22, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 18:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Cannot find anything of note online Newhaven lad ( talk) 17:19, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 18:44, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't find any significant English sources, and the Chinese sources that I found seemed to be the company's financial reports. QuietCicada chirp 17:09, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 02:17, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
To preface, I'm going off my observations from the first 2 sources in descending order. The third and fourth refs, "Journal of the United Service Institution of India" and "Selections from the records of the government of Punjab" are WP:RAJ era sources and thus not allowed. The last source seems to be merely a Google snapshot.
Here is what Hari Ram Gupta says of the battle: "Having failed at Peshawar, Sayyid Ahmad planned to seize Attock fort from the Sikhs. Its possession by him would automatically clear Hazara and Peshawar from the Sikhs, and it would open the gateway for the invasion of the Panjab. Khadi Khan of Hund secretly alerted the Sikh commander of the fort, and the plan fell through. Sayyid Ahmad, in anger attacked the village Haidru, and put to the sword all the inhabitants, both Hindus and Muslims. On hearing this news Hari Singh Nalwa suddenly appeared on the scene and massacred nearly three-fourths of Khalifa's Ghazis. Sayyid Ahmad managed to escape to the west of the Indus."
Rishi Singh says: "It appears that even when he seemed successful, Syed Ahmad began losing his control over the tribal leadership. Many tribal chiefs began betraying him. For instance, at the time of taking over the fort of Attock, Khadi Khan of Hund alerted the Sikh commander, Hari Singh Nalwa, who with his 20,000 men attacked Syed Ahmad’s forces and killed three-fourths of the Khalifa’s Ghazis".
I think this content would be better suited in the exploits and military campaigns of both Hari Singh Nalwa and Syed Ahmed Barelvi, I don't think the amount of coverage in both sources, which are small paragraphs, justifies an entire article, though I could be wrong. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 15:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps this could be redirected to the page Military campaigns of Hari Singh Nalwa? The battle is already listed there- [11], and I think that on its own is sufficient. An entire article is superflous. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 16:24, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Withdrawn by nominator: Best suited for a RFD to Military campaigns of Hari Singh Nalwa instead. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 02:02, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of programs broadcast by Game Show Network#Former original programming. Star Mississippi 02:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:NTV DonaldD23 talk to me 23:07, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To analyze the secondary sources, especially with respect to depth.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 01:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 15:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
The subject lacks substantial coverage in reputable third-party sources and fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:MUSICBIO. The existing sources do not establish notability effectively. Additionally, the source from middleeasteye.net is an interview, and its reliability is questionable, infomigrants.net is not reliable, and the article from The Guardian seems to rely heavily on hearsay. A WP:BEFORE search yielded no additional reliable sources beyond those currently cited. GSS 💬 14:53, 5 March 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) 15:20, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a TV guide, lacks any sources whatsoever. Let'srun ( talk) 14:41, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous
WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:58, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Geschichte ( talk) 09:23, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Local politician, does not meet the criteria at WP:NPOL. Sourcing (or lack of) is purely routine local media coverage. 𝔓420° 𝔓Holla 14:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:15, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
The entirety of this article is written through primary, non WP:HISTRS sources. Sources like the Suraj Granth and Macaullife were explicitly deprecated here- [12]. Harinder Singh Mehboob's work is self published and the author is a poet, not a historian. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 12:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 02:12, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Not noteworthy of an incident to have its own article- it appears to be a minor scuffle with minimal casualties, so the title including "Battle" seems to be a misnomer. From what I can tell, this event was the casus belli for a larger battle which is described here- [13] and per Surjit Singh Gandhi's book- [14]. This event is far better suited being accosted as the casus belli of the next battle wich actually seems to be consequential. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 12:50, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Withdrawn by nominator: Best suited for a redirect as per Moriwen. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 01:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete per CSD G11. (non-admin closure) 🔥 Jala peño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 08:16, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Blatant WP:PROMO article written entirely by User:Jesuscalderon as a personal résumé. Sources do not even come close to WP:GNG. InDimensional ( talk) 11:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:30, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a headteacher and classicist, and added a passing reference in the local paper. I cannot see coverage to meet WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:NAUTHOR. Tacyarg ( talk) 11:01, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:POLITICIAN for the lack of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. There is no reference to winning an election or being in a position of power in another party to qualify as a political activist WP:POLITICIAN ~ Spworld2 ( talk) 10:55, 12 March 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 11:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Not yet notable per WP:WEB. It is used as a source in the RUSI and Bellingcat pages cited, but not actually mentioned. In a WP:BEFORE search I could only find passing mentions of the site in three BusinessWorld articles , citing it for the number of shipyards in the Philippines in 2021: [15] [16] [17]. Wikishovel ( talk) 09:45, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
