The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 22:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
This subject fails WP:GNG because she enjoys in-depth coverage mainly by primary sources (the UN -- I also found university coverage of her as its associate but did not add it). In-depth coverage by multiple reliable sources appears not to exist. Separately, she remains far from passing special criteria at WP:ACADEMIC or WP:POLITICIAN as well. JFHJr ( ㊟) 22:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG ( talk) 22:42, 17 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! 22:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG ( talk) 22:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:46, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't think this passes WP: N. Previous AfDs didn't reach a consensus, but not a single one of the Keep votes in any of those AfDs actually cites any notability guidelines. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 21:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:23, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 22:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:BIO, puff piece on a WP:ROTM architect doing his job. Contains significant paid mainspace contributions by an employee. WP:NOTRESUME applies. The whole slew of awards is a form of WP:BOMBARD. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:22, 17 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! 22:52, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
This page has no references, and so fails both verifiability and general notability. It has been moved to draft space twice, by User:Hey man im josh and User:Wikishovel, and moved back to article space twice by the originator with no apparent improvement. Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Lots of possibilities mentioned but we need opinions for specific outcomes they want to happen.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:14, 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! 22:12, 17 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! 22:53, 24 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. JTtheOG ( talk) 21:37, 17 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! 22:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:BIO, provided reason why he was notable (head of macro) is not substantiated by sources and was publicly disputed by previous employer. Fails WP:GNG, only secondary source is a few quotes in Fox News, all of the others are blogs/podcasts/primary sources Reflord ( talk) 19:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
References
The result was procedural close as the AfD was started by a now-blocked sock. Number 5 7 22:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
It doesn't appear to be a notable company. I searched for sources using all alternatives: "DarwinHealth" but couldn't find anything that satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH.
Sure there are mentions of DarwinHealth in articles about targeted medicine but this article isn't based on those mentions it's fluffed up from the organization's first-hand research and press releases because there are no independent peer reviews of this company's work yet. One of the sources that looks like it might support notability, the WSJ article is, upon closer inspection an essay written by none other than the company's CEO then we have a load more primary sources like this listings site https://www.nature.com/nature-index/institution-outputs/united-states-of-america-usa/darwinhealth/59f35838b615d2287807e4cd a press release in PharmaBiz https://www.pharmabiz.com/PrintArticle.aspx?aid=138344&sid=2 and the mother of all primary, promotional, PR puffery the organization's about us page https://darwinhealth.com/about/ this article fails WP:NCORP fails WP:CORPDEPTH fails WP:N and should be deleted. Dafydd y Corach ( talk) 17:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 08:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Contested WP:CSD. Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Being a "veteran leader" of a party doesn't inherently makes one notable. Sources found both here and WP:BEFORE can not establish GNG either. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 17:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of programs broadcast by Hum TV#Horror or supernatural series. Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't find sign/in-depth coverage, such as reviews. All I could find is some ROTM coverage and announcements/press release based coverage like this and this, and pieces by freelancers in RS like this all of which isn't sufficient to establish GNG. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 15:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Angeline Malik#As a director. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't find sign/in-depth coverage, such as reviews. All I could find is some ROTM coverage like this and this which isn't sufficient to establish GNG. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 15:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Despite the limited participation, this cannot be soft-deleted, as it qualifies under G5 as the creation of an indef-blocked sock. No prejudice against recreation by an editor in good standing, if sources establishing notability can be found. Owen× ☎ 22:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
It doesn't appear to be a notable company. I searched for sources using all alternatives: "Altair4 Multimedia," "Altair 4 Multimedia," and "Altair Multimedia," but couldn't find anything that satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH. GSS 💬 15:45, 17 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! 23:03, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
This buzzword soup appears to be sourced entirely to the book that invented the term ( WP:NOTNEO) and the blog posts and press releases of the author promoting it ( WP:SPIP, WP:NOTPROMO). I am unable to find any reliable sources using the term, much less anything meeting the other three criteria. I'm not quite sure the tone is G11, so here we are. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 15:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:04, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
The only real claim to fame in the article is a "former candidate for the United States House of Representatives" and an academic. The information for the candidate for the House of Representatives specifically states he was considering running and formed an exploratory committee. This does not meet the requirements for notability. The article was created in 2005 so there has been plenty of opportunities to add reliable sourced content if it existed, but from what I can see it doesn't exist. This individual does not meet the requirements for notability to have a stand alone Wikipedia article. VViking Talk Edits 15:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Subject fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. The only reference I can find that is significant coverage in an independent, reliable, secondary source is this (note 3, and it's an edge case for notability since it seems to come from VinePair's WP:TRADES coverage.). All other sources in this article, as well as WP:BEFORE sources offering significant coverage, are press releases or sponsored content once you click through, even the Yahoo Finance pieces. Other references on this page are to LinkedIn, the subject's own website or other primary/user-generated sources. One item of significant coverage in an independent, secondary, reliable source is not enough; we need multiple. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 15:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Geschichte ( talk) 06:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Band fails WP:GNG, WP:NBAND, WP:NMUSIC. No WP:SIGCOV in reliable and independent sources. Sources cited in article are (1) primarily about the lead singer, incidentally referencing the subject; (2) AllMusic which is of disputed reliability (and in any event is a single paragraph); and (3) a primary source. WP:BEFORE search turns up nothing else to support notability. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 11:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to the most ardent fans. Fails WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. As with sources per WP:RS, these consists of WP:PRIMARY and dead links, the only decent source is an announcment for a new announcer; not helping this list to assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to the most ardent fans. Fails WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. As with sources per WP:RS, only consist of a single one about the 2023 season; not helping this list to assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Nawabshah , which is the current target of the Benazirabad redirect, as a sensible ATD. Feel free to amend the target if the Nawabshah/Benazirabad title-war settles differently. Owen× ☎ 22:32, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 09:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Astroinformatics. Liz Read! Talk! 23:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
