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 03:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Couldn't find any sources for this show, there are none in the article right now. Niafied ( talk) 04:09, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
04:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Jake Wartenberg ( talk) 13:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails
WP:GNG and
notability guidelines for organizations; the only source in the article is a primary source connected to the organization. Additionally, I don't think
this is in-depth coverage we're looking to estabilsh notability! ~
Tails
Wx (
🐾,
me!)
02:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:34, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Deletion on the basis of consensus in so small a field might be doubtful, but the fact that the article also qualifies for speedy deletion as created by a block-evading editor (using both an account & IP editing), and arguably also as promotional removes any doubt. JBW ( talk) 21:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
No notability upon WP:BEFORE. Doesn't meet GNG or NME 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 13:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
02:23, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We really need a lot more editors participating in AFD discussions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 21:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
This appears to be a clear case of WP:AUTOBIO. None of the subject's work appears outstanding, which means he fails to meet WP:AUTHOR. Additionally, there is a lack of significant coverage in WP:RS, further failing to meet the basic WP:GNG. Moreover, the BLP seems overly promotional and is written by SPAs Urdulibrary ( talk · contribs) Hammad.anwar ( talk · contribs) Sibyl12drip ( talk · contribs) — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 13:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Keep. The article needs work, including the addition of reliable citations. However, a quick search in the Wikipedia Library turned out a ton of reliable citations proving this author's notability. This includes reviews in places like Publishers Weekly ( link 1 and 2), Kirkus ( link) and many other places. The subject also has an entry in Baker & Taylor Author Biographies. All in all, easily meets Wikipedia's author notability standards. -- SouthernNights ( talk) 21:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
02:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Same rationale as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Road signs in Lesotho. It's a WP:NOTGALLERY violation apparently by intention. There are tons of these articles that don't appear to be attempts at creating an encyclopedia article at all, but are just making a space to put 100+ images. There's already a place for that, and it's on Commons. GMG talk 10:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Part of a bundled AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:48, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Czech First League#Media coverage. Liz Read! Talk! 02:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, not a single source. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:45, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided. How do "Delete" voters think about the possibility of a Redirect or Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I initially tagged this for UPE for cleanup but after it was challenged by two SPAs, and at the request of one, I dug further into cleanup. The issue is that the references, other than this, are not reliable to show notability. Everything is mentions, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, press releases, churnalism, interviews, or otherwise unreliable. I removed some WP:FAKEREFerences prior but kept everything else in tact so the AfD could be judged based on how it sits currently. CNMall41 ( talk) 04:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This article must be added with citations available in the public domain and be made available. It’s a KEEP. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Fixing001 (
talk •
contribs) 08:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC) struck sock vote --
CNMall41 (
talk)
22:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Here are just some of the articles that are published where the actor is talked and discussed in a positive prominent light and not merely in mentionary terms. This merely are a few articles from only one of the indian publications, Times of India, TOI Entertainment.
Again, all this issue of notability was only brought by the editor who flagged the article, when was requested on the Talk page to remove the paid templates as there was no citation of proof for payment by the artist in discussion for a period of two months or so. I still am not clear why is it happening here, where the article on this actor in discussion can easily be expanded with reliable reference and citations that are available on the public domain.
My perspective -
The India media is suffering with the malady of copying and publishing information from one source to another and is suffocating genuine talents and films with the issue of paid marketing and publicity. If Wikipedia doesn’t provide a platform like its own of credible acknowledgement to authentic artists/talents, soon must find it surfeit with articles on Arts & Entertainment , that are already influenced and published under bias and discreet funding from production houses. Why are we not calling out the ones overtly known ? As for this article, this feels like a pitiful hassling over an unjust removal of a credible and relevant indian talent.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Centrepiece12 (
talk •
contribs) struck sock vote
Dreamy Jazz
talk to me |
my contributions
22:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For policy based input
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete: I went through all the sources cited in the article. Can't find any that satisfy reliability + independence + significant coverage. Most of the sources are about the movies the subject played a role in, with trivial mentions of him interspersed. I doubt the notability of the movies too, These are sponsored stories [1] [2]. This is an interview. So not WP:IS. Alternative Film Festival best actor is not a significant award or honor. The article is just deliberate and malicious refbombing. — hako9 ( talk) 19:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'm not sure about determining consensus as I see editors I respect on both sides of this debate along with a lot of IPs and newcomers. Can we get an essential THREE that can be agreed upon instead of posting dozens of links to bad quality sources? Also editors are advised they need to sign all of their comments with their signatures.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
https://www.deccanherald.com/amp/story/entertainment/anurag-sinha-marry-girlfriend-nov-2568467
https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/anurag-sinha-to-play-sarabjit-in-subhash-ghais-next-614525/amp/1
The article can be expanded. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2409:40E4:1047:11C:F8F7:A83:EA0A:22DF (
talk)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 09:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Appears PROMO. I don't see articles about this individual, only interviews or use of him as an expert on xyz health topic in various media. Odd that all sourcing here is from Nigeria, but none in the home country, possible "pay to publish" as we see typically in Nigerian media. I have my concerns, bringing ti AfD to discuss. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk)
16:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:40, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I have no confidence about a consensus here. Critiquing media from specific countries needn't be a slam against a nationality, just a comment on the prevalence of paid/sponsored journalism is particular countries. I know we have list of Indian sources that don't meet Wikipedia standards for independence and editorial rigor.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Apparently I have to use AfD for this: I think this article should be moved to draftspace as it as the potential to be a good article similar to FA Cup semi-finals. However it is currently incomplete, unreferenced, and is not fit for the mainspace. Mn1548 ( talk) 15:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion. But the nominator is suggesting draftification, is that option acceptable?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:53, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Once again, this AFD needs more participation from editors, weighing in with their assessments of this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. I count two delete !votes - one from the nominator and one from Mn1548 ("if references can't be found...") - which I count as "delete" on the basis the nomination has been open for two weeks with no new references being added. No arguments in favour of keeping. We'd prefer more involvement but 2 weeks is long enough and the decision from those who contributed seems unanimous. Waggers TALK 14:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an English rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found were transactional announcements ( 1, 2, 3) and this confirms he was out of the sport by 2016. JTtheOG ( talk) 00:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'll be a little blunt here but "neutral" or "undecided" comments don't help closers come to a closure decision.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:45, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Being a candidate in the imminent general election isn't a pass for WP:NPOL. Getting his wife elected to whatever position isn't a pass either. Subject was never elected for any political position and the general election is yet to happen. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 00:35, 4 May 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, 11 May 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 03:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Questionable notability and lack of sustained coverage with WP:RS Amigao ( talk) 22:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:13, 10 May 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 03:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
One of many poorly created articles translated from the Azeri Wikipedia (for more details, see [3]).
Nothing comes up when searching "Battles of Inje and Qalaburun", which makes me fail to see how it meets the notable criteria. And the most cited sources here (5 out of 6 citations) is by a genocide denier [4] Jamil Hasanli, who is also closely connected to the Aliyev-ruled Azerbaijani government, notorious for its historical negationism/revisionism [5] [6] [7] and anti-Iranian sentiments [8], which is not really ideal for an article about the history of Iran. HistoryofIran ( talk) 23:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:12, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jake Wartenberg ( talk) 13:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Completely unsourced article which fails WP:NBIO. Redirect to List of people from Goa as an WP:ATD since subject is mentioned there. CycloneYoris talk! 21:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to S.T.D (Shelters to Deltas). Jake Wartenberg ( talk) 13:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSINGLE due to no significant coverage. The album may be notable, but there is no significant coverage of this single in reviews, only passing mentions. Pilaz ( talk) 21:23, 10 May 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.
This page title was originally a Redirect, it wouldn't be out of line to reestablish that Redirect. Liz Read! Talk! 02:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Redirect disputed by IP. Cannot find sources to show how this meets notability. CNMall41 ( talk) 21:15, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. This has already been relisted twice. Editors have weighed in with comments but not !votes. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
The subsidiary doesn't seem notable. This page can be a redirect to Securian Financial Group. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 15:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk)
19:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 20:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable grouping that fails to meet the WP:NLIST due to a lack of WP:RS. Let'srun ( talk) 14:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:16, 10 May 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 03:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The press coverage received lacked depth or significance, failing to meet the WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found was a transactional announcement. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 09:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable business/hotel. This former family-run hotel business doesn't meet WP:NORG or WP:GNG. And the building from which it operated doesn't meet WP:NBUILDING. In terms of the business, in order to establish even the most basic facts about the subject, we are reliant on business registration records, classifieds in local newspapers, death records and funeral notices, small regional adverts, planning notices and the most trivial of passing mentions in wedding announcements. Each of a type that we would find (and likely, frankly, exceed) for just about ANY such business. Indicating that SIGCOV is not met. In terms of the building, while it (and some of the other neighbouring buildings) are subject to some recognition/protection, the building has not been the subject of "significant in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources" (as expected by WP:NBUILD). Or for "which verifiable information beyond simple statistics is available" (as expected by WP:GEOFEAT). Even if the building were notable (and I don't see that it is), it is currently occupied by a franchise of a coffee chain. If the building were notable (and I do not see that it is), that notability wouldn't be "inherited" by any of the businesses operating within it (whether a small family hotel or a coffee chain franchisee or a short-lived sports shop or whatever). I do not see how a redirect (to Mullingar#Tourism or List of hotels in Ireland) or similar WP:ATD would be reasonable, proportional or appropriate... Guliolopez ( talk) 20:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The book notes on page 43: "In the early 1950s, some Mullingar men went to Canada to mine uranium on the edges of the Arctic Circle. Those who returned to Ireland would later start local businesses such as The Yukon Bar and the Lake County Hotel with the money they earned in the mines."