This article seems to be about an imaginary event. It confuses two different things - (i) the outbreak of the Belgian Revolution in a series of riots in Brussels on 25 August 1830 and (ii) a genuine "siege" (or at least a battle inside Brussels) in mid-September 1830 known as the "September Days". Given the lack of sourced content and the basic confusion about scope which prevents improvement, I propose that deletion of this article seems the most straightforward way to remediate. — Brigade Piron ( talk) 08:21, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of European films#Monaco. Owen× ☎ 17:05, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
A list containing just three films, none of which have articles. References section is empty. Does not meet WP:NLIST AusLondonder ( talk) 08:03, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Regardless of a G5, it's snowing. Star Mississippi 01:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and I'm unable to find WP:GNG-level sources for this person. - MPGuy2824 ( talk) 06:56, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (Notability can be demonstrated.) ( non-admin closure)
Does not seem to satisfy GNG. I couldn't find any independent sources that provide significant coverage of Lego pneumatics in general outside of hobby blogs. A few magazines reported on a Lego pneumatic V8 engine (e.g. [18]) but they do not discuss the pneumatics in detail. This should be redirected to Lego Technic#Pneumatics. Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 05:31, 12 March 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 06:30, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 05:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 06:29, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Delete: as non-notable. Fails ARTIST, SIGCOV and GNG. Nirva20 ( talk) 04:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC) Nirva20 ( talk) 04:57, 12 March 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 12:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
I am not seeing any actual significant coverage of her that would meet the WP:GNG. Lone ref is a 2010 biography published by her then-employer, and I am not finding much significant chatter about her in the time since. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:47, 12 March 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 04:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 04:29, 12 March 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 04:50, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 04:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Sources only mention Rad in passing, do not support notability. Violates NOTDIRECTORY. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 00:50, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:29, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
All of the sources in the article are primary. I can't find any secondary sources on the subject, let alone ones that would be reliable enough to establish notability. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 01:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:23, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 08:16, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The current sources do not establish notability. The only two secondary sources I could find were this and this, neither of which are reliable sources. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 01:04, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Per former nominations. Since the former deletion, there is no source for passing WP: GNG and WP: NMUSIC. Otuọcha ( talk) 00:55, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relistiing to assess content changes since nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:21, 12 March 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 12:43, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
I could not find any significant coverage under its name or "Superweeks". Fails WP:ORG. LibStar ( talk) 00:26, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:18, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. The Keep arguments are weak here but they are the consensus and I see no support for Deletion other than the proposal by the nominator. Editors are encouraged to help improve this article so it meets Wikipedia's standards for articles on political parties. Liz Read! Talk! 22:24, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Unrepresented minor political party lacking "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" required by WP:ORGCRIT. Has has no secondary sources since creation nearly two decades ago. AusLondonder ( talk) 10:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:31, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Only primary sources provided. A search for sources did not yield coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL. LibStar ( talk) 23:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Lee Navigation. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 02:36, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Inferior duplicate of a more complete template already transcludef at River Lea. No need for a standalone list. RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk) 13:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 07:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of notability under GNG or SNG. A defunct local football club. North8000 ( talk) 14:35, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 03:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein 16:13, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Yes, the closure was reverted and the changes to the article as well. This was not a good discussion for an NAC closure as opinion is divided.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
