Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 27 May 29 >

Purge server cache

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 21:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Marti Group

Marti Group (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage in reliable third-party sources that establish notability. Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. GSS  💬 10:43, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Switzerland. GSS  💬 10:43, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. This is a major Swiss engineering company. According to de:Marti Holding, their annual turnover is more than a billion Swiss francs. Anyway, a quick search in Swiss Google News confirms notability immediately: [1], [2], [3], [4]. — Kusma ( talk) 11:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Kusma: Thank you for finding these sources. Although I can't read German, Google Translate revealed that the second source is routine coverage with no significant detail on the company, and the fourth source is just a passing mention, both of which fail to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. However, the third one provides some depth about the company. The first source requires a subscription, so I am unable to review it; let's wait for others to check it. Additionally, it's a bit confusing whether the article is about a group of companies or an individual company, as the article on de-wiki is titled Marti Holding. If the article is kept, the title should be adjusted accordingly. GSS  💬 13:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Most of the articles will talk about what the company does, and go into depth about their projects, and not about the company itself. I think that should be expected of most companies, but especially of private and construction companies who are not usually in the spotlight. With that said, as Kusma noted, even information about the company itself can be found to establish notability.
    The article is intentionally meant to be about the entire group, as I think that their internal company structure and who does what is not easy to decipher for the public and it's also not interesting. Marti Holding is a holding company that owns a lot of others, but in a sense it's just one of many official entities and less relevant. They call themselves Marti Group on their own official channels and that's why I named it as such. Fejesjoco ( talk) 14:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    A deal worth a billion dollars for a significant part of Central Europe's greatest infrastructure project may be "routine coverage" to you. To me, it indicates that we should have an article about this company. It is an embarrassment that we did not have one ten years ago. — Kusma ( talk) 15:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
In the past hour, I added some sources found by Kusma and some others by me. These go in depth about the company so these should satisfy the notability and coverage depth criteria, much better than the average in this category. Additionally, since at one point you wanted to delete the article on grounds of being promotional, I added a section about a controversy of theirs, with even more direct news coverage sources. Fejesjoco ( talk) 18:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep (but I'm biased). With recent edits to the article, the concerns raised should be eliminated by now. BTW found another strong source [5] a university research project. The talk page lists additional ideas for extending the article, but even without that it should be good enough already. Fejesjoco ( talk) 15:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 00:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Star Premium. Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Star Action

Star Action (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

movie channel fails WP:Notability, the sources are only routine announcements with no deep or direct coverage of the company Assirian cat ( talk) 07:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 00:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Sameja (clan)

Sameja (clan) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Do we really need a standalone WP article on each and every tribe that exists on this planet? Fails WP:GNG. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 00:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

It is a major tribe of the Sindh region of Pakistan and they are a branch of a former ruling dynasty. You should avoid speed nominating multiple articles without hesitation and get yourself familiarized with South Asian caste related articles. Perhaps engage in a talk page discussion first with major contributors. The references provided are more than sufficient and reliable. Sir Calculus ( talk) 05:02, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment - I know nothing about this although I am confused about the content of the page. First Samma (tribe) is said to be a clan, then Sameja (clan) is said to be a clan and then on the page there are clans (or subclans?). It is unclear to me how many of the sources on the page are actually substantially discussing the topic. Second, there are wp pages in other languages for Samma (tribe) but none have one for Sameja (clan). It strikes me that unless someone can show a source which goes into depth then we should maybe follow the lead of the other WP language versions. JMWt ( talk) 09:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 00:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎ to take action, either on this article or the wider scope as proposed subsequently. I would suggest an RFC to be held, well-advertised, to discuss a potential new structure for these articles as being the best way forward. Daniel ( talk) 23:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Abro (tribe)

Abro (tribe) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Do we really need a standalone WP article on each and every tribe that exists on this planet? Fails WP:GNG. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 00:33, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

It is a major tribe of the Sindh region of Pakistan and they are a branch of a former ruling dynasty. You should avoid speed nominating multiple articles without hesitation and get yourself familiarized with South Asian caste related articles. Perhaps engage in a talk page discussion first with major contributors. Sir Calculus ( talk) 05:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Draftify and merge region wise all similar articles after RfC @ WT:PAK:
Though I would share main concern. I suppose it needs deeper collective thought. I do not see any WP:RFCBEFORE to have taken place at Talk:Abro (tribe) or rather better would have been at WT:PAK.
Likelihood of similar articles in 100s?
Category:Sindhi tribes likely to have more than 250 similar stubs. The way articles seem to have formed I can imagine similar would be the case for many in Category:Tribes of Pakistan. Though there is one central article Ethnic groups of Pakistan it's scope does not seem to be tribal specific.
Importance of topic and issue
I am surprised region wise central articles for tribes of Pakistan do not exist but such large number of stubs going no where seem to exist. Baradari (brotherhood) system is influential cultural part of Pakistan and that article too is a stub. Tribal and ethnicity antecedents form clan culture / Baradari (brotherhood) so anthropologically it's important core of Pakistan's demographic history. Though not paid enough attention to on WP.
Idk if any similar articles were listed and deleted up til now but my suggestion is Draftify and merge region wise all similar articles after RfC @ WT:PAK. If no one is ready to work on the drafts then put in my user name space I shall try to promote for expansion in due course. Bookku ( talk) 05:44, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Hi! Is it really possible to merge all region wise articles? There are many which may not be suitable for a single list-like descriptive article publishing. Jadeja, Kalhora, Soomro, Jokhio, Bhutto, Burfat are some examples. Sir Calculus ( talk) 12:24, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Well developed ones need not be merged. Even for region list may be long but it can be further divided tribal district wise because many tribes are likely to be concentrated in few districts only. May be you can have separate article for extinct tribes. End of the day AfD is would not be right venue to take a detail call but project notice board would be IMO. Bookku ( talk) 15:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 23:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to SIC Ferries. Liz Read! Talk! 00:12, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

MV Linga

MV Linga (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG or any other notability guidelines. Only references are primary. No independent coverage online. Clear friend a 💬 01:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

There aren't many references that can be used other the primary sources from the owner/operator of the vessel, there is also this one though: https://www.faktaomfartyg.se/linga_2002.htm
I don't understand how MV Linga is the only Shetland Islands Council ferry article that has been getting brought up for editor issues, despite it being the same layout and similar text style to the rest of the ferry articles that I have made.
It would also be better to be more explicit with which changes would be good as it doesn't make sense that you're not allowed to make an article using references to the owners website. ZetShip ( talk) 13:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to SIC Ferries. The most applicable guideline appears to be WP:NVEHICLES, which is an essay, and anyway pretty much defaults to WP:GNG for individual vehicles. Thus secondary sourcing beyond database entries would be needed here. Unfortunately the most I can find is a fairly routine news source [6]. I'd be happy to be proven wrong, but unless more sources come up - such as an offline news feature on the vessel - as an WP:ATD I recommend redirect to SIC Ferries. Resonant Distortion 15:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 23:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Tanith Lee bibliography#Tales from the Flat Earth. Liz Read! Talk! 21:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The Earth is Flat: Tales from the Flat Earth and Elsewhere

The Earth is Flat: Tales from the Flat Earth and Elsewhere (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Collection, fails GNG and WP:NBOOK. Cannot find a single review. Redirect to author? PARAKANYAA ( talk) 23:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Discussion about a possible redirect can occur on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 21:44, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Jokaru

Jokaru (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All the sources doesn't meet our requirement for WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV. For good, a redirect to the "List of 2023 films in Maldives" or related can help. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 04:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 23:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Residencial Manuel A. Perez

Residencial Manuel A. Perez (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG, NGEO, NBUILDING. All sources are to news coverage, mostly of crime, that mentions the subject in passing as the location of the crime but does not provide significant coverage. No SIGCOV comes up in a BEFORE search either. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 16:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Being in the headline is not the test of significant coverage. The articles are about other things in the news (crimes, individual people) that happen to mention the event happened/people lived in the Residencial Manuel A. Perez. Those events/people are getting the significant coverage. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 19:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

I appreciate that you have developed an alternative way of thinking about apartment complexes, but at AfD I'm nominating on the basis of official policies, not personal essays that do not represent the consensus of the community. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 01:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 23:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete The article and the sources are about some crimes that have taken place at this location, which I assume is being named as a residence complex. I don't see anything that would explain the significance of the named complex in these crimes. The residencia is a backdrop, not a foreground for the crimes. There would need to be more about the residencia itself for this article to be kept. Lamona ( talk) 03:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete A BEFORE search brings up a lot of coverage, but it's not about the building itself, but rather about crime that occurs there. I think there's the possibility for an article, but in the very limited and narrow scope of "is this building notable," there's just not enough there on the complex itself to be notable under GNG. SportingFlyer T· C 06:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    I do want to say that what is there may possibly be able to be included elsewhere in another article on residenciales. SportingFlyer T· C 06:07, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 00:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Adam Solya

Adam Solya (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find any independent, secondary coverage of the subject, does not meet WP:GNG. Coverage appears limited to attribution for choreography credits in ISU competition reports (e.g. [7]), which are not secondary prose coverage or significant, and interviews ( [8], [9]) lacking independent coverage of Solya. I tried searching for both the Western-style and Hungarian-style (Solya Adam) renditions of Solya's name online and found nothing relevant beyond the second interview example cited here. signed, Rosguill talk 17:23, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 17:12, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 21:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Huupe

Huupe (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find mention of this sporting item, beyond sites to purchase it. Appears PROMO. Sourcing used in the article appears in non-RS. Oaktree b ( talk) 22:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Oaktree b I agree with @ Kompyoub where the article does have reliable sources that show history and information on the product. This is not anything to do with anything promotional. I am happy to help answer anything but this article should stay. Nrochluz ( talk) 12:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I agree with all of this, delete Cmarsch☮︎ ( talk) ( contribs) 03:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Actually, re Rosguill, if you're referring to the bit in the sitemap (where it says Sponsored Content / All Sponsored Content across two lines) that seems to be a link to all their sponsored pieces. Those all have a marking at the top from what I can see, and I can't see anywhere else with the word Sponsored. On the other hand, there seems to be very little secondary analysis from the reporter themselves in the article that I could see, and analysing under TRADES, I am inclined to classify it as failing ORGCRIT. Also, it's a bit of a moot point, since I can't find another source that might meeet ORGCRIT. Overall, my assessment is that it is very likely that it is too soon for this company to meet NCORP, so I would also have to go with delete. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 08:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    re Rosguill, if you're referring to the bit in the sitemap (where it says Sponsored Content / All Sponsored Content across two lines) No, that appears to be further down the page. On my computer, below the last line of the article, there's a navigation bar to two other articles, followed by red text on a line on its own reading SPONSORED CONTENT, which is then a link to this page explaining their native advertisements signed, Rosguill talk 17:29, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no or few reliable sources for this product or brand. Bearian ( talk) 16:39, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 21:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Judoscript

Judoscript (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There are two reasons why this article should be deleted. The first reason is that it fails WP: N. A PROD on this article failed, but neither of the sources suggested when dePRODing covers the subject in-depth. The second reason is that this article is almost entirely (>80%) written by a user named JianboHuang, a single-purpose editor whose name closely matches that of the creator of the language. While AfD is not a venue to determine whether a COI has occurred, the edits made by this user cover the subject in excessive detail and in a tone that isn't really appropriate for an encyclopedia. At this point, I think WP: STARTOVER applies here. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 22:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 00:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lyazzat Tanysbay

Lyazzat Tanysbay (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ANYBIO / WP:JOURNALIST BoraVoro ( talk) 14:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 00:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Migue García (musician)

Migue García (musician) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Biography of a musician that does not clear WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, WP:NMUSIC. While several sources refer to Migue Garcia, they all cover him in a WP:TRIVIAL manner connected to his father Charly Garcia, from whom notability cannot be WP:INHERITED. Other available sources found in BEFORE search are user-generated or primary. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 17:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Live & Kicking. Liz Read! Talk! 22:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Trey Farley

Trey Farley (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage. Non-notable broadcaster. SL93 ( talk) 18:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Star Mississippi 01:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Margaret Adamson

AfDs for this article:
Margaret Adamson (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Appears to fail WP:GNG. Uhooep ( talk) 20:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Maryborough Castlemaine District Football Netball League. Liz Read! Talk! 00:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Trentham Football Netball Club

Trentham Football Netball Club (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG and NORG/CORP. Source in article and BEFORE are database records, game recaps, routine local mill news, and name mentions, nothing that meets WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth. Ping me if indepth sources addressing the subject directly meeting WP:SIRS are found.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Tim, here is a link to the official history book of the Australian Rules football club, Trentham Football / Netball Club in Victoria, Australia - https://trenthamsaintsfnc.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/TDFNC-The-First-100-Years-by-Vin-Cowell.pdf which should provide you with a good source for you add in any other citations for verification, addressing your concerns. Thanks, Justin. Justin J. Kelly ( talk) 18:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist to see if some consensus on an outcome can be found.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Redirect to Maryborough Castlemaine District Football Netball League as an AtD. I'm likewise not impressed with the applied, presented or found sourcing, none of which meets RS. Redirect protects full page history. Some of these articles are insufficiently sourced to avoid deletion process tests. BusterD ( talk) 08:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • @ BusterD: What's wrong with this source? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 15:27, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
      • I would classify it as "small beer." It's difficult for me to take seriously an interview with a "legendary" somebody who recalls successfully playing minor league football in a small Victoria town sixty years ago (a "legendary" but non-notable figure in a village of almost 1,200 dwellers!), I see nothing which demonstrates this team any more notable than any of the other entries on the league article which don't have pages about them. I see nothing significant and independent which actually shows the club exists as of this datestamp. If I stipulate the team exists, I'm forced to add there's not enough direct detailing to make this team meet WP:NTEAM (these days GNG) to rate an article on English Wikipedia. Not all local amateur sports teams are notable. The BURDEN is on those asserting keep. I assert page supporters haven't met their burden. I am arguing for a redirect outcome so that when sufficient sources ARE found, page supporters can just improve the page without hassle. BusterD ( talk) 18:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 00:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Ryan Mitchell (wrestler)

Ryan Mitchell (wrestler) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No notable pro wrestler, doesn't meet WP:GNG. 1, he worked on independent promotions. Not enough coverage from third party sources about him for an article. 2, the article is half hoax. He never won titles on OVW, TNA Wrestling, JCW or PWG. Looking his Cagematch profile, just won a few titles. HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 19:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment looks like, months ago, an IP included Josh Hardy and Ryan Mitchell on several championships as champions, which is fake. -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 19:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hoërskool Noordheuwel

AfDs for this article:
Hoërskool Noordheuwel (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previously deleted at AfD in October 2023; insufficient improvement in sourcing to meet N:SCHOOL. Sources are to hyperlocal news sources that read like user-submitted or sponsored copy ("Die kersie op die koek: Hoërskool Noordheuwel is die TOP AKADEMIESE SKOOL in Gauteng-Wes en bekleë ook die nr 5 posisie in Gauteng waarop ons baie trots is"... "The icing on the cake: Noordheuwel High School is the TOP ACADEMIC SCHOOL in Gauteng West and also holds the No. 5 position in Gauteng, which we are very proud of.") or a news site comprising regional high school sport news, not clearing the bar for NORG or GNG. A BEFORE search turns up no significant coverage in independent sources. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 16:56, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Please start a talk page discussion on a possible article page move. There are a lot of opinions about this article and it shouldn't be one editor's decision on what its title should be. Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Anti-Bengali sentiment

Anti-Bengali sentiment (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The whole article is WP:OR and is making connection of any unfavorable event that occurred in or around West Bengal as discrimination against its people. Ratnahastin ( talk) 09:08, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment I am withdrawing this nomination since the article went through a page move and that move appears to have been accepted by multiple editors on this AfD. I don't support deletion anymore as long as the suggested page move has been preferred. Ratnahastin ( talk) 14:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While this might be a clear Delete, I'm seeing too much opinion and not enough policy-based arguments about this article. Let's lower the temperature and consider how this article does or doesn't abide by Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Just because discrimination happens against other groups isn't a good reason to delete this particular article. I also note that this AFD has been available for closure for over 13 hours and no admin has opted to close it which made me consider whether it needed more substantive discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep I did a google scholar search for "anti-bengali discrimination india" and found a decent number of sources that seem to contribute to WP:GNG. I don't see a good reason to delete at this time. CarringtonMist ( talk) 16:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Although there is an issue with original research, there is also a decent amount of directly-related sources. Definitely needs to be cleaned up though. Perhaps since the page has been renamed, expand its coverage to include anti-Bengali sentiment in Pakistan/Myanmar. 70.176.221.156 ( talk) 01:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
70.176.221.156 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete Not denying that there is discrimination. It is just that the topic is not notable enough for a stand-alone article. Georgethedragonslayer ( talk) 18:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Does not need a standalone article for this WP:SYNTH. Most of the content is only about the language-related issues and religiously motivated discrimination where the victim happened to be Bengali speaker. Captain AmericanBurger1775 ( talk) 01:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep I have just done a massive (~1hr) edit on the article, stripping it of extensive OR/SYNTH and a lottttt of off-topic/unencyclopedic content. Despite the massive removals, I feel a pretty solid article remains, one that I've hopefully stripped down to the most relevant content (and thoroughly marked remaining statements in need of sources). I'm a bit scared to venture into picking/defining RSes myself, as an overly cautious editor, but given the statements from others above that more sources DO seem to exist, I hope I've paved the way for this to be an easier "keep and improve" Chiselinccc ( talk) 08:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to see opinions after Chiselinccc's massive clean-up job on this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Weak Keep and Weak Delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Alandré van Rooyen

Alandré van Rooyen (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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 routine transfer news ( 1, 2). JTtheOG ( talk) 23:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Week Keep - Found this should pass WP:BASIC

[12], [13], [14], [15]. Otbest ( talk) 19:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:03, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 00:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Keepa Mewett

Keepa Mewett (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a New Zealand rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 23:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. The Delete views present a stronger case, resulting in a rough consensus. Owen× ☎ 12:19, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of Australian Open broadcasters

List of Australian Open broadcasters (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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. As of sources per WP:RS: three of those are about announcment of deals, one is a listing of TV schedules, one just quotes the tourney in passing which has no relevance to this list. Checked WP:BEFORE which resulted in nothing. I would have no objections to a keep if the article was in the same quality of List of Wimbledon broadcasters.

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of French Open broadcasters (2nd nomination) SpacedFarmer ( talk) 11:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Tennis, Lists, and Australia. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 11:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of French Open broadcasters (2nd nomination) and WP:NOTTVGUIDE. LibStar ( talk) 00:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - except this one has better sourcing than the deleted French Open article. It needs to be tidied, but just because it's not up to a good article like Wimbledon broadcasters doesn't mean we delete it. Wimbledon broadcasters shows these articles can be kept and in the discussion on the deleteion of the French article it was mentioned that Wimbledon and Australia are much better. What's next... the US Open Broadcasters article.? Fyunck(click) ( talk) 19:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - I do not feel strongly about this page, but I do find the reasons for deletion to be garbage. This is not a TV guide, neither was the French Open page or any other of the tennis tournament broadcasters pages. This statement about the page "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?" I find to be the most nonsense. This page is not bloated at all. Since when is something listed in an encyclopedia only because it is popular? The whole point about an encyclopedia (particularly an online one that is not limited in size by printing costs) is that it should contain obscure information (I am not sure a listing of which networks broadcast a major tennis event is that obscure anyway). I would never request any page on wikipedia be deleted, as this goes against what I believe wikipedia should be about. If editors feel pages are not sourced well that is a different issue. If I feel that is the case when I look at a page, I look to find sources (in this page's case many sources may be broadcasts of finals which list the commentators). The only problematic issue with this page (and other Grand Slam TV broadcasters history pages) is that TV broadcast contracts are merging into online streaming contracts (with various limitations to customers based on location) and keeping up with all the different streaming contracts may be problematic going forward. But the pages still have a value when looking back on the era when events were broadcast on TV (for the time being Wimbledon is still broadcast on conventional TV by the BBC, though maybe not for much longer). This change to streaming could easily be overcome by a simple statement "in recent years the event has been available on a variety of streaming services". The No TV guide wikipedia policy that the deletion proposer posted a link to says the following: "An article on a broadcaster should not list upcoming events, current promotions, current schedules, format clocks, etc., although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant program lists and schedules may be acceptable." That clearly shows a primary reason for deletion of this article and others like it is bogus. Tennishistory1877 ( talk) 18:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 04:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • "Linking to online videos can be acceptable if it is demonstrated that the content was posted by the copyright holder or with their permission." More and more videos from long ago are being published on YouTube from official tennis sources, particularly the Australian Open (they are currently undertaking a project uploading a lot of their archive from 1975 onwards). A very good source of who is commentating on a match is the match itself provided by the tournament itself (just about as reliable as it can possibly be). And wikipedia policy seems to agree with that. The No original research policy states "Faithfully translating sourced material into English, or transcribing spoken words from audio or video sources, is not considered original research." Tennishistory1877 ( talk) 18:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Given that information, and some due thought, the videos that the Open produce via YouTube or distributable under the rights of the Open to their respective broadcasting partners, are therefore WP:PRIMARY. So, basically, a source that demonstrates some significant coverage of who calls the game, commentates, reports, etc. would have to be done by a secondary source, like if a local tv station called out who was doing it. I am not saying it's a bad source, just that it wouldn't qualify for the main thing I am arguing for: WP:LISTN. Conyo14 ( talk) 05:49, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • This is not a stand-alone list. Regarding primary sources, "a primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge". Obviously the wikipedia policy has to be careful to ensure that, for example, an article written about a political party does not solely use as its source the political party's official website. Not relevant to a broadcast of the Australian Open, where the commentators are mentioned (incidentally there are many other videos of the same matches not posted by the official YouTube channel of the tournament which have the same commentary). What this whole thing about is one editor copying and pasting deletion requests and posting them on many pages based on bogus reasons, referencing wikipedia policy articles that he clearly hasn't read. This editor does not seem to be contributing much to wikipedia (certainly not anything to this article), and is only intent on destroying and removing perfectly valid material. And you Conyo14, seem to be acting as a tag team with this editor. In common with the original poster, you seem to show no interest in the subject matter (even admitting so in your comments here) yet despite this seem intent on giving your views on whether this article should be removed, quoting wikipedia policy articles you clearly have not read, then when your ignorance is shown up, quoting other articles. There has already been one ANI trying to ban the user posting this deletion request and there may be more if this user continues to behave in this way. Why don't both users consider spending their time more productively, creating rather than destroying. Tennishistory1877 ( talk) 08:56, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    Hey! I don't appreciate your tone here, perhaps you need to stop replying here as your accusations of a tag team are mislead as well as my interpretations of a policy that are not unfounded. You're welcome to continue your usage of your interpretation of the policy as well as mine, because as far as that goes, it won't matter until the relister does their judgment. Conyo14 ( talk) 13:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • It wasn't me that first used the term "tag team", it was another editor that I do not know on the ANI, but it seems a pretty accurate description to me. I read the following text that you posted on the deletion proposer's user page, regarding the mass posting of deletion requests. "It's getting exhausting pressing copy and paste on these haha. Good work though on these. I definitely recommend slowing down a bit though. I'm not sure by how much, but one prior editor had a run going and then was formally warned to slow down in WP:ANI. You may create a user space here for the lists you wish to delete, that way you don't lose track of them". Those comments speak for themselves. I have quoted wikipedia policy documents that you and the deletion proposer have quoted throughout, showing how ridiculous your interpretations of them are (not surprising really, considering a lot of the text in the posts proposing deletion had very similar text on deletion requests for many pages which vary immensely). I have nothing personal against you, Conyo14, but your interventions here and on other removal pages do you no credit. I have not commented on the vast majority of the hundreds of pages which the user has requested for deletion, because they are on sports that I have no interest in, and I have a rule that I never edit or comment on subjects that do not interest me. But I agree there is little to be gained by a protracted argument. The wikipedia policies speak for themselves, as does the edit history of the editor proposing the deletion. Tennishistory1877 ( talk) 16:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    k Conyo14 ( talk) 16:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Conyo14, this discussion can't be closed as a "Soft Delete" as there are editors arguing for "Keeping" this article. Therefore, deletion is not uncontroversial and Soft Deletion is not appropriate. Soft Deletions are similar to Proposed Deletions and so if Deletion is contested, then SD can't be a closure result. Liz Read! Talk! 00:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Subject does not meet the WP:GNG or WP:LISTN due to a lack of references from secondary sources discussing the broadcasters as a set. Let'srun ( talk) 13:05, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Let'srun, I am struggling to see where the notability here comes from to meet the LISTN threshold. While a secondary consideration as AfD is not cleanup, there's far too much original research here for my liking too — representative in my opinion of the lack of secondary sources covering this topic, hence the LISTN concerns. Daniel ( talk) 23:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I have a good knowledge of the level of accuracy of this article (the accuracy level is high). I would not defend an article that was not accurate. There are numerous sources already, primary and secondary, but I have added more. Tennishistory1877 ( talk) 08:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Your personal knowledge of the content included in this article is of minimal relevance, per WP:OR. But that is not the primary reason I believe this should be deleted. It is the failure of meeting the LISTN threshold through independent, reliable secondary sources that mean this should be deleted. Daniel ( talk) 11:09, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. NLIST states, "There is no present consensus for how to assess the notability of more complex and cross-categorization lists (such as "Lists of X of Y") or what other criteria may justify the notability of stand-alone lists..." This AfD reflects the present lack of consensus on this wider issue. Jake Wartenberg ( talk) 20:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of Major League Baseball career double plays as a center fielder leaders

List of Major League Baseball career double plays as a center fielder leaders (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm not seeing any coverage of this specific statistic beyond the list maintained by Baseball-Reference.com ( [16]), having searched the internet, Google Books, and Google Scholar. We appear to fall short of WP:LISTN, and this title does not seem to make for an appropriate redirect to any more general article. signed, Rosguill talk 18:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Abdulsalam Haykal. Liz Read! Talk! 22:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Aliqtisadi

Aliqtisadi (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (web) the site is not notable and serves mainly as a promotional platform. It lacks coverage from reliable, independent sources. Additionally, it is listed on the Arabic Wikipedia blacklist, indicating its unsuitability as a reliable source. فيصل ( talk) 21:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 22:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

David Calloway Ross, Jr.