The book notes on page 49: "It was the era of the showbands and of disco, and Mullingar people could see and hear their favourite stars in venues such as the Lake County Hotel, the Horizon Ballroom, the County Hall and Larry Caffrey's singing lounge."
The book notes on page 127: "Bands played weekly in venues such as the County Hall, the Lake County Hotel and The Lakeland (later Horizon) Ballroom."
The book notes on pages 176– 177: "Across the road from Shaw's (now Fagan's Office Supplies), is the Lake County Hotel, opened in 1962 by Paddy Fagan, who had made his money in Canada. The Lake County became one of Mulligan's top entertainment venues."
The book notes on an image caption on page 188: "Fine Gael politicians in the Lake County Hotel in 196s. From left to right: Gerry LEstrange TD, James Dillon TD, Charlie Fagan, Sean McEoin, Liam Cosgrave TD." The book notes on another image caption on page 188: "Jack Lynch, then Taoiseach, in the Lake County Hotel in 1972 with proprietor Paddy Fagan and local Fianna Fáil councillors Joe Feely and Sean Keegan."
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 20:45, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
At first glance, this appears to be a legit BLP - however, upon closer examination of each referenced source, it becomes evident that they merely mention the subject without providing sig./in-depth coverage. Consequently, the subject fails to meet the criteria outlined in both WP:GNG and WP:JOURNALIST. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 19:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Subject is not described as journalist and should not be measured in WP:JOURNALIST.
Subject is described as a lawyer and falls under Notability of attorneys guildeline provided in Wikipedia:Notability (law), which says 3-4 factors are sufficent. Subject meets more than that. From the guideline:
"To be a notable attorney, a person must have notable accomplishments as an attorney, backed up by references that are reliable. These accomplishments include:
trying a notable case, which has its own article in Wikipedia
being recognized as an expert in a specialized area of law (see Mark Zaid and John S. Lowe)
service as a law clerk at SCOTUS or having clerked for another famous judge.
service in an administrative capacity in a major court system agency (example, clerk of a Federal court, chief court administrator).
service as a general counsel of a large state or federal agency (example, secretary of state or transportation authority).
Also partially meets
The BLP is well-sourced, contains no OR, Maintains a NPOV. Also in WP:GNG at least two referenced sources are in-depth with sig coverage and most are not in passing, with consistent coverage in the news over many years. Retinscn20 ( talk) 09:18, 4 May 2024 (UTC) — Retinscn20 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
References
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 09:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Recreated by likely SOCK after prior deletion discussion. CNMall41 ( talk) 19:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Previously deleted at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
No suitable sources. Only source is an online shop selling the product. No indication of meeting WP:GNG. AusLondonder ( talk) 20:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Comment this item has a long history. There are any number of auction catalogs, and there are probably examples in the collections of multiple museums. There's a good likelihood that it is covered in books about antique sterling, silverplate, tableware. Unfortunately I'm not easily finding them online with previews. I think this might require a trip to an actual library. Valereee ( talk) 11:25, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
on the face of it, it appear that the subject has directed some dramas, but those dramas themselves don't appear to be WP:N, which suggests that this person fails to meet WP:DIRECTOR. The reference cited in this BLP are either unreliable or don't mention the subject at all, contradicting what the SPA Ritajon ( talk · contribs) claimed when they created this BLP. A quick Google search also yields not much, indicating a failure to meet the basic WP:GNG. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 17:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:57, 10 May 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 03:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The coverage is not in depth or significance, failing to meet the basic WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:56, 10 May 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 03:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
She doesn't appears to meet WP:GNG beause the press coverage she received in WP:RS lacks significance or depth which does not satisfy WP:N. N-Peace Award alone may not confer WP:N — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 15:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:01, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Previously survived AfD when criteria was less strict for his 'client list', however notability is not inherited and I don't see much individual notability for this mastering engineer. Additionally the article has been edited multiple times by the subject which is a conflict of interest. InDimensional ( talk) 20:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I am still alive and well, so why should my page be deleted. My page explains my career and life. Nothing wrong with that.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyemastering ( talk • contribs)
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 03:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The press coverage received lacked depth or significance, failing to meet the WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 14:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:54, 10 May 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! 02:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Seems fails to meet WP:NBUILDING as well basic WP:GNG — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 14:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 20:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Unreferenced article and subject does not seem notable, either for his music career or for his app designs. Can't find any significant coverage online and seems to fail WP:MUSICBIO InDimensional ( talk) 20:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Anyone care to take on a rebuttal of the many points issued by the IP editor?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Fictosexuality. Owen× ☎ 20:48, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
COATRACK for fictosexuality, which is already itself a fringe topic with the article existing mainly as a massive advocacy page. In reality any sexuality peference that is directed at non-humans would almost certainly be regarded as a paraphilia in mainstream psychology, but these articles are built almost 100% without any actual clinical research, just opinion/"analysis" articles from dubious publications which seem intent on hijacking LGBT rethoric. The fictosexuality article may be fixed eventually with some work to reduce the obvious POV issues but I don't see how this article is anything but an undue weight spin-off. Both this an the main article have been created by the same editor, who very clearly seem to be a single purpose account which does nothing but link to these two articles and insert mentions of the subject in random pages. ★Trekker ( talk) 17:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss the sourcing in more depth... while trying to keep a straight face at all of this.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
20:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As an AFD closer, after reading the discussion, I'm leaning towards a Merge but there are also arguments against that outcome and no rough consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I feel it would meet CSD, however, I've already PROD'it before, so I am going to do a full AfD. The company existed at one time. Maybe sources exist, but from what I can find, I am not finding adequate sourcing to meet company notability guidelines threshold, and as presented, I feel article actually meets "no indication of importance" based deletion Graywalls ( talk) 19:15, 10 May 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! 23:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an Italian rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The best source I found was a transactional announcement. JTtheOG ( talk) 19:14, 10 May 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! 23:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I can't see why this would be forked. The prose is bad, and this could easily be cut down and mentioned in Olflag IV-C
Oflag IV-C, which it is.
—asparagusus
(interaction)
sprouts!
19:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to New Hampshire Department of Transportation. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 05:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
There is no indication of any significant contributions from this agency, as it was short-lived and never accomplished its intended purpose, and does not necessarily need an entire article that gives undue detail into this agency. This article should be merged, the topic would be better suited as a brief section in the NHDOT article or some other relevant article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OldPalChummus ( talk • contribs) 20:30, 8 May 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! 23:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an Italian rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found was a few sentences here, a video there, but nothing substantial. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:15, 10 May 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! 23:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The article doesn't cite any WP:RS and doesn't meet WP:GNG, hence should be deleted
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! 23:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Stub on a minor badminton player that doesn't meet WP:NBAD and shows no sign of WP:GNG. He has no significant achievements on BWF, which shows a complete lack of info on him. The best that I can find are passing mentions in Crónica and Movimiento y Deporte neither of which we can build an article from. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:09, 10 May 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! 23:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Stub on a minor badminton player that doesn't meet WP:NBAD and shows no sign of WP:GNG. He has no significant achievements on BWF and his career prize money of $41.25 doesn't give me confidence that Mathumo is a notable professional sportsperson. The best that I can find are passing mentions in CSC and Mmegi and I'm not even convinced that the former source is WP:RS. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Brighton & Hove (bus company). ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 05:14, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable bus route, see discussion of similar recent deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brighton & Hove bus route 6 -- wooden superman 14:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Reliable sources meeting SIGCOV were added; passes WP:ORGCRIT (non-admin closure) (non-admin closure) BoraVoro ( talk) 15:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Sources available in the usual searches seem to be a mirror of what's already in the article, funding announcements, which are excluded under WP:ORGTRIV, and the product reviews on miscellaneous sites which do not have the requisite reputation for fact checking to be considered RS (Forbes Advisor and Investopedia both also fall under this latter category). Searches for קונקטים appear to be more or less the same (e.g. [35], [36]) though I just dumped it at the usual English language search engines, I'm not sure if there is a more comprehensive index for Hebrew language web sources outside GBY.