It is notable that F.C. has left discernible footprints on Google, as evidenced by available information. Their players were acknowledged as Soccer Stars of the Year. It should be noted that not every country enjoyed international coverage during their era, unlike the extensive coverage available today. DIV IN E 05:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:47, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Delete: as non-notable. Only one published work as per this source. Nirva20 ( talk) 23:20, 12 March 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 12:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPROF. The only possible claim of notability is via the Atlantis theory. But it barely seems influential enough to satisfy NPROF#1, as he is not a professional historian and the Antiquity article has only 19 citations according to the Google Scholar. It is also somewhat dubious whether his theory really motivated the excavations, since it is not discussed in the peer-reviewed articles, Refs. 7-9. In Wikipedia, his theory is covered by Atlantis location hypotheses#Andalusia, which seems like WP:DUE coverage. Jähmefyysikko ( talk) 16:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:31, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO, WP:CREATIVE, WP:BIO or WP:GNG. I can find only passing mentions of him in reliable English and Hindi sources, nearly always in connection with his notable son Himesh Reshammiya. I did find this quote from him in a RS book, but that's effectively a WP:Primary source. He's worked with some notable people on some notable films, but on Wikipedia notability is not inherited. We could redirect to Himesh Reshammiya as an ATD, but I'm bringing it to AFD for discussion. Wikishovel ( talk) 11:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 16:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist, as there is an unbolded Keep vote in these comments, I don't think Soft Deletion is appropriate. It would be helpful to get a response from the article creator
User:ArjunKR92 and a review of the sources brought up in this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:14, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. Sometimes reslitings can prompt a consensus as editors discuss the fate of an article. Just a note, do not strike out any "votes"/arguments unless the editor is a confirmed sockpuppet of a block-evading editor. Being an inexperienced editor, especially inexperienced with commenting at AFDs, doesn't warrant having ones opinion struck. Liz Read! Talk! 17:46, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP: GNG and WP: SIGCOV. There were questionable sources cited and they neither say why the article is notable. Otuọcha ( talk) 09:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Vandalism from Otuọcha ( talk · contribs). Administrators have been informed. -- BobVillars ( talk) 09:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 17:04, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Opinion is divided so let's try one more relist so this doesn't need to close as No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:04, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
In 2012, Forbes considered her one of the 20 most influential young African women.And looking at this source from Forbes, there were none like that. All the Best! Otuọcha ( talk) 01:58, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
one of the 20 most influential young African women.
Extended content
|
---|
Yswara, a luxury tea company based in Johannesburg, South Africa, was launched in 2012. Its founder and CEO, Swaady Martin-Leke, a national of Côte d’Ivoire, hand-selects the tea from the various African countries, to incorporate into her company’s collection of 23 varieties of tea. This curator of precious African teas wants to make her offering a prestigious product through educating customers on the quality and benefits of African teas, by creating an experience that includes African tea rituals, African-made tea paraphernalia and elegant packaging. Martin-Leke sources Yswara’s tea from South Africa, Malawi, Rwanda and Kenya with plans to source from Burundi, Cameroon, Madagascar, Malawi, Rwanda and Zimbabwe. All her staff are women and the suppliers must be 75% female-owned or managed. Martin-Leke is already shipping her luxury tea around the world via her online store and online partners like africacandy.com. |
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:08, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
As it stands - this article makes no sense. The College is described as closing in 2019 - but as offering courses. It is not listed as a College in the local district website (Hapur). Can't find contemporary online references. Newhaven lad ( talk) 17:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:58, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:52, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Case of WP:BLP1E: "Being in the news does not in itself mean that someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article". Per BLP1E we should avoid having articles on individuals that reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event. Also relevant is WP:SUSPECT: "For individuals who are not public figures...editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed or is accused of having committed a crime, unless a conviction has been secured." AusLondonder ( talk) 17:14, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Criticism of Facebook#Downtime and outages. This is how I've decided to close this discussion as an ATD. What I would recommend is to follow the suggestion mentioned several times here to create a Meta services outages article and then content from this article-turned-redirect can be Merged there. I think that is a better use of editor time than to contest this AFD closure. Liz Read! Talk! 22:37, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