David Calloway Ross, Jr. (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Dubious notability, zero hits from RS in Google, created by an SPA intent on promoting a business the article's subject managed Fastily 20:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Missouri. Shellwood ( talk) 21:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Alabama and Georgia (U.S. state). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, fails to establish what the individual is actually notable for - no notable achievements apart from running a small local funeral parlour. Dan arndt ( talk) 00:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete--I don't see any notability for this person either. Drmies ( talk) 17:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • I understand the concerns raised about the article's subject, David Calloway Ross, Jr. However, I'd like to provide additional context and evidence to support his notability. While it's true that Ross's achievements may not be globally recognized, his contributions to the local community and funeral services industry are significant. As the president and funeral director of Ross-Clayton Funeral Home, he has:Continued the legacy of his family's business, which has been serving the community for over 100 years; Provided leadership and guidance to the funeral home, ensuring its continued operation and service to the community; Demonstrated a commitment to the local community through his involvement in various organizations and initiatives; Regarding the lack of Google search results, I'd like to point out that not all notable individuals have a strong online presence. This doesn't diminish Ross's achievements or impact on the community.
      As for the article being created by a single-purpose account (SPA), I assure you that my intention is not to promote a business but to document Ross's historical significance and contributions. I believe the article meets Wikipedia's guidelines for notability and verifiability. Ross's achievements may not be widely recognized, but they are notable in the context of his community and industry. I'm willing to work with you to improve the article and address any concerns. Please consider retaining the article. Mcrossphd ( talk) 17:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
      • Currently he does NOT meet our requirements; what is needed is reliable secondary sourcing. You argued that the Ross-Clayton funeral home is the oldest in the city--that's not even verified and I'm not sure it's true. There's a few mentions in a few books, but nothing of significance. If you would produce reliable secondary sources, that would be a different matter. Drmies ( talk) 17:27, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
      • The article on the business by Brad Harper is maybe a small step on the way to notability, but that's for the business, not the person. I note also that neither Harper nor the historical marker (I'm surprised the Alabama Historical Society accepted that text) make the "oldest funeral home" claim. BTW I'm about to write up the article on Lincoln Cemetery--there is no doubt that that is notable, on the basis of secondary sources and history. For this person, that argument is hard to make though perhaps the business might be notable. Drmies ( talk) 17:33, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        • Sir, please review Historical Marker Database for reliable source for Ross Clayton Funeral Home's History. Also view link for David Callaway Ross's notability references Mcrossphd ( talk) 17:45, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
          • Mrcrossphd, please don't call me "sir"--"Drmies" will do just fine, thanks. Historical markers are not generally accepted as acceptable secondary sources here, and that particular text is so blatantly non-neutral. Let me put it another way: it would be somewhat silly to dispute the facts on a marker (the Historical Association--Scotty Kirkland runs that--checks it) but we shouldn't be using historical markers as the basis for our articles. A historical marker is an indication of some importance, but not by itself a guarantor of notability. I've done that Google search, but better: I looked at Google News and Google Books. Your search, unfortunately, does not deliver a single reliable secondary source; if you correct "callaway" to "calloway" and check news, you at least get the obituary from WSFA, but that's really all. If you had checked "books", you'd have found this--but again, that's not much. Sorry. Drmies ( talk) 20:57, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
            I want to highlight two references regarding Ross Clayton Funeral Home notability as mentioned in ref. 1 and ref. 2.also see Google Search Result Mcrossphd ( talk) 13:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: fails WP:GNG. Seems like the page creator has some undisclosed WP:COI. Contributor892z ( talk) 20:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete doesn't meet WP:GNG. Best, GPL93 ( talk) 15:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete due to lack of even an allegation of notability. He was a mortician, a useful and necessary but common profession. Bearian ( talk) 16:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Posey Township, Clay County, Indiana. as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 22:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Purdy Hill, Indiana

Purdy Hill, Indiana (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is another case where lack of info leaves us with quite the puzzle. Baker describes it as a "locale", which I wouldn't take as damning per se, and there is a string of residences along the road as far back as I can get; from the streetview car they appear to date from the 1900s onward. But that is all I can get: I'm getting increasingly annoyed with Google finding stuff I wasn't looking for, but still, I came up with nothing, except the usual clickbait and similarly named places in other states. I think we need more evidence here. Mangoe ( talk) 20:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Why? Mangoe ( talk) 21:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • As of a 1975 inventory of dam inspections, the Department of the Army believed that a village by that name existed, but other than being downstream from a non-notable dam, that doesn't offer any help. Even a pretty deep-dive search of Internet Archive scanned media offered absolutely nothing. The redirect to Posey Township, Clay County, Indiana -- where this is included in a list of unincorporated communities -- may be the best call. This verifiably exists/ed in some fashion, but as far as I can tell, no one -- ever -- took note of that and we can't really say anything else at all. Lubal ( talk) 22:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Demoscene#List of demoparties. Liz Read! Talk! 22:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Wired (demoparty)

Wired (demoparty) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli ( talk) 20:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure)‎ LibStar ( talk) 13:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Lucy Marinkovich

Lucy Marinkovich (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. Google news doesn't reveal much in-depth. LibStar ( talk) 20:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep I consider Marinkovich is notable and the criteria are better met with the recent expansions. I will also look to expand and demonstrate this in the article.
Pakoire ( talk) 09:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Segilola Ogidan. Liz Read! Talk! 23:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Tainted Canvas

Tainted Canvas (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject film falls short of WP:GNG, should redirect to the director, Segilola Ogidan. The cited sources are not helpful for establishing notability, as they are promotional pre-release coverage with no independent analysis of the film. Searching online, I was able to find reviews, but only one of them (a negative review in WhatKeptMeUp) appears to be potentially reliable ( [19]); the others include a Medium blogpost ( [20]), a two-person blog ( [21]), an unbylined review from a 3-person blog ( [22]), and a review on what appears to be a social media and PR site ( [23], no masthead, no editorial policies, but there is a Log In button for their "African creatives community"). The film's Rotten Tomatoes entry lists no critics' reviews ( [24]), and it seems somewhat telling that Pulse, which published most of the pre-release coverage, did not publish a review following release. signed, Rosguill talk 20:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 22:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The Wutars

The Wutars (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a band, and changed an external link to a reference. Coverage is thin, however, and I do not think the article meets WP:NBAND or WP:GNG. The band's two releases were on their own label and did not chart. The article has been tagged as possibly not meeting WP:NMUSIC since 2020. Tacyarg ( talk) 20:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 22:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of battles in medieval India

List of battles in medieval India (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN WP:UNSOURCED. Follow-up to

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 22:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of conflicts in Egypt

List of conflicts in Egypt (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN WP:UNSOURCED (the few entries that are sourced are highly speculative as to what happened, where, involving whom, and why; the modern Arab Republic of Egypt has very little to do with it). Follow-up to

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 23:12, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Inus Kritzinger

Inus Kritzinger (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. There are a few sentences of coverage here. JTtheOG ( talk) 19:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 23:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Martin Bezuidenhout

Martin Bezuidenhout (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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) 19:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:32, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of battles in Afghanistan

List of battles in Afghanistan (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN WP:UNSOURCED. Follow-up to

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 23:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Pieter Louw

Pieter Louw (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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) 19:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:32, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of West Coast Conference women's basketball tournament finals broadcasters

List of West Coast Conference women's basketball tournament finals broadcasters (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the WP:LISTN as the broadcasters for this game have not been discussed as a group in non-primary sources. Let'srun ( talk) 19:26, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:31, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Claire Harris (artist)

Claire Harris (artist) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ARTIST. LibStar ( talk) 19:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete. Non-notable artist. 104.7.152.180 ( talk) 03:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete. I do not think any of the sources establish notability per WP:ARTIST. David Palmer// cloventt ( talk) 08:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete only independent coverage is trivial. Traumnovelle ( talk) 04:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. As one commenter notes, the star does not appear in the list suggested by the one redirect !vote. Consensus to delete is clear. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

V538 Carinae

V538 Carinae (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article was created back in 2020 on a basis of a very large size (1,870 R☉) that would make it the " largest known star" in that year, altought this size was taken from a large catalog that used a very inaccurate distance for calculate the radius. Nonetheless, it fails the notability guidelines for astronomical objects: Not visible to the naked eye (at magnitude 8.15 [25]), not listed in any important astromical catalogue, never received significant coverage in any reliable source and was not discovered before 1850. SIMBAD cites 29 references for this star, but all are only large catalogues. InTheAstronomy32 ( talk) 19:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete as non-notable per nomination. hamster717 ( discuss anything!🐹✈️ * my contribs) 20:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of channels owned by Sun TV Network. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:28, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Sun Marathi

Sun Marathi (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

One of the many stations owned by Sun TV Network. There are two sources which are not reliable ( WP:NEWSORGINDIA) and I cannot find anything online that would meet WP:ORGCRIT. Recommend redirecting to List of channels owned by Sun TV Network. Note that most of the Wikilinks from that page are also redirects so Sun TV Networks. CNMall41 ( talk) 18:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

B1gMail

B1gMail (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional article without references to reliable sources with significant coverage. Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NPRODUCT. AlexandraAVX ( talk) 17:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete: unable to find sources per WP:GNG on Google or Google Books, also fails WP:NSOFT. —Matrix(!) { user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 16:57, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Sheikh Russel#In Popular Culture. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Amader Choto Russel Shona

Amader Choto Russel Shona (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks significant coverage in reliable Source. - AlbeitPK ( talk) 17:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Sheikh Ahmadullah

Sheikh Ahmadullah (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reference are self published, primary sources and promotional. These sources do not establish notability of the person. AlbeitPK ( talk) 16:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While it has been variously asserted by nom and the current majority for keep that the sources do/don't establish GNG, there has been no discussion of individual sources that could move towards decisively substantiating such evaluations.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Rick Burke (musician)

Rick Burke (musician) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(PROD declined with no explanation) Fails WP:MUSICBIO. What little coverage I can find featuring this person's name is about his bands, not Burke himself Mach61 14:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. Mach61 14:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    This page we should keep given that the musician written about has a long-term and ongoing authentic discography as cited on reliable archival / data sites such as Discogs with news features on various media outlets. If for some reason it is a problem for the information to be listed under “Rick Burke (musician)”, I would strongly recommend that rather than deleting the article on superfluous grounds, the content should be split into 2 pages: one for “Comacozer” and one for “Tropical Sludge” with a redirect from the original “Rick Burke (musician)” page. In saying that, it does not make sense to split the information into several pages therefore it should be retained as one to keep the information tidy on Wikipedia. NEXUS6N6MAA10816 ( talk) 06:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ NEXUS6N6MAA10816 Having a long-term and ongoing authentic discography does not count towards inclusion in Wikipedia. With regard to your suggestion the article be split, there is not enough content about those bands for one to be viable. Mach61 16:28, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Hi Mach61, thanks for your kind suggestions. The article is important as it streamlines information on Rick Burke which people actively search for on the internet within the context of "Underground Music" (see Wiki entry for this) and fits into the scope of "WikiProject Music". Associated acts such as Kikagaku Moyo, Electric Wizard, It's Psychedelic Baby and so on have existing entries on Wikipedia and this article will complete a missing part of that academic puzzle as it increasingly gets fleshed out as a public document. Best wishes. NEXUS6N6MAA10816 ( talk) 05:07, 26 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ NEXUS6N6MAA10816 I see no indication Burke is connected to any of those people, and even if he were that would be irrelevant (see WP:notability is not inherited. Mach61 15:40, 26 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 02:00, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lori Wells

Lori Wells (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have been unable to find sources to meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. The single source cited in the article is a Wordpress blog. She doesn't seem to me to meet WP:NACTOR either; Coronation Street is a notable show but her role in it was not significant, Kisses at Fifty is one episode of an anthology drama. Overall, she doesn't seem to meet notability requirements. Chocmilk03 ( talk) 04:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete While she does have a Wikipedia page, most of her roles seem to be minor, except Get Some In! in which she has acted in 21 episodes, but as a minor role. She doesn't meet the notability criterion. Wikilover3509 ( talk) 08:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep Kisses at Fifty was a one-off TV play, but an important one, where she had an important role. It was one of the best-known plays in Play for Today, and the BBC repeated it quite recently. Here role in Get Some In! wasn't that minor, she appears in the list of characters, and in the box at the start (and I did not put her there). PatGallacher ( talk) 14:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: seems to pass WP:NACTOR for 2 significant roles in notable productions. More sources wouldn't hurt. I would have suggested a redirect to Kisses at Fifty, but her role in Get Some In! is also rather significant. Worst case scenario, that might be a solution, though. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Malinaccier ( talk) 20:12, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hypelist

Hypelist (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an WP:ADMASQ of a non-notable app/company. Speedy deletion was contested by a new editor who claims to be a "fan" of the app. No evidence of satisfying WP:NPRODUCT or WP:ORGIND. The references all provide routine coverage and/or are from unreliable sources. Teemu.cod ( talk) 19:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Here is my analyzation of the article:
Like said in the nomination, the article, especially the product section, is positive about the "mobile social application". Buzz words like popular and AI-driven are used along with a dose of ethos, stating that several celebrities use it.
The citations seem to mostly based in trendiness or promotion. For example, HIGHXTAR is designed to advertise to the youths. Trying to research the topic, most of the citations seem to be of the same caliber but there may be a few citations. Any additional citations should be analyzed. ✶Qux yz ✶ 20:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The topic is notable, as with Alfonso Cobo and related articles. There are sources from MSN, Conde Nast, Avenue Illustrated, and many other well-known sources. The article is meant to be a summary of existing sources, some of which might be bordering on the promotional side, but that can easily be fixed. There is no overtly promotional wording either, such as "award-winning" or "innovative" for instance. Moreover, this article satisfies basic notability criteria. MaghrebiFalafel ( talk) 09:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Hi MaghrebiFalafel, this is a company therefore GNG/ WP:NCORP criteria applies. You mentioned three sources. The MSN article is about a singer using the app - the article mentions the company in passing and does not provide any in-depth Independent Content about the company - fails CORPDEPTH. The Vanity Fair article is a "puff profile" on the founder and relies entirely on an interview. All the information is provided by the founder and has no Independent Content. Fails both CORPDEPTH and ORGIND. Finally the Avenue article has zero in-depth information about the company, fails CORPDEPTH. Are there any other sources you believe meets NCORP? If not, perhaps you might reconsider your !vote? HighKing ++ 14:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Id looked up to see if there was any new news and didn't find any. Then given there already are some references in Spanish thought id see if there are other results in Spanish and there are: Larazon El Correo. They seem to say more of the same thing ie new app from this guy and it does xyz. I dont know if this helps establish notability. If the issue isn't the references, but the subject matter, so be it. If I had to vote it would be weakish keep but I also get the desire to delete. MaskedSinger ( talk) 05:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep delete It's all hype about hypelist, and it may be TOO SOON, but the sourcing is reasonable. If this app does not pan out, the hype here may not be enough to save the article in the future. I looked again and the software has no reviews in the mac app store, and it only has one rating. All that we have are product announcements. I'm !voting to wait and see. Lamona ( talk) 16:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    If the sourcing might not be enough in the future, then it definitely won't be enough now. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 08:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Thanks, your comment got me to look again. Lamona ( talk) 17:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Seems almost A7, wouldn't go G11 though. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 09:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 03:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: The sources about the song can't establish notability, because notability isn't transitive. The only source I think could possibly establish notability is the Rivera article. The Vanity Fair article is an interview that contains almost exclusively quotations from the subject themself, and I couldn't immediately establish the other sources as credible. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 21:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: As I have mentioned elsewhere, Hypelist is definitely notable and has quite a few users. It's widely used by now and many other applications with similar notability levels are also on Wikipedia. Redcrablegs ( talk) 10:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Just because a lot of people an app does guarantee notability. That's also a weasle statement: how many people are quite a few and who is providing these numbers? ✶Qux yz ✶ 17:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Came back here to see what happened since my first comment. I noticed that the vote by Okmrman was deleted and they've now been blocked for being a sock puppet. On April 30 there was a comment on his talk page regarding spurious tagging of pages for speedy deletion. That was on April 30. This article was nominated for speedy deletion by a somewhat dormant account on May 9. The speedy was contested and 9 hours after this was nominated for deletion the sockpuppet voted here. Not that this affects the vote here one way or another. Sock puppet or not, doesn't impact whether a subject is notable or not, but the powers that be may wish to cast the Okmrman sock puppet net wider and investigate the editor who nominated this article for deletion. MaskedSinger ( talk) 05:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Liz @ Yamla Looking at this some more, I'm now convinced that Teemu.cod and Okmrman are one and the same. MaskedSinger ( talk) 07:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Strictly speaking, they were blocked for disruptive editing and their other account was the puppet (they're the master). It is a little weird, has AfD always been this much of a sockfest? Alpha3031 ( t • c) 08:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't know. It is peculiar. Then again, longer one spends here, harder it is to get shocked. MaskedSinger ( talk) 09:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Teemu.cod is Red X Unrelated to Okmrman. Just a bizarre coincidence. -- Yamla ( talk) 11:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    ok thanks for looking into it. my apologies to teemu.cod MaskedSinger ( talk) 11:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment People here saying the *company* is notable and then talking about the product are missing the point of establishing the notability of the *company*. None of the reference meet GNG/ WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability. If you think one does, can you please post a link here and point out which page/para meets NCORP including CORPDEPTH and ORGIND? HighKing ++ 14:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Advertorial tone, and little or no depth to the coverage. Stifle ( talk) 08:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Wow. Can't believe this is still going. Not sure what's happening with AFD but this is a weird one. Nominated for deletion by editor who comes out of dormancy to nominate it and then hasn't edited since. Some editor who votes delete is blocked for going on a voting rampage. And then yesterday the discussion is closed not once, but twice by editors who are sock puppets?!?! Still this has nothing to do the merits of the page. Given that its been relisted twice and still no consensus, I think it should get the benefit of the doubt. It satsifies WP:GNG with the non English coverage and there is probably more non English coverage that can be translated and added. If it stays, Ill look for some and add it. MaskedSinger ( talk) 08:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    Now closed a third time by some rogue editor! It's not just this article. It's also others that are up for deletion. Anyone have any idea what is going on and why? MaskedSinger ( talk) 12:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    Yeah there's an AFD closing LTA. Just revert, WP:DENY and move on. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 13:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Alpha3031 Wow! That's so bizarre. Why do they do it? MaskedSinger ( talk) 13:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. "'Hypelist', el nuevo proyecto del exitoso emprendedor español que triunfa en EE UU" ['Hypelist', the new project of the successful Spanish entrepreneur who triumphs in the US]. El Correo (in Spanish). 2024-04-15. Archived from the original on 2024-06-06. Retrieved 2024-06-06.

      The article notes: "For the second time, the young entrepreneur has managed to cover another need of social media consumers in time. His new app, 'Hypelist', was launched a few months ago and aims to help people share recommendations for activities, products or places they are passionate about. The app innovates by leaving the framework of aesthetics and superficiality that so characterises content on today's networks, something that places this second project at an extreme opposite to 'Unfold', focused precisely on the visual. ... 'Hypelist' allows you to collect all the recommendations in a personalized space for when they are going to be missed. In this way, it has been presented as an application not for entertainment, something that already abounds, but for self-realisation and growth that pushes people to fulfill all their plans. ... This time the launch of the project has been accompanied by the 'Hypelist Session', events organised to promote the use of the new app and full of 'influencers' eager to share their recommendations through this new channel."

    2. Martin, Ruth (2024-03-26). "Esta es la Nueva App Que Usan Los Viajeros Expertos. Hypelist amenaza competir con Instagram y es perfecta para los que no pueden vivir sin las listas de favoritos" [This Is the New App That Expert Travelers Use. Hypelist threatens to compete with Instagram and is perfect for those who cannot live without favorites lists]. Grazia (in Italian). Archived from the original on 2024-06-06. Retrieved 2024-06-06.

      The article notes: "Are you one of those who always makes lists for everything? Are you one of those who miss the guides that Instagram has made disappear and where you had your favorites saved? Then this new App is for you because with it you can organize, share and connect your best recommendations. It is called Hypelist and was created by a Spanish entrepreneur, Alfonso Cobo, who is not new to the world of entrepreneurship and technology. But not only can you create lists to save all your favorites, but you can also discover everything your favorite creators are obsessed with. Hypelist is the place where users share their true interests: the quirks that make them who they are; what truly obsesses and excites them"

    3. Pujalví, Camila (2024-02-07). "Hypelist: la aplicación para compartir recomendaciones que necesitas en tu móvil" [Hypelist: the application to share recommendations that you need on your mobile]. La Razón (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2024-06-06. Retrieved 2024-06-06.

      The article notes: "In the blink of an eye, Hypelist has gone from a simple app to a cultural phenomenon. Its creator, Alfonso Cobo, recognised for his previous hits like Unfold, has once again surprised the market with what promises to be the hit of the year 2024. But his ambition goes far beyond conventional. Following the wild launch of the app, Cobo has decided to expand its reach and create an entire universe around Hypelist. Hypelist stands out as a platform to organize, share and connect the best recommendations. Aiming to appeal to a younger audience, Cobo has collaborated with talented singer Cara Hart to release a single titled "Hypelist.""

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Hypelist to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard ( talk) 08:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply

    Cough, Cunard I don't think Grazia can be considered an RS for anything other than uncontroversial self descriptions, certainly not for establishing notability. I mean, on their about page, which is very conveniently written in English, where most publications normally put how they're totally very well edited and all that, they instead put:

    Our award-winning team prides ourselves on working with partners to create interesting, unexpected and unique experiences. Our collaborations are designed to deliver incremental value to our partners’ businesses. GRAZIA has a wide range of solutions to suit almost any kind of marketing and media mix. We offer branded content, video, integration into editorial franchises, innovative high impact ad units and local events.