This appears to be either or both a PhD project proposal, for a MA or Part II. It describes what will be done as part of an apparently funded proposal. Since there already is a more general page on the wider topic at Astroinformatics, I see no rationale for this page. Ldm1954 ( talk) 08:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Complex/ Rational 14:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Another case of a politician who got involved in the upcoming election and withdrew or defected to another party and stuff like that. Sources are mostly WP:ROUTINE and WP:RUNOFTHEMILL, some are unreliable. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 08:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to James Follett#Radio without prejudice to selectively merging sourced content, if any. Owen× ☎ 22:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
No refs on the page for many years. I'm not seeing any RS to consider against the inclusion criteria - not all BBC radio dramas are notable. WP:NOTEVERYTHING WP:NOTPLOT JMWt ( talk) 08:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to NBC Sports Philadelphia#Sports coverage. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
No refs on the page for many years and I'm not seeing much that could be considered substantial RS to consider against the inclusion criteria. Possibly as an ATD could merge to NBC Sports Philadelphia JMWt ( talk) 08:17, 17 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! 04:17, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Unfortunately, aside from the usual announcements and sponsored articles (excluded under WP:ORGTRIV and ORGIND respectively), I was unable to find any relevant coverage. The topic may be more suitable in a more comprehensive publication or database. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 14:49, 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! 07:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to KUAM-TV. Liz Read! Talk! 04:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG; no sources; could merge with KUAM-TV. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 14:34, 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! 07:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Nothing in the article suggests notability. TheLongTone ( talk) 14:25, 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! 07:04, 17 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. 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 speedy keep. Procedural Keep, no deletion rationale provided. "Feels like PROD" isn't a justified rationale to delete an article which should focus on notability and Wikipedia policies that aren't being met. Liz Read! Talk! 02:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Only links to one article being her husband. Searching in google news, google scholar and JSTOR yields very little. Fails WP:BIO, WP:AUTHOR, WP:ACADEMIC. LibStar ( talk) 06:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. I see a consensus to Delete this article. Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Not enough sources to establish GNG here. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 06:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
[16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22]. I'm of the opinion that some articles doesn't need to go through AFD instead a notability tag should be placed for it to be improved on if the editor placing it , isn't ready to find source. Otbest ( talk) 07:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nominator has withdrawn their nomination and voted to Keep this article. Liz Read! Talk! 04:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Article is well sourced and well written, however, it does not refer to a municipality, but an ill-defined geographic area. Silicon Slopes is essentially a commercial high tech real estate project that over time grew out of Thanksgiving Point with a large amount (over 40%) of vacant real estate and this article is the ad for that . Article makes more sense merged into Utah Valley since having a standalone article is nothing more than advertising for commercial real estate in Lehi, Utah. Recommend delete or merge into the previously mentioned articles. KindHorta ( talk) 05:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 05:33, 18 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) 02:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 04:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Searches did not return any coverage of a settlement or community, and USGS topo maps do not show a community or even a name at this location. The GNIS entry lists its source as "Illustrated Historical Atlas of the State of Indiana. Chicago: Baskin, Forster and Company, 1876. An extensively illustrated atlas which includes several U.S. and Indiana thematic and political maps, and maps of counties, towns and cities. The atlas also has many illustrations and portraits, patrons' and business directories, county histories and a U.S. Post Office list." As far as I can tell this was never anything more than a named point on the railroad. – dlthewave ☎ 04:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:49, 23 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) 02:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Dutch Figure Skating Championships. Liz Read! Talk! 03:37, 24 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) 02:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Owen× ☎ 22:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
No sources and I have been unable to find any. Also does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Kingsmasher678 ( talk) 02:45, 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! 03:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 02:41, 24 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) 02:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:06, 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) 02:44, 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! 03:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:49, 23 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) 02:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Doczilla
Ohhhhhh, no! 02:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Both sides bring up valid arguments. This type of discussion is probably better suited for an RFC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography or similar project page, with broader participation. Owen× ☎ 12:05, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
As has been discussed on the talk page, this list relies on a single
WP:PRIMARY source and has multiple
WP:SYNTH issues. It is a poor summary of the primary source [UK
Office for National Statistics (ONS) release] because it lacks the extensive contextualisation included in that source. In the absence of any secondary sources, it adds nothing to the original source. In terms of encyclopedic value, it is of dubious merit because the nomenclature chosen by the ONS conflicts with common usage and thus requires qualification by a complete list of included and excluded wards/parishes – which it doesn't have as that would require even more SYNTH violations.