With these sources, it is not currently possible to write an article to our current standards (i.e. more than just a list of funding announcements) so unfortunately this company might not be suited for this encyclopedia. Perhaps it might be able to find its home on a more specialised or comprehensive publication or database, or back here at a later date. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 15:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep as the basic media coverage contributes to the subject’s notability. Also, the famous and influential Israeli newspaper the Globes named the it as the most promising station in the country. Given the power of Israel tech and venture industry that is significantly in itself. Prhinohoursers ( talk) 22:01, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 07:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
07:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs more policy-based discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk)
14:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 21:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Had a brief career filled with cameo appearances before disappearing in 2020. No sign of any WP:SIGCOV. The closest that I can find is a press conference quote in El Sport, which contains no significant independent analysis of the player. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 21:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Played only a handful of professional games with no apparent WP:SIGCOV. My searches in Arabic don't yield anything other than social media posts, which do not indicate notability. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:52, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Deprod by IP. Deletion reason still stands. The Yahoo Finance ref is a press release, the other sources are likewise either primary and nonindependent, blogs, or both. I have performed searches in EBSCO, Gale and ProQuest and have not been able to locate any sources suitable for WP:NCORP, it is likely that it is simply WP:TOOSOON for any significant coverage to exist. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 14:08, 3 May 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
14:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Only had a brief professional career with no evidence of passing WP:GNG. The only mention of him that I can find from independent news sources is Arabian Gulf League, which is merely a passing mention. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn to draftify. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 14:56, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Contest PROD; fails GNG and NSPORT. Only coverage is trivial mentions in match coverage or coverage of his siblings. (And notability is not
WP:INHERITED)
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 14:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC) Withdrawn due to author request to draftify
Dclemens1971 (
talk)
14:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:09, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the WP:LISTN as an indiscriminate list of players. Let'srun ( talk) 14:04, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
This wikipage is about a preprint that came out a week ago. It's generated some hype on webforums, but that's an extremely unreliable barometer of notability. Gumshoe2 ( talk) 13:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Although less important than the issue of whether notability is established in reliable sources, I'd like to highlight that a main part of the preprint's self-reported notability is reflected in the wiki-statement "KANs have been shown to perform well on problems from knot theory and physics (such as Anderson localization)." This statement is extremely dubious. I'd encourage any mathematician to look at Table 5 on page 24 of the preprint or Table 6 on page 28. The KAN-discovered formulas are, in effect, nothing but classical regression with complicated functions. It has been possible to discover similarly complicated formulas for well over a century, and they aren't of any self-apparent interest whatsoever. The stark difference with the "Theory" or "Human"-discovered formulas should be apparent to even non-mathematicians.
The other examples in the paper are of (extremely) small toy data sets, nowhere close the scale at which machine learning is uniquely useful. As always, possibly papers in the future will develop this topic further, but at present it isn't remotely clear that this preprint is a significant development. Gumshoe2 ( talk) 16:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The article clearly situates the KAN as a recent addition to the long history of attempting to apply KART in a machine learning context. Given the standing of the researchers involved (e.g. Ziming Liu, Jim Halverson, Max Tegmark), this is more than just a random arXiv preprint and I don't see any benefit to Wikipedia in deleting this information until it gets formally published somewhere in a year or two, no matter whether we personally find the paper's content convincing or important. calr ( talk) 09:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
That's a bizarre description of (that part of) what I'm saying, which is that the word "notable" loses all meaning if just about every preprint is notable. I am suggesting that your usage of the word is not even cogent.
Here's equally (or much more) notable authors from preprints #5-10 uploaded yesterday: Hao Li, Andreas Krause, Djamila Aouada, Dan Klein, Stefano Savazzi. So all ten of the most recent preprints on machine learning uploaded to arxiv are clearly 'more than just a random arXiv preprint' by your standard. Should I go through all 95 uploaded yesterday? Gumshoe2 ( talk) 23:54, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Batik Air#Incidents and accidents. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 09:14, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
If other articles with injuries and damage are not notabile enough to have a page this has to be deleted. Also a lot of other cases of pilots falling asleep are not on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by SignorPignolini ( talk • contribs) 05:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete it doesn't meet the notability guidelines and i agree with the reasoning behind this deletion. this article was deleted previously so i have no idea why it was re-added.— Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKUggaBanga ( talk • contribs) 13:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't see her meeting WP:ACTOR criteria, as I am unable to verify major roles in films which require as required per WP:ACTOR. I tried evaluating it based on WP:GNG, but there's not enough coverage to pass that either. AUTOBIO by Aleeze nasser ( talk · contribs) — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 13:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Note to nominator: Please offer more detail and explain how it fails. See WP:IGNORINGATD. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:08, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 12:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
In short, fails WP:GNG and lacking of WP:RS. Source consists of WP:PRIMARY. The BBC source does not credit the production company. This, like many of those also listed via AfD, may have been created by WP:COI. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 12:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Enron scandal#Timeline of downfall. (non-admin closure) Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 05:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
This is WP:BLP1E. TarnishedPath talk 12:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Geschichte ( talk) 08:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Besides being entirely or poorly unsourced, this does not assert ntoability, thus fails WP:GNG. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 12:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The review notes: "If this were a film script, it would be rejected on the grounds of Stallone-grade realism shortfall. But it isn't. This is the true story of down-on-his-luck American Carroll Shelby's dramatically successful exploits as a racing team owner in the early 1960s. There isn't a great deal in the way of contemporary footage (although the surviving material is pleasingly evocative), so the bulk of the story is told by those who took part. Their narrative is an undiluted treat. Director Richard Symons ended up with far too much footage, so a second, outtake-rich disc is included. DVD extras can be superfluous frivolities - worthless junkets that tempt the unwitting to part with their cash. These, however, are every bit as compelling as the main documentary."
The article notes: "The Cobra Ferrari Wars movie is a classic tale of Texas-chicken- farmer-turned-American-sporting-hero versus Italian automotive aristocracy. Ten years in the making, the documentary tells the remarkable story of Carroll Shelby's mission to "nail Ferrari's ass," resulting in the fearsome Cobra -- possibly the most revered sports car of all time. It made its way on to some TV screens shortly after its release in 2002 but then gathered dust until recently, when producer/ director Richard Symons got to work adding previously unseen footage and interviews. Now a twin-set DVD version has been released for about $50. In addition to the original film, it includes three picture galleries, deleted scenes and six hours' worth of uncut transcripts of interviews with Shelby, giving a unique insight into the man as well as spilling the beans on back-door shenanigans/politics. Its fast-pace, 1960s-era soundtrack and split-screen scenes make it compelling viewing."
The article notes: "And so began the Cobra Ferrari wars. British director Richard Symons has spent over four years researching, filming and compiling unique, never-before-seen footage of this dramatic era in motor racing history. The Cobra Ferrari Wars documentary is produced to recapture the spirit of the 60's in its racing action, soundtrack and graphics and is a compelling tale of courage and dogged determination to be shown on BBC television this summer. The unique footage tells the story of how self-belief and circumstances combined to propel a bunch of Southern Californian hot rodders and their charismatic leader against incredible odds to wage war in Europe and give Enzo Ferrari the hiding of his life. ... For petrolheads and those intrigued by this titanic David and Goliath struggle The Cobra Ferrari Wars makes compelling viewing. The programme will be shown on BBC4 Digital on Monday, June 17, at 9.00pm (following the Le Mans racing weekend), and will migrate to BBC TV later. "
The article notes: "Automotive history buffs will be interested in The Cobra Ferrari Wars, right, a documentary 10 years in the making, telling the story of Carroll Shelby's mission to beat Ferrari at Le Mans, resulting in the Cobra. Available for the first time on DVD, the pack includes the full broadcast film, three picture galleries and a lot of previously unseen footage. The set is available at selected specialist motoring shops."
The article notes: "The Cobra Ferrari Wars: Without doubt the best racing documentary ever. Director Richard Symons spent four years researching and producing the story of how chicken farmer Carroll Shelby came to take on Enzo Ferrari and win. $59.95"
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. Owen× ☎ 20:49, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Source is entirely unsourced, does not assert notability other than being broadcasted on a cable channel and thus fails WP:GNG SpacedFarmer ( talk) 12:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
06:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 13:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; one is a Twitter post; and the rest are merely announcements, some are WP:PRIMARY. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 12:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 13:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails NCORP. Graywalls ( talk) 11:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Khaled Anam#Family and XC-protect the page for six months, at which point we can reexamine independent notability. Owen× ☎ 13:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't see her meeting WP:SINGER or WP:ACTOR criteria, as I am unable to verify major roles in TV shows which require as required per WP:ACTOR. @ MPGuy2824: redirected it, but it was restored by a SPA. I tried evaluating it based on WP:GNG, but there's not enough coverage to pass that either. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 11:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Owen× ☎ 13:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTLINKEDIN. The subject of the article fails several of our notability policies: there is no evidence of WP:INDEPTH coverage – all references are to publications where he was co-author, or to unrelated press releases about drugs that don't even mention the subject's name, not speaking about confirming his role or achievements. There is no evidence of compliance with any criteria listed under WP:NACADEMIC either. The listed awards are minor awards, none has an article (note: NIH Director's Pioneer Award is not an award honouring its recipients but a research initiative).
Worst: there are many unverified claims in the article: the subject, who left Novartis in 2020, is claimed to have been "involved in early successes in gene therapy, including (...) Zolgensma (...) and Hemgenix". However, Novartis was not involved in Zolgensma development – the drug was developed by a US startup Avexis which received marketing authorisation for it just before the subject left Novartis, while remaining a separate company from Novartis; whereas Hemgenix is not a success yet, as it's barely a year on the market with very little uptake from payers outside the US. Claims that Dolmetch contributed to their "successes" appear unfounded and entirely unsourced WP:PUFFERY.
Nearly every sentence needs one or more of {{citation needed}}, {{fails verification}}, or {{secondary source needed}}.