    ... Yeah. I'll look at the other ones in a couple of minutes. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 10:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't believe La Razón meets ORGDEPTH. I'm less sure about El Correo, but like risbel I am more concerned about ORGIND in their case (though El Correo might be better than risbel RS-wise generally). While I can't find anything other than the January press release, which those two articles seem to have additional content to (about the launch event, etc) they still read like content taken (perhaps paraphrased) from press kits rather than organic, intellectually independent coverage. Would rather kick it to RSN, though would not terribly object to this actually being closed as no consensus either. I would expect to renominate this (after some time of course) if that happens though. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 12:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    Another thing I'm a bit concerned about is the language. It is clear that they are trying to sell Hypelist. It honestly sounds like a pitch to investors more specifically, they establish the credibility of the creator, describe demographics that it was made to appeal to, and describe the problem it is trying to solve. These are all pretty reasonable, but at the same time, the language is overly positive. Hart isn't just a singer, she's a talented singer. In Grazia, they describe the creator as well-trained, but they don't give any information in the quote. There are a lot more situations but their easy enough to parse through where I dont think I need to go over it more. ✶Qux yz ✶ 13:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. If an editor wants to work on a version of this article in Draft space, let me know or make a request at WP:REFUND. TOOSOON implies that there might be a time when better sources exist and a new article can pass AFC review and be put back into main space. Liz Read! Talk! 00:49, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Jon Forshee

Jon Forshee (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Bio of a composer/academic fails GNG, NBIO, NACADEMIC, NMUSIC. The independent sources do not show WP:SIGCOV; WP:BEFORE search turns up no other reliable, independent, secondary sources with significant coverage or evidence of notability under any of the other SNG guidelines that might apply. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 23:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, France, California, Colorado, Michigan, New York, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete -- composer/researcher doing good things to advance his career that are pretty typical for composers at this stage. Significantly TOOSOON at this point. On the non-academic side, lacking the awards or major ensembles (those not dedicated to producing student work) to pass notability; on the WP:PROF side, does not have academic appointments or the sort of extensive influence to pass there. (Some of the journals are important in the field, but book/CD reviews are not articles.) -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    These are mostly fair points. Not sure what the "TOOSOON" means--too soon to have a wiki article? Regarding academic appointment, a Google search shows that Forshee was a visiting professor and now instructor. As to the ensembles performing Forshee's compositions, the Callithumpian Consort and Trio Kobayashi are, according to their own websites, not dedicated to performing student works (they list Elliott Carter, Schuittke, Huber, Scelsi, Cage, Lachenmann, Richard Barrett, Jürg Frey, Larry Polansky, James Tenney, basically all widely known composers on the international scene). The articles by Forshee don't appear to be book reviews or CD reviews, but neither do they appear to be rigorous scholarly research articles; they seem to be somewhere in between: interpretive analytical essays? The one in Computer Music Journal is an early review of software by the pioneering computer music composer Trevor Wishart. Part of the motivation for this article is that Forshee is one of the few notable (or borderline notable) students of composer Anthony Davis, who just had his Met Opera premiere of his Malcolm X this season. Dolemites ( talk) 18:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Notability cannot WP:INHERITED from Anthony Davis or anyone else; for each subject it must be established independently according to the criteria. No articles by Forshee can be used establish his notability, only what independent and reliable sources have to say about him with "significant coverage." Dclemens1971 ( talk) 03:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Discussion currently leans toward deletion, but a clearer consensus would be appreciated given that there has been an objection to deletion and thus soft-deletion seems inappropriate. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

2017 Pattani bombing

2017 Pattani bombing (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The sources are all from the time of the event. Need lasting coverage and impact to meet WP:EVENT. A search for sources yielded sources for a different bombing in Pattani in 2016. LibStar ( talk) 02:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge to Timeline of events related to the South Thailand insurgency#2017, where it is mentioned. If what Oblivy says is true, then I'd vote keep, but I can't actually find what is mentioned above, or verify that it has long standing significance. The added links are bordering on run of the mill and don't seem to have much commentary. Or commentary on the documentary. If that is provided I would change my vote to keep. PARAKANYAA ( talk) 23:37, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Significant coverage can be found in the Al Jazeera, CNA, and International Business Times articles. I don't think run-of-the-mill applies to any of that.
The deletion rationale was about lasting coverage and impact. The event gets continuing discussion by security researchers like this [32]. It seems to have gotten extended discussion in Wheeler, Thailand's Southern Insurgency in 2017: Running in Place (2018, paywalled). The court case was reported as a standalone article in the Bangkok Post, a good indicator of lasting impact, as is the fact that a filmmaker decided to make a documentary about it. The article isn't about the documentary - it's cited to show that there was lasting coverage of the event via the documentary - and I don't think it's reasonable to require commentary on the documentary. Oblivy ( talk) 01:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 02:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Anyone wishing to vote on this should probably have a look at the substantially revised article. I've added cites, and have been through most or all of the ones that are in the article. Lack of inline citations in some places has been dealt with. I have made my case for sustained coverage and impact and these changes strengthen that argument. Oblivy ( talk) 08:53, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep without prejudice to further merger discussion on the talk page. There does seem to be just enough coverage to support a stand-alone article, though whether the content (which isn't very extensive) would be better served within the broader context of the conflict would be an editorial consideration. The timeline article is already quite long and brief as it is, so a lot of restructuring would be needed before it can become a suitable merge target. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 09:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Suspicious deaths of notable Russians (2022–2024). Jake Wartenberg ( talk) 14:55, 7 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Aleksandr Surikov (diplomat)

Aleksandr Surikov (diplomat) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG and NBIO. Recently deceased Russian diplomat. Sources found in article and BEFORE fail WP:SIRS. Source eval:

Comments Source
Government obit, fails WP:SIRS, all the normal obit problems plus the Russian government should not be considered a reliable source 1. www.mid.ru https://www.mid.ru/ru/activity/shots/vnutrivedomstvennye_novosti/nekrologi_pamyati_kolleg/1949977/ . Retrieved 2024-05-13 .
Government decree, fails WP:IS, does not contain SIGCOV about the subject. 2. ^ "Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of July 29, 2017 No. 348 “On the Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation in the Republic of Mozambique”" . Archived from the original on 2019-01-26 . Retrieved 2017-09-14 .
Government decree, fails WP:IS, does not contain SIGCOV about the subject. 3. ^ "Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of February 16, 2018 No. 76 “On the Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation in the Kingdom of Swaziland on a part-time basis”" . Archived from the original on 2018-02-16 . Retrieved 2018-02-16 .
Government obit, fails WP:SIRS, all the normal obit problems plus the Russian government should not be considered a reliable source 4. ^ www.mid.ru https://www.mid.ru/ru/activity/shots/vnutrivedomstvennye_novosti/nekrologi_pamyati_kolleg/1949977/ . Retrieved 2024-05-13 .
Obit based on government sources, fails WP:SIRS, all the normal obit problems plus the Russian government should not be considered a reliable source 5. ^ "Russian Ambassador to Mozambique Died" . TACC (in Russian) . Retrieved 2024-05-13 .

BEFORE found name mentions and government statements they released, and an interview, nothing meet WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth from independent reliable sources.  //  Timothy ::  talk  02:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment: First and foremost, lower your tone while nominating the article for deletion. Secondly, government decrees can be used as secondary sources as if you can type the full name in a Russian, many sources will pop up, (in Russian of course), apart from the official government statement. Here's my third point, he is the ambassador to Mozambique, the highest office of any diplomat in office. Would you delete the ambassador of the United States of Mozambique for that reason? Ivan Milenin ( talk) 02:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
he is the ambassador to Mozambique, the highest office of any diplomat in office Ambassadors are not inherently notable, several hundred have been deleted. LibStar ( talk) 03:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Discussion leans delete at the time of this relist, but further participation would be beneficial for establishing a clear consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep I decided to keep because even if the some coverage had been lacking, I found some source that could suffice these... [33] [34] [35] Ivan Milenin ( talk) 22:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply

I'm striking your duplicate vote. Editors can comment all they want (within limits) but can only cast one vote. Liz Read! Talk! 00:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete‎. G5 applies - the author is a sock of a blocked (and globally locked) spammer. Girth Summit (blether) 10:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Yubin Shin

Yubin Shin (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no mention of her in any of the sources. Please check GNG. Claggy ( talk) 15:34, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

There is no mention of her in any of the sources?? Hmmm, yes, there is mention of her in the sources! I'm not saying it's great but it's about her. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hannah Ryder

Hannah Ryder (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very questionable WP:SUSTAINED notability Amigao ( talk) 01:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

*: </"keep"> this article has been edited to comply to NPOV since it's nomination allied by a declaration of COI from editors in the View AfD the page in its current existence complies with NPOV User:Gold Junior Talk 09:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further opinions from as-yet uninvolved editors regarding the quality of sourcing available would be beneficial.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep, she's mentioned in a broad range of reliable sources, many cited in the article including the BBC, The Guardian, Reuters, The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Washington Post. The mentions are usually brief, but these three secondary sources at least offer brief bios to base an article: [39] [40] [41] Also, the article was almost entirely rewritten after its nomination. The writing has issues, but the subject seems notable. Rjjiii ( talk) 06:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Baalveer as independent notability has not been substantiated Star Mississippi 02:01, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Baalveer 4

Baalveer 4 (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

References are just interviews. No in-depth found. Twinkle1990 ( talk) 15:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment - Those who are placing !vote in favour of the article, I want to ask them about the notability of the season itself, not about the series. We don't need a separate Wikipedia page for each of the seasons where the primary page exists and no reviews for the seasons are found. Placing interviews and WP:IMDb links as references is just against WP:ICTFSOURCES. Demonstrate notability or please stop flooding. A MERGE would be better. -- Twinkle1990 ( talk) 07:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
(note to Admin) - There is campaign going on per this diff, this diff, this diff regarding this AfD. Is this allowed? Isn't it WP:VOTESTACK? -- Twinkle1990 ( talk) 07:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
According to WP:VOTESTACK Posting an appropriate notice on other users' talk pages to notify them about the deletion process is allowed (Posting an appropriate notice on users' talk pages in order to inform editors on all "sides" of a debate (e.g., everyone who participated in a previous deletion debate on a given subject) may be appropriate under certain circumstances). I notified them cause they also edit Indian tv show articles, I didn't tell to vote to keep the article so it's not violation of WP:VOTESTACK. M S Hassan ( talk) 18:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ M S Hassan: how is "please help me save the article by voting" in this diff not a violation of WP:VOTESTACK? Daniel ( talk) 23:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Just saying that the series is notable doesn’t make this season of the series notable. Maybe the series is notable, but establishing notability for a standalone article on Season 4 requires in-depth coverage from multiple independent reliable sources, which, in my opinion, is lacking. These sources are just interviews and announcements. The article currently fails to meet WP:GNG as no in-depth coverage of the subject is found. Do we need to create new pages for every season even when there are no significant sources? Additionally, another issue that the patrolling Admin should address is WP:VOTESTACK, which is the real reason behind these non-policy-based “Keep” votes. GrabUp - Talk 13:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Note to Closer. Page was created by sockpuppet account User:Shabeelko and so is good for WP:G5 speedy deletion. RangersRus ( talk) 13:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply

WP:G5 will not apply to this page now, as the article is substantially edited by others. GrabUp - Talk 13:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Bummer. Unnoticed it. RangersRus ( talk) 14:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge with Baalveer: while not a direct sequel, a section in the main article will not require independent notability. Most of the "Keep" comments here seem to talk about the notability of the Baalveer franchise, not that of Baalveer 4. Please note that Baalveer 3 is also on the chopping block, so merging with that would be a mistake. Owen× ☎ 10:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Merge with Baalveer, notability standard not met for this precise series based on sources available and presented, per OwenX this can be folded into main article using non-notability-contributing references. Daniel ( talk) 23:36, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to No Limit Records with the option of merging encyclopedic content. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 18:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

No Limit Forever Records

No Limit Forever Records (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Vanity label that no longer operates. Most of the refences are from their own defunct website or to streaming media. No indication of notability. Karst ( talk) 15:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Second, the company (CA 201030110082) doesn't appear to be independent at all of Master P or No Limit Records. Its only official act was incorporation (Oct 2010). It was effectively dead 3 1/2 years later when its agent quit and officially dead 6 months after that. Except in company blog posts it's Master P who's signing artists, not the putative company founder Lil Romeo, and he's signing them to NL Records, not NL Forever. Some of the signings postdate the 2014 demise of this company. I'm persuaded that No Limit Records, New No Limit, No Limit Forever, and No Limit Global are simply alternative branding of one entity. Yappy2bhere ( talk) 01:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge and redirect to No Limit Records per Yappy2bhere toweli ( talk) 03:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. There are good arguments to keep, several good arguments to merge or split the article, and overall no consensus to delete the article. Malinaccier ( talk) 20:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lois Lane (DC Extended Universe)

Lois Lane (DC Extended Universe) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I try again. Lois Lane is indeed an encyclopedic character but its counterpart from the DC Extended Universe seems to be irrelevant in a real world perspective. First thing first, this article does not meet the requirements of WP:NFILMCHAR: the character has appeared in three films, but not in a lead or titular capacity. Also, this iteration of Lois Lane does not have an extensive coverage. Redjedi23 ( talk) 11:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

We meet again, old friend.
As discussed last time, I wouldn't do a straight up delete, but would merge to either Lois Lane in other media or Characters of the DC Extended Universe if it's decided this page isn't worth being a stand-alone article. WuTang94 ( talk) 01:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete At the very least needs a good WP:TNT because the Fandom/Screen Rant-like writing and heading styles are non-standard and discouraged, and this could easily be two-three reduced paragraphs in the main Lois Lane article (and the Superman and Lois article has the same style issues; stop pushing this onto en.wiki, we don't have ads which require this awful style of formatting). Nate • ( chatter) 20:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Undo split or re-merge, per MrSchimpf. Deletion would be acceptable, but we should strive for WP:CONSENSUS-building and WP:ATD. This can easily be reduced to two or three paragraphs in the main character article, and even then, the important details are already covered at Lois Lane and Lois Lane in other media. There aren't enough sources to support a third article about essentially the same subject, and two articles are already questionable. Shooterwalker ( talk) 16:34, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep the content as it's well-referenced and notable. I would be supportive of merging/moving to a topic such as Lois Lane in film also, but that doesn't need to be decided here. Stifle ( talk) 07:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 14:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Soccer at the 1986 International Cerebral Palsy Games

Soccer at the 1986 International Cerebral Palsy Games (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability found. Tournament has no article, match results are missing for many games, sources are databases, location is a small village. Fram ( talk) 15:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 18:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Surprise! (film)

Surprise! (film) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced article about a short film. The notability claim here, that it won an award at a regional film festival, would be fine if the article were properly sourced -- but the "awards" criterion in NFILM is looking for top internationally-prominent film festivals on the order of Cannes, Berlin, Venice, Toronto or Sundance, not just any film festival that exists, so winning an award at the Seattle film festival isn't "inherently" notable enough to exempt the film from actually having to have any sources. Bearcat ( talk) 14:46, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

I'll try to find a source for that; SIFF is about one level down from the aforementioned. It is certainly not a "regional film festival". - Jmabel | Talk 14:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The source for a film festival award cannot be said film festival's own self-published website about itself, as that isn't independent of the statement — the source has to be a journalist-written newspaper or magazine article, or a book, that shows that the film festival's award announcements are considered newsworthy and/or historically significant by people other than the film festival's own staff. (The awards at the top-level likes of Cannes or TIFF make films notable because those are awards that get reported by media as news — they're special because media tell us they're special by treating them as newsworthy, not just because we like them more than we like smaller film festivals.) But so far the source you've added is SIFF's own website, not a piece of GNG-building third-party coverage — and even if you can find a more GNG-worthy source for that, we would still need to see other GNG-worthy sourcing about the film alongside that anyway. Bearcat ( talk) 15:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
We are not citing for the importance of SIFF. We are citing for whether they gave the award. An instutition's own site is the preferred source for an an official action by that institution. - Jmabel | Talk 16:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep. A lot of the material here is in German, and a lot of it appears to have come narrowly too early for widespread digitization. Here is unquestionably relevant coverage in a German film studies book. I believe this Google Books snippet view is actually of a magazine article reviewing its release as part of a DVD. Finally, I only have a citation so I can't evaluate the source, but there appears to be a Spanish-language scholarly article about this short film: Meier, A. "Sorpresas educativas en Surprise de Veit Helmer." Posibilidades del análisis cinematográfico (1era ed., Vol. 1, pp. 365-373). Secretaría de Educación del gobierno del Estado de México (2015). Lubal ( talk) 15:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I've added another citation (from shortfilm.de) for the film having had 48 festival invitations and 26 awards. Surely that is enough. And, no, I'm not working on this further. - Jmabel | Talk 16:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: new sources added and mentioned; awards. A redirect to the director should be considered anyway, so, opposed to deletion. (Will try to add things) (added coverage in various languages including English, more exists)- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 14:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Exocentric environment

Exocentric environment (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Endocentric environment which was nominated with: "No refs on the page for many years. No finding sources to show that this term meets the notability standards for inclusion". Shreevatsa ( talk) 13:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 14:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Charli Evans

AfDs for this article:
Charli Evans (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSPORT. No reliable sources in the article or online. GMH Melbourne ( talk) 13:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 13:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Mackay Radio

Mackay Radio (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG. The link http://www.mackayhistory.com/ doesn’t exist anymore. Wikilover3509 ( talk) 12:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete‎ under G5. Owen× ☎ 13:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Seunzzy Sax

AfDs for this article:
Seunzzy Sax (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article was created by a sockpuppet. The artist has little notability and the sources are poor at best. 333fortheain ( talk) 12:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 18:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Millennial pause

Millennial pause (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is supported by weak sources or one-off articles; there is an insufficient amount of reliable sourcing to justify an article. Tkbrett (✉) 12:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep The Atlantic is a reliable source as are other listed sources. "One-off article" is not a problem with a source under WP:N. JoshuaZ ( talk) 13:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Sources are easy to find ( 1, 2, 3, 4). It seems no WP:BEFORE was done here. Cortador ( talk) 14:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    These sources are still insufficient because they only provide passing mentions. Refer to D3 at WP:BEFORE. Tkbrett (✉) 15:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    No, they do not. The first two sources especially are only about the concept and nothing else. You clearly didn't read them, just like you didn't look for sources before you started this AfD. Cortador ( talk) 19:06, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I do not subscribe to paywalled German websites, nor do I read German. And, again, the English-language sources provide no more than a passing mention. Refer to D3 at WP:BEFORE. Tkbrett (✉) 20:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    You claimed above that the sources "only provide passing mentions", not that you couldn't access to read those sources. What language the sources are in doesn't matter, English-language Wikipedia doesn't require sources to be in English. Cortador ( talk) 20:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    This isn't quite the zinger you think it is, as it further indicates how little reliable sourcing there is. Tkbrett (✉) 22:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I kindly ask you to come up with a coherent argument why this article should be deleted. You started with there not being enough sources, then moved on to sources only mentioning the topic in passing, then to sources covering the topic but not in a language you can read, and finally that there are sources but not in a sufficiently high number. Cortador ( talk) 09:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    It was the same argument the whole time. But I am not going to waste my time trying convince you; the sourcing presented has been flimsy, and you seem to know this, which is why you pivoted away from trying to produce anything more substantial. Coming from a side of the encyclopedia that deals mainly in books, it is quite surprising to see how the weakest of sourcing passes on some parts. Tkbrett (✉) 10:14, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    It clearly was not - you claimed above that the sources "only provide passing mentions" and then admitted that you didn't even read them because you lacked access to the (paywalled) site, and because the articles were written in a language you can't read. Cortador ( talk) 10:18, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    The entire paragraph in the business insider (culture) source is not a passing mention. It counts partially to the notability. Aaron Liu ( talk) 13:17, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Here's another source in addition to all the ones already mentioned. Definitely seems like there's enough reliable sources to justify an article. -- Aabicus ( talk) 14:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Click-bait articles collecting social media posts hardly seem reliable, even if it is published on something potentially reliable, like WP:BUSINESSINSIDER. Outside of one Atlantic article, I have not seen a reliable source which points to this topic's notability. Tkbrett (✉) 20:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    This probably fails the Wikipedia notability test, under the Not a (Newspaper/Tabloid) disqualification. Nontoxicjon ( talk) 23:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Tkbrett @ Nontoxicjon This source falls under the Culture section, which RSP explicitly calls an exception that has consensus as reliable. Aaron Liu ( talk) 13:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Abstain/weak Delete This seems to be one of those "just-so" popcorn articles that as of this writing are hot on Reddit. There is definitely a flavor of being contrived as the concept has less empirical backing here in quality sources than similar articles like the vocal fry.-- ~Sıgehelmus♗ (Tøk) 23:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:NEOLOGISM. I was considering nominating this article when I first saw it, and at least from a WP:PAG perspective, the case for not keeping the article seems even stronger as I read through the support !votes here. This very much seems to be a neologism that that exists when you do a Google search, but the sources presented so far don't really reach WP:N, especially as I read through the comments here so far. Instead it's more in the purview of pop culture stuff that isn't always WP:DUE coverage for an encyclopedia (see WP:FART). It's similar to how Human-interest story isn't really considered hard news, and soft news is often considered flaky at best for discussions of notability. The other issue I'm seeing is that sources presented so far don't show sustained coverage, another required aspect of notability. It seems most of the pop-culture blogs, etc. talked about it in late 2022/early 2023. If the topic ever gets substantial and sustained coverage above the lower quality sources presented here and in the article here so far, then inclusion can always be reassessed, but I'm very wary of arguments merely saying sources exist. KoA ( talk) 00:52, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep I agree with N. JoshuaZ and Cortador above. Maxx1222 ( talk) 01:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: The sources above already establish notability. As an editor who deals a lot with book sources, the nominator should know that a source being less-than-accessible does not hurt its notability at all. Two years seems enough for sustained coverage to me. I will not comment on the “all soft news are flaky” part as a proud member of m:AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTAD. Aaron Liu ( talk) 13:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Fair enough, thanks, Aaron. Though I do think they are different things; there are topics covered in great detail by hard-to-find books, but there does not to seem to be any substantive discussion about the topic, which instead seems to only be covered in clickbait articles from the first couple months of last year. I do not think those articles collecting social media posts would qualify as reliable on any article I'd normally work on, so it is surprising to hear that it helps establish notability. I don't deal in this area of the encyclopedia normally, so I'll just drop it. Tkbrett (✉) 13:43, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Thanks for the clarification. I feel like the purpose of these articles are to identify longstanding online phenomena and what they mean. While, indeed, no sources have analyzed the topic yet, the coverage does confer notability and the topic seems like something worthy of further research. Even though there isn’t much information, it does seem big enough to at least document. Aaron Liu ( talk) 14:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep, as painful as it is -- this is a silly article, which cites silly clickpieces, but our policies are that dumb clickpieces = notability, so until such a time as we revisit our notability guidelines, let this (and others like Cheugy which I wrote some years ago) stand as monuments to our hubris. jp× g 🗯️ 01:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep, Article is necessary and provided with Reliable sources. I suggest to Keep the Article. Caxwax ( talk) 05:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete for WP:N and WP:NEOLOGISM. The referenced sources consist entirely (besides dictionary definitions) of opinion articles that are collations of social media posts, and the article spends as almost much time explaining what millennials and zoomers are as it does on the subject matter. Sources are irrelevant, article contents are mostly irrelevant. Would be better suited for a Wiki focused on TikTokisms. Timothy "The Baron" Pickle ( talk) 16:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
This is the only edit Baron has made so far.
NEOLOGISM only applies to those that have little or no usage in reliable sources. This is clearly not the case with the sources above, which I don't see how are "opinion" articles, and summarizing the neologism is pretty relevant. RSes pick up and explore it (which is more than just collected usages and has been done), so we include and explore it. The article also only spends 4 footnoted sentences for explaining what generations are. Aaron Liu ( talk) 17:00, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 13:12, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Cake in a Cup

Cake in a Cup (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG. The owners names or the company name doesn’t appear in /info/en/?search=List_of_Cupcake_Wars_episodes Wikilover3509 ( talk) 12:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete even if they did appear on that show, notability is not WP:INHERITED BrigadierG ( talk) 12:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete Can't see how this meets notability. Also one of the citations is to a cupcake-themed 2048 clone? [1] That's not part of my rationale or anything, it's just amusing. It does bring their citation count down to 3 though, all of which are Toledo-specific news articles. The Savage Norwegian 21:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

References

  1. ^ Kristen, Micael. "2048 Cupcakes".
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Princess Polly

Princess Polly (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested G11. This appears to have been written by a UPE and reads like an advertisement. All of the coverage I can find is run of the mill. Even if notable, G11 is appropriate. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 11:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

There are plenty of notable references to this company that could be included in this page as it meets the WP:NCORP. Including the sources noted by Liance, Ragtrader which speaks to both positive and negative market fluctuations of the parent company, IT News discussing a data breach, and BBC article with Lori Loughlin scandal. Amongst all these references is a wealth of information poised to add valuable information to the wikipedia audience. Wikiguru777 ( talk) 04:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Ragtrader has no clear editorial policy, the article you've cited is run-of-the-mill reporting about stores opening, and trade journals generally don't satisfy NCORP. IT News is likewise a run-of-the-mill data breach story in a trade publication, and does not establish that the company is notable. The BBC article contains only this brief mention of the brand: "The social media influencer has launched a clothing collection with women's online fashion boutique Princess Polly and a make-up palette with cosmetics chain Sephora." voorts ( talk/ contributions) 21:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
plenty of notable references to this company: for a company to be notable under NCORP, there needs to be more than "references"; there needs to be several sources, each of which must be secondary, independent, and reliable, and contain significant coverage of the company.
Regarding: Amongst all these references is a wealth of information poised to add valuable information to the wikipedia audience. Wikipedia's readers are not an audience for advertising to. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 21:26, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
In response to " trade journals generally don't satisfy NCORP" I can see that featured trade stories from leading trade magazines may be used where independence is clear. Reporting on net revenue decrease and factual store openings is unbiased, independent information. Sydney Morning Herald is a notable article and speaks to the brand multiple times throughout the article.
In addition, I've also found the BBB review / complaints for the company (where reviews must be independent secondary sources that contain significant coverage of the subject).
Another article with substantial, reliable, and independent coverage from a secondary source relating to news article exploring sustainability of the company - Greenmatters - https://www.greenmatters.com/p/is-princess-polly-good-quality
Agree that the BBC article I previously referenced does not meet the criteria for notable source. Wikiguru777 ( talk) 22:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • BBB complaints are user-generated content and thus not reliable.
  • Greenmatters appears to be reliable and its critique of the company's claims of being ethical while sourcing from "countries with extreme risk of label abuse" indicates this definitely isn't a sponsored post.
  • Sydney Morning Herald is a notable article and speaks to the brand multiple times throughout the article. References or mentions are not enough to establish notability. The article also isn't about this company; it's about the parent company's IPO.
voorts ( talk/ contributions) 23:03, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Agreed significant, reliable, independent sources
Business insider
Green matters
I believe IT news should also be considered a source as it is “featured trade stories from leading trade magazines may be used where independence is clear.”
I’ve also found Goon On You which questions Princess Polly’s ethical standards. This source is reliable & independent
The above is enough to satisfy NCORP as “significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.”
This is my first publishing so I'm learning more about the rules here and I appreciate your previous feedback to help discern what is appropriate. I believe the above should be suitable to comply with NCORP. Wikiguru777 ( talk) 23:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
IT News is not a "leading trade magazine" in fashion. It's a run-of-the-mill news story that focuses on the data breach, not significant coverage about the company itself. Greenmatters is basically secondary source coverage of Good on You, which is a primary source since it's a report made by an advocacy group. So, we still only have two sources that meet WP:SIRS, Green Matters and BI, which isn't enough under NCORP. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 01:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I'd agree BI is ok though I'm not so sure Green Matters is sufficient for ORGDEPTH. IT news would also fail ORGIND given its like, 90% quotes from the company, and does not appear to have any secondary analysis, very far from being a featured story, so I'd agree there also. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 04:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Inca Civil War. There is clear consensus against a standalone article, and clear preference for a redirect. Consensus as to the target is less clear, but Inca Civil War has more support than the alternative, and if anyone is not content with this outcome I suggest a talk page discussion followed by an RfD if absolutely necessary. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 18:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Battle of Mullihambato

Battle of Mullihambato (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources found on the "Battle of Mullihambato" as described here in the vaguest of terms (with plenty of WP:WEASEL words raising red flags here – even the most basic facts are "possibly", "probably", "inconclusive" (in terms of the victor), and "unknown") – and they are totally unverifiable. Spanish version of article also doesn't inspire confidence, as it suggests that this battle is also called the "Battle of Ambato", the "Battle of Chimborazo", or the "Battle of Nagsichi" – and it's doubtful that any source actually links all 4 of them as one and the same. (Newson (1995), Life and Death in Early Colonial Ecuador, mentions a major battle in Ambato, but that doesn't exactly match the description here, either.) Perhaps a new article could be created in the future called "Battle of Ambato" or equivalent, but if so, it would need to be backed by reliable sources. (N.B., a separate article on Battle of Chimborazo already exists in English Wikipedia.) Article as it has stood for 16 years is essentially original research ( WP:OR) and should be deleted on those grounds. Cielquiparle ( talk) 11:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Ecuador. Cielquiparle ( talk) 11:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Mccapra ( talk) 19:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Battle of Chillopampa per Maria Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, History of the Inca Realm, 1999, p. 116:

    "The two armies had their first encounter on the plain of Chillopampa, with Huascar's troops defeating those of Atahualpa. Nevertheless, Atahualpa's generals, reacting quickly, regrouped their scattered troops and, with fresh reinforcements from Quito, were able to recover. According to Cabello de Valboa, this first encounter took place in Mullihambato, near the river, and in a second battle, luck favored Atahualpa's captains. Cieza maintains that only one battle took place. In this fighting...Atoc was taken prisoner and fell victim to the cruelty of Challcochima, who, according to some versions, had a gold-incrusted chica cup made of his skull."