The only alternative to outright deletion that I can see is to park it in draft space until the ONS produces its statistics by agglomeration (conurbation). There is a reason why no secondary sources have bothered to respond to this release of statistics: it is not useful. -- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 16:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
1. Primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them-- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 09:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Doczilla
Ohhhhhh, no! 09:43, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 02:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 02:31, 24 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) 02:20, 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! 01:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 04:24, 19 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) 02:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A comment to "procedural keep" is not an argument on why an article should be Kept. I'm relisting this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 01:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 02:29, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 01:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. The nominator needs to present a more compelling justification for deletion than that you couldn't find the sources online when you looked. Sources aren't required to be accessible online. Liz Read! Talk! 02:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
A google search for the topic found only the website, a local guide, and user-generated information. Also I couldn't find any of the first 5 sources online, and 6th source is trivial coverage. Therefore not notable. -- unsigned post by EternalNub
The result was speedy keep. Procedural Keep, no deletion rationale provided. "Feels like PROD" isn't a justified rationale to delete an article which should focus on notability and Wikipedia policies that aren't being met. Liz Read! Talk! 02:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 22:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
This subject fails WP:GNG because she enjoys in-depth coverage mainly by primary sources (the UN -- I also found university coverage of her as its associate but did not add it). In-depth coverage by multiple reliable sources appears not to exist. Separately, she remains far from passing special criteria at WP:ACADEMIC or WP:POLITICIAN as well. JFHJr ( ㊟) 22:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG ( talk) 22:42, 17 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! 22:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG ( talk) 22:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:46, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't think this passes WP: N. Previous AfDs didn't reach a consensus, but not a single one of the Keep votes in any of those AfDs actually cites any notability guidelines. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 21:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:23, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 22:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:BIO, puff piece on a WP:ROTM architect doing his job. Contains significant paid mainspace contributions by an employee. WP:NOTRESUME applies. The whole slew of awards is a form of WP:BOMBARD. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:22, 17 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! 22:52, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
This page has no references, and so fails both verifiability and general notability. It has been moved to draft space twice, by User:Hey man im josh and User:Wikishovel, and moved back to article space twice by the originator with no apparent improvement. Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Lots of possibilities mentioned but we need opinions for specific outcomes they want to happen.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:14, 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! 22:12, 17 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! 22:53, 24 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. JTtheOG ( talk) 21:37, 17 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! 22:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:BIO, provided reason why he was notable (head of macro) is not substantiated by sources and was publicly disputed by previous employer. Fails WP:GNG, only secondary source is a few quotes in Fox News, all of the others are blogs/podcasts/primary sources Reflord ( talk) 19:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
References
The result was procedural close as the AfD was started by a now-blocked sock. Number 5 7 22:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
It doesn't appear to be a notable company. I searched for sources using all alternatives: "DarwinHealth" but couldn't find anything that satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH.