All in all, with lack of independent coverage, I don't think this coporate staff member fulfils our criteria of encyclopaedia-level notability. — kashmīrī TALK 11:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Role in Novartis over many years? What policy would this be based on? Because there are tens of thousands of corporations in the world, perhaps hundreds of thousands of C-level executives, and he wasn't even C-level, so we'd need a policy if this was to be a notability criteria. — kashmīrī TALK 18:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Comment: The article, seemingly created by the subject or someone very close to him, contains a lot of made-up claims and attempts to look more important. For instance, the author claims to have been Global Head of Neuroscience at Novartis. Actually, he wasn't [55] – he did not work for the Swiss pharmaceutical giant but for Novartis Institutes of BioMedical Research, a US-based biotechnology company (separate legally and structurally, even as wholly owned by Novartis). Different company, different post, different splendour, different country. I've updated the article, but a bad taste remained. Then, the article claims that the subject oversaw the development of gene therapies while in NIBR ("his team... helped bring several therapies to the clinic that included Zolgensma"). That again is misleading. Not only has NIBR never done any substantial work on the mentioned gene therapy (apart from internal consulting) but NIBR even does not carry out clinical development. The mentioned Zolgensma in particular was licensed by Novartis long after all its preclinical and much of clinical development was over.
After the subject joined NIBR, its neuroscience division indeed attempted to engage in clinical development – initially, it was clinical trials of branaplam. Yet the two trials they conducted not only failed but the first one was a disaster (children dying due to poor decision making, and no sensible data generated in 7 years) – to the extent that, to the best of my knowledge, Novartis recommended internally that NIBR no longer does clinical development again. The subject left NIBR shortly after.
That's not the end of problems with the article. The subject could not "curate the drug development pipeline that included... ofatumumab", the reason being that ofatumumab received marketing authorisation four years before the subject joined NIBR, [56] not mentioning that ofatumumab was discovered and had preclinical development done by the Danish company Genmab.
Unfortunately, I have no time to research other claims, however the sheer number of WP:PEACOCK/ WP:PROMO statements constitutes a big red light for me. — kashmīrī TALK 00:30, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Papers authored or co-authored by Dolmetsch don't help with [establishing that he is notable]. Because they are not about Dolmetch. — kashmīrī TALK 20:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Hello my name is Ricardo Dolmetsch. Someone brought to my attention that there was a wikipedia article about me and that there was a discussion about its content. I’m arriving a little late to the discussion but I thought I could shed some light on some of the issues that are being discussed. First I didn’t commission or approve this article. It was submitted by my mother who is a journalist in Colombia, without my consent or approval. My mom thinks I’m important but I don’t think that meets the criteria for notability in Wikipedia. There are many scientists who have records like mine so I leave it to you to decide whether to keep the page or take it down. The small group of people who need to know about me can usually find me online, so a Wikipedia entry is not absolutely essential.
Ok that’s it. Thank you all so much for being such selfless editors of Wikipedia. It’s kind of amazing that we have this resource. I’m thinking I should join the effort and help you all. 24.2.241.30 ( talk) 17:05, 14 May 2024 (UTC) Ricardo
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 11:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 10:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of software patents#Notable due to proprietor hyperbole. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Small patent troll that made a bit of an ephemeral stir 20 years ago when it tried to claim a patent on XML. Quickly sank back into obscurity. As a company it doesn't really do anything. 29 employees, 6 million revenue. No sources meet
WP:CORPDEPTH.
WP:ORGCRIT tells us that sources for such companies must be presented with a stronger emphasis on quality of the sources to prevent gaming of the rules by marketing and public relations professionals.
Thus CORPDEPTH says Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization
. No such sources exist. This is just a patent troll. Added a notability template in April to attempt to address the issues but this was summarily removed after a second report of the patent trolling was added (misdated. It is from 2005, and not 2020).
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk)
10:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
just a patent trolland
doesn't really do anythingmisses the point a little bit – the patent trolling is precisely what the company is notable for. I agree it
sank back into obscurityafterwards, but notability isn't temporary. The requirement is the company receives significant independent coverage in multiple sources; there's nothing about this coverage needing to take place over a prolonged period.
(misdated. It is from 2005, and not 2020)2005 is the publication date, 2020 is the archive date. – Tera tix ₵ 12:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
I agree it sank back into obscurity afterwards, but notability isn't temporary—OK but the immediate next section is
notable topics have attracted attention over a sufficiently significant period of time, so the question is, does SBST apply here? Alpha3031 ( t • c) 13:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
routine coverage such as press releases, public announcements, sports coverage, and tabloid journalism. I could see a reasonable argument this could be covered as part of a larger article ( patent troll, XML or somewhere else), or that the article needs to be rewritten to be about the patent controversy rather than the company as such, but the nominator was pretty clear he doesn't think there are any sources providing deep and significant coverage on the topic and seeks deletion rather than any alternative. – Tera tix ₵ 15:10, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS that is neither a YouTube video or a dead link; one is a WP:PRIMARY of one of the teams, three of the ESPN articles is about the Bowl or BCS games, not exclusive to this and the rest is about the games itself with the broadcasting element being given a passing mention. The rest is about the games itself, far less for the broadcasting of this game. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; besides a YouTube and a dead link, one is a WP:PRIMARY of one of the teams, one needs a Flash reader and thus inactive. Of the news scans, one is about the game itself, one is an announcment and one redirects to the home page. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS, barring five Wikipedia articles; two duplicate source is about the BCS game itself, not just this. One is about the Bowl games itself, one is about the coverage of the Bowl games and the rest about the game itself with the goverage being given a passing mention. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; one is a dead link; four (a duplicate source of two articles), is about the BCS game in general, not just the broadcasting of this and one has a brief info about TV information and five of those (a single source), although a WP:PRIMARY, now a dead link. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable businessperson, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. A WP:BEFORE search turns up only the interview in the ACCA house magazine cited here, the rest is only passing mentions. Her honorary doctorate is from the "Swiss School of Business and Management", which appears to be a degree mill, since it's not listed in the Swiss Accreditation Council's website. Article was moved to draft, submitted without improvement today, then copypasted to main space four minutes later. Wikishovel ( talk) 09:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; is about a switch from ESPN, which should be in an article about the game itself, not a list of broadcasters. Additionally, one is a YouTube video, one is about the BCS coverages in general, not just this and though all of those are about the games itself, the broadcasting gets a passing mention. The rest is about the games itself, far less for the broadcasting of this game. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:10, 10 May 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! 06:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; one is a 404, one are announcments of the BCS coverages, not just this. The rest is about the games itself, far less for the broadcasting of this game. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 08:57, 10 May 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! 06:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; one is about the BCS games in general, not just this, one is a 403, three of those talk about the BCS and Bowl games in general one is a TV schedule listing and one is about one of the announcers in general, not the boradcasting of this game. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 08:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS, this game gets a brief mention, the rest are TV schedules. In all, not doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 08:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS, two of those are blogspot posts. Of the four ESPN press releases, two of those are TV schedule listings, two of those is about the 34 Bowl games, not just this which gets a brief mention. In all, not doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the rest are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 08:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; as with the ESPN sources, one redirects to the main page whilst the other is a 403. The other two are news report of the game itself, so not doing much to assert notability, which is used to argue about the notability of lists like this. One is a YouTube video, the one of a local paper leads to an error message. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 08:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. There is clear consensus among editors other than the primary contributors to the article that sources are lacking, and no convincing rebuttals to delete arguments' source analyses have been provided. signed, Rosguill talk 15:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG, barely any reliable sources online. Sources used in the article may not be reliable, especially excessive use of Discogs. Toadette Edit! 08:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 13:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Only sources are a column and two citations of a deprecated source. WP:BEFORE only returns similar, unreliable, sources. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. AlexandraAVX ( talk) 07:55, 10 May 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! 06:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Expanding on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srbija FF, I don't see this low-level Swedish football club meeting GNG. Modest history peaking on the 6th tier. Geschichte ( talk) 07:01, 10 May 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! 06:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Expanding on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srbija FF, I don't see this low-level Swedish football club meeting GNG. Modest history peaking on the 5th tier. Geschichte ( talk) 07:01, 10 May 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! 06:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Expanding on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srbija FF, I don't see this low-level Swedish football club meeting GNG. Modest history peaking on the 5th tier. Geschichte ( talk) 06:59, 10 May 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! 06:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Expanding on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srbija FF, I don't see this low-level Swedish football club meeting GNG. Modest history peaking on the 6th tier. Geschichte ( talk) 06:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Does not pass WP:GNG. The only reliable source I can find is this, but all the rest are just unreliable outlets. Toadette Edit! 06:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Lacks significant coverage, though his company Design Projects is an extremely generic name. No possible redirect as his company does not have an article. He seems to have worked mostly on B movies. —Kaliforniyka Hi! 01:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
04:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
06:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. If an editor wants to work on this article in Draft space, let m know or make a request at WP:REFUND Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:NJOURNALIST. Couldn't find any articles or independent information about him online. The article is mostly puffery. Probably a COI - draftifying might be an alternative, though I can't find any coverage about him at all. Clear friend a 💬 02:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:18, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 04:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 03:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. The commenters make a good point that the nominator's actions do not reflect due diligence when considering then nominating this for deletion. No support for deletion has appeared. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 02:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC) Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 02:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 02:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 02:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:26, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't see a reason why this article should exist -- none of the sources (that aren't broken) talk about the software industry in Madurai as a broader trend. This failed a PROD for being potentially notable, but absent any evidence to support that potential, I think this article should be deleted. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 01:26, 3 May 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
01:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 01:16, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails notability guidelines and has no significant coverage. Kingsmasher678 ( talk) 01:03, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep - I think I have added sufficient refs to bring this up to notable. -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk) 01:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep - Agree. He satisfies WP:GNG MaskedSinger ( talk) 11:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 00:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 00:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 00:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 00:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 00:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 00:26, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 00:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 00:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 00:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 00:19, 10 May 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 03:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Couldn't find any sources for this show, there are none in the article right now. Niafied ( talk) 04:09, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
04:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Jake Wartenberg ( talk) 13:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails
WP:GNG and
notability guidelines for organizations; the only source in the article is a primary source connected to the organization. Additionally, I don't think
this is in-depth coverage we're looking to estabilsh notability! ~
Tails
Wx (
🐾,
me!)
02:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:34, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Deletion on the basis of consensus in so small a field might be doubtful, but the fact that the article also qualifies for speedy deletion as created by a block-evading editor (using both an account & IP editing), and arguably also as promotional removes any doubt. JBW ( talk) 21:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
No notability upon WP:BEFORE. Doesn't meet GNG or NME 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 13:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
02:23, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We really need a lot more editors participating in AFD discussions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 21:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
This appears to be a clear case of WP:AUTOBIO. None of the subject's work appears outstanding, which means he fails to meet WP:AUTHOR. Additionally, there is a lack of significant coverage in WP:RS, further failing to meet the basic WP:GNG. Moreover, the BLP seems overly promotional and is written by SPAs Urdulibrary ( talk · contribs) Hammad.anwar ( talk · contribs) Sibyl12drip ( talk · contribs) — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 13:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Keep. The article needs work, including the addition of reliable citations. However, a quick search in the Wikipedia Library turned out a ton of reliable citations proving this author's notability. This includes reviews in places like Publishers Weekly ( link 1 and 2), Kirkus ( link) and many other places. The subject also has an entry in Baker & Taylor Author Biographies. All in all, easily meets Wikipedia's author notability standards. -- SouthernNights ( talk) 21:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
02:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
02:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Same rationale as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Road signs in Lesotho. It's a WP:NOTGALLERY violation apparently by intention. There are tons of these articles that don't appear to be attempts at creating an encyclopedia article at all, but are just making a space to put 100+ images. There's already a place for that, and it's on Commons. GMG talk 10:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Part of a bundled AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:48, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Czech First League#Media coverage. Liz Read! Talk! 02:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, not a single source. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:45, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided. How do "Delete" voters think about the possibility of a Redirect or Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I initially tagged this for UPE for cleanup but after it was challenged by two SPAs, and at the request of one, I dug further into cleanup. The issue is that the references, other than this, are not reliable to show notability. Everything is mentions, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, press releases, churnalism, interviews, or otherwise unreliable. I removed some WP:FAKEREFerences prior but kept everything else in tact so the AfD could be judged based on how it sits currently. CNMall41 ( talk) 04:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This article must be added with citations available in the public domain and be made available. It’s a KEEP. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Fixing001 (
talk •
contribs) 08:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC) struck sock vote --
CNMall41 (
talk)
22:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Here are just some of the articles that are published where the actor is talked and discussed in a positive prominent light and not merely in mentionary terms. This merely are a few articles from only one of the indian publications, Times of India, TOI Entertainment.
Again, all this issue of notability was only brought by the editor who flagged the article, when was requested on the Talk page to remove the paid templates as there was no citation of proof for payment by the artist in discussion for a period of two months or so. I still am not clear why is it happening here, where the article on this actor in discussion can easily be expanded with reliable reference and citations that are available on the public domain.
My perspective -
The India media is suffering with the malady of copying and publishing information from one source to another and is suffocating genuine talents and films with the issue of paid marketing and publicity. If Wikipedia doesn’t provide a platform like its own of credible acknowledgement to authentic artists/talents, soon must find it surfeit with articles on Arts & Entertainment , that are already influenced and published under bias and discreet funding from production houses. Why are we not calling out the ones overtly known ? As for this article, this feels like a pitiful hassling over an unjust removal of a credible and relevant indian talent.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Centrepiece12 (
talk •
contribs) struck sock vote
Dreamy Jazz
talk to me |
my contributions
22:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For policy based input
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete: I went through all the sources cited in the article. Can't find any that satisfy reliability + independence + significant coverage. Most of the sources are about the movies the subject played a role in, with trivial mentions of him interspersed. I doubt the notability of the movies too, These are sponsored stories [1] [2]. This is an interview. So not WP:IS. Alternative Film Festival best actor is not a significant award or honor. The article is just deliberate and malicious refbombing. — hako9 ( talk) 19:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'm not sure about determining consensus as I see editors I respect on both sides of this debate along with a lot of IPs and newcomers. Can we get an essential THREE that can be agreed upon instead of posting dozens of links to bad quality sources? Also editors are advised they need to sign all of their comments with their signatures.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
https://www.deccanherald.com/amp/story/entertainment/anurag-sinha-marry-girlfriend-nov-2568467
https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/anurag-sinha-to-play-sarabjit-in-subhash-ghais-next-614525/amp/1
The article can be expanded. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2409:40E4:1047:11C:F8F7:A83:EA0A:22DF (
talk)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 09:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Appears PROMO. I don't see articles about this individual, only interviews or use of him as an expert on xyz health topic in various media. Odd that all sourcing here is from Nigeria, but none in the home country, possible "pay to publish" as we see typically in Nigerian media. I have my concerns, bringing ti AfD to discuss. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk)
16:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi
01:40, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I have no confidence about a consensus here. Critiquing media from specific countries needn't be a slam against a nationality, just a comment on the prevalence of paid/sponsored journalism is particular countries. I know we have list of Indian sources that don't meet Wikipedia standards for independence and editorial rigor.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Apparently I have to use AfD for this: I think this article should be moved to draftspace as it as the potential to be a good article similar to FA Cup semi-finals. However it is currently incomplete, unreferenced, and is not fit for the mainspace. Mn1548 ( talk) 15:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion. But the nominator is suggesting draftification, is that option acceptable?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:53, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Once again, this AFD needs more participation from editors, weighing in with their assessments of this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. I count two delete !votes - one from the nominator and one from Mn1548 ("if references can't be found...") - which I count as "delete" on the basis the nomination has been open for two weeks with no new references being added. No arguments in favour of keeping. We'd prefer more involvement but 2 weeks is long enough and the decision from those who contributed seems unanimous. Waggers TALK 14:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an English rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found were transactional announcements ( 1, 2, 3) and this confirms he was out of the sport by 2016. JTtheOG ( talk) 00:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'll be a little blunt here but "neutral" or "undecided" comments don't help closers come to a closure decision.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:45, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Being a candidate in the imminent general election isn't a pass for WP:NPOL. Getting his wife elected to whatever position isn't a pass either. Subject was never elected for any political position and the general election is yet to happen. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 00:35, 4 May 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, 11 May 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 03:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Questionable notability and lack of sustained coverage with WP:RS Amigao ( talk) 22:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:13, 10 May 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 03:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
One of many poorly created articles translated from the Azeri Wikipedia (for more details, see [3]).
Nothing comes up when searching "Battles of Inje and Qalaburun", which makes me fail to see how it meets the notable criteria. And the most cited sources here (5 out of 6 citations) is by a genocide denier [4] Jamil Hasanli, who is also closely connected to the Aliyev-ruled Azerbaijani government, notorious for its historical negationism/revisionism [5] [6] [7] and anti-Iranian sentiments [8], which is not really ideal for an article about the history of Iran. HistoryofIran ( talk) 23:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:12, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Jake Wartenberg ( talk) 13:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Completely unsourced article which fails WP:NBIO. Redirect to List of people from Goa as an WP:ATD since subject is mentioned there. CycloneYoris talk! 21:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to S.T.D (Shelters to Deltas). Jake Wartenberg ( talk) 13:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSINGLE due to no significant coverage. The album may be notable, but there is no significant coverage of this single in reviews, only passing mentions. Pilaz ( talk) 21:23, 10 May 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.
This page title was originally a Redirect, it wouldn't be out of line to reestablish that Redirect. Liz Read! Talk! 02:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Redirect disputed by IP. Cannot find sources to show how this meets notability. CNMall41 ( talk) 21:15, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. This has already been relisted twice. Editors have weighed in with comments but not !votes. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
The subsidiary doesn't seem notable. This page can be a redirect to Securian Financial Group. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 15:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk)
19:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 20:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable grouping that fails to meet the WP:NLIST due to a lack of WP:RS. Let'srun ( talk) 14:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:16, 10 May 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 03:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The press coverage received lacked depth or significance, failing to meet the WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found was a transactional announcement. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 09:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable business/hotel. This former family-run hotel business doesn't meet WP:NORG or WP:GNG. And the building from which it operated doesn't meet WP:NBUILDING. In terms of the business, in order to establish even the most basic facts about the subject, we are reliant on business registration records, classifieds in local newspapers, death records and funeral notices, small regional adverts, planning notices and the most trivial of passing mentions in wedding announcements. Each of a type that we would find (and likely, frankly, exceed) for just about ANY such business. Indicating that SIGCOV is not met. In terms of the building, while it (and some of the other neighbouring buildings) are subject to some recognition/protection, the building has not been the subject of "significant in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources" (as expected by WP:NBUILD). Or for "which verifiable information beyond simple statistics is available" (as expected by WP:GEOFEAT). Even if the building were notable (and I don't see that it is), it is currently occupied by a franchise of a coffee chain. If the building were notable (and I do not see that it is), that notability wouldn't be "inherited" by any of the businesses operating within it (whether a small family hotel or a coffee chain franchisee or a short-lived sports shop or whatever). I do not see how a redirect (to Mullingar#Tourism or List of hotels in Ireland) or similar WP:ATD would be reasonable, proportional or appropriate... Guliolopez ( talk) 20:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The book notes on page 43: "In the early 1950s, some Mullingar men went to Canada to mine uranium on the edges of the Arctic Circle. Those who returned to Ireland would later start local businesses such as The Yukon Bar and the Lake County Hotel with the money they earned in the mines."