    There is no clear source that says that this battle occurred independently of either Chillopampa or Chimborazo, and through Rostworowski the suggestion is made that Mullihambato is Chillopampa, with the second battle, if it occurred, being Chimborazo. A redirect to the Chillopampa page would allow mention of the possibility of this name to be made there. I do not recommend a merge because the article is uncited and would require a complete rewrite to be useful in any article. Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk) 14:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Comment. @ Pickersgill-Cunliffe Interesting find...but then why not simply redirect to Inca Civil War and have some corresponding text there explaining the historians' disagreement? In general I'm wary of the entire set of individual battle pages – it's almost like the Wikipedia "wars/battles" structure is driving a certain type of framing of the Inca Civil War that may not be warranted, given that there is disagreement among historians about which battles even took place to start with, and the depth of information available about a few of the battles is quite thin for many. (Even the broader Inca Civil War article itself tells a different story from what the individual battle pages and template seem to suggest.) As an example, there is yet another framing in Enduring controversies in military history: critical analyses and context (ABC-CLIO, 2017) which explores "Did the Inca Civil War play an important role in the Spanish conquest of the Inca Empire?" which suggests that the main battles occurred in Tumebamba, Ambato, and Quipaipan.
    On Wikipedia now we have the following pages, some of which only cite one source, and present information as though it's uncontested:
If you go through the sequence of individual battle pages, it feels like a rather breezy creation of a bunch of articles for the sake of building a narrative that fits the template. (Not suggesting we need solve the whole problem here, just pointing out the context.) Cielquiparle ( talk) 23:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Cielquiparle: Agree there seems to be some confusion about the civil war, but as you say we'll stick to this article. I think that redirecting to Chillopampa is most appropriate because it appears that we do have historians mostly agreeing that this battle occurred, and that if Mullihambato existed (as the same battle or a different one) it was directly connected to it. People searching for these events are more likely to go to Chillopampa, which isn't actually mentioned in the main article! Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk) 12:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Dozy Mmobuosi. (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 ( t • c) 13:36, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Dozy Mmobuosi Foundation

Dozy Mmobuosi Foundation (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not meeting GNG; Promo; delete or redirect to Dozy Mmobuosi or BoraVoro ( talk) 11:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 11:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

ILOT Bet Nigeria

ILOT Bet Nigeria (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable bookmaker, fails NCORP BoraVoro ( talk) 11:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 11:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

William D. Clay Jr.

William D. Clay Jr. (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not appear to be notable. Avishai11 ( talk) 11:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 11:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Stefan Savić (Serbian footballer)

Stefan Savić (Serbian footballer) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This men's footballer, who seems to have a minor career, last played one appearance for BSK Borca in 2016 before disappearing from the football world. Using his name in Cyrillic (Стефан Савић), my Google search exclusively came up with that Montenegrin footballer; nothing about the Serb with the same birth name. The only reliable source regarding AfD target seems to be Sportski Žurnal when he played for FK Sloga Petrovac na Mlavi in 2015. However, after translation, it's only a passing mention in squad list which definitely doesn't count as significant coverage. Article fails WP:GNG overall. Clara A. Djalim ( talk) 11:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 11:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Chizo 1 Germany

Chizo 1 Germany (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An article that lacks the minimal inclusion for bios. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. A WP:MILL. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 10:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 12:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Big Ben Phonogram

Big Ben Phonogram (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG. The About section in the website listed in References - https://www.bigben.se/phonogram/about draws a blank. Wikilover3509 ( talk) 10:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:03, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Natalie Labbée

AfDs for this article:
Natalie Labbée (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

City councillors are not presumptively notable based on WP:NPOL, they have to be notable for other things or pass WP:GNG or at least WP:ANYBIO. This subject fails all. Sources presented and from WP:BEFORE are WP:ROUTINE coverages/ WP:RUNOFTHEMILL sources and cannot be used to establish GNG because there's no WP:SIGCOV anywhere. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 10:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to North American Soccer League on television. Consensus is clearly to remove this article. No one has actually suggested redirect, but enough have made the case for merge (although without agreement on where to merge it) that a redirect would allow preservation of accessible content should someone choose to put in the work to merge any of it into another article. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of Soccer Bowl broadcasters

List of Soccer Bowl broadcasters (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTTVGUIDE and WP:LISTCRUFT applies. Fails WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE. Of the sources per WP:RS; besides unsourced, one of those is a blogspot post; of the three offline sources, one is a personal opinion of one of the announcers, anything supporting this list is minimal. Another offline source is an announcement about a deal. A majority of those are WP:PRIMARY, forums and dead links besides the YouTube posts, not offering anything to assert notability. A small section in a main article about broadcasters will be more appropriate than a list about broadcasters. WP:ATD will be a merge to Soccer Bowl. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:05, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Death of Shaylee Mejia

Death of Shaylee Mejia (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of sustained in-depth coverage; all local coverage from March; lead includes a weaseled potential BLP violation that this girl's death has been "widely attributed" to a fight she had at school. Zanahary ( talk) 07:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Crime, and California. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 07:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Seems a clear WP:BLP1E situation. Reliable sources only cover her in the context of a single event, she is a low-profile individual, and the event itself is not significant (although it is of course very sad). WP:NOTNEWS also relevant, I think. Chocmilk03 ( talk) 08:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't really get your argument here. If it's an event based article it can't really be a BLP1E issue? But this definitely doesn't pass NEVENT either and should be deleted on those grounds. PARAKANYAA ( talk) 19:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Yeah, I guess it's not technically a bio but about the event of her murder? The line is maybe a little blurry in the case of an article that is solely about the death of a single person. But agree, WP:NEVENT doesn't seem to be met either. There's no deadline, but there's also no evidence of continued coverage since the event or that this event will have any sustained significance. Chocmilk03 ( talk) 06:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: I can only find a half-dozen articles in Gnews about the event happening from the time it did, then nothing. Another non-notable death with no lasting consequences, NOTNEWS. Oaktree b ( talk) 12:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: The incident which could be a potential murder/manslaughter case is already gaining significant coverage in the entire country, not just from local news. There will likely be bigger matters and legal proceedings concerning the death, which if you thoroughly investigate the details you will find some connection between the bullying and violence that the victim endured.
Cheera L ( talk) 19:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Well, we aren't a CRYSTALBALL. Oaktree b ( talk) 04:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
That's the article's author btw Zanahary ( talk) 23:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Avetec

Avetec (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable, no longer active. Looking back at the active dates of this organisation, I couldn't find any references in news. There are references like https://www.businessinsider.com/peter-thiel-invested-300000-in-man-made-tornados-2012-12 in 2012, which appears to be an unrelated company. Looking through the history of the page, there are references, but are for things like the definition of STEM, not the organisation Newystats ( talk) 11:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:05, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete - Fails WP:NCORP. Melmann 07:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Defunct website, no coverage in American media. I get a few hits in Canadian media [48] for a different entity. Nothing found for sourcing, what's used in the article is primary. Oaktree b ( talk) 14:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Note that Chiselinccc's bolded 'delete' !vote was somewhat altered by subsequent comment below Cunard's posts. Daniel ( talk) 06:36, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lusongyuan Hotel

Lusongyuan Hotel (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. Hardly anything in Google News for both English and Chinese name 北京侣松园宾馆 LibStar ( talk) 05:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Edwards, Natasha (2002-06-01). "The Traveller: Short Breaks: 24-Hour Room Service Lu Song Yuan Hotel, Beijing". The Independent. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

      The review notes: "One exception, offering lashings of atmosphere and a taste of authentic China, is the Lu Song Yuan Hotel. The 19th-century courtyard dwelling was built for the fearless General Zeng Ge Ling Qin. After serving as a rather run-down hostel for 30 years, the Lu Song Yuan was bought in 1997 by the Hong Kong-based Silk Road Hotel Management Company, and reopened as a Culture Hotel in 1998 after extensive renovation. The hotel spreads over five courtyards; the main one, where you can sit for a drink, opens off the restaurant."

    2. Wang, Dandan (2001-08-17). "Lu Song Yuan a "Siheyuan" hotel". Beijing Today. Retrieved 2024-05-28 – via Internet Archive.

      The review notes: "The hotel was the former residence of the relatives of Qing royal family and is surrounded by historic buildings. Zenggelinqin, the first owner of the house, is described as a national hero in the film “Burning Yuanmingyuan”. ... The Lu Song Yuan hotel is built around four charming traditional courtyards. It includes an outdoor lounge, bamboo gardens and a grape garden. Many of the rooms open onto one of the courtyards. The hotel has 59 guest rooms, which are tastefully furnished with replicas of Ming dynasty furniture. There is a business center, which provides an English speaking secretarial service, copying, fax, internet access, as well as ticketing and foreign currency exchange. "

    3. Biggs, Cassie (2004-07-11). "Boutique hotels in Beijing". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

      The article provides 149 words of coverage about the subject. The article notes: "In the 19th century the two-storey Lu Song Yuan Hotel was the private residence of General Zeng Ge Ling Qin, one-time defence minister and regarded as the "Great Wall" of the Qing Court. Reasonably priced and centrally located in a hutong just north of Bei Hai Park, the hotel has been on the backpacker trail for some time and can be busy. But with four courtyards, a bamboo grove and a grape garden, there's more than enough space for a spot of solitude. The best suites open onto a tiny courtyard at the back where you can sit and sip tea, listen to the birds and contemplate the hotel's 170 years of history. Or you can hop in a rickshaw and go for a spin around the hutongs, many of which haven't changed since their Kublai Khan days. Rooms range from US$10 dormatories to $100 suites with private courtyards"

    4. Chen, Stephen (2008-07-13). "Games worse for hotel trade than the 1989 crackdown". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

      The article notes: "The Lusongyuan Hotel in Beijing's Banchang hutong has thrived since the last time the Dalai Lama checked in and roamed its courtyards in his pyjamas, according to some of the elderly people who live in the alley. For half a century, the former imperial residence in central Beijing has been a stopover for senior government officials, diplomats and, lately, overseas tourists. ... The occupancy rate at the hotel hit a low this month - even lower than the July after the bloodshed in Tiananmen Square in 1989. ... The hotel, now owned by Hong Kong businessman Peter Wong Man-kong as part of Culture Resources Development, has modernised its bathrooms, added broadband internet access and Wi-fi, established a 24-hour multilingual service hotline, and reprinted their service guide to cover the Olympic Games and sports venues."

    5. Less significant coverage:
      1. Izon, Lucy (1992-01-19). "Melbourne Hostel: It's Not in the Books". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

        The article notes: "After several delays, China’s first internationally affiliated youth hostel is due to open this month. Although it’s expected to be a little more expensive than some of the budget hotels favored by backpackers in Beijing, it will be a good place to meet fellow travelers and share information on getting around within this vast country. The 60-bed hostel is located in a traditional four-courtyard-style building, which was originally the Lu Song Yuan Hotel"

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Lusongyuan Hotel, also known as Lu Song Yuan Hotel ( simplified Chinese: 北京侣松园宾馆; traditional Chinese: 北國情侶松園賓館), to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard ( talk) 10:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Hi Cunard ( talk · contribs), thanks for this research and the ping! As this is one of the first AfDs I've participated in, and I'm doing so in part so I can observe discussions and learn more about evaluating RSes, I am probably not a good person to judge these, so I will eagerly await input from our other peers you've tagged.
That being said, these *look* like decently significant coverage to my "newbie" eyes, and particularly your find about the Qing general! Looking forward to see what others think, if they concur with your assessment I'd love to help you in patching these sources in to build article content from them. (Also, apologies, I'm trying to indent this as a response in sourcecode but I'm not sure I did so properly) Cheers! Chiselinccc ( talk) 11:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Thank you for reviewing the sources, Chiselinccc ( talk · contribs), and for your interest in patching the sources in to build article content from them! I participate in many AfDs so don't always have time to add the sources to the article since searching for sources is time-consuming. (I've adjusted the indentation of your comment so that it's nested under my comment.) Cunard ( talk) 06:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Editors can create a redirect if they choose to do so. Liz Read! Talk! 23:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Milroy Goes

Milroy Goes (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This appears to be a non-notable filmmaker with no significant coverage in reliable third-party sources. He has directed several non-notable films, ad films, and music videos, including Welcome M1LL10NS, a non-theatrical release whose notability is questionable. The currently cited sources offer nothing beyond passing mentions, and a Google News search yields no helpful results. This fails to meet the criteria of WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. GSS  💬 04:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, India, and Goa. GSS  💬 04:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. GSS  💬 04:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Based on my check, I found no in-depth coverage from multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. This means the subject completely fails to meet WP:GNG. The majority of the sources are around his films. GrabUp - Talk 05:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: Significant coverage in independent (although some articles include interviews), reliable sources. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    (and if the majority of sources is considered to be around his films (not sure that can be said, but let's assume it is the case, it means that the films may be considered notable, so that he would meet WP:DIRECTOR). - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:54, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don’t think the article about his film meets WP:GNG as it requires in-depth coverage from multiple sources. The cited sources seem unreliable to me or are full of quotations from connected individuals. It fails WP:NFILM as no reviews were found and WP:NFO because the film only received coverage at the time of its release. To pass, it requires “publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film’s initial release.” I can nominate that article anytime soon. GrabUp - Talk 09:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Mushy Yank, could you point out sources that provide "significant coverage"? WP:SIGCOV requires coverage that "addresses the topic directly and in detail." Unfortunately, as mentioned earlier, almost all the sources are merely name drops. Additionally, I agree with Grabup that the film they directed appears to be non-notable as it lacks the coverage required by WP:GNG and shows no evidence of notability under WP:NFILM.
    Regarding your claim of meeting WP:NDIRECTOR, it is weak for two reasons: first, the film is likely not notable, and second, there is no coverage that discusses the subject in detail. WP:BIOSPECIAL states that "If neither a satisfying explanation nor appropriate sources can be found for a standalone article, but the person meets one or more of the additional criteria: Merge the article into a broader article providing context." However, this is likely not possible due to the weak notability of the film. GSS  💬 09:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    At random, for example:
    Perhaps the film producer with the most interesting experience is Milroy Goes whose film Welcome Millions is being shown on Amazon Prime in Europe and America after being dubbed in the local language. It is expected to be available for viewership in India shortly. Made in three languages and shot in Goa, Punjab, and the UK, the movie was meant to have its premiere at the IFFI 2019 but was turned down because it had been one of two Indian film selected by the Oscar committee. ( https://www.heraldgoa.in/Cafe/It’s-time-to-go-‘Over-the-Top’-for-Konkani-cinema/161417)
    In 2012, director Milroy Goes brought about a whole new change in Konkani cinema by introducing his digital theatrical film, (as was mentioned in the Afd about The Victim) ( https://www.heraldgoa.in/Cafe/Good-days-ahead-for-Goan-cinema/108329)
    Pervis Milroy Goes, known better as Milroy Goes is an Indian film director from Goa. He hails from the beautiful village of Cuncolim in South Goa. He ventured into the Film Industry in 2007 with his first short film “Vengeance”. Milroy gained a lot of recognition as a film director soon after the release of his second short film “Unexpected” in 2009. Milroy was mentored by a French film enthusiast named Anthony Coombs-Humphreys, who not only believed in Milroy’s potential as a filmmaker but also assisted him in producing a remake of his short film “Unexpected” for the international audience. The movie, which was titled “Expect the Unexpected”, featured a Bollywood actor named Deepraj Rana. The movie was released in 2011 and received very good reviews. Milroy Goes’ film “Welcome Millions”, which was released in 2018, was eligible for the Best Picture Award in the General Entry category at the 91st Academy Awards (Oscars) in 2019, but was not nominated. Milroy Goes is credited with being the person to introduce digital cinema in Goa with his debut theatrical film “The Victim” (2012).Besides filmmaking, Milroy Goes also has various other business ventures including a coffee shop, an artist management firm and a Portuguese passport consultancy firm. ( It's Goa)
    These are just examples, it's +- short but significant imv, and there are many of those. If really everyone agrees this is not enough, nor for the film(s) nor for him, may I suggest a redirect for all of them to Konkani cinema (another guideline might apply if one considers the regional scope), that might help add prose to the page, which is very listy. I'm not that interested in this filmmaker, to be honest, and will probably leave it at that (I am not watching this), Best, - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don’t think Heraldgoa’s covarage can establish notability. And Itsgoa is a self-proclaimed blog based site according to their about us page. As it says “ ItsGoa was started in 2015, with the aim of becoming the premier portal for all things Goa. Today with thousands of visitors a month from across the world, our blog based website has transcended the virtual space, with the ItsGoa magazine – a sought after resource for visitors to Goa.” GrabUp - Talk 11:29, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    It's Goa: A blog, yes, technically, but not a personal one and that is what matters ( WP:EXPERTSPS). As for O Heraldo, not sure what you mean, but it's one of the (if not the, in English) main newspapers in Goa!! Again, a redirect to Konkani cinema might be considered. Really no time to make any further comments, sorry. Decide what you think is best. Thanks. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    It's Goa is not only a blog, but the article you mentioned above is an interview, and such articles are not accepted for establishing notability. Additionally, there is no evidence of who runs that blog or their background, nor are there details on their editorial policies. Such sources fall under WP:QUESTIONABLE. The section "The Folks Behind The Jokes" on their about us page states, "Our writers come from all walks of life, and through our social media handles," confirming that they lack real editorial control. They also encourage people to send in their stories and experiences, share their events and happenings, or create discussions around the articles they post, further undermining their reliability. The other two sources you mentioned are just passing mentions and are not even close to WP:INDEPTH. GSS  💬 12:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is any more support Redirection as it looks like the sourcing doesn't hold up for scrutiny.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Pyewacket (novel)

Pyewacket (novel) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage of this book. Fails WP:BK. SL93 ( talk) 04:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Lockridge, Richard (1967-11-05). "Cat Tales ...". The New York Times. p. BR24. ProQuest  118057210.

      The review noters: "Rosemary Weir's Pyewacket (Abelard-Schuman, $3.25. illustrated by Charles Pickard) is about a group of varied cats who live in a run-down street called Pig Lane and who, under the leadership of Pyewacket (himself 2 semi-magic cat), decide to evict the humans who also inhabit the street and are inclined to get in the way of cats. The humans do go, although not precisely in accordance with Pyewacket's plan—which involves an alliance with rats. The story for 6 to 9's is ingenious, well-plotted and pretty funny. The cats talk only to one another."

    2. "Pyewacket review". Kirkus Reviews. 1967. p. 1210. Retrieved 2024-05-25 – via Internet Archive.

      The page verifies that Kirkus Reviews reviewed Pyewacket in 1967.

    3. Martin, Pat (1968-09-21). "Pat Martin Scans Books for the Young". Redwood City Tribune. Archived from the original on 2024-05-25. Retrieved 2024-05-25 – via Newspapers.com.

      The review notes: "For those boys and girls who would like to hear about a coterie of conniving cats, here is one-eyed Pyewacket with his gang, in a most amusing story. Living in Pig Lane, the cats decide to drive out their unworthy owners and so take over the disreputable homes in which they live. When the owners are legally dispossessed, one can understand that the cats are entitled to think their plan is succeeding. What actually happens provides a satisfactory solution and the cats find exactly the spot for a gang of good ratters. The things that make this special are illustrations of Pyewacket by Charles Pickard and a very fine characterization of a very tough cat. (Ages 10-12.)"

    4. Van Fleet, Virginia (1968-04-28). "Young Readers: Cat Tale Excellent". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Archived from the original on 2024-05-25. Retrieved 2024-05-25 – via Newspapers.com.

      The review notes: "For all who enjoy cats and their unpredictable antics, "Pyewacket" by Rosemary Weir (Abelard-Schuman, New York, 13.25) will (although it was written for children from 6 to 9; be a delightful tidbit. The story concerns a colony of cats, led by a redoubtable fighter, Pyewacket, whose owners live in shacks in a slum district in a British city, called Pig Lane. ... At their leader's suggestion, they decide to get rid of their people by making a peace treaty with the rats. ... What happens then shouldn't happen to a cat, even a rebel feline, but the author contrives a most ingenious and satisfying solution."

    5. Less significant coverage:
      1. Blishen, Edward (1967-07-07). "Books for children: History and imagination". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 2024-05-25. Retrieved 2024-05-25 – via Newspapers.com.

        The review notes: "Finally, for younger readers, there's Pyewacket, by Rosemary Weir (Abelard-Schuman, 15s), also about the East End and demolition; the heroes here are cats, who set out to drive the humans from Pig Lane. I take off at once at the behest of almost any fantasy and especially one about cats: but this seemed heavy and calculated, and I just found myself being bumped gloomily along the ground."

    6. Article about a sequel:
      1. "The World of Books". Manchester Evening News. 1981-03-06. Archived from the original on 2024-05-25. Retrieved 2024-05-25 – via Newspapers.com .