Sure there are mentions of DarwinHealth in articles about targeted medicine but this article isn't based on those mentions it's fluffed up from the organization's first-hand research and press releases because there are no independent peer reviews of this company's work yet. One of the sources that looks like it might support notability, the WSJ article is, upon closer inspection an essay written by none other than the company's CEO then we have a load more primary sources like this listings site https://www.nature.com/nature-index/institution-outputs/united-states-of-america-usa/darwinhealth/59f35838b615d2287807e4cd a press release in PharmaBiz https://www.pharmabiz.com/PrintArticle.aspx?aid=138344&sid=2 and the mother of all primary, promotional, PR puffery the organization's about us page https://darwinhealth.com/about/ this article fails WP:NCORP fails WP:CORPDEPTH fails WP:N and should be deleted. Dafydd y Corach ( talk) 17:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 08:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Contested WP:CSD. Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Being a "veteran leader" of a party doesn't inherently makes one notable. Sources found both here and WP:BEFORE can not establish GNG either. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 17:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of programs broadcast by Hum TV#Horror or supernatural series. Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't find sign/in-depth coverage, such as reviews. All I could find is some ROTM coverage and announcements/press release based coverage like this and this, and pieces by freelancers in RS like this all of which isn't sufficient to establish GNG. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 15:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Angeline Malik#As a director. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't find sign/in-depth coverage, such as reviews. All I could find is some ROTM coverage like this and this which isn't sufficient to establish GNG. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 15:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Despite the limited participation, this cannot be soft-deleted, as it qualifies under G5 as the creation of an indef-blocked sock. No prejudice against recreation by an editor in good standing, if sources establishing notability can be found. Owen× ☎ 22:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
It doesn't appear to be a notable company. I searched for sources using all alternatives: "Altair4 Multimedia," "Altair 4 Multimedia," and "Altair Multimedia," but couldn't find anything that satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH. GSS 💬 15:45, 17 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! 23:03, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
This buzzword soup appears to be sourced entirely to the book that invented the term ( WP:NOTNEO) and the blog posts and press releases of the author promoting it ( WP:SPIP, WP:NOTPROMO). I am unable to find any reliable sources using the term, much less anything meeting the other three criteria. I'm not quite sure the tone is G11, so here we are. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 15:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:04, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
The only real claim to fame in the article is a "former candidate for the United States House of Representatives" and an academic. The information for the candidate for the House of Representatives specifically states he was considering running and formed an exploratory committee. This does not meet the requirements for notability. The article was created in 2005 so there has been plenty of opportunities to add reliable sourced content if it existed, but from what I can see it doesn't exist. This individual does not meet the requirements for notability to have a stand alone Wikipedia article. VViking Talk Edits 15:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Subject fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. The only reference I can find that is significant coverage in an independent, reliable, secondary source is this (note 3, and it's an edge case for notability since it seems to come from VinePair's WP:TRADES coverage.). All other sources in this article, as well as WP:BEFORE sources offering significant coverage, are press releases or sponsored content once you click through, even the Yahoo Finance pieces. Other references on this page are to LinkedIn, the subject's own website or other primary/user-generated sources. One item of significant coverage in an independent, secondary, reliable source is not enough; we need multiple. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 15:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Geschichte ( talk) 06:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Band fails WP:GNG, WP:NBAND, WP:NMUSIC. No WP:SIGCOV in reliable and independent sources. Sources cited in article are (1) primarily about the lead singer, incidentally referencing the subject; (2) AllMusic which is of disputed reliability (and in any event is a single paragraph); and (3) a primary source. WP:BEFORE search turns up nothing else to support notability. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 11:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to the most ardent fans. Fails WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. As with sources per WP:RS, these consists of WP:PRIMARY and dead links, the only decent source is an announcment for a new announcer; not helping this list to assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to the most ardent fans. Fails WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. As with sources per WP:RS, only consist of a single one about the 2023 season; not helping this list to assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Nawabshah , which is the current target of the Benazirabad redirect, as a sensible ATD. Feel free to amend the target if the Nawabshah/Benazirabad title-war settles differently. Owen× ☎ 22:32, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 09:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Astroinformatics. Liz Read! Talk! 23:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
This appears to be either or both a PhD project proposal, for a MA or Part II. It describes what will be done as part of an apparently funded proposal. Since there already is a more general page on the wider topic at Astroinformatics, I see no rationale for this page. Ldm1954 ( talk) 08:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Complex/ Rational 14:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Another case of a politician who got involved in the upcoming election and withdrew or defected to another party and stuff like that. Sources are mostly WP:ROUTINE and WP:RUNOFTHEMILL, some are unreliable. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 08:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to James Follett#Radio without prejudice to selectively merging sourced content, if any. Owen× ☎ 22:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
No refs on the page for many years. I'm not seeing any RS to consider against the inclusion criteria - not all BBC radio dramas are notable. WP:NOTEVERYTHING WP:NOTPLOT JMWt ( talk) 08:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to NBC Sports Philadelphia#Sports coverage. Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