The book notes on page 49: "It was the era of the showbands and of disco, and Mullingar people could see and hear their favourite stars in venues such as the Lake County Hotel, the Horizon Ballroom, the County Hall and Larry Caffrey's singing lounge."
The book notes on page 127: "Bands played weekly in venues such as the County Hall, the Lake County Hotel and The Lakeland (later Horizon) Ballroom."
The book notes on pages 176– 177: "Across the road from Shaw's (now Fagan's Office Supplies), is the Lake County Hotel, opened in 1962 by Paddy Fagan, who had made his money in Canada. The Lake County became one of Mulligan's top entertainment venues."
The book notes on an image caption on page 188: "Fine Gael politicians in the Lake County Hotel in 196s. From left to right: Gerry LEstrange TD, James Dillon TD, Charlie Fagan, Sean McEoin, Liam Cosgrave TD." The book notes on another image caption on page 188: "Jack Lynch, then Taoiseach, in the Lake County Hotel in 1972 with proprietor Paddy Fagan and local Fianna Fáil councillors Joe Feely and Sean Keegan."
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 20:45, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
At first glance, this appears to be a legit BLP - however, upon closer examination of each referenced source, it becomes evident that they merely mention the subject without providing sig./in-depth coverage. Consequently, the subject fails to meet the criteria outlined in both WP:GNG and WP:JOURNALIST. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 19:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Subject is not described as journalist and should not be measured in WP:JOURNALIST.
Subject is described as a lawyer and falls under Notability of attorneys guildeline provided in Wikipedia:Notability (law), which says 3-4 factors are sufficent. Subject meets more than that. From the guideline:
"To be a notable attorney, a person must have notable accomplishments as an attorney, backed up by references that are reliable. These accomplishments include:
trying a notable case, which has its own article in Wikipedia
being recognized as an expert in a specialized area of law (see Mark Zaid and John S. Lowe)
service as a law clerk at SCOTUS or having clerked for another famous judge.
service in an administrative capacity in a major court system agency (example, clerk of a Federal court, chief court administrator).
service as a general counsel of a large state or federal agency (example, secretary of state or transportation authority).
Also partially meets
The BLP is well-sourced, contains no OR, Maintains a NPOV. Also in WP:GNG at least two referenced sources are in-depth with sig coverage and most are not in passing, with consistent coverage in the news over many years. Retinscn20 ( talk) 09:18, 4 May 2024 (UTC) — Retinscn20 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
References
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 09:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Recreated by likely SOCK after prior deletion discussion. CNMall41 ( talk) 19:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Previously deleted at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
No suitable sources. Only source is an online shop selling the product. No indication of meeting WP:GNG. AusLondonder ( talk) 20:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Comment this item has a long history. There are any number of auction catalogs, and there are probably examples in the collections of multiple museums. There's a good likelihood that it is covered in books about antique sterling, silverplate, tableware. Unfortunately I'm not easily finding them online with previews. I think this might require a trip to an actual library. Valereee ( talk) 11:25, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
on the face of it, it appear that the subject has directed some dramas, but those dramas themselves don't appear to be WP:N, which suggests that this person fails to meet WP:DIRECTOR. The reference cited in this BLP are either unreliable or don't mention the subject at all, contradicting what the SPA Ritajon ( talk · contribs) claimed when they created this BLP. A quick Google search also yields not much, indicating a failure to meet the basic WP:GNG. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 17:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:57, 10 May 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 03:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The coverage is not in depth or significance, failing to meet the basic WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:56, 10 May 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 03:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
She doesn't appears to meet WP:GNG beause the press coverage she received in WP:RS lacks significance or depth which does not satisfy WP:N. N-Peace Award alone may not confer WP:N — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 15:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:01, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Previously survived AfD when criteria was less strict for his 'client list', however notability is not inherited and I don't see much individual notability for this mastering engineer. Additionally the article has been edited multiple times by the subject which is a conflict of interest. InDimensional ( talk) 20:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I am still alive and well, so why should my page be deleted. My page explains my career and life. Nothing wrong with that.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyemastering ( talk • contribs)
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 03:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The press coverage received lacked depth or significance, failing to meet the WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 14:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:54, 10 May 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! 02:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Seems fails to meet WP:NBUILDING as well basic WP:GNG — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 14:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone
19:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 20:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Unreferenced article and subject does not seem notable, either for his music career or for his app designs. Can't find any significant coverage online and seems to fail WP:MUSICBIO InDimensional ( talk) 20:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Anyone care to take on a rebuttal of the many points issued by the IP editor?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Fictosexuality. Owen× ☎ 20:48, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
COATRACK for fictosexuality, which is already itself a fringe topic with the article existing mainly as a massive advocacy page. In reality any sexuality peference that is directed at non-humans would almost certainly be regarded as a paraphilia in mainstream psychology, but these articles are built almost 100% without any actual clinical research, just opinion/"analysis" articles from dubious publications which seem intent on hijacking LGBT rethoric. The fictosexuality article may be fixed eventually with some work to reduce the obvious POV issues but I don't see how this article is anything but an undue weight spin-off. Both this an the main article have been created by the same editor, who very clearly seem to be a single purpose account which does nothing but link to these two articles and insert mentions of the subject in random pages. ★Trekker ( talk) 17:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss the sourcing in more depth... while trying to keep a straight face at all of this.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
20:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As an AFD closer, after reading the discussion, I'm leaning towards a Merge but there are also arguments against that outcome and no rough consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I feel it would meet CSD, however, I've already PROD'it before, so I am going to do a full AfD. The company existed at one time. Maybe sources exist, but from what I can find, I am not finding adequate sourcing to meet company notability guidelines threshold, and as presented, I feel article actually meets "no indication of importance" based deletion Graywalls ( talk) 19:15, 10 May 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! 23:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an Italian rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The best source I found was a transactional announcement. JTtheOG ( talk) 19:14, 10 May 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! 23:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I can't see why this would be forked. The prose is bad, and this could easily be cut down and mentioned in Olflag IV-C
Oflag IV-C, which it is.
—asparagusus
(interaction)
sprouts!
19:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to New Hampshire Department of Transportation. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 05:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
There is no indication of any significant contributions from this agency, as it was short-lived and never accomplished its intended purpose, and does not necessarily need an entire article that gives undue detail into this agency. This article should be merged, the topic would be better suited as a brief section in the NHDOT article or some other relevant article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OldPalChummus ( talk • contribs) 20:30, 8 May 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! 23:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an Italian rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found was a few sentences here, a video there, but nothing substantial. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:15, 10 May 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! 23:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The article doesn't cite any WP:RS and doesn't meet WP:GNG, hence should be deleted
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! 23:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Stub on a minor badminton player that doesn't meet WP:NBAD and shows no sign of WP:GNG. He has no significant achievements on BWF, which shows a complete lack of info on him. The best that I can find are passing mentions in Crónica and Movimiento y Deporte neither of which we can build an article from. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:09, 10 May 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! 23:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Stub on a minor badminton player that doesn't meet WP:NBAD and shows no sign of WP:GNG. He has no significant achievements on BWF and his career prize money of $41.25 doesn't give me confidence that Mathumo is a notable professional sportsperson. The best that I can find are passing mentions in CSC and Mmegi and I'm not even convinced that the former source is WP:RS. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Brighton & Hove (bus company). ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 05:14, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable bus route, see discussion of similar recent deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brighton & Hove bus route 6 -- wooden superman 14:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Reliable sources meeting SIGCOV were added; passes WP:ORGCRIT (non-admin closure) (non-admin closure) BoraVoro ( talk) 15:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Sources available in the usual searches seem to be a mirror of what's already in the article, funding announcements, which are excluded under WP:ORGTRIV, and the product reviews on miscellaneous sites which do not have the requisite reputation for fact checking to be considered RS (Forbes Advisor and Investopedia both also fall under this latter category). Searches for קונקטים appear to be more or less the same (e.g. [35], [36]) though I just dumped it at the usual English language search engines, I'm not sure if there is a more comprehensive index for Hebrew language web sources outside GBY.