        The review is about a sequel. The review notes: "Pyewacket and Son by Rosemary Weir (Grasshopper, 95p). Feline fantasy about a pack of cats who work as rat-catchers in a cat-food factory. Their leader, the one-eyed, torn-eared Pyewacket, declares war on a gang of alley-cats when his son is accused of stealing fish by the workers, How he traps the villains makes a perfectly delightful tale. Magnificent moggy madness."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Pyewacket to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard ( talk) 07:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 00:57, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Korry Howell

Korry Howell (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 22:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 00:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Martín Gaitán

Martín Gaitán (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All citations are profiles. No news coverage can be found. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina ( talk) 20:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: I find a bit of coverage for a blind football player [54], but there is no coverage for this rugby person. Delete for a lack of sourcing. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:32, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: French wiki article lists what seem to be newspaper stories about this person, but there are no online links to them, so I can't evaluate how good they are. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Lean Keep, per the offline sources at the French Wikipedia and per Rugbyfan22. The titles seem to translate to "Gaïtan: 'hope'", "The pleasure of Gaïtan", "Martin Gaitan, the miraculous", and "The eye of Martin Gaitan", all of which, based on the titles, appear to be highly likely significant coverage. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 19:20, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Gonçalo Foro

Gonçalo Foro (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina ( talk) 19:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 08:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Puerta Real (Granada)

Puerta Real (Granada) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced since 2014 and does not seem to meet notability criteria per WP:NPLACE. I can't find non-trivial coverage in independent and reliable sources, only mentions of the name in the context of directions and addresses, but never descriptions in detail (not in English, at any rate). The article defines it as a neighbourhood, but it is not an official district I can identify: downtown Granada is called simply Centro (e.g. see Spanish Wiki articles Distrito Centro (Granada) or Distritos de Granada). Even the Spanish version of the article isn't promising: the only somewhat detailed sources are a tour agency website and a blog post, neither of which counts as reliable. This topic could be mentioned in another overview article or a future article about the Centro district, but unlikely to be helpful and verifiable on its own. R Prazeres ( talk) 20:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:26, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of South Africa national rugby sevens players. Liz Read! Talk! 04:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Milo Nqoro

Milo Nqoro (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to List of South Africa national rugby sevens players as I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG ( talk) 03:26, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:29, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Baker Ninan Fenn

Baker Ninan Fenn (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure. Half of the hits I get from searching for sources (string:"baker ninan fenn") are non-responsive; the other half are useless as sources for Fenn. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:29, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Yakob Elias

Yakob Elias (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure. Source search (string:"yakob elias") returns nothing. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per above. This church is a part of the wider Orthodox church and there is no reason why its bishops would not be notable. Keralan bishops of all denominations seem to be challenged more than European ones, presumably because most sources will be in the local languages and/or offline. Here are some additional Eng lang ones, searching on "Yakob Mar Elias": [59], [60], [61]. Ingratis ( talk) 05:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:28, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Anthonios Yaqu'b

Anthonios Yaqu'b (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure; both sources in the article are 404-compliant. Search for sources (string: "anthonios yaqub") turns up nothing. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

information Note: The sources have been fixed to not be dead; the first is of unknown authorship and the second doesn't discuss Yaqu'b in depth (though "Yaq'ub" gets name-dropped a fair bit). — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 22:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Abraham Julios

Abraham Julios (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure. Google search (string:"abraham julios") turns up barely anything, and the lot of it is unusable as sources. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:32, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:36, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: Maybe this is one of the deprecated places needing attention I. Wikipedia. That doesn't mean a clergy if such office won't be entered. By the Merit of the office, he is notable. I don't seem the nominator took this in or maybe had been nominated generally with others. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 11:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Mathew Moolakkatt

Mathew Moolakkatt (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure. The only sources I can find that discuss him at length (string: "Mathew Moolakkatt") are tied to a controversy and legal case about Catholic marriage practises. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Thomas Koorilos

Thomas Koorilos (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure. Google search (string:"thomas koorilos") turns up no usable sources what-so-ever, mainly profiles and name-drops. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 04:32, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Kerala Gazetted Officers' Federation

Kerala Gazetted Officers' Federation (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. A google news search found only 3 sources of routine coverage. Fails WP:ORG and GNG. LibStar ( talk) 23:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Tonga national rugby union players. Liz Read! Talk! 01:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lotu Filipine

Lotu Filipine (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Only one brief article exists [here https://www.looptonga.com/business/lotu-filipine-wins-500-cash-digicel-tonga-easter-promotion-91903], which is not enough. Shinadamina ( talk) 19:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: the article I linked to, is not even about his career and may not be him. Shinadamina ( talk) 19:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply
There's also a sexual harassment incident when he was captain of the Tonga under-21 team [76]. There should be more on this, but it would require digging in NewzText, which I don't have access to. IdiotSavant ( talk) 13:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep World Cup player and a simple search is bringing up WP:GNG passing coverage. There is likely more coverage offline also from the time of his career and locations of his playing career. Rugbyfan22 ( talk) 18:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Please share 2 or 3 reliable sources that have in-depth coverage on the person. We cannot assume reliable sources from the past can be found. We need to find them. Appearances in World Cup are not sufficient, unless there is such a WP policy which I am not aware of. If so, please link to the said policy. Shinadamina ( talk) 04:22, 8 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Shady Lane, Indiana

Shady Lane, Indiana (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

According to Baker, this was... a shady lane. Supposedly they used excessively green sycamore logs to make a stretch of corduroy road, and the ends sprouted and produced a line of sycamores on either side of the road. YMMV, as they say, but at any rate he says nothing about "tree-lined streets" or about streets at all. And he certainly doesn't identify it as a settlement in any way. The maps are of no particular help since I couldn't find one that had the name on it until it was back-added from GNIS, so it's hard to say where exactly this was supposed to have been. The one dominant feature on all maps and aerials I saw was a substantial factory complex south of the area; it's now a bulldozed ruin, so I have no idea what it was. Searching hits lots of other Shady Lanes but although there's a geological reference to it, there's no such road name in the vicinity that I can find. So I don't think this is a real place. Mangoe ( talk) 02:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Skynxnex ( talk) 04:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete No information found, other than the cited source, which is completely misrepresented by saying this is a community. WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk) 14:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • General note: I've noticed a lot of these settlements I created ages ago coming up for deletion. I believe at the time I was just creating articles for red links in the county-level "Municipalities and communities" templates. I have no opinion on whether they are notable or not (or whether they get deleted or not); I assume you all are already removing the communities from the templates when these items are deleted. Thanks! Sweet kate ( talk) 17:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete The tree story is plausible, I've seen fence lines that grew a tree from the posts. Presumably for the same reason. And while Shady lane locale may be notable its not a community of any kind as is made clear in "From Needmore to Prosperity : Hoosier place names in folklore and history" page 298-299 [77] James.folsom ( talk) 21:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Alexandre Castaing

Alexandre Castaing (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Several searches in both English and French came up with nothing but match reports, databases, and bit references with no substance. This player certainly exists, but he lacks WP:SIGCOV. Anwegmann ( talk) 02:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Yazman Tehsil. If you disagree with the redirect target, please discuss it on the talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 04:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Chak 15 DNB

Chak 15 DNB (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested PROD. Non-notable village. Article is completely unsourced, and there isn't any evidence of notability either. CycloneYoris talk! 01:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 03:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 03:46, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment I have added the GPS coordinates from Google Maps. The place does exist (and has buildings), but I can't find any good online sources about the location. Walsh90210 ( talk) 23:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, without other sources than a map, it is not an encyclopedic article. Looking at the category, there is no precedent to create individual articles about the chaks in the district. If anything, they could be covered in a list. Geschichte ( talk) 03:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Redirect to Bahawalpur as an ATD. Only one of the villages in this category has sources, so a separate list seems inappropriate. Better to redirect them each to the main article until the subjects draw sourcing requiring their expansion. BusterD ( talk) 07:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Comment: I have boldly redirected two (both wholly unsourced) of the four village articles in the category as I've asserted above. I have left Channan Pir alone because it seems to have some sourcing. In the event this page is deleted, I propose to redirect the pagespace as I've suggested above. BusterD ( talk) 07:52, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Is anyone concerned these redirects are not mentioned in Bahawalpur? ~ Kvng ( talk) 16:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
It isn't in the city of Bahawalpur; it's in Yazman Tehsil (where it is mentioned) in Bahawalpur district. A redirect to the tehsil would be appropriate. Peter James ( talk) 20:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 02:28, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Prabodhan Vidyalaya School

Prabodhan Vidyalaya School (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Zero coverage in independent sources,fails WP:NSCHOOL Ratnahastin ( talk) 02:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:19, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Italy national rugby union players. Liz Read! Talk! 04:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Matteo Zanusso

Matteo Zanusso (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to List of Italy national rugby union players as I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG. The most I found was a few sentences here, which would not suffice. JTtheOG ( talk) 17:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

List of songs about Bangalore

AfDs for this article:
List of songs about Bangalore (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previous AFD was a mass nomination that ended in keep, for many reasons, except for the article's actual merits. Because there are none.

The deletion reason is the same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about Ahmedabad, Madras, Oslo etc.: The list fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:LISTN and WP:OR. There is little to nothing worthwhile in this list, be it content or context. Geschichte ( talk) 08:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Neutral None of these songs have their own articles, but some of the people singing them do, and the films they are in do as well. Dream Focus 03:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 ( talk) 19:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Article has changed, discussion has clear direction and no "deleters". ( non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte ( talk) 20:48, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Instagram face

Instagram face (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

"Instagram Face" is something very abstract and unverifiable, ie. two reliable sources may define it differently. It may also be inherently derogatory, as it is based on negative opinions about women's appearances. With Love from Cassie Schebel ( talk) 01:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Why? Since these are reasons to delete the article entirely, I would think this is where it belongs. This is a genuine question, I've never nominated an article for deletion before, and I am probably doing at least two things wrong. With Love from Cassie Schebel ( talk) 01:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, divided between those editors arguing for Draftification and those advocating Keep as is.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

James Garcia

AfDs for this article:
James Garcia (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable baseball player. Article was deleted by discussion in 2007 and then recreated in 2014. It's different enough to not be speedily deleted, I think. Subject does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NSPORTS. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 00:57, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete, as per nom. - Samoht27 ( talk) 19:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously at AFD, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. If an editor wants to work on a version of this article in Draft or User space, contact me or make a request at WP:REFUND. Liz Read! Talk! 00:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lauren King (actress)

Lauren King (actress) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability under WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. All available sources are primary sources, trivial mentions, or affiliated with this actress's agency. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 00:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, User:Dclemens1971, I've moved the article back to main space from User space. The editor clearly wants the article to be draftified or userfied. Liz Read! Talk! 23:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Thanks for moving it back @ Liz. I'm OK with draftify as an AtD if others are. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 00:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Since the creator has not requested it, I am switching my !vote back to delete. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 15:21, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 00:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Shah Zanuriman Nuar Paras Khan

Shah Zanuriman Nuar Paras Khan (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't see how this meets WP:NPOL. He doesn't appear to actually have national/state-wide office, and is rather just a member of his party's youth division. Not enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:BASIC. C F A 💬 00:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2024_May_28&oldid=1227308270"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 27 May 29 >

Purge server cache

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 21:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Marti Group

Marti Group (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage in reliable third-party sources that establish notability. Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. GSS  💬 10:43, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Switzerland. GSS  💬 10:43, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. This is a major Swiss engineering company. According to de:Marti Holding, their annual turnover is more than a billion Swiss francs. Anyway, a quick search in Swiss Google News confirms notability immediately: [1], [2], [3], [4]. — Kusma ( talk) 11:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Kusma: Thank you for finding these sources. Although I can't read German, Google Translate revealed that the second source is routine coverage with no significant detail on the company, and the fourth source is just a passing mention, both of which fail to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. However, the third one provides some depth about the company. The first source requires a subscription, so I am unable to review it; let's wait for others to check it. Additionally, it's a bit confusing whether the article is about a group of companies or an individual company, as the article on de-wiki is titled Marti Holding. If the article is kept, the title should be adjusted accordingly. GSS  💬 13:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Most of the articles will talk about what the company does, and go into depth about their projects, and not about the company itself. I think that should be expected of most companies, but especially of private and construction companies who are not usually in the spotlight. With that said, as Kusma noted, even information about the company itself can be found to establish notability.
    The article is intentionally meant to be about the entire group, as I think that their internal company structure and who does what is not easy to decipher for the public and it's also not interesting. Marti Holding is a holding company that owns a lot of others, but in a sense it's just one of many official entities and less relevant. They call themselves Marti Group on their own official channels and that's why I named it as such. Fejesjoco ( talk) 14:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    A deal worth a billion dollars for a significant part of Central Europe's greatest infrastructure project may be "routine coverage" to you. To me, it indicates that we should have an article about this company. It is an embarrassment that we did not have one ten years ago. — Kusma ( talk) 15:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
In the past hour, I added some sources found by Kusma and some others by me. These go in depth about the company so these should satisfy the notability and coverage depth criteria, much better than the average in this category. Additionally, since at one point you wanted to delete the article on grounds of being promotional, I added a section about a controversy of theirs, with even more direct news coverage sources. Fejesjoco ( talk) 18:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep (but I'm biased). With recent edits to the article, the concerns raised should be eliminated by now. BTW found another strong source [5] a university research project. The talk page lists additional ideas for extending the article, but even without that it should be good enough already. Fejesjoco ( talk) 15:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 00:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Star Premium. Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Star Action

Star Action (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

movie channel fails WP:Notability, the sources are only routine announcements with no deep or direct coverage of the company Assirian cat ( talk) 07:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 00:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Sameja (clan)

Sameja (clan) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Do we really need a standalone WP article on each and every tribe that exists on this planet? Fails WP:GNG. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 00:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

It is a major tribe of the Sindh region of Pakistan and they are a branch of a former ruling dynasty. You should avoid speed nominating multiple articles without hesitation and get yourself familiarized with South Asian caste related articles. Perhaps engage in a talk page discussion first with major contributors. The references provided are more than sufficient and reliable. Sir Calculus ( talk) 05:02, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment - I know nothing about this although I am confused about the content of the page. First Samma (tribe) is said to be a clan, then Sameja (clan) is said to be a clan and then on the page there are clans (or subclans?). It is unclear to me how many of the sources on the page are actually substantially discussing the topic. Second, there are wp pages in other languages for Samma (tribe) but none have one for Sameja (clan). It strikes me that unless someone can show a source which goes into depth then we should maybe follow the lead of the other WP language versions. JMWt ( talk) 09:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 00:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎ to take action, either on this article or the wider scope as proposed subsequently. I would suggest an RFC to be held, well-advertised, to discuss a potential new structure for these articles as being the best way forward. Daniel ( talk) 23:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Abro (tribe)

Abro (tribe) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Do we really need a standalone WP article on each and every tribe that exists on this planet? Fails WP:GNG. — Saqib ( talk I contribs) 00:33, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

It is a major tribe of the Sindh region of Pakistan and they are a branch of a former ruling dynasty. You should avoid speed nominating multiple articles without hesitation and get yourself familiarized with South Asian caste related articles. Perhaps engage in a talk page discussion first with major contributors. Sir Calculus ( talk) 05:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Draftify and merge region wise all similar articles after RfC @ WT:PAK:
Though I would share main concern. I suppose it needs deeper collective thought. I do not see any WP:RFCBEFORE to have taken place at Talk:Abro (tribe) or rather better would have been at WT:PAK.
Likelihood of similar articles in 100s?
Category:Sindhi tribes likely to have more than 250 similar stubs. The way articles seem to have formed I can imagine similar would be the case for many in Category:Tribes of Pakistan. Though there is one central article Ethnic groups of Pakistan it's scope does not seem to be tribal specific.
Importance of topic and issue
I am surprised region wise central articles for tribes of Pakistan do not exist but such large number of stubs going no where seem to exist. Baradari (brotherhood) system is influential cultural part of Pakistan and that article too is a stub. Tribal and ethnicity antecedents form clan culture / Baradari (brotherhood) so anthropologically it's important core of Pakistan's demographic history. Though not paid enough attention to on WP.
Idk if any similar articles were listed and deleted up til now but my suggestion is Draftify and merge region wise all similar articles after RfC @ WT:PAK. If no one is ready to work on the drafts then put in my user name space I shall try to promote for expansion in due course. Bookku ( talk) 05:44, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Hi! Is it really possible to merge all region wise articles? There are many which may not be suitable for a single list-like descriptive article publishing. Jadeja, Kalhora, Soomro, Jokhio, Bhutto, Burfat are some examples. Sir Calculus ( talk) 12:24, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Well developed ones need not be merged. Even for region list may be long but it can be further divided tribal district wise because many tribes are likely to be concentrated in few districts only. May be you can have separate article for extinct tribes. End of the day AfD is would not be right venue to take a detail call but project notice board would be IMO. Bookku ( talk) 15:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 23:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to SIC Ferries. Liz Read! Talk! 00:12, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

MV Linga

MV Linga (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG or any other notability guidelines. Only references are primary. No independent coverage online. Clear friend a 💬 01:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

There aren't many references that can be used other the primary sources from the owner/operator of the vessel, there is also this one though: https://www.faktaomfartyg.se/linga_2002.htm
I don't understand how MV Linga is the only Shetland Islands Council ferry article that has been getting brought up for editor issues, despite it being the same layout and similar text style to the rest of the ferry articles that I have made.
It would also be better to be more explicit with which changes would be good as it doesn't make sense that you're not allowed to make an article using references to the owners website. ZetShip ( talk) 13:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to SIC Ferries. The most applicable guideline appears to be WP:NVEHICLES, which is an essay, and anyway pretty much defaults to WP:GNG for individual vehicles. Thus secondary sourcing beyond database entries would be needed here. Unfortunately the most I can find is a fairly routine news source [6]. I'd be happy to be proven wrong, but unless more sources come up - such as an offline news feature on the vessel - as an WP:ATD I recommend redirect to SIC Ferries. Resonant Distortion 15:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 23:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Tanith Lee bibliography#Tales from the Flat Earth. Liz Read! Talk! 21:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The Earth is Flat: Tales from the Flat Earth and Elsewhere

The Earth is Flat: Tales from the Flat Earth and Elsewhere (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Collection, fails GNG and WP:NBOOK. Cannot find a single review. Redirect to author? PARAKANYAA ( talk) 23:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Discussion about a possible redirect can occur on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 21:44, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Jokaru

Jokaru (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All the sources doesn't meet our requirement for WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV. For good, a redirect to the "List of 2023 films in Maldives" or related can help. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 04:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 23:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Residencial Manuel A. Perez

Residencial Manuel A. Perez (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG, NGEO, NBUILDING. All sources are to news coverage, mostly of crime, that mentions the subject in passing as the location of the crime but does not provide significant coverage. No SIGCOV comes up in a BEFORE search either. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 16:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Being in the headline is not the test of significant coverage. The articles are about other things in the news (crimes, individual people) that happen to mention the event happened/people lived in the Residencial Manuel A. Perez. Those events/people are getting the significant coverage. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 19:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

I appreciate that you have developed an alternative way of thinking about apartment complexes, but at AfD I'm nominating on the basis of official policies, not personal essays that do not represent the consensus of the community. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 01:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette Edit! 23:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete The article and the sources are about some crimes that have taken place at this location, which I assume is being named as a residence complex. I don't see anything that would explain the significance of the named complex in these crimes. The residencia is a backdrop, not a foreground for the crimes. There would need to be more about the residencia itself for this article to be kept. Lamona ( talk) 03:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete A BEFORE search brings up a lot of coverage, but it's not about the building itself, but rather about crime that occurs there. I think there's the possibility for an article, but in the very limited and narrow scope of "is this building notable," there's just not enough there on the complex itself to be notable under GNG. SportingFlyer T· C 06:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    I do want to say that what is there may possibly be able to be included elsewhere in another article on residenciales. SportingFlyer T· C 06:07, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 00:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Adam Solya

Adam Solya (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find any independent, secondary coverage of the subject, does not meet WP:GNG. Coverage appears limited to attribution for choreography credits in ISU competition reports (e.g. [7]), which are not secondary prose coverage or significant, and interviews ( [8], [9]) lacking independent coverage of Solya. I tried searching for both the Western-style and Hungarian-style (Solya Adam) renditions of Solya's name online and found nothing relevant beyond the second interview example cited here. signed, Rosguill talk 17:23, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 17:12, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 21:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Huupe

Huupe (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find mention of this sporting item, beyond sites to purchase it. Appears PROMO. Sourcing used in the article appears in non-RS. Oaktree b ( talk) 22:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Oaktree b I agree with @ Kompyoub where the article does have reliable sources that show history and information on the product. This is not anything to do with anything promotional. I am happy to help answer anything but this article should stay. Nrochluz ( talk) 12:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I agree with all of this, delete Cmarsch☮︎ ( talk) ( contribs) 03:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Actually, re Rosguill, if you're referring to the bit in the sitemap (where it says Sponsored Content / All Sponsored Content across two lines) that seems to be a link to all their sponsored pieces. Those all have a marking at the top from what I can see, and I can't see anywhere else with the word Sponsored. On the other hand, there seems to be very little secondary analysis from the reporter themselves in the article that I could see, and analysing under TRADES, I am inclined to classify it as failing ORGCRIT. Also, it's a bit of a moot point, since I can't find another source that might meeet ORGCRIT. Overall, my assessment is that it is very likely that it is too soon for this company to meet NCORP, so I would also have to go with delete. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 08:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    re Rosguill, if you're referring to the bit in the sitemap (where it says Sponsored Content / All Sponsored Content across two lines) No, that appears to be further down the page. On my computer, below the last line of the article, there's a navigation bar to two other articles, followed by red text on a line on its own reading SPONSORED CONTENT, which is then a link to this page explaining their native advertisements signed, Rosguill talk 17:29, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no or few reliable sources for this product or brand. Bearian ( talk) 16:39, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 21:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Judoscript

Judoscript (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There are two reasons why this article should be deleted. The first reason is that it fails WP: N. A PROD on this article failed, but neither of the sources suggested when dePRODing covers the subject in-depth. The second reason is that this article is almost entirely (>80%) written by a user named JianboHuang, a single-purpose editor whose name closely matches that of the creator of the language. While AfD is not a venue to determine whether a COI has occurred, the edits made by this user cover the subject in excessive detail and in a tone that isn't really appropriate for an encyclopedia. At this point, I think WP: STARTOVER applies here. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 22:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 00:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lyazzat Tanysbay

Lyazzat Tanysbay (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ANYBIO / WP:JOURNALIST BoraVoro ( talk) 14:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 00:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Migue García (musician)

Migue García (musician) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Biography of a musician that does not clear WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, WP:NMUSIC. While several sources refer to Migue Garcia, they all cover him in a WP:TRIVIAL manner connected to his father Charly Garcia, from whom notability cannot be WP:INHERITED. Other available sources found in BEFORE search are user-generated or primary. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 17:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Live & Kicking. Liz Read! Talk! 22:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Trey Farley

Trey Farley (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage. Non-notable broadcaster. SL93 ( talk) 18:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Star Mississippi 01:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Margaret Adamson

AfDs for this article:
Margaret Adamson (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Appears to fail WP:GNG. Uhooep ( talk) 20:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Maryborough Castlemaine District Football Netball League. Liz Read! Talk! 00:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Trentham Football Netball Club

Trentham Football Netball Club (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG and NORG/CORP. Source in article and BEFORE are database records, game recaps, routine local mill news, and name mentions, nothing that meets WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth. Ping me if indepth sources addressing the subject directly meeting WP:SIRS are found.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Tim, here is a link to the official history book of the Australian Rules football club, Trentham Football / Netball Club in Victoria, Australia - https://trenthamsaintsfnc.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/TDFNC-The-First-100-Years-by-Vin-Cowell.pdf which should provide you with a good source for you add in any other citations for verification, addressing your concerns. Thanks, Justin. Justin J. Kelly ( talk) 18:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist to see if some consensus on an outcome can be found.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Redirect to Maryborough Castlemaine District Football Netball League as an AtD. I'm likewise not impressed with the applied, presented or found sourcing, none of which meets RS. Redirect protects full page history. Some of these articles are insufficiently sourced to avoid deletion process tests. BusterD ( talk) 08:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • @ BusterD: What's wrong with this source? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 15:27, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
      • I would classify it as "small beer." It's difficult for me to take seriously an interview with a "legendary" somebody who recalls successfully playing minor league football in a small Victoria town sixty years ago (a "legendary" but non-notable figure in a village of almost 1,200 dwellers!), I see nothing which demonstrates this team any more notable than any of the other entries on the league article which don't have pages about them. I see nothing significant and independent which actually shows the club exists as of this datestamp. If I stipulate the team exists, I'm forced to add there's not enough direct detailing to make this team meet WP:NTEAM (these days GNG) to rate an article on English Wikipedia. Not all local amateur sports teams are notable. The BURDEN is on those asserting keep. I assert page supporters haven't met their burden. I am arguing for a redirect outcome so that when sufficient sources ARE found, page supporters can just improve the page without hassle. BusterD ( talk) 18:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 00:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Ryan Mitchell (wrestler)

Ryan Mitchell (wrestler) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No notable pro wrestler, doesn't meet WP:GNG. 1, he worked on independent promotions. Not enough coverage from third party sources about him for an article. 2, the article is half hoax. He never won titles on OVW, TNA Wrestling, JCW or PWG. Looking his Cagematch profile, just won a few titles. HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 19:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment looks like, months ago, an IP included Josh Hardy and Ryan Mitchell on several championships as champions, which is fake. -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 19:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hoërskool Noordheuwel