recentism. fails a ten year test and probably a one year test as well. ltb d l ( talk) 17:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
relies on other news reports as primary sources. That is exactly why it does apply. And as you say, the article is built on primary sources, which is why it does not meet GNG either. Sources should be secondary for notability. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 23:31, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Okay, it's a week later and we need to see more of a consensus. Right now we have editors arguing for Delete, Redirect/Merge (but with different target articles suggested) and Wait which I'm assuming is actually a Keep argument. This article was created fast and AFD'd fast, has the passage of time clarified the situation any?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 21:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Sourcing currently in the article is one forum (MSE) thread, two blog-posts, one youtube video from a math popularizer, and one page that is hosted on a university website but is of unclear authorship, which describes this notation as "so young that one could conceive of it as still gestating in the womb and "new and as-yet-unaccepted by the general mathematics community". Google Scholar finds no hits for the topic (searching for both the title of the article and "'triangle notation' logarithm"). The PROD rationale "Does not appear to meet WP:GNG. No significant coverage found." certainly describes this sourcing; it was reverted by Kvng, while adding one of the two blog posts, which doesn't suggest the presence of sources of appropriate quality. Maybe some day someone will write some RS about this subject. JBL ( talk) 21:05, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. I think that some editors new to the English Wikipedia need to read up on SIGCOV and notability standards on this project. Also, next time, focus on sources, not each other. Bickering with others never persuades other editors that you are presenting a strong argument. It's a distraction from what you are trying to achieve. Liz Read! Talk! 07:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails GNG. Secondary sources lack significant coverage and fail to provide substantial information about the individual beyond routine mentions or mere references to their name. (fails WP:SIGCOV) It is evident that the examples of source citations in the article also fails the requirements. Moreover, the facts presented in the article, including the individual's activities, positions held, and awards received, do not pass the criterias of WP:NBLP guidelines and also, even with a little research, it becomes clear that these facts are not significant. Sura Shukurlu ( talk) 19:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Sufficient sourcing to meet GNG. Though searches such as "Elxan Bəşirov" or "Elkhan Bashirov pdf" don't yield many results? -- Jasulan.T TT me 14:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
The person's name is included only as a participant and is not of significance that would make this article encyclopedic. Redivy ( talk) 23:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:54, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
I don't see WP:NBUSINESS satisfied. Paradoctor ( talk) 20:01, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:59, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. after sources added. Looks like it could use some pruning though. Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Former Disneyland attraction. WP:GNG is very weak. Sourcing is 90% Youtube, with one footnote to a passing mention in a news story and another mention in "The Disneyland Encyclopedia". Per WP:ATD-R, I suggest redirecting this to Tomorrowland (Disney Parks). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
asilvering (
talk) 20:37, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. after improvements have been made to the article. Liz Read! Talk! 22:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG. DonaldD23 talk to me 13:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: with reminder to avoid personal attacks against the nom, thank you.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
asilvering (
talk) 20:37, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:56, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a preparatory school, and not found sources to add. The existing references are to the school's website. I cannot see three independent, reliable, secondary refs, and so don't think the school meets WP:GNG, WP:NCORP or WP:NSCHOOL. Tacyarg ( talk) 21:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 00:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP, all citations to otherwise reliable sources read more like press releases or advertising than actual reporting. AlexandraAVX ( talk) 17:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 22:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 20:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 21:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Just a suburban development built around 1960. Searching is pretty hopeless given commonality of the name. Mangoe ( talk) 20:26, 12 March 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. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 20:58, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 20:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. The question is not whether the proposal suggested in the article was made but whether the content of the article can be verified through reliable sources. If those reliable sources are located in the future, this article can be reconsidered but right now, it appears that the sourcing doesn't support the claims of the article. Liz Read! Talk! 19:26, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Most of the relevant information on the Order-State of Burgundy is either not cited or comes from discussion board. The main citations are to discussion boards which are not considered Reliable sources and violate policies of No original research and Verifiability. Their are no reliable sources fo information I can find on it online for the topic. It appears to be related more to an online game " Hearts of Iron" Myotus ( talk) 19:31, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 19:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORGCRIT, current sources are either WP:PRIMARY or do not provide WP:SIGCOV. A BEFORE also doesn't help but turn out profiles, etc. NAN and Guardian Nigeria pieces are obviously press releases. Also, generally fails WP:GNG. Thus, non-notable entity. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 18:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Beyoncé#2022–present: Trilogy Project. as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 18:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
This is just a WP:CATEGORY-like article that will list the three albums of the trilogy. There is nothing in this article that is not already covered in the other two. ℛonherry ☘ 18:22, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 18:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Cannot find anything of note online Newhaven lad ( talk) 17:19, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 18:44, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't find any significant English sources, and the Chinese sources that I found seemed to be the company's financial reports. QuietCicada chirp 17:09, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 02:17, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
To preface, I'm going off my observations from the first 2 sources in descending order. The third and fourth refs, "Journal of the United Service Institution of India" and "Selections from the records of the government of Punjab" are WP:RAJ era sources and thus not allowed. The last source seems to be merely a Google snapshot.
Here is what Hari Ram Gupta says of the battle: "Having failed at Peshawar, Sayyid Ahmad planned to seize Attock fort from the Sikhs. Its possession by him would automatically clear Hazara and Peshawar from the Sikhs, and it would open the gateway for the invasion of the Panjab. Khadi Khan of Hund secretly alerted the Sikh commander of the fort, and the plan fell through. Sayyid Ahmad, in anger attacked the village Haidru, and put to the sword all the inhabitants, both Hindus and Muslims. On hearing this news Hari Singh Nalwa suddenly appeared on the scene and massacred nearly three-fourths of Khalifa's Ghazis. Sayyid Ahmad managed to escape to the west of the Indus."
Rishi Singh says: "It appears that even when he seemed successful, Syed Ahmad began losing his control over the tribal leadership. Many tribal chiefs began betraying him. For instance, at the time of taking over the fort of Attock, Khadi Khan of Hund alerted the Sikh commander, Hari Singh Nalwa, who with his 20,000 men attacked Syed Ahmad’s forces and killed three-fourths of the Khalifa’s Ghazis".
I think this content would be better suited in the exploits and military campaigns of both Hari Singh Nalwa and Syed Ahmed Barelvi, I don't think the amount of coverage in both sources, which are small paragraphs, justifies an entire article, though I could be wrong. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 15:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps this could be redirected to the page Military campaigns of Hari Singh Nalwa? The battle is already listed there- [11], and I think that on its own is sufficient. An entire article is superflous. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 16:24, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Withdrawn by nominator: Best suited for a RFD to Military campaigns of Hari Singh Nalwa instead. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 02:02, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of programs broadcast by Game Show Network#Former original programming. Star Mississippi 02:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:NTV DonaldD23 talk to me 23:07, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To analyze the secondary sources, especially with respect to depth.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 01:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 15:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
The subject lacks substantial coverage in reputable third-party sources and fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:MUSICBIO. The existing sources do not establish notability effectively. Additionally, the source from middleeasteye.net is an interview, and its reliability is questionable, infomigrants.net is not reliable, and the article from The Guardian seems to rely heavily on hearsay. A WP:BEFORE search yielded no additional reliable sources beyond those currently cited. GSS 💬 14:53, 5 March 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) 15:20, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a TV guide, lacks any sources whatsoever. Let'srun ( talk) 14:41, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous
WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:58, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Geschichte ( talk) 09:23, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Local politician, does not meet the criteria at WP:NPOL. Sourcing (or lack of) is purely routine local media coverage. 𝔓420° 𝔓Holla 14:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:15, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