No refs on the page for many years and I'm not seeing much that could be considered substantial RS to consider against the inclusion criteria. Possibly as an ATD could merge to NBC Sports Philadelphia JMWt ( talk) 08:17, 17 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! 04:17, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Unfortunately, aside from the usual announcements and sponsored articles (excluded under WP:ORGTRIV and ORGIND respectively), I was unable to find any relevant coverage. The topic may be more suitable in a more comprehensive publication or database. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 14:49, 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! 07:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to KUAM-TV. Liz Read! Talk! 04:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG; no sources; could merge with KUAM-TV. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 14:34, 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! 07:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 05:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Nothing in the article suggests notability. TheLongTone ( talk) 14:25, 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! 07:04, 17 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. 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 speedy keep. Procedural Keep, no deletion rationale provided. "Feels like PROD" isn't a justified rationale to delete an article which should focus on notability and Wikipedia policies that aren't being met. Liz Read! Talk! 02:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Only links to one article being her husband. Searching in google news, google scholar and JSTOR yields very little. Fails WP:BIO, WP:AUTHOR, WP:ACADEMIC. LibStar ( talk) 06:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. I see a consensus to Delete this article. Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Not enough sources to establish GNG here. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 06:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
[16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22]. I'm of the opinion that some articles doesn't need to go through AFD instead a notability tag should be placed for it to be improved on if the editor placing it , isn't ready to find source. Otbest ( talk) 07:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Nominator has withdrawn their nomination and voted to Keep this article. Liz Read! Talk! 04:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Article is well sourced and well written, however, it does not refer to a municipality, but an ill-defined geographic area. Silicon Slopes is essentially a commercial high tech real estate project that over time grew out of Thanksgiving Point with a large amount (over 40%) of vacant real estate and this article is the ad for that . Article makes more sense merged into Utah Valley since having a standalone article is nothing more than advertising for commercial real estate in Lehi, Utah. Recommend delete or merge into the previously mentioned articles. KindHorta ( talk) 05:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 05:33, 18 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) 02:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 04:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Searches did not return any coverage of a settlement or community, and USGS topo maps do not show a community or even a name at this location. The GNIS entry lists its source as "Illustrated Historical Atlas of the State of Indiana. Chicago: Baskin, Forster and Company, 1876. An extensively illustrated atlas which includes several U.S. and Indiana thematic and political maps, and maps of counties, towns and cities. The atlas also has many illustrations and portraits, patrons' and business directories, county histories and a U.S. Post Office list." As far as I can tell this was never anything more than a named point on the railroad. – dlthewave ☎ 04:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:49, 23 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) 02:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Dutch Figure Skating Championships. Liz Read! Talk! 03:37, 24 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) 02:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Owen× ☎ 22:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
No sources and I have been unable to find any. Also does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Kingsmasher678 ( talk) 02:45, 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! 03:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 02:41, 24 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) 02:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:06, 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) 02:44, 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! 03:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 03:49, 23 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) 02:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Doczilla
Ohhhhhh, no! 02:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Both sides bring up valid arguments. This type of discussion is probably better suited for an RFC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography or similar project page, with broader participation. Owen× ☎ 12:05, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
As has been discussed on the talk page, this list relies on a single
WP:PRIMARY source and has multiple
WP:SYNTH issues. It is a poor summary of the primary source [UK
Office for National Statistics (ONS) release] because it lacks the extensive contextualisation included in that source. In the absence of any secondary sources, it adds nothing to the original source. In terms of encyclopedic value, it is of dubious merit because the nomenclature chosen by the ONS conflicts with common usage and thus requires qualification by a complete list of included and excluded wards/parishes – which it doesn't have as that would require even more SYNTH violations.
The only alternative to outright deletion that I can see is to park it in draft space until the ONS produces its statistics by agglomeration (conurbation). There is a reason why no secondary sources have bothered to respond to this release of statistics: it is not useful. -- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 16:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
1. Primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them-- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 09:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Doczilla
Ohhhhhh, no! 09:43, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 02:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 02:31, 24 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) 02:20, 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! 01:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 04:24, 19 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) 02:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A comment to "procedural keep" is not an argument on why an article should be Kept. I'm relisting this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 01:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 02:29, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 ( talk) 01:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. The nominator needs to present a more compelling justification for deletion than that you couldn't find the sources online when you looked. Sources aren't required to be accessible online. Liz Read! Talk! 02:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
A google search for the topic found only the website, a local guide, and user-generated information. Also I couldn't find any of the first 5 sources online, and 6th source is trivial coverage. Therefore not notable. -- unsigned post by EternalNub
The result was speedy keep. Procedural Keep, no deletion rationale provided. "Feels like PROD" isn't a justified rationale to delete an article which should focus on notability and Wikipedia policies that aren't being met. Liz Read! Talk! 02:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!