AfDs for this article:
Hoërskool Noordheuwel (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previously deleted at AfD in October 2023; insufficient improvement in sourcing to meet N:SCHOOL. Sources are to hyperlocal news sources that read like user-submitted or sponsored copy ("Die kersie op die koek: Hoërskool Noordheuwel is die TOP AKADEMIESE SKOOL in Gauteng-Wes en bekleë ook die nr 5 posisie in Gauteng waarop ons baie trots is"... "The icing on the cake: Noordheuwel High School is the TOP ACADEMIC SCHOOL in Gauteng West and also holds the No. 5 position in Gauteng, which we are very proud of.") or a news site comprising regional high school sport news, not clearing the bar for NORG or GNG. A BEFORE search turns up no significant coverage in independent sources. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 16:56, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Please start a talk page discussion on a possible article page move. There are a lot of opinions about this article and it shouldn't be one editor's decision on what its title should be. Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Anti-Bengali sentiment

Anti-Bengali sentiment (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The whole article is WP:OR and is making connection of any unfavorable event that occurred in or around West Bengal as discrimination against its people. Ratnahastin ( talk) 09:08, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment I am withdrawing this nomination since the article went through a page move and that move appears to have been accepted by multiple editors on this AfD. I don't support deletion anymore as long as the suggested page move has been preferred. Ratnahastin ( talk) 14:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While this might be a clear Delete, I'm seeing too much opinion and not enough policy-based arguments about this article. Let's lower the temperature and consider how this article does or doesn't abide by Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Just because discrimination happens against other groups isn't a good reason to delete this particular article. I also note that this AFD has been available for closure for over 13 hours and no admin has opted to close it which made me consider whether it needed more substantive discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep I did a google scholar search for "anti-bengali discrimination india" and found a decent number of sources that seem to contribute to WP:GNG. I don't see a good reason to delete at this time. CarringtonMist ( talk) 16:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Although there is an issue with original research, there is also a decent amount of directly-related sources. Definitely needs to be cleaned up though. Perhaps since the page has been renamed, expand its coverage to include anti-Bengali sentiment in Pakistan/Myanmar. 70.176.221.156 ( talk) 01:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
70.176.221.156 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete Not denying that there is discrimination. It is just that the topic is not notable enough for a stand-alone article. Georgethedragonslayer ( talk) 18:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Does not need a standalone article for this WP:SYNTH. Most of the content is only about the language-related issues and religiously motivated discrimination where the victim happened to be Bengali speaker. Captain AmericanBurger1775 ( talk) 01:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep I have just done a massive (~1hr) edit on the article, stripping it of extensive OR/SYNTH and a lottttt of off-topic/unencyclopedic content. Despite the massive removals, I feel a pretty solid article remains, one that I've hopefully stripped down to the most relevant content (and thoroughly marked remaining statements in need of sources). I'm a bit scared to venture into picking/defining RSes myself, as an overly cautious editor, but given the statements from others above that more sources DO seem to exist, I hope I've paved the way for this to be an easier "keep and improve" Chiselinccc ( talk) 08:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to see opinions after Chiselinccc's massive clean-up job on this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Weak Keep and Weak Delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Alandré van Rooyen

Alandré van Rooyen (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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 routine transfer news ( 1, 2). JTtheOG ( talk) 23:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Week Keep - Found this should pass WP:BASIC

[12], [13], [14], [15]. Otbest ( talk) 19:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:03, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 00:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Keepa Mewett

Keepa Mewett (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a New Zealand rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 23:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. The Delete views present a stronger case, resulting in a rough consensus. Owen× ☎ 12:19, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of Australian Open broadcasters

List of Australian Open broadcasters (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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. As of sources per WP:RS: three of those are about announcment of deals, one is a listing of TV schedules, one just quotes the tourney in passing which has no relevance to this list. Checked WP:BEFORE which resulted in nothing. I would have no objections to a keep if the article was in the same quality of List of Wimbledon broadcasters.

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of French Open broadcasters (2nd nomination) SpacedFarmer ( talk) 11:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Tennis, Lists, and Australia. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 11:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of French Open broadcasters (2nd nomination) and WP:NOTTVGUIDE. LibStar ( talk) 00:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - except this one has better sourcing than the deleted French Open article. It needs to be tidied, but just because it's not up to a good article like Wimbledon broadcasters doesn't mean we delete it. Wimbledon broadcasters shows these articles can be kept and in the discussion on the deleteion of the French article it was mentioned that Wimbledon and Australia are much better. What's next... the US Open Broadcasters article.? Fyunck(click) ( talk) 19:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - I do not feel strongly about this page, but I do find the reasons for deletion to be garbage. This is not a TV guide, neither was the French Open page or any other of the tennis tournament broadcasters pages. This statement about the page "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?" I find to be the most nonsense. This page is not bloated at all. Since when is something listed in an encyclopedia only because it is popular? The whole point about an encyclopedia (particularly an online one that is not limited in size by printing costs) is that it should contain obscure information (I am not sure a listing of which networks broadcast a major tennis event is that obscure anyway). I would never request any page on wikipedia be deleted, as this goes against what I believe wikipedia should be about. If editors feel pages are not sourced well that is a different issue. If I feel that is the case when I look at a page, I look to find sources (in this page's case many sources may be broadcasts of finals which list the commentators). The only problematic issue with this page (and other Grand Slam TV broadcasters history pages) is that TV broadcast contracts are merging into online streaming contracts (with various limitations to customers based on location) and keeping up with all the different streaming contracts may be problematic going forward. But the pages still have a value when looking back on the era when events were broadcast on TV (for the time being Wimbledon is still broadcast on conventional TV by the BBC, though maybe not for much longer). This change to streaming could easily be overcome by a simple statement "in recent years the event has been available on a variety of streaming services". The No TV guide wikipedia policy that the deletion proposer posted a link to says the following: "An article on a broadcaster should not list upcoming events, current promotions, current schedules, format clocks, etc., although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant program lists and schedules may be acceptable." That clearly shows a primary reason for deletion of this article and others like it is bogus. Tennishistory1877 ( talk) 18:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 04:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • "Linking to online videos can be acceptable if it is demonstrated that the content was posted by the copyright holder or with their permission." More and more videos from long ago are being published on YouTube from official tennis sources, particularly the Australian Open (they are currently undertaking a project uploading a lot of their archive from 1975 onwards). A very good source of who is commentating on a match is the match itself provided by the tournament itself (just about as reliable as it can possibly be). And wikipedia policy seems to agree with that. The No original research policy states "Faithfully translating sourced material into English, or transcribing spoken words from audio or video sources, is not considered original research." Tennishistory1877 ( talk) 18:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Given that information, and some due thought, the videos that the Open produce via YouTube or distributable under the rights of the Open to their respective broadcasting partners, are therefore WP:PRIMARY. So, basically, a source that demonstrates some significant coverage of who calls the game, commentates, reports, etc. would have to be done by a secondary source, like if a local tv station called out who was doing it. I am not saying it's a bad source, just that it wouldn't qualify for the main thing I am arguing for: WP:LISTN. Conyo14 ( talk) 05:49, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • This is not a stand-alone list. Regarding primary sources, "a primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge". Obviously the wikipedia policy has to be careful to ensure that, for example, an article written about a political party does not solely use as its source the political party's official website. Not relevant to a broadcast of the Australian Open, where the commentators are mentioned (incidentally there are many other videos of the same matches not posted by the official YouTube channel of the tournament which have the same commentary). What this whole thing about is one editor copying and pasting deletion requests and posting them on many pages based on bogus reasons, referencing wikipedia policy articles that he clearly hasn't read. This editor does not seem to be contributing much to wikipedia (certainly not anything to this article), and is only intent on destroying and removing perfectly valid material. And you Conyo14, seem to be acting as a tag team with this editor. In common with the original poster, you seem to show no interest in the subject matter (even admitting so in your comments here) yet despite this seem intent on giving your views on whether this article should be removed, quoting wikipedia policy articles you clearly have not read, then when your ignorance is shown up, quoting other articles. There has already been one ANI trying to ban the user posting this deletion request and there may be more if this user continues to behave in this way. Why don't both users consider spending their time more productively, creating rather than destroying. Tennishistory1877 ( talk) 08:56, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    Hey! I don't appreciate your tone here, perhaps you need to stop replying here as your accusations of a tag team are mislead as well as my interpretations of a policy that are not unfounded. You're welcome to continue your usage of your interpretation of the policy as well as mine, because as far as that goes, it won't matter until the relister does their judgment. Conyo14 ( talk) 13:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • It wasn't me that first used the term "tag team", it was another editor that I do not know on the ANI, but it seems a pretty accurate description to me. I read the following text that you posted on the deletion proposer's user page, regarding the mass posting of deletion requests. "It's getting exhausting pressing copy and paste on these haha. Good work though on these. I definitely recommend slowing down a bit though. I'm not sure by how much, but one prior editor had a run going and then was formally warned to slow down in WP:ANI. You may create a user space here for the lists you wish to delete, that way you don't lose track of them". Those comments speak for themselves. I have quoted wikipedia policy documents that you and the deletion proposer have quoted throughout, showing how ridiculous your interpretations of them are (not surprising really, considering a lot of the text in the posts proposing deletion had very similar text on deletion requests for many pages which vary immensely). I have nothing personal against you, Conyo14, but your interventions here and on other removal pages do you no credit. I have not commented on the vast majority of the hundreds of pages which the user has requested for deletion, because they are on sports that I have no interest in, and I have a rule that I never edit or comment on subjects that do not interest me. But I agree there is little to be gained by a protracted argument. The wikipedia policies speak for themselves, as does the edit history of the editor proposing the deletion. Tennishistory1877 ( talk) 16:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    k Conyo14 ( talk) 16:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Conyo14, this discussion can't be closed as a "Soft Delete" as there are editors arguing for "Keeping" this article. Therefore, deletion is not uncontroversial and Soft Deletion is not appropriate. Soft Deletions are similar to Proposed Deletions and so if Deletion is contested, then SD can't be a closure result. Liz Read! Talk! 00:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Subject does not meet the WP:GNG or WP:LISTN due to a lack of references from secondary sources discussing the broadcasters as a set. Let'srun ( talk) 13:05, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Let'srun, I am struggling to see where the notability here comes from to meet the LISTN threshold. While a secondary consideration as AfD is not cleanup, there's far too much original research here for my liking too — representative in my opinion of the lack of secondary sources covering this topic, hence the LISTN concerns. Daniel ( talk) 23:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I have a good knowledge of the level of accuracy of this article (the accuracy level is high). I would not defend an article that was not accurate. There are numerous sources already, primary and secondary, but I have added more. Tennishistory1877 ( talk) 08:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Your personal knowledge of the content included in this article is of minimal relevance, per WP:OR. But that is not the primary reason I believe this should be deleted. It is the failure of meeting the LISTN threshold through independent, reliable secondary sources that mean this should be deleted. Daniel ( talk) 11:09, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. NLIST states, "There is no present consensus for how to assess the notability of more complex and cross-categorization lists (such as "Lists of X of Y") or what other criteria may justify the notability of stand-alone lists..." This AfD reflects the present lack of consensus on this wider issue. Jake Wartenberg ( talk) 20:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of Major League Baseball career double plays as a center fielder leaders

List of Major League Baseball career double plays as a center fielder leaders (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm not seeing any coverage of this specific statistic beyond the list maintained by Baseball-Reference.com ( [16]), having searched the internet, Google Books, and Google Scholar. We appear to fall short of WP:LISTN, and this title does not seem to make for an appropriate redirect to any more general article. signed, Rosguill talk 18:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Abdulsalam Haykal. Liz Read! Talk! 22:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Aliqtisadi

Aliqtisadi (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (web) the site is not notable and serves mainly as a promotional platform. It lacks coverage from reliable, independent sources. Additionally, it is listed on the Arabic Wikipedia blacklist, indicating its unsuitability as a reliable source. فيصل ( talk) 21:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 22:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

David Calloway Ross, Jr.

David Calloway Ross, Jr. (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Dubious notability, zero hits from RS in Google, created by an SPA intent on promoting a business the article's subject managed Fastily 20:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Missouri. Shellwood ( talk) 21:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Alabama and Georgia (U.S. state). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, fails to establish what the individual is actually notable for - no notable achievements apart from running a small local funeral parlour. Dan arndt ( talk) 00:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete--I don't see any notability for this person either. Drmies ( talk) 17:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • I understand the concerns raised about the article's subject, David Calloway Ross, Jr. However, I'd like to provide additional context and evidence to support his notability. While it's true that Ross's achievements may not be globally recognized, his contributions to the local community and funeral services industry are significant. As the president and funeral director of Ross-Clayton Funeral Home, he has:Continued the legacy of his family's business, which has been serving the community for over 100 years; Provided leadership and guidance to the funeral home, ensuring its continued operation and service to the community; Demonstrated a commitment to the local community through his involvement in various organizations and initiatives; Regarding the lack of Google search results, I'd like to point out that not all notable individuals have a strong online presence. This doesn't diminish Ross's achievements or impact on the community.
      As for the article being created by a single-purpose account (SPA), I assure you that my intention is not to promote a business but to document Ross's historical significance and contributions. I believe the article meets Wikipedia's guidelines for notability and verifiability. Ross's achievements may not be widely recognized, but they are notable in the context of his community and industry. I'm willing to work with you to improve the article and address any concerns. Please consider retaining the article. Mcrossphd ( talk) 17:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
      • Currently he does NOT meet our requirements; what is needed is reliable secondary sourcing. You argued that the Ross-Clayton funeral home is the oldest in the city--that's not even verified and I'm not sure it's true. There's a few mentions in a few books, but nothing of significance. If you would produce reliable secondary sources, that would be a different matter. Drmies ( talk) 17:27, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
      • The article on the business by Brad Harper is maybe a small step on the way to notability, but that's for the business, not the person. I note also that neither Harper nor the historical marker (I'm surprised the Alabama Historical Society accepted that text) make the "oldest funeral home" claim. BTW I'm about to write up the article on Lincoln Cemetery--there is no doubt that that is notable, on the basis of secondary sources and history. For this person, that argument is hard to make though perhaps the business might be notable. Drmies ( talk) 17:33, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        • Sir, please review Historical Marker Database for reliable source for Ross Clayton Funeral Home's History. Also view link for David Callaway Ross's notability references Mcrossphd ( talk) 17:45, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
          • Mrcrossphd, please don't call me "sir"--"Drmies" will do just fine, thanks. Historical markers are not generally accepted as acceptable secondary sources here, and that particular text is so blatantly non-neutral. Let me put it another way: it would be somewhat silly to dispute the facts on a marker (the Historical Association--Scotty Kirkland runs that--checks it) but we shouldn't be using historical markers as the basis for our articles. A historical marker is an indication of some importance, but not by itself a guarantor of notability. I've done that Google search, but better: I looked at Google News and Google Books. Your search, unfortunately, does not deliver a single reliable secondary source; if you correct "callaway" to "calloway" and check news, you at least get the obituary from WSFA, but that's really all. If you had checked "books", you'd have found this--but again, that's not much. Sorry. Drmies ( talk) 20:57, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
            I want to highlight two references regarding Ross Clayton Funeral Home notability as mentioned in ref. 1 and ref. 2.also see Google Search Result Mcrossphd ( talk) 13:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: fails WP:GNG. Seems like the page creator has some undisclosed WP:COI. Contributor892z ( talk) 20:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete doesn't meet WP:GNG. Best, GPL93 ( talk) 15:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete due to lack of even an allegation of notability. He was a mortician, a useful and necessary but common profession. Bearian ( talk) 16:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Posey Township, Clay County, Indiana. as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 22:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Purdy Hill, Indiana

Purdy Hill, Indiana (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is another case where lack of info leaves us with quite the puzzle. Baker describes it as a "locale", which I wouldn't take as damning per se, and there is a string of residences along the road as far back as I can get; from the streetview car they appear to date from the 1900s onward. But that is all I can get: I'm getting increasingly annoyed with Google finding stuff I wasn't looking for, but still, I came up with nothing, except the usual clickbait and similarly named places in other states. I think we need more evidence here. Mangoe ( talk) 20:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Why? Mangoe ( talk) 21:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • As of a 1975 inventory of dam inspections, the Department of the Army believed that a village by that name existed, but other than being downstream from a non-notable dam, that doesn't offer any help. Even a pretty deep-dive search of Internet Archive scanned media offered absolutely nothing. The redirect to Posey Township, Clay County, Indiana -- where this is included in a list of unincorporated communities -- may be the best call. This verifiably exists/ed in some fashion, but as far as I can tell, no one -- ever -- took note of that and we can't really say anything else at all. Lubal ( talk) 22:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Demoscene#List of demoparties. Liz Read! Talk! 22:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Wired (demoparty)

Wired (demoparty) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli ( talk) 20:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure)‎ LibStar ( talk) 13:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Lucy Marinkovich

Lucy Marinkovich (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. Google news doesn't reveal much in-depth. LibStar ( talk) 20:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep I consider Marinkovich is notable and the criteria are better met with the recent expansions. I will also look to expand and demonstrate this in the article.
Pakoire ( talk) 09:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Segilola Ogidan. Liz Read! Talk! 23:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Tainted Canvas

Tainted Canvas (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject film falls short of WP:GNG, should redirect to the director, Segilola Ogidan. The cited sources are not helpful for establishing notability, as they are promotional pre-release coverage with no independent analysis of the film. Searching online, I was able to find reviews, but only one of them (a negative review in WhatKeptMeUp) appears to be potentially reliable ( [19]); the others include a Medium blogpost ( [20]), a two-person blog ( [21]), an unbylined review from a 3-person blog ( [22]), and a review on what appears to be a social media and PR site ( [23], no masthead, no editorial policies, but there is a Log In button for their "African creatives community"). The film's Rotten Tomatoes entry lists no critics' reviews ( [24]), and it seems somewhat telling that Pulse, which published most of the pre-release coverage, did not publish a review following release. signed, Rosguill talk 20:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 22:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The Wutars

The Wutars (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a band, and changed an external link to a reference. Coverage is thin, however, and I do not think the article meets WP:NBAND or WP:GNG. The band's two releases were on their own label and did not chart. The article has been tagged as possibly not meeting WP:NMUSIC since 2020. Tacyarg ( talk) 20:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 22:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of battles in medieval India

List of battles in medieval India (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN WP:UNSOURCED. Follow-up to

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 22:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of conflicts in Egypt

List of conflicts in Egypt (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN WP:UNSOURCED (the few entries that are sourced are highly speculative as to what happened, where, involving whom, and why; the modern Arab Republic of Egypt has very little to do with it). Follow-up to

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 23:12, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Inus Kritzinger

Inus Kritzinger (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. There are a few sentences of coverage here. JTtheOG ( talk) 19:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 23:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Martin Bezuidenhout

Martin Bezuidenhout (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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) 19:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:32, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of battles in Afghanistan

List of battles in Afghanistan (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN WP:UNSOURCED. Follow-up to

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 23:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Pieter Louw

Pieter Louw (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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) 19:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:32, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of West Coast Conference women's basketball tournament finals broadcasters

List of West Coast Conference women's basketball tournament finals broadcasters (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the WP:LISTN as the broadcasters for this game have not been discussed as a group in non-primary sources. Let'srun ( talk) 19:26, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:31, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Claire Harris (artist)

Claire Harris (artist) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ARTIST. LibStar ( talk) 19:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete. Non-notable artist. 104.7.152.180 ( talk) 03:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete. I do not think any of the sources establish notability per WP:ARTIST. David Palmer// cloventt ( talk) 08:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete only independent coverage is trivial. Traumnovelle ( talk) 04:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. As one commenter notes, the star does not appear in the list suggested by the one redirect !vote. Consensus to delete is clear. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

V538 Carinae

V538 Carinae (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article was created back in 2020 on a basis of a very large size (1,870 R☉) that would make it the " largest known star" in that year, altought this size was taken from a large catalog that used a very inaccurate distance for calculate the radius. Nonetheless, it fails the notability guidelines for astronomical objects: Not visible to the naked eye (at magnitude 8.15 [25]), not listed in any important astromical catalogue, never received significant coverage in any reliable source and was not discovered before 1850. SIMBAD cites 29 references for this star, but all are only large catalogues. InTheAstronomy32 ( talk) 19:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete as non-notable per nomination. hamster717 ( discuss anything!🐹✈️ * my contribs) 20:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of channels owned by Sun TV Network. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:28, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Sun Marathi

Sun Marathi (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

One of the many stations owned by Sun TV Network. There are two sources which are not reliable ( WP:NEWSORGINDIA) and I cannot find anything online that would meet WP:ORGCRIT. Recommend redirecting to List of channels owned by Sun TV Network. Note that most of the Wikilinks from that page are also redirects so Sun TV Networks. CNMall41 ( talk) 18:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

B1gMail

B1gMail (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional article without references to reliable sources with significant coverage. Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NPRODUCT. AlexandraAVX ( talk) 17:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete: unable to find sources per WP:GNG on Google or Google Books, also fails WP:NSOFT. —Matrix(!) { user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 16:57, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Sheikh Russel#In Popular Culture. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Amader Choto Russel Shona

Amader Choto Russel Shona (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks significant coverage in reliable Source. - AlbeitPK ( talk) 17:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Sheikh Ahmadullah

Sheikh Ahmadullah (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reference are self published, primary sources and promotional. These sources do not establish notability of the person. AlbeitPK ( talk) 16:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While it has been variously asserted by nom and the current majority for keep that the sources do/don't establish GNG, there has been no discussion of individual sources that could move towards decisively substantiating such evaluations.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Rick Burke (musician)

Rick Burke (musician) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(PROD declined with no explanation) Fails WP:MUSICBIO. What little coverage I can find featuring this person's name is about his bands, not Burke himself Mach61 14:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. Mach61 14:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    This page we should keep given that the musician written about has a long-term and ongoing authentic discography as cited on reliable archival / data sites such as Discogs with news features on various media outlets. If for some reason it is a problem for the information to be listed under “Rick Burke (musician)”, I would strongly recommend that rather than deleting the article on superfluous grounds, the content should be split into 2 pages: one for “Comacozer” and one for “Tropical Sludge” with a redirect from the original “Rick Burke (musician)” page. In saying that, it does not make sense to split the information into several pages therefore it should be retained as one to keep the information tidy on Wikipedia. NEXUS6N6MAA10816 ( talk) 06:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ NEXUS6N6MAA10816 Having a long-term and ongoing authentic discography does not count towards inclusion in Wikipedia. With regard to your suggestion the article be split, there is not enough content about those bands for one to be viable. Mach61 16:28, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Hi Mach61, thanks for your kind suggestions. The article is important as it streamlines information on Rick Burke which people actively search for on the internet within the context of "Underground Music" (see Wiki entry for this) and fits into the scope of "WikiProject Music". Associated acts such as Kikagaku Moyo, Electric Wizard, It's Psychedelic Baby and so on have existing entries on Wikipedia and this article will complete a missing part of that academic puzzle as it increasingly gets fleshed out as a public document. Best wishes. NEXUS6N6MAA10816 ( talk) 05:07, 26 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ NEXUS6N6MAA10816 I see no indication Burke is connected to any of those people, and even if he were that would be irrelevant (see WP:notability is not inherited. Mach61 15:40, 26 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 02:00, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lori Wells

Lori Wells (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have been unable to find sources to meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. The single source cited in the article is a Wordpress blog. She doesn't seem to me to meet WP:NACTOR either; Coronation Street is a notable show but her role in it was not significant, Kisses at Fifty is one episode of an anthology drama. Overall, she doesn't seem to meet notability requirements. Chocmilk03 ( talk) 04:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete While she does have a Wikipedia page, most of her roles seem to be minor, except Get Some In! in which she has acted in 21 episodes, but as a minor role. She doesn't meet the notability criterion. Wikilover3509 ( talk) 08:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep Kisses at Fifty was a one-off TV play, but an important one, where she had an important role. It was one of the best-known plays in Play for Today, and the BBC repeated it quite recently. Here role in Get Some In! wasn't that minor, she appears in the list of characters, and in the box at the start (and I did not put her there). PatGallacher ( talk) 14:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: seems to pass WP:NACTOR for 2 significant roles in notable productions. More sources wouldn't hurt. I would have suggested a redirect to Kisses at Fifty, but her role in Get Some In! is also rather significant. Worst case scenario, that might be a solution, though. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Malinaccier ( talk) 20:12, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hypelist