With these sources, it is not currently possible to write an article to our current standards (i.e. more than just a list of funding announcements) so unfortunately this company might not be suited for this encyclopedia. Perhaps it might be able to find its home on a more specialised or comprehensive publication or database, or back here at a later date. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 15:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep as the basic media coverage contributes to the subject’s notability. Also, the famous and influential Israeli newspaper the Globes named the it as the most promising station in the country. Given the power of Israel tech and venture industry that is significantly in itself. Prhinohoursers ( talk) 22:01, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 07:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
07:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs more policy-based discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk)
14:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 21:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Had a brief career filled with cameo appearances before disappearing in 2020. No sign of any WP:SIGCOV. The closest that I can find is a press conference quote in El Sport, which contains no significant independent analysis of the player. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 21:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Played only a handful of professional games with no apparent WP:SIGCOV. My searches in Arabic don't yield anything other than social media posts, which do not indicate notability. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:52, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Deprod by IP. Deletion reason still stands. The Yahoo Finance ref is a press release, the other sources are likewise either primary and nonindependent, blogs, or both. I have performed searches in EBSCO, Gale and ProQuest and have not been able to locate any sources suitable for WP:NCORP, it is likely that it is simply WP:TOOSOON for any significant coverage to exist. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 14:08, 3 May 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
14:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Only had a brief professional career with no evidence of passing WP:GNG. The only mention of him that I can find from independent news sources is Arabian Gulf League, which is merely a passing mention. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was Withdrawn to draftify. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 14:56, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Contest PROD; fails GNG and NSPORT. Only coverage is trivial mentions in match coverage or coverage of his siblings. (And notability is not
WP:INHERITED)
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 14:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC) Withdrawn due to author request to draftify
Dclemens1971 (
talk)
14:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:09, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the WP:LISTN as an indiscriminate list of players. Let'srun ( talk) 14:04, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
This wikipage is about a preprint that came out a week ago. It's generated some hype on webforums, but that's an extremely unreliable barometer of notability. Gumshoe2 ( talk) 13:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Although less important than the issue of whether notability is established in reliable sources, I'd like to highlight that a main part of the preprint's self-reported notability is reflected in the wiki-statement "KANs have been shown to perform well on problems from knot theory and physics (such as Anderson localization)." This statement is extremely dubious. I'd encourage any mathematician to look at Table 5 on page 24 of the preprint or Table 6 on page 28. The KAN-discovered formulas are, in effect, nothing but classical regression with complicated functions. It has been possible to discover similarly complicated formulas for well over a century, and they aren't of any self-apparent interest whatsoever. The stark difference with the "Theory" or "Human"-discovered formulas should be apparent to even non-mathematicians.
The other examples in the paper are of (extremely) small toy data sets, nowhere close the scale at which machine learning is uniquely useful. As always, possibly papers in the future will develop this topic further, but at present it isn't remotely clear that this preprint is a significant development. Gumshoe2 ( talk) 16:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The article clearly situates the KAN as a recent addition to the long history of attempting to apply KART in a machine learning context. Given the standing of the researchers involved (e.g. Ziming Liu, Jim Halverson, Max Tegmark), this is more than just a random arXiv preprint and I don't see any benefit to Wikipedia in deleting this information until it gets formally published somewhere in a year or two, no matter whether we personally find the paper's content convincing or important. calr ( talk) 09:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
That's a bizarre description of (that part of) what I'm saying, which is that the word "notable" loses all meaning if just about every preprint is notable. I am suggesting that your usage of the word is not even cogent.
Here's equally (or much more) notable authors from preprints #5-10 uploaded yesterday: Hao Li, Andreas Krause, Djamila Aouada, Dan Klein, Stefano Savazzi. So all ten of the most recent preprints on machine learning uploaded to arxiv are clearly 'more than just a random arXiv preprint' by your standard. Should I go through all 95 uploaded yesterday? Gumshoe2 ( talk) 23:54, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Batik Air#Incidents and accidents. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 09:14, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
If other articles with injuries and damage are not notabile enough to have a page this has to be deleted. Also a lot of other cases of pilots falling asleep are not on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by SignorPignolini ( talk • contribs) 05:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete it doesn't meet the notability guidelines and i agree with the reasoning behind this deletion. this article was deleted previously so i have no idea why it was re-added.— Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKUggaBanga ( talk • contribs) 13:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't see her meeting WP:ACTOR criteria, as I am unable to verify major roles in films which require as required per WP:ACTOR. I tried evaluating it based on WP:GNG, but there's not enough coverage to pass that either. AUTOBIO by Aleeze nasser ( talk · contribs) — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 13:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Note to nominator: Please offer more detail and explain how it fails. See WP:IGNORINGATD. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:08, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 12:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
In short, fails WP:GNG and lacking of WP:RS. Source consists of WP:PRIMARY. The BBC source does not credit the production company. This, like many of those also listed via AfD, may have been created by WP:COI. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 12:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Enron scandal#Timeline of downfall. (non-admin closure) Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 05:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
This is WP:BLP1E. TarnishedPath talk 12:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Geschichte ( talk) 08:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Besides being entirely or poorly unsourced, this does not assert ntoability, thus fails WP:GNG. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 12:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The review notes: "If this were a film script, it would be rejected on the grounds of Stallone-grade realism shortfall. But it isn't. This is the true story of down-on-his-luck American Carroll Shelby's dramatically successful exploits as a racing team owner in the early 1960s. There isn't a great deal in the way of contemporary footage (although the surviving material is pleasingly evocative), so the bulk of the story is told by those who took part. Their narrative is an undiluted treat. Director Richard Symons ended up with far too much footage, so a second, outtake-rich disc is included. DVD extras can be superfluous frivolities - worthless junkets that tempt the unwitting to part with their cash. These, however, are every bit as compelling as the main documentary."
The article notes: "The Cobra Ferrari Wars movie is a classic tale of Texas-chicken- farmer-turned-American-sporting-hero versus Italian automotive aristocracy. Ten years in the making, the documentary tells the remarkable story of Carroll Shelby's mission to "nail Ferrari's ass," resulting in the fearsome Cobra -- possibly the most revered sports car of all time. It made its way on to some TV screens shortly after its release in 2002 but then gathered dust until recently, when producer/ director Richard Symons got to work adding previously unseen footage and interviews. Now a twin-set DVD version has been released for about $50. In addition to the original film, it includes three picture galleries, deleted scenes and six hours' worth of uncut transcripts of interviews with Shelby, giving a unique insight into the man as well as spilling the beans on back-door shenanigans/politics. Its fast-pace, 1960s-era soundtrack and split-screen scenes make it compelling viewing."
The article notes: "And so began the Cobra Ferrari wars. British director Richard Symons has spent over four years researching, filming and compiling unique, never-before-seen footage of this dramatic era in motor racing history. The Cobra Ferrari Wars documentary is produced to recapture the spirit of the 60's in its racing action, soundtrack and graphics and is a compelling tale of courage and dogged determination to be shown on BBC television this summer. The unique footage tells the story of how self-belief and circumstances combined to propel a bunch of Southern Californian hot rodders and their charismatic leader against incredible odds to wage war in Europe and give Enzo Ferrari the hiding of his life. ... For petrolheads and those intrigued by this titanic David and Goliath struggle The Cobra Ferrari Wars makes compelling viewing. The programme will be shown on BBC4 Digital on Monday, June 17, at 9.00pm (following the Le Mans racing weekend), and will migrate to BBC TV later. "
The article notes: "Automotive history buffs will be interested in The Cobra Ferrari Wars, right, a documentary 10 years in the making, telling the story of Carroll Shelby's mission to beat Ferrari at Le Mans, resulting in the Cobra. Available for the first time on DVD, the pack includes the full broadcast film, three picture galleries and a lot of previously unseen footage. The set is available at selected specialist motoring shops."
The article notes: "The Cobra Ferrari Wars: Without doubt the best racing documentary ever. Director Richard Symons spent four years researching and producing the story of how chicken farmer Carroll Shelby came to take on Enzo Ferrari and win. $59.95"
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. Owen× ☎ 20:49, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Source is entirely unsourced, does not assert notability other than being broadcasted on a cable channel and thus fails WP:GNG SpacedFarmer ( talk) 12:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
06:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 13:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; one is a Twitter post; and the rest are merely announcements, some are WP:PRIMARY. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 12:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 13:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails NCORP. Graywalls ( talk) 11:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Khaled Anam#Family and XC-protect the page for six months, at which point we can reexamine independent notability. Owen× ☎ 13:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't see her meeting WP:SINGER or WP:ACTOR criteria, as I am unable to verify major roles in TV shows which require as required per WP:ACTOR. @ MPGuy2824: redirected it, but it was restored by a SPA. I tried evaluating it based on WP:GNG, but there's not enough coverage to pass that either. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 11:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Owen× ☎ 13:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTLINKEDIN. The subject of the article fails several of our notability policies: there is no evidence of WP:INDEPTH coverage – all references are to publications where he was co-author, or to unrelated press releases about drugs that don't even mention the subject's name, not speaking about confirming his role or achievements. There is no evidence of compliance with any criteria listed under WP:NACADEMIC either. The listed awards are minor awards, none has an article (note: NIH Director's Pioneer Award is not an award honouring its recipients but a research initiative).
Worst: there are many unverified claims in the article: the subject, who left Novartis in 2020, is claimed to have been "involved in early successes in gene therapy, including (...) Zolgensma (...) and Hemgenix". However, Novartis was not involved in Zolgensma development – the drug was developed by a US startup Avexis which received marketing authorisation for it just before the subject left Novartis, while remaining a separate company from Novartis; whereas Hemgenix is not a success yet, as it's barely a year on the market with very little uptake from payers outside the US. Claims that Dolmetch contributed to their "successes" appear unfounded and entirely unsourced WP:PUFFERY.
Nearly every sentence needs one or more of {{citation needed}}, {{fails verification}}, or {{secondary source needed}}.
All in all, with lack of independent coverage, I don't think this coporate staff member fulfils our criteria of encyclopaedia-level notability. — kashmīrī TALK 11:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Role in Novartis over many years? What policy would this be based on? Because there are tens of thousands of corporations in the world, perhaps hundreds of thousands of C-level executives, and he wasn't even C-level, so we'd need a policy if this was to be a notability criteria. — kashmīrī TALK 18:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Comment: The article, seemingly created by the subject or someone very close to him, contains a lot of made-up claims and attempts to look more important. For instance, the author claims to have been Global Head of Neuroscience at Novartis. Actually, he wasn't [55] – he did not work for the Swiss pharmaceutical giant but for Novartis Institutes of BioMedical Research, a US-based biotechnology company (separate legally and structurally, even as wholly owned by Novartis). Different company, different post, different splendour, different country. I've updated the article, but a bad taste remained. Then, the article claims that the subject oversaw the development of gene therapies while in NIBR ("his team... helped bring several therapies to the clinic that included Zolgensma"). That again is misleading. Not only has NIBR never done any substantial work on the mentioned gene therapy (apart from internal consulting) but NIBR even does not carry out clinical development. The mentioned Zolgensma in particular was licensed by Novartis long after all its preclinical and much of clinical development was over.