The entirety of this article is written through primary, non WP:HISTRS sources. Sources like the Suraj Granth and Macaullife were explicitly deprecated here- [12]. Harinder Singh Mehboob's work is self published and the author is a poet, not a historian. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 12:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 02:12, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Not noteworthy of an incident to have its own article- it appears to be a minor scuffle with minimal casualties, so the title including "Battle" seems to be a misnomer. From what I can tell, this event was the casus belli for a larger battle which is described here- [13] and per Surjit Singh Gandhi's book- [14]. This event is far better suited being accosted as the casus belli of the next battle wich actually seems to be consequential. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 12:50, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Withdrawn by nominator: Best suited for a redirect as per Moriwen. Southasianhistorian8 ( talk) 01:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete per CSD G11. (non-admin closure) 🔥 Jala peño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 08:16, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Blatant WP:PROMO article written entirely by User:Jesuscalderon as a personal résumé. Sources do not even come close to WP:GNG. InDimensional ( talk) 11:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:30, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a headteacher and classicist, and added a passing reference in the local paper. I cannot see coverage to meet WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:NAUTHOR. Tacyarg ( talk) 11:01, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:POLITICIAN for the lack of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. There is no reference to winning an election or being in a position of power in another party to qualify as a political activist WP:POLITICIAN ~ Spworld2 ( talk) 10:55, 12 March 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 11:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Not yet notable per WP:WEB. It is used as a source in the RUSI and Bellingcat pages cited, but not actually mentioned. In a WP:BEFORE search I could only find passing mentions of the site in three BusinessWorld articles , citing it for the number of shipyards in the Philippines in 2021: [15] [16] [17]. Wikishovel ( talk) 09:45, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 11:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
This article seems to be about an imaginary event. It confuses two different things - (i) the outbreak of the Belgian Revolution in a series of riots in Brussels on 25 August 1830 and (ii) a genuine "siege" (or at least a battle inside Brussels) in mid-September 1830 known as the "September Days". Given the lack of sourced content and the basic confusion about scope which prevents improvement, I propose that deletion of this article seems the most straightforward way to remediate. — Brigade Piron ( talk) 08:21, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of European films#Monaco. Owen× ☎ 17:05, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
A list containing just three films, none of which have articles. References section is empty. Does not meet WP:NLIST AusLondonder ( talk) 08:03, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Regardless of a G5, it's snowing. Star Mississippi 01:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and I'm unable to find WP:GNG-level sources for this person. - MPGuy2824 ( talk) 06:56, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (Notability can be demonstrated.) ( non-admin closure)
Does not seem to satisfy GNG. I couldn't find any independent sources that provide significant coverage of Lego pneumatics in general outside of hobby blogs. A few magazines reported on a Lego pneumatic V8 engine (e.g. [18]) but they do not discuss the pneumatics in detail. This should be redirected to Lego Technic#Pneumatics. Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 05:31, 12 March 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 06:30, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 05:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 06:29, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Delete: as non-notable. Fails ARTIST, SIGCOV and GNG. Nirva20 ( talk) 04:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC) Nirva20 ( talk) 04:57, 12 March 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 12:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
I am not seeing any actual significant coverage of her that would meet the WP:GNG. Lone ref is a 2010 biography published by her then-employer, and I am not finding much significant chatter about her in the time since. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:47, 12 March 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 04:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 04:29, 12 March 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 04:50, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 04:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Sources only mention Rad in passing, do not support notability. Violates NOTDIRECTORY. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 00:50, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:29, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
All of the sources in the article are primary. I can't find any secondary sources on the subject, let alone ones that would be reliable enough to establish notability. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 01:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:23, 12 March 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. Liz Read! Talk! 08:16, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The current sources do not establish notability. The only two secondary sources I could find were this and this, neither of which are reliable sources. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 01:04, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Per former nominations. Since the former deletion, there is no source for passing WP: GNG and WP: NMUSIC. Otuọcha ( talk) 00:55, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relistiing to assess content changes since nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:21, 12 March 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 12:43, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
I could not find any significant coverage under its name or "Superweeks". Fails WP:ORG. LibStar ( talk) 00:26, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:18, 12 March 2024 (UTC)