Hypelist (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an WP:ADMASQ of a non-notable app/company. Speedy deletion was contested by a new editor who claims to be a "fan" of the app. No evidence of satisfying WP:NPRODUCT or WP:ORGIND. The references all provide routine coverage and/or are from unreliable sources. Teemu.cod ( talk) 19:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Here is my analyzation of the article:
Like said in the nomination, the article, especially the product section, is positive about the "mobile social application". Buzz words like popular and AI-driven are used along with a dose of ethos, stating that several celebrities use it.
The citations seem to mostly based in trendiness or promotion. For example, HIGHXTAR is designed to advertise to the youths. Trying to research the topic, most of the citations seem to be of the same caliber but there may be a few citations. Any additional citations should be analyzed. ✶Qux yz ✶ 20:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The topic is notable, as with Alfonso Cobo and related articles. There are sources from MSN, Conde Nast, Avenue Illustrated, and many other well-known sources. The article is meant to be a summary of existing sources, some of which might be bordering on the promotional side, but that can easily be fixed. There is no overtly promotional wording either, such as "award-winning" or "innovative" for instance. Moreover, this article satisfies basic notability criteria. MaghrebiFalafel ( talk) 09:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Hi MaghrebiFalafel, this is a company therefore GNG/ WP:NCORP criteria applies. You mentioned three sources. The MSN article is about a singer using the app - the article mentions the company in passing and does not provide any in-depth Independent Content about the company - fails CORPDEPTH. The Vanity Fair article is a "puff profile" on the founder and relies entirely on an interview. All the information is provided by the founder and has no Independent Content. Fails both CORPDEPTH and ORGIND. Finally the Avenue article has zero in-depth information about the company, fails CORPDEPTH. Are there any other sources you believe meets NCORP? If not, perhaps you might reconsider your !vote? HighKing ++ 14:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Id looked up to see if there was any new news and didn't find any. Then given there already are some references in Spanish thought id see if there are other results in Spanish and there are: Larazon El Correo. They seem to say more of the same thing ie new app from this guy and it does xyz. I dont know if this helps establish notability. If the issue isn't the references, but the subject matter, so be it. If I had to vote it would be weakish keep but I also get the desire to delete. MaskedSinger ( talk) 05:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep delete It's all hype about hypelist, and it may be TOO SOON, but the sourcing is reasonable. If this app does not pan out, the hype here may not be enough to save the article in the future. I looked again and the software has no reviews in the mac app store, and it only has one rating. All that we have are product announcements. I'm !voting to wait and see. Lamona ( talk) 16:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    If the sourcing might not be enough in the future, then it definitely won't be enough now. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 08:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Thanks, your comment got me to look again. Lamona ( talk) 17:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Seems almost A7, wouldn't go G11 though. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 09:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 03:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: The sources about the song can't establish notability, because notability isn't transitive. The only source I think could possibly establish notability is the Rivera article. The Vanity Fair article is an interview that contains almost exclusively quotations from the subject themself, and I couldn't immediately establish the other sources as credible. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 21:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: As I have mentioned elsewhere, Hypelist is definitely notable and has quite a few users. It's widely used by now and many other applications with similar notability levels are also on Wikipedia. Redcrablegs ( talk) 10:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Just because a lot of people an app does guarantee notability. That's also a weasle statement: how many people are quite a few and who is providing these numbers? ✶Qux yz ✶ 17:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Came back here to see what happened since my first comment. I noticed that the vote by Okmrman was deleted and they've now been blocked for being a sock puppet. On April 30 there was a comment on his talk page regarding spurious tagging of pages for speedy deletion. That was on April 30. This article was nominated for speedy deletion by a somewhat dormant account on May 9. The speedy was contested and 9 hours after this was nominated for deletion the sockpuppet voted here. Not that this affects the vote here one way or another. Sock puppet or not, doesn't impact whether a subject is notable or not, but the powers that be may wish to cast the Okmrman sock puppet net wider and investigate the editor who nominated this article for deletion. MaskedSinger ( talk) 05:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Liz @ Yamla Looking at this some more, I'm now convinced that Teemu.cod and Okmrman are one and the same. MaskedSinger ( talk) 07:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Strictly speaking, they were blocked for disruptive editing and their other account was the puppet (they're the master). It is a little weird, has AfD always been this much of a sockfest? Alpha3031 ( t • c) 08:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't know. It is peculiar. Then again, longer one spends here, harder it is to get shocked. MaskedSinger ( talk) 09:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Teemu.cod is Red X Unrelated to Okmrman. Just a bizarre coincidence. -- Yamla ( talk) 11:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    ok thanks for looking into it. my apologies to teemu.cod MaskedSinger ( talk) 11:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment People here saying the *company* is notable and then talking about the product are missing the point of establishing the notability of the *company*. None of the reference meet GNG/ WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability. If you think one does, can you please post a link here and point out which page/para meets NCORP including CORPDEPTH and ORGIND? HighKing ++ 14:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Advertorial tone, and little or no depth to the coverage. Stifle ( talk) 08:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Wow. Can't believe this is still going. Not sure what's happening with AFD but this is a weird one. Nominated for deletion by editor who comes out of dormancy to nominate it and then hasn't edited since. Some editor who votes delete is blocked for going on a voting rampage. And then yesterday the discussion is closed not once, but twice by editors who are sock puppets?!?! Still this has nothing to do the merits of the page. Given that its been relisted twice and still no consensus, I think it should get the benefit of the doubt. It satsifies WP:GNG with the non English coverage and there is probably more non English coverage that can be translated and added. If it stays, Ill look for some and add it. MaskedSinger ( talk) 08:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    Now closed a third time by some rogue editor! It's not just this article. It's also others that are up for deletion. Anyone have any idea what is going on and why? MaskedSinger ( talk) 12:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    Yeah there's an AFD closing LTA. Just revert, WP:DENY and move on. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 13:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Alpha3031 Wow! That's so bizarre. Why do they do it? MaskedSinger ( talk) 13:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. "'Hypelist', el nuevo proyecto del exitoso emprendedor español que triunfa en EE UU" ['Hypelist', the new project of the successful Spanish entrepreneur who triumphs in the US]. El Correo (in Spanish). 2024-04-15. Archived from the original on 2024-06-06. Retrieved 2024-06-06.

      The article notes: "For the second time, the young entrepreneur has managed to cover another need of social media consumers in time. His new app, 'Hypelist', was launched a few months ago and aims to help people share recommendations for activities, products or places they are passionate about. The app innovates by leaving the framework of aesthetics and superficiality that so characterises content on today's networks, something that places this second project at an extreme opposite to 'Unfold', focused precisely on the visual. ... 'Hypelist' allows you to collect all the recommendations in a personalized space for when they are going to be missed. In this way, it has been presented as an application not for entertainment, something that already abounds, but for self-realisation and growth that pushes people to fulfill all their plans. ... This time the launch of the project has been accompanied by the 'Hypelist Session', events organised to promote the use of the new app and full of 'influencers' eager to share their recommendations through this new channel."

    2. Martin, Ruth (2024-03-26). "Esta es la Nueva App Que Usan Los Viajeros Expertos. Hypelist amenaza competir con Instagram y es perfecta para los que no pueden vivir sin las listas de favoritos" [This Is the New App That Expert Travelers Use. Hypelist threatens to compete with Instagram and is perfect for those who cannot live without favorites lists]. Grazia (in Italian). Archived from the original on 2024-06-06. Retrieved 2024-06-06.

      The article notes: "Are you one of those who always makes lists for everything? Are you one of those who miss the guides that Instagram has made disappear and where you had your favorites saved? Then this new App is for you because with it you can organize, share and connect your best recommendations. It is called Hypelist and was created by a Spanish entrepreneur, Alfonso Cobo, who is not new to the world of entrepreneurship and technology. But not only can you create lists to save all your favorites, but you can also discover everything your favorite creators are obsessed with. Hypelist is the place where users share their true interests: the quirks that make them who they are; what truly obsesses and excites them"

    3. Pujalví, Camila (2024-02-07). "Hypelist: la aplicación para compartir recomendaciones que necesitas en tu móvil" [Hypelist: the application to share recommendations that you need on your mobile]. La Razón (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2024-06-06. Retrieved 2024-06-06.

      The article notes: "In the blink of an eye, Hypelist has gone from a simple app to a cultural phenomenon. Its creator, Alfonso Cobo, recognised for his previous hits like Unfold, has once again surprised the market with what promises to be the hit of the year 2024. But his ambition goes far beyond conventional. Following the wild launch of the app, Cobo has decided to expand its reach and create an entire universe around Hypelist. Hypelist stands out as a platform to organize, share and connect the best recommendations. Aiming to appeal to a younger audience, Cobo has collaborated with talented singer Cara Hart to release a single titled "Hypelist.""

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Hypelist to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard ( talk) 08:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply

    Cough, Cunard I don't think Grazia can be considered an RS for anything other than uncontroversial self descriptions, certainly not for establishing notability. I mean, on their about page, which is very conveniently written in English, where most publications normally put how they're totally very well edited and all that, they instead put:

    Our award-winning team prides ourselves on working with partners to create interesting, unexpected and unique experiences. Our collaborations are designed to deliver incremental value to our partners’ businesses. GRAZIA has a wide range of solutions to suit almost any kind of marketing and media mix. We offer branded content, video, integration into editorial franchises, innovative high impact ad units and local events.

    ... Yeah. I'll look at the other ones in a couple of minutes. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 10:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't believe La Razón meets ORGDEPTH. I'm less sure about El Correo, but like risbel I am more concerned about ORGIND in their case (though El Correo might be better than risbel RS-wise generally). While I can't find anything other than the January press release, which those two articles seem to have additional content to (about the launch event, etc) they still read like content taken (perhaps paraphrased) from press kits rather than organic, intellectually independent coverage. Would rather kick it to RSN, though would not terribly object to this actually being closed as no consensus either. I would expect to renominate this (after some time of course) if that happens though. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 12:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
    Another thing I'm a bit concerned about is the language. It is clear that they are trying to sell Hypelist. It honestly sounds like a pitch to investors more specifically, they establish the credibility of the creator, describe demographics that it was made to appeal to, and describe the problem it is trying to solve. These are all pretty reasonable, but at the same time, the language is overly positive. Hart isn't just a singer, she's a talented singer. In Grazia, they describe the creator as well-trained, but they don't give any information in the quote. There are a lot more situations but their easy enough to parse through where I dont think I need to go over it more. ✶Qux yz ✶ 13:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. If an editor wants to work on a version of this article in Draft space, let me know or make a request at WP:REFUND. TOOSOON implies that there might be a time when better sources exist and a new article can pass AFC review and be put back into main space. Liz Read! Talk! 00:49, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Jon Forshee

Jon Forshee (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Bio of a composer/academic fails GNG, NBIO, NACADEMIC, NMUSIC. The independent sources do not show WP:SIGCOV; WP:BEFORE search turns up no other reliable, independent, secondary sources with significant coverage or evidence of notability under any of the other SNG guidelines that might apply. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 23:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, France, California, Colorado, Michigan, New York, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete -- composer/researcher doing good things to advance his career that are pretty typical for composers at this stage. Significantly TOOSOON at this point. On the non-academic side, lacking the awards or major ensembles (those not dedicated to producing student work) to pass notability; on the WP:PROF side, does not have academic appointments or the sort of extensive influence to pass there. (Some of the journals are important in the field, but book/CD reviews are not articles.) -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    These are mostly fair points. Not sure what the "TOOSOON" means--too soon to have a wiki article? Regarding academic appointment, a Google search shows that Forshee was a visiting professor and now instructor. As to the ensembles performing Forshee's compositions, the Callithumpian Consort and Trio Kobayashi are, according to their own websites, not dedicated to performing student works (they list Elliott Carter, Schuittke, Huber, Scelsi, Cage, Lachenmann, Richard Barrett, Jürg Frey, Larry Polansky, James Tenney, basically all widely known composers on the international scene). The articles by Forshee don't appear to be book reviews or CD reviews, but neither do they appear to be rigorous scholarly research articles; they seem to be somewhere in between: interpretive analytical essays? The one in Computer Music Journal is an early review of software by the pioneering computer music composer Trevor Wishart. Part of the motivation for this article is that Forshee is one of the few notable (or borderline notable) students of composer Anthony Davis, who just had his Met Opera premiere of his Malcolm X this season. Dolemites ( talk) 18:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Notability cannot WP:INHERITED from Anthony Davis or anyone else; for each subject it must be established independently according to the criteria. No articles by Forshee can be used establish his notability, only what independent and reliable sources have to say about him with "significant coverage." Dclemens1971 ( talk) 03:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Discussion currently leans toward deletion, but a clearer consensus would be appreciated given that there has been an objection to deletion and thus soft-deletion seems inappropriate. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

2017 Pattani bombing

2017 Pattani bombing (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The sources are all from the time of the event. Need lasting coverage and impact to meet WP:EVENT. A search for sources yielded sources for a different bombing in Pattani in 2016. LibStar ( talk) 02:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge to Timeline of events related to the South Thailand insurgency#2017, where it is mentioned. If what Oblivy says is true, then I'd vote keep, but I can't actually find what is mentioned above, or verify that it has long standing significance. The added links are bordering on run of the mill and don't seem to have much commentary. Or commentary on the documentary. If that is provided I would change my vote to keep. PARAKANYAA ( talk) 23:37, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Significant coverage can be found in the Al Jazeera, CNA, and International Business Times articles. I don't think run-of-the-mill applies to any of that.
The deletion rationale was about lasting coverage and impact. The event gets continuing discussion by security researchers like this [32]. It seems to have gotten extended discussion in Wheeler, Thailand's Southern Insurgency in 2017: Running in Place (2018, paywalled). The court case was reported as a standalone article in the Bangkok Post, a good indicator of lasting impact, as is the fact that a filmmaker decided to make a documentary about it. The article isn't about the documentary - it's cited to show that there was lasting coverage of the event via the documentary - and I don't think it's reasonable to require commentary on the documentary. Oblivy ( talk) 01:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 02:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Anyone wishing to vote on this should probably have a look at the substantially revised article. I've added cites, and have been through most or all of the ones that are in the article. Lack of inline citations in some places has been dealt with. I have made my case for sustained coverage and impact and these changes strengthen that argument. Oblivy ( talk) 08:53, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep without prejudice to further merger discussion on the talk page. There does seem to be just enough coverage to support a stand-alone article, though whether the content (which isn't very extensive) would be better served within the broader context of the conflict would be an editorial consideration. The timeline article is already quite long and brief as it is, so a lot of restructuring would be needed before it can become a suitable merge target. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 09:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Suspicious deaths of notable Russians (2022–2024). Jake Wartenberg ( talk) 14:55, 7 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Aleksandr Surikov (diplomat)

Aleksandr Surikov (diplomat) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG and NBIO. Recently deceased Russian diplomat. Sources found in article and BEFORE fail WP:SIRS. Source eval:

Comments Source
Government obit, fails WP:SIRS, all the normal obit problems plus the Russian government should not be considered a reliable source 1. www.mid.ru https://www.mid.ru/ru/activity/shots/vnutrivedomstvennye_novosti/nekrologi_pamyati_kolleg/1949977/ . Retrieved 2024-05-13 .
Government decree, fails WP:IS, does not contain SIGCOV about the subject. 2. ^ "Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of July 29, 2017 No. 348 “On the Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation in the Republic of Mozambique”" . Archived from the original on 2019-01-26 . Retrieved 2017-09-14 .
Government decree, fails WP:IS, does not contain SIGCOV about the subject. 3. ^ "Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of February 16, 2018 No. 76 “On the Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation in the Kingdom of Swaziland on a part-time basis”" . Archived from the original on 2018-02-16 . Retrieved 2018-02-16 .
Government obit, fails WP:SIRS, all the normal obit problems plus the Russian government should not be considered a reliable source 4. ^ www.mid.ru https://www.mid.ru/ru/activity/shots/vnutrivedomstvennye_novosti/nekrologi_pamyati_kolleg/1949977/ . Retrieved 2024-05-13 .
Obit based on government sources, fails WP:SIRS, all the normal obit problems plus the Russian government should not be considered a reliable source 5. ^ "Russian Ambassador to Mozambique Died" . TACC (in Russian) . Retrieved 2024-05-13 .

BEFORE found name mentions and government statements they released, and an interview, nothing meet WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth from independent reliable sources.  //  Timothy ::  talk  02:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment: First and foremost, lower your tone while nominating the article for deletion. Secondly, government decrees can be used as secondary sources as if you can type the full name in a Russian, many sources will pop up, (in Russian of course), apart from the official government statement. Here's my third point, he is the ambassador to Mozambique, the highest office of any diplomat in office. Would you delete the ambassador of the United States of Mozambique for that reason? Ivan Milenin ( talk) 02:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
he is the ambassador to Mozambique, the highest office of any diplomat in office Ambassadors are not inherently notable, several hundred have been deleted. LibStar ( talk) 03:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Discussion leans delete at the time of this relist, but further participation would be beneficial for establishing a clear consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep I decided to keep because even if the some coverage had been lacking, I found some source that could suffice these... [33] [34] [35] Ivan Milenin ( talk) 22:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply

I'm striking your duplicate vote. Editors can comment all they want (within limits) but can only cast one vote. Liz Read! Talk! 00:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete‎. G5 applies - the author is a sock of a blocked (and globally locked) spammer. Girth Summit (blether) 10:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Yubin Shin

Yubin Shin (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no mention of her in any of the sources. Please check GNG. Claggy ( talk) 15:34, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

There is no mention of her in any of the sources?? Hmmm, yes, there is mention of her in the sources! I'm not saying it's great but it's about her. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hannah Ryder

Hannah Ryder (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very questionable WP:SUSTAINED notability Amigao ( talk) 01:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

*: </"keep"> this article has been edited to comply to NPOV since it's nomination allied by a declaration of COI from editors in the View AfD the page in its current existence complies with NPOV User:Gold Junior Talk 09:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further opinions from as-yet uninvolved editors regarding the quality of sourcing available would be beneficial.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep, she's mentioned in a broad range of reliable sources, many cited in the article including the BBC, The Guardian, Reuters, The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Washington Post. The mentions are usually brief, but these three secondary sources at least offer brief bios to base an article: [39] [40] [41] Also, the article was almost entirely rewritten after its nomination. The writing has issues, but the subject seems notable. Rjjiii ( talk) 06:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Baalveer as independent notability has not been substantiated Star Mississippi 02:01, 5 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Baalveer 4

Baalveer 4 (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

References are just interviews. No in-depth found. Twinkle1990 ( talk) 15:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment - Those who are placing !vote in favour of the article, I want to ask them about the notability of the season itself, not about the series. We don't need a separate Wikipedia page for each of the seasons where the primary page exists and no reviews for the seasons are found. Placing interviews and WP:IMDb links as references is just against WP:ICTFSOURCES. Demonstrate notability or please stop flooding. A MERGE would be better. -- Twinkle1990 ( talk) 07:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
(note to Admin) - There is campaign going on per this diff, this diff, this diff regarding this AfD. Is this allowed? Isn't it WP:VOTESTACK? -- Twinkle1990 ( talk) 07:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
According to WP:VOTESTACK Posting an appropriate notice on other users' talk pages to notify them about the deletion process is allowed (Posting an appropriate notice on users' talk pages in order to inform editors on all "sides" of a debate (e.g., everyone who participated in a previous deletion debate on a given subject) may be appropriate under certain circumstances). I notified them cause they also edit Indian tv show articles, I didn't tell to vote to keep the article so it's not violation of WP:VOTESTACK. M S Hassan ( talk) 18:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ M S Hassan: how is "please help me save the article by voting" in this diff not a violation of WP:VOTESTACK? Daniel ( talk) 23:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Just saying that the series is notable doesn’t make this season of the series notable. Maybe the series is notable, but establishing notability for a standalone article on Season 4 requires in-depth coverage from multiple independent reliable sources, which, in my opinion, is lacking. These sources are just interviews and announcements. The article currently fails to meet WP:GNG as no in-depth coverage of the subject is found. Do we need to create new pages for every season even when there are no significant sources? Additionally, another issue that the patrolling Admin should address is WP:VOTESTACK, which is the real reason behind these non-policy-based “Keep” votes. GrabUp - Talk 13:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Note to Closer. Page was created by sockpuppet account User:Shabeelko and so is good for WP:G5 speedy deletion. RangersRus ( talk) 13:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply

WP:G5 will not apply to this page now, as the article is substantially edited by others. GrabUp - Talk 13:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Bummer. Unnoticed it. RangersRus ( talk) 14:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge with Baalveer: while not a direct sequel, a section in the main article will not require independent notability. Most of the "Keep" comments here seem to talk about the notability of the Baalveer franchise, not that of Baalveer 4. Please note that Baalveer 3 is also on the chopping block, so merging with that would be a mistake. Owen× ☎ 10:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Merge with Baalveer, notability standard not met for this precise series based on sources available and presented, per OwenX this can be folded into main article using non-notability-contributing references. Daniel ( talk) 23:36, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to No Limit Records with the option of merging encyclopedic content. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 18:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

No Limit Forever Records

No Limit Forever Records (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Vanity label that no longer operates. Most of the refences are from their own defunct website or to streaming media. No indication of notability. Karst ( talk) 15:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Second, the company (CA 201030110082) doesn't appear to be independent at all of Master P or No Limit Records. Its only official act was incorporation (Oct 2010). It was effectively dead 3 1/2 years later when its agent quit and officially dead 6 months after that. Except in company blog posts it's Master P who's signing artists, not the putative company founder Lil Romeo, and he's signing them to NL Records, not NL Forever. Some of the signings postdate the 2014 demise of this company. I'm persuaded that No Limit Records, New No Limit, No Limit Forever, and No Limit Global are simply alternative branding of one entity. Yappy2bhere ( talk) 01:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge and redirect to No Limit Records per Yappy2bhere toweli ( talk) 03:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. There are good arguments to keep, several good arguments to merge or split the article, and overall no consensus to delete the article. Malinaccier ( talk) 20:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lois Lane (DC Extended Universe)

Lois Lane (DC Extended Universe) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I try again. Lois Lane is indeed an encyclopedic character but its counterpart from the DC Extended Universe seems to be irrelevant in a real world perspective. First thing first, this article does not meet the requirements of WP:NFILMCHAR: the character has appeared in three films, but not in a lead or titular capacity. Also, this iteration of Lois Lane does not have an extensive coverage. Redjedi23 ( talk) 11:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

We meet again, old friend.
As discussed last time, I wouldn't do a straight up delete, but would merge to either Lois Lane in other media or Characters of the DC Extended Universe if it's decided this page isn't worth being a stand-alone article. WuTang94 ( talk) 01:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete At the very least needs a good WP:TNT because the Fandom/Screen Rant-like writing and heading styles are non-standard and discouraged, and this could easily be two-three reduced paragraphs in the main Lois Lane article (and the Superman and Lois article has the same style issues; stop pushing this onto en.wiki, we don't have ads which require this awful style of formatting). Nate • ( chatter) 20:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Undo split or re-merge, per MrSchimpf. Deletion would be acceptable, but we should strive for WP:CONSENSUS-building and WP:ATD. This can easily be reduced to two or three paragraphs in the main character article, and even then, the important details are already covered at Lois Lane and Lois Lane in other media. There aren't enough sources to support a third article about essentially the same subject, and two articles are already questionable. Shooterwalker ( talk) 16:34, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep the content as it's well-referenced and notable. I would be supportive of merging/moving to a topic such as Lois Lane in film also, but that doesn't need to be decided here. Stifle ( talk) 07:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 14:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Soccer at the 1986 International Cerebral Palsy Games

Soccer at the 1986 International Cerebral Palsy Games (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability found. Tournament has no article, match results are missing for many games, sources are databases, location is a small village. Fram ( talk) 15:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 18:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Surprise! (film)

Surprise! (film) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced article about a short film. The notability claim here, that it won an award at a regional film festival, would be fine if the article were properly sourced -- but the "awards" criterion in NFILM is looking for top internationally-prominent film festivals on the order of Cannes, Berlin, Venice, Toronto or Sundance, not just any film festival that exists, so winning an award at the Seattle film festival isn't "inherently" notable enough to exempt the film from actually having to have any sources. Bearcat ( talk) 14:46, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

I'll try to find a source for that; SIFF is about one level down from the aforementioned. It is certainly not a "regional film festival". - Jmabel | Talk 14:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The source for a film festival award cannot be said film festival's own self-published website about itself, as that isn't independent of the statement — the source has to be a journalist-written newspaper or magazine article, or a book, that shows that the film festival's award announcements are considered newsworthy and/or historically significant by people other than the film festival's own staff. (The awards at the top-level likes of Cannes or TIFF make films notable because those are awards that get reported by media as news — they're special because media tell us they're special by treating them as newsworthy, not just because we like them more than we like smaller film festivals.) But so far the source you've added is SIFF's own website, not a piece of GNG-building third-party coverage — and even if you can find a more GNG-worthy source for that, we would still need to see other GNG-worthy sourcing about the film alongside that anyway. Bearcat ( talk) 15:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
We are not citing for the importance of SIFF. We are citing for whether they gave the award. An instutition's own site is the preferred source for an an official action by that institution. - Jmabel | Talk 16:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep. A lot of the material here is in German, and a lot of it appears to have come narrowly too early for widespread digitization. Here is unquestionably relevant coverage in a German film studies book. I believe this Google Books snippet view is actually of a magazine article reviewing its release as part of a DVD. Finally, I only have a citation so I can't evaluate the source, but there appears to be a Spanish-language scholarly article about this short film: Meier, A. "Sorpresas educativas en Surprise de Veit Helmer." Posibilidades del análisis cinematográfico (1era ed., Vol. 1, pp. 365-373). Secretaría de Educación del gobierno del Estado de México (2015). Lubal ( talk) 15:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I've added another citation (from shortfilm.de) for the film having had 48 festival invitations and 26 awards. Surely that is enough. And, no, I'm not working on this further. - Jmabel | Talk 16:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: new sources added and mentioned; awards. A redirect to the director should be considered anyway, so, opposed to deletion. (Will try to add things) (added coverage in various languages including English, more exists)- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 14:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Exocentric environment