After the subject joined NIBR, its neuroscience division indeed attempted to engage in clinical development – initially, it was clinical trials of branaplam. Yet the two trials they conducted not only failed but the first one was a disaster (children dying due to poor decision making, and no sensible data generated in 7 years) – to the extent that, to the best of my knowledge, Novartis recommended internally that NIBR no longer does clinical development again. The subject left NIBR shortly after.
That's not the end of problems with the article. The subject could not "curate the drug development pipeline that included... ofatumumab", the reason being that ofatumumab received marketing authorisation four years before the subject joined NIBR, [56] not mentioning that ofatumumab was discovered and had preclinical development done by the Danish company Genmab.
Unfortunately, I have no time to research other claims, however the sheer number of WP:PEACOCK/ WP:PROMO statements constitutes a big red light for me. — kashmīrī TALK 00:30, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Papers authored or co-authored by Dolmetsch don't help with [establishing that he is notable]. Because they are not about Dolmetch. — kashmīrī TALK 20:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Hello my name is Ricardo Dolmetsch. Someone brought to my attention that there was a wikipedia article about me and that there was a discussion about its content. I’m arriving a little late to the discussion but I thought I could shed some light on some of the issues that are being discussed. First I didn’t commission or approve this article. It was submitted by my mother who is a journalist in Colombia, without my consent or approval. My mom thinks I’m important but I don’t think that meets the criteria for notability in Wikipedia. There are many scientists who have records like mine so I leave it to you to decide whether to keep the page or take it down. The small group of people who need to know about me can usually find me online, so a Wikipedia entry is not absolutely essential.
Ok that’s it. Thank you all so much for being such selfless editors of Wikipedia. It’s kind of amazing that we have this resource. I’m thinking I should join the effort and help you all. 24.2.241.30 ( talk) 17:05, 14 May 2024 (UTC) Ricardo
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 11:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 10:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of software patents#Notable due to proprietor hyperbole. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Small patent troll that made a bit of an ephemeral stir 20 years ago when it tried to claim a patent on XML. Quickly sank back into obscurity. As a company it doesn't really do anything. 29 employees, 6 million revenue. No sources meet
WP:CORPDEPTH.
WP:ORGCRIT tells us that sources for such companies must be presented with a stronger emphasis on quality of the sources to prevent gaming of the rules by marketing and public relations professionals.
Thus CORPDEPTH says Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization
. No such sources exist. This is just a patent troll. Added a notability template in April to attempt to address the issues but this was summarily removed after a second report of the patent trolling was added (misdated. It is from 2005, and not 2020).
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk)
10:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
just a patent trolland
doesn't really do anythingmisses the point a little bit – the patent trolling is precisely what the company is notable for. I agree it
sank back into obscurityafterwards, but notability isn't temporary. The requirement is the company receives significant independent coverage in multiple sources; there's nothing about this coverage needing to take place over a prolonged period.
(misdated. It is from 2005, and not 2020)2005 is the publication date, 2020 is the archive date. – Tera tix ₵ 12:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
I agree it sank back into obscurity afterwards, but notability isn't temporary—OK but the immediate next section is
notable topics have attracted attention over a sufficiently significant period of time, so the question is, does SBST apply here? Alpha3031 ( t • c) 13:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
routine coverage such as press releases, public announcements, sports coverage, and tabloid journalism. I could see a reasonable argument this could be covered as part of a larger article ( patent troll, XML or somewhere else), or that the article needs to be rewritten to be about the patent controversy rather than the company as such, but the nominator was pretty clear he doesn't think there are any sources providing deep and significant coverage on the topic and seeks deletion rather than any alternative. – Tera tix ₵ 15:10, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS that is neither a YouTube video or a dead link; one is a WP:PRIMARY of one of the teams, three of the ESPN articles is about the Bowl or BCS games, not exclusive to this and the rest is about the games itself with the broadcasting element being given a passing mention. The rest is about the games itself, far less for the broadcasting of this game. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; besides a YouTube and a dead link, one is a WP:PRIMARY of one of the teams, one needs a Flash reader and thus inactive. Of the news scans, one is about the game itself, one is an announcment and one redirects to the home page. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS, barring five Wikipedia articles; two duplicate source is about the BCS game itself, not just this. One is about the Bowl games itself, one is about the coverage of the Bowl games and the rest about the game itself with the goverage being given a passing mention. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; one is a dead link; four (a duplicate source of two articles), is about the BCS game in general, not just the broadcasting of this and one has a brief info about TV information and five of those (a single source), although a WP:PRIMARY, now a dead link. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable businessperson, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. A WP:BEFORE search turns up only the interview in the ACCA house magazine cited here, the rest is only passing mentions. Her honorary doctorate is from the "Swiss School of Business and Management", which appears to be a degree mill, since it's not listed in the Swiss Accreditation Council's website. Article was moved to draft, submitted without improvement today, then copypasted to main space four minutes later. Wikishovel ( talk) 09:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; is about a switch from ESPN, which should be in an article about the game itself, not a list of broadcasters. Additionally, one is a YouTube video, one is about the BCS coverages in general, not just this and though all of those are about the games itself, the broadcasting gets a passing mention. The rest is about the games itself, far less for the broadcasting of this game. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:10, 10 May 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! 06:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; one is a 404, one are announcments of the BCS coverages, not just this. The rest is about the games itself, far less for the broadcasting of this game. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 08:57, 10 May 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! 06:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; one is about the BCS games in general, not just this, one is a 403, three of those talk about the BCS and Bowl games in general one is a TV schedule listing and one is about one of the announcers in general, not the boradcasting of this game. None of these are doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 08:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS, this game gets a brief mention, the rest are TV schedules. In all, not doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the others are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 08:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS, two of those are blogspot posts. Of the four ESPN press releases, two of those are TV schedule listings, two of those is about the 34 Bowl games, not just this which gets a brief mention. In all, not doing anything at all to help assert notability of lists like this. All the rest are unsourced. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 08:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here? The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. Of the sources per WP:RS; as with the ESPN sources, one redirects to the main page whilst the other is a 403. The other two are news report of the game itself, so not doing much to assert notability, which is used to argue about the notability of lists like this. One is a YouTube video, the one of a local paper leads to an error message. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 08:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. There is clear consensus among editors other than the primary contributors to the article that sources are lacking, and no convincing rebuttals to delete arguments' source analyses have been provided. signed, Rosguill talk 15:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG, barely any reliable sources online. Sources used in the article may not be reliable, especially excessive use of Discogs. Toadette Edit! 08:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 13:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Only sources are a column and two citations of a deprecated source. WP:BEFORE only returns similar, unreliable, sources. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. AlexandraAVX ( talk) 07:55, 10 May 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! 06:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Expanding on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srbija FF, I don't see this low-level Swedish football club meeting GNG. Modest history peaking on the 6th tier. Geschichte ( talk) 07:01, 10 May 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! 06:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Expanding on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srbija FF, I don't see this low-level Swedish football club meeting GNG. Modest history peaking on the 5th tier. Geschichte ( talk) 07:01, 10 May 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! 06:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Expanding on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srbija FF, I don't see this low-level Swedish football club meeting GNG. Modest history peaking on the 5th tier. Geschichte ( talk) 06:59, 10 May 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! 06:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Expanding on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srbija FF, I don't see this low-level Swedish football club meeting GNG. Modest history peaking on the 6th tier. Geschichte ( talk) 06:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Does not pass WP:GNG. The only reliable source I can find is this, but all the rest are just unreliable outlets. Toadette Edit! 06:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Lacks significant coverage, though his company Design Projects is an extremely generic name. No possible redirect as his company does not have an article. He seems to have worked mostly on B movies. —Kaliforniyka Hi! 01:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
04:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
06:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. If an editor wants to work on this article in Draft space, let m know or make a request at WP:REFUND Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:NJOURNALIST. Couldn't find any articles or independent information about him online. The article is mostly puffery. Probably a COI - draftifying might be an alternative, though I can't find any coverage about him at all. Clear friend a 💬 02:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
03:18, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 04:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 03:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. The commenters make a good point that the nominator's actions do not reflect due diligence when considering then nominating this for deletion. No support for deletion has appeared. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 02:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC) Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 02:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 02:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 02:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:26, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't see a reason why this article should exist -- none of the sources (that aren't broken) talk about the software industry in Madurai as a broader trend. This failed a PROD for being potentially notable, but absent any evidence to support that potential, I think this article should be deleted. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 01:26, 3 May 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
01:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 01:16, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails notability guidelines and has no significant coverage. Kingsmasher678 ( talk) 01:03, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep - I think I have added sufficient refs to bring this up to notable. -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk) 01:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep - Agree. He satisfies WP:GNG MaskedSinger ( talk) 11:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 00:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 00:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 00:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 00:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 00:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 00:26, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 00:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 00:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 00:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 00:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)