Exocentric environment (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Endocentric environment which was nominated with: "No refs on the page for many years. No finding sources to show that this term meets the notability standards for inclusion". Shreevatsa ( talk) 13:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 14:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Charli Evans

AfDs for this article:
Charli Evans (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSPORT. No reliable sources in the article or online. GMH Melbourne ( talk) 13:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 13:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Mackay Radio

Mackay Radio (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG. The link http://www.mackayhistory.com/ doesn’t exist anymore. Wikilover3509 ( talk) 12:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete‎ under G5. Owen× ☎ 13:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Seunzzy Sax

AfDs for this article:
Seunzzy Sax (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article was created by a sockpuppet. The artist has little notability and the sources are poor at best. 333fortheain ( talk) 12:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 18:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Millennial pause

Millennial pause (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is supported by weak sources or one-off articles; there is an insufficient amount of reliable sourcing to justify an article. Tkbrett (✉) 12:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep The Atlantic is a reliable source as are other listed sources. "One-off article" is not a problem with a source under WP:N. JoshuaZ ( talk) 13:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Sources are easy to find ( 1, 2, 3, 4). It seems no WP:BEFORE was done here. Cortador ( talk) 14:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    These sources are still insufficient because they only provide passing mentions. Refer to D3 at WP:BEFORE. Tkbrett (✉) 15:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    No, they do not. The first two sources especially are only about the concept and nothing else. You clearly didn't read them, just like you didn't look for sources before you started this AfD. Cortador ( talk) 19:06, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I do not subscribe to paywalled German websites, nor do I read German. And, again, the English-language sources provide no more than a passing mention. Refer to D3 at WP:BEFORE. Tkbrett (✉) 20:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    You claimed above that the sources "only provide passing mentions", not that you couldn't access to read those sources. What language the sources are in doesn't matter, English-language Wikipedia doesn't require sources to be in English. Cortador ( talk) 20:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    This isn't quite the zinger you think it is, as it further indicates how little reliable sourcing there is. Tkbrett (✉) 22:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I kindly ask you to come up with a coherent argument why this article should be deleted. You started with there not being enough sources, then moved on to sources only mentioning the topic in passing, then to sources covering the topic but not in a language you can read, and finally that there are sources but not in a sufficiently high number. Cortador ( talk) 09:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    It was the same argument the whole time. But I am not going to waste my time trying convince you; the sourcing presented has been flimsy, and you seem to know this, which is why you pivoted away from trying to produce anything more substantial. Coming from a side of the encyclopedia that deals mainly in books, it is quite surprising to see how the weakest of sourcing passes on some parts. Tkbrett (✉) 10:14, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    It clearly was not - you claimed above that the sources "only provide passing mentions" and then admitted that you didn't even read them because you lacked access to the (paywalled) site, and because the articles were written in a language you can't read. Cortador ( talk) 10:18, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    The entire paragraph in the business insider (culture) source is not a passing mention. It counts partially to the notability. Aaron Liu ( talk) 13:17, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Here's another source in addition to all the ones already mentioned. Definitely seems like there's enough reliable sources to justify an article. -- Aabicus ( talk) 14:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Click-bait articles collecting social media posts hardly seem reliable, even if it is published on something potentially reliable, like WP:BUSINESSINSIDER. Outside of one Atlantic article, I have not seen a reliable source which points to this topic's notability. Tkbrett (✉) 20:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    This probably fails the Wikipedia notability test, under the Not a (Newspaper/Tabloid) disqualification. Nontoxicjon ( talk) 23:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Tkbrett @ Nontoxicjon This source falls under the Culture section, which RSP explicitly calls an exception that has consensus as reliable. Aaron Liu ( talk) 13:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Abstain/weak Delete This seems to be one of those "just-so" popcorn articles that as of this writing are hot on Reddit. There is definitely a flavor of being contrived as the concept has less empirical backing here in quality sources than similar articles like the vocal fry.-- ~Sıgehelmus♗ (Tøk) 23:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:NEOLOGISM. I was considering nominating this article when I first saw it, and at least from a WP:PAG perspective, the case for not keeping the article seems even stronger as I read through the support !votes here. This very much seems to be a neologism that that exists when you do a Google search, but the sources presented so far don't really reach WP:N, especially as I read through the comments here so far. Instead it's more in the purview of pop culture stuff that isn't always WP:DUE coverage for an encyclopedia (see WP:FART). It's similar to how Human-interest story isn't really considered hard news, and soft news is often considered flaky at best for discussions of notability. The other issue I'm seeing is that sources presented so far don't show sustained coverage, another required aspect of notability. It seems most of the pop-culture blogs, etc. talked about it in late 2022/early 2023. If the topic ever gets substantial and sustained coverage above the lower quality sources presented here and in the article here so far, then inclusion can always be reassessed, but I'm very wary of arguments merely saying sources exist. KoA ( talk) 00:52, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep I agree with N. JoshuaZ and Cortador above. Maxx1222 ( talk) 01:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: The sources above already establish notability. As an editor who deals a lot with book sources, the nominator should know that a source being less-than-accessible does not hurt its notability at all. Two years seems enough for sustained coverage to me. I will not comment on the “all soft news are flaky” part as a proud member of m:AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTAD. Aaron Liu ( talk) 13:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Fair enough, thanks, Aaron. Though I do think they are different things; there are topics covered in great detail by hard-to-find books, but there does not to seem to be any substantive discussion about the topic, which instead seems to only be covered in clickbait articles from the first couple months of last year. I do not think those articles collecting social media posts would qualify as reliable on any article I'd normally work on, so it is surprising to hear that it helps establish notability. I don't deal in this area of the encyclopedia normally, so I'll just drop it. Tkbrett (✉) 13:43, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Thanks for the clarification. I feel like the purpose of these articles are to identify longstanding online phenomena and what they mean. While, indeed, no sources have analyzed the topic yet, the coverage does confer notability and the topic seems like something worthy of further research. Even though there isn’t much information, it does seem big enough to at least document. Aaron Liu ( talk) 14:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep, as painful as it is -- this is a silly article, which cites silly clickpieces, but our policies are that dumb clickpieces = notability, so until such a time as we revisit our notability guidelines, let this (and others like Cheugy which I wrote some years ago) stand as monuments to our hubris. jp× g 🗯️ 01:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep, Article is necessary and provided with Reliable sources. I suggest to Keep the Article. Caxwax ( talk) 05:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete for WP:N and WP:NEOLOGISM. The referenced sources consist entirely (besides dictionary definitions) of opinion articles that are collations of social media posts, and the article spends as almost much time explaining what millennials and zoomers are as it does on the subject matter. Sources are irrelevant, article contents are mostly irrelevant. Would be better suited for a Wiki focused on TikTokisms. Timothy "The Baron" Pickle ( talk) 16:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
This is the only edit Baron has made so far.
NEOLOGISM only applies to those that have little or no usage in reliable sources. This is clearly not the case with the sources above, which I don't see how are "opinion" articles, and summarizing the neologism is pretty relevant. RSes pick up and explore it (which is more than just collected usages and has been done), so we include and explore it. The article also only spends 4 footnoted sentences for explaining what generations are. Aaron Liu ( talk) 17:00, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 13:12, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Cake in a Cup

Cake in a Cup (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG. The owners names or the company name doesn’t appear in /info/en/?search=List_of_Cupcake_Wars_episodes Wikilover3509 ( talk) 12:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete even if they did appear on that show, notability is not WP:INHERITED BrigadierG ( talk) 12:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete Can't see how this meets notability. Also one of the citations is to a cupcake-themed 2048 clone? [1] That's not part of my rationale or anything, it's just amusing. It does bring their citation count down to 3 though, all of which are Toledo-specific news articles. The Savage Norwegian 21:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

References

  1. ^ Kristen, Micael. "2048 Cupcakes".
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Princess Polly

Princess Polly (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested G11. This appears to have been written by a UPE and reads like an advertisement. All of the coverage I can find is run of the mill. Even if notable, G11 is appropriate. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 11:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

There are plenty of notable references to this company that could be included in this page as it meets the WP:NCORP. Including the sources noted by Liance, Ragtrader which speaks to both positive and negative market fluctuations of the parent company, IT News discussing a data breach, and BBC article with Lori Loughlin scandal. Amongst all these references is a wealth of information poised to add valuable information to the wikipedia audience. Wikiguru777 ( talk) 04:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Ragtrader has no clear editorial policy, the article you've cited is run-of-the-mill reporting about stores opening, and trade journals generally don't satisfy NCORP. IT News is likewise a run-of-the-mill data breach story in a trade publication, and does not establish that the company is notable. The BBC article contains only this brief mention of the brand: "The social media influencer has launched a clothing collection with women's online fashion boutique Princess Polly and a make-up palette with cosmetics chain Sephora." voorts ( talk/ contributions) 21:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
plenty of notable references to this company: for a company to be notable under NCORP, there needs to be more than "references"; there needs to be several sources, each of which must be secondary, independent, and reliable, and contain significant coverage of the company.
Regarding: Amongst all these references is a wealth of information poised to add valuable information to the wikipedia audience. Wikipedia's readers are not an audience for advertising to. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 21:26, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
In response to " trade journals generally don't satisfy NCORP" I can see that featured trade stories from leading trade magazines may be used where independence is clear. Reporting on net revenue decrease and factual store openings is unbiased, independent information. Sydney Morning Herald is a notable article and speaks to the brand multiple times throughout the article.
In addition, I've also found the BBB review / complaints for the company (where reviews must be independent secondary sources that contain significant coverage of the subject).
Another article with substantial, reliable, and independent coverage from a secondary source relating to news article exploring sustainability of the company - Greenmatters - https://www.greenmatters.com/p/is-princess-polly-good-quality
Agree that the BBC article I previously referenced does not meet the criteria for notable source. Wikiguru777 ( talk) 22:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • BBB complaints are user-generated content and thus not reliable.
  • Greenmatters appears to be reliable and its critique of the company's claims of being ethical while sourcing from "countries with extreme risk of label abuse" indicates this definitely isn't a sponsored post.
  • Sydney Morning Herald is a notable article and speaks to the brand multiple times throughout the article. References or mentions are not enough to establish notability. The article also isn't about this company; it's about the parent company's IPO.
voorts ( talk/ contributions) 23:03, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Agreed significant, reliable, independent sources
Business insider
Green matters
I believe IT news should also be considered a source as it is “featured trade stories from leading trade magazines may be used where independence is clear.”
I’ve also found Goon On You which questions Princess Polly’s ethical standards. This source is reliable & independent
The above is enough to satisfy NCORP as “significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.”
This is my first publishing so I'm learning more about the rules here and I appreciate your previous feedback to help discern what is appropriate. I believe the above should be suitable to comply with NCORP. Wikiguru777 ( talk) 23:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
IT News is not a "leading trade magazine" in fashion. It's a run-of-the-mill news story that focuses on the data breach, not significant coverage about the company itself. Greenmatters is basically secondary source coverage of Good on You, which is a primary source since it's a report made by an advocacy group. So, we still only have two sources that meet WP:SIRS, Green Matters and BI, which isn't enough under NCORP. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 01:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I'd agree BI is ok though I'm not so sure Green Matters is sufficient for ORGDEPTH. IT news would also fail ORGIND given its like, 90% quotes from the company, and does not appear to have any secondary analysis, very far from being a featured story, so I'd agree there also. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 04:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Inca Civil War. There is clear consensus against a standalone article, and clear preference for a redirect. Consensus as to the target is less clear, but Inca Civil War has more support than the alternative, and if anyone is not content with this outcome I suggest a talk page discussion followed by an RfD if absolutely necessary. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 18:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Battle of Mullihambato

Battle of Mullihambato (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources found on the "Battle of Mullihambato" as described here in the vaguest of terms (with plenty of WP:WEASEL words raising red flags here – even the most basic facts are "possibly", "probably", "inconclusive" (in terms of the victor), and "unknown") – and they are totally unverifiable. Spanish version of article also doesn't inspire confidence, as it suggests that this battle is also called the "Battle of Ambato", the "Battle of Chimborazo", or the "Battle of Nagsichi" – and it's doubtful that any source actually links all 4 of them as one and the same. (Newson (1995), Life and Death in Early Colonial Ecuador, mentions a major battle in Ambato, but that doesn't exactly match the description here, either.) Perhaps a new article could be created in the future called "Battle of Ambato" or equivalent, but if so, it would need to be backed by reliable sources. (N.B., a separate article on Battle of Chimborazo already exists in English Wikipedia.) Article as it has stood for 16 years is essentially original research ( WP:OR) and should be deleted on those grounds. Cielquiparle ( talk) 11:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Ecuador. Cielquiparle ( talk) 11:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Mccapra ( talk) 19:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Battle of Chillopampa per Maria Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, History of the Inca Realm, 1999, p. 116:

    "The two armies had their first encounter on the plain of Chillopampa, with Huascar's troops defeating those of Atahualpa. Nevertheless, Atahualpa's generals, reacting quickly, regrouped their scattered troops and, with fresh reinforcements from Quito, were able to recover. According to Cabello de Valboa, this first encounter took place in Mullihambato, near the river, and in a second battle, luck favored Atahualpa's captains. Cieza maintains that only one battle took place. In this fighting...Atoc was taken prisoner and fell victim to the cruelty of Challcochima, who, according to some versions, had a gold-incrusted chica cup made of his skull."

    There is no clear source that says that this battle occurred independently of either Chillopampa or Chimborazo, and through Rostworowski the suggestion is made that Mullihambato is Chillopampa, with the second battle, if it occurred, being Chimborazo. A redirect to the Chillopampa page would allow mention of the possibility of this name to be made there. I do not recommend a merge because the article is uncited and would require a complete rewrite to be useful in any article. Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk) 14:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Comment. @ Pickersgill-Cunliffe Interesting find...but then why not simply redirect to Inca Civil War and have some corresponding text there explaining the historians' disagreement? In general I'm wary of the entire set of individual battle pages – it's almost like the Wikipedia "wars/battles" structure is driving a certain type of framing of the Inca Civil War that may not be warranted, given that there is disagreement among historians about which battles even took place to start with, and the depth of information available about a few of the battles is quite thin for many. (Even the broader Inca Civil War article itself tells a different story from what the individual battle pages and template seem to suggest.) As an example, there is yet another framing in Enduring controversies in military history: critical analyses and context (ABC-CLIO, 2017) which explores "Did the Inca Civil War play an important role in the Spanish conquest of the Inca Empire?" which suggests that the main battles occurred in Tumebamba, Ambato, and Quipaipan.
    On Wikipedia now we have the following pages, some of which only cite one source, and present information as though it's uncontested:
If you go through the sequence of individual battle pages, it feels like a rather breezy creation of a bunch of articles for the sake of building a narrative that fits the template. (Not suggesting we need solve the whole problem here, just pointing out the context.) Cielquiparle ( talk) 23:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Cielquiparle: Agree there seems to be some confusion about the civil war, but as you say we'll stick to this article. I think that redirecting to Chillopampa is most appropriate because it appears that we do have historians mostly agreeing that this battle occurred, and that if Mullihambato existed (as the same battle or a different one) it was directly connected to it. People searching for these events are more likely to go to Chillopampa, which isn't actually mentioned in the main article! Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk) 12:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Dozy Mmobuosi. (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 ( t • c) 13:36, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Dozy Mmobuosi Foundation

Dozy Mmobuosi Foundation (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not meeting GNG; Promo; delete or redirect to Dozy Mmobuosi or BoraVoro ( talk) 11:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 11:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

ILOT Bet Nigeria

ILOT Bet Nigeria (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable bookmaker, fails NCORP BoraVoro ( talk) 11:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 11:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

William D. Clay Jr.

William D. Clay Jr. (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not appear to be notable. Avishai11 ( talk) 11:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 11:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Stefan Savić (Serbian footballer)

Stefan Savić (Serbian footballer) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This men's footballer, who seems to have a minor career, last played one appearance for BSK Borca in 2016 before disappearing from the football world. Using his name in Cyrillic (Стефан Савић), my Google search exclusively came up with that Montenegrin footballer; nothing about the Serb with the same birth name. The only reliable source regarding AfD target seems to be Sportski Žurnal when he played for FK Sloga Petrovac na Mlavi in 2015. However, after translation, it's only a passing mention in squad list which definitely doesn't count as significant coverage. Article fails WP:GNG overall. Clara A. Djalim ( talk) 11:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 11:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Chizo 1 Germany

Chizo 1 Germany (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An article that lacks the minimal inclusion for bios. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. A WP:MILL. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 10:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 12:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Big Ben Phonogram

Big Ben Phonogram (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG. The About section in the website listed in References - https://www.bigben.se/phonogram/about draws a blank. Wikilover3509 ( talk) 10:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:03, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Natalie Labbée

AfDs for this article:
Natalie Labbée (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

City councillors are not presumptively notable based on WP:NPOL, they have to be notable for other things or pass WP:GNG or at least WP:ANYBIO. This subject fails all. Sources presented and from WP:BEFORE are WP:ROUTINE coverages/ WP:RUNOFTHEMILL sources and cannot be used to establish GNG because there's no WP:SIGCOV anywhere. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 10:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to North American Soccer League on television. Consensus is clearly to remove this article. No one has actually suggested redirect, but enough have made the case for merge (although without agreement on where to merge it) that a redirect would allow preservation of accessible content should someone choose to put in the work to merge any of it into another article. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

List of Soccer Bowl broadcasters

List of Soccer Bowl broadcasters (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTTVGUIDE and WP:LISTCRUFT applies. Fails WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE. Of the sources per WP:RS; besides unsourced, one of those is a blogspot post; of the three offline sources, one is a personal opinion of one of the announcers, anything supporting this list is minimal. Another offline source is an announcement about a deal. A majority of those are WP:PRIMARY, forums and dead links besides the YouTube posts, not offering anything to assert notability. A small section in a main article about broadcasters will be more appropriate than a list about broadcasters. WP:ATD will be a merge to Soccer Bowl. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 09:05, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Death of Shaylee Mejia

Death of Shaylee Mejia (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of sustained in-depth coverage; all local coverage from March; lead includes a weaseled potential BLP violation that this girl's death has been "widely attributed" to a fight she had at school. Zanahary ( talk) 07:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Crime, and California. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 07:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Seems a clear WP:BLP1E situation. Reliable sources only cover her in the context of a single event, she is a low-profile individual, and the event itself is not significant (although it is of course very sad). WP:NOTNEWS also relevant, I think. Chocmilk03 ( talk) 08:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't really get your argument here. If it's an event based article it can't really be a BLP1E issue? But this definitely doesn't pass NEVENT either and should be deleted on those grounds. PARAKANYAA ( talk) 19:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Yeah, I guess it's not technically a bio but about the event of her murder? The line is maybe a little blurry in the case of an article that is solely about the death of a single person. But agree, WP:NEVENT doesn't seem to be met either. There's no deadline, but there's also no evidence of continued coverage since the event or that this event will have any sustained significance. Chocmilk03 ( talk) 06:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: I can only find a half-dozen articles in Gnews about the event happening from the time it did, then nothing. Another non-notable death with no lasting consequences, NOTNEWS. Oaktree b ( talk) 12:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: The incident which could be a potential murder/manslaughter case is already gaining significant coverage in the entire country, not just from local news. There will likely be bigger matters and legal proceedings concerning the death, which if you thoroughly investigate the details you will find some connection between the bullying and violence that the victim endured.
Cheera L ( talk) 19:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Well, we aren't a CRYSTALBALL. Oaktree b ( talk) 04:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
That's the article's author btw Zanahary ( talk) 23:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Avetec

Avetec (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable, no longer active. Looking back at the active dates of this organisation, I couldn't find any references in news. There are references like https://www.businessinsider.com/peter-thiel-invested-300000-in-man-made-tornados-2012-12 in 2012, which appears to be an unrelated company. Looking through the history of the page, there are references, but are for things like the definition of STEM, not the organisation Newystats ( talk) 11:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:05, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete - Fails WP:NCORP. Melmann 07:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Defunct website, no coverage in American media. I get a few hits in Canadian media [48] for a different entity. Nothing found for sourcing, what's used in the article is primary. Oaktree b ( talk) 14:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Note that Chiselinccc's bolded 'delete' !vote was somewhat altered by subsequent comment below Cunard's posts. Daniel ( talk) 06:36, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lusongyuan Hotel

Lusongyuan Hotel (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. Hardly anything in Google News for both English and Chinese name 北京侣松园宾馆 LibStar ( talk) 05:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Edwards, Natasha (2002-06-01). "The Traveller: Short Breaks: 24-Hour Room Service Lu Song Yuan Hotel, Beijing". The Independent. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

      The review notes: "One exception, offering lashings of atmosphere and a taste of authentic China, is the Lu Song Yuan Hotel. The 19th-century courtyard dwelling was built for the fearless General Zeng Ge Ling Qin. After serving as a rather run-down hostel for 30 years, the Lu Song Yuan was bought in 1997 by the Hong Kong-based Silk Road Hotel Management Company, and reopened as a Culture Hotel in 1998 after extensive renovation. The hotel spreads over five courtyards; the main one, where you can sit for a drink, opens off the restaurant."

    2. Wang, Dandan (2001-08-17). "Lu Song Yuan a "Siheyuan" hotel". Beijing Today. Retrieved 2024-05-28 – via Internet Archive.

      The review notes: "The hotel was the former residence of the relatives of Qing royal family and is surrounded by historic buildings. Zenggelinqin, the first owner of the house, is described as a national hero in the film “Burning Yuanmingyuan”. ... The Lu Song Yuan hotel is built around four charming traditional courtyards. It includes an outdoor lounge, bamboo gardens and a grape garden. Many of the rooms open onto one of the courtyards. The hotel has 59 guest rooms, which are tastefully furnished with replicas of Ming dynasty furniture. There is a business center, which provides an English speaking secretarial service, copying, fax, internet access, as well as ticketing and foreign currency exchange. "

    3. Biggs, Cassie (2004-07-11). "Boutique hotels in Beijing". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

      The article provides 149 words of coverage about the subject. The article notes: "In the 19th century the two-storey Lu Song Yuan Hotel was the private residence of General Zeng Ge Ling Qin, one-time defence minister and regarded as the "Great Wall" of the Qing Court. Reasonably priced and centrally located in a hutong just north of Bei Hai Park, the hotel has been on the backpacker trail for some time and can be busy. But with four courtyards, a bamboo grove and a grape garden, there's more than enough space for a spot of solitude. The best suites open onto a tiny courtyard at the back where you can sit and sip tea, listen to the birds and contemplate the hotel's 170 years of history. Or you can hop in a rickshaw and go for a spin around the hutongs, many of which haven't changed since their Kublai Khan days. Rooms range from US$10 dormatories to $100 suites with private courtyards"

    4. Chen, Stephen (2008-07-13). "Games worse for hotel trade than the 1989 crackdown". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

      The article notes: "The Lusongyuan Hotel in Beijing's Banchang hutong has thrived since the last time the Dalai Lama checked in and roamed its courtyards in his pyjamas, according to some of the elderly people who live in the alley. For half a century, the former imperial residence in central Beijing has been a stopover for senior government officials, diplomats and, lately, overseas tourists. ... The occupancy rate at the hotel hit a low this month - even lower than the July after the bloodshed in Tiananmen Square in 1989. ... The hotel, now owned by Hong Kong businessman Peter Wong Man-kong as part of Culture Resources Development, has modernised its bathrooms, added broadband internet access and Wi-fi, established a 24-hour multilingual service hotline, and reprinted their service guide to cover the Olympic Games and sports venues."

    5. Less significant coverage:
      1. Izon, Lucy (1992-01-19). "Melbourne Hostel: It's Not in the Books". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

        The article notes: "After several delays, China’s first internationally affiliated youth hostel is due to open this month. Although it’s expected to be a little more expensive than some of the budget hotels favored by backpackers in Beijing, it will be a good place to meet fellow travelers and share information on getting around within this vast country. The 60-bed hostel is located in a traditional four-courtyard-style building, which was originally the Lu Song Yuan Hotel"

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Lusongyuan Hotel, also known as Lu Song Yuan Hotel ( simplified Chinese: 北京侣松园宾馆; traditional Chinese: 北國情侶松園賓館), to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard ( talk) 10:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Hi Cunard ( talk · contribs), thanks for this research and the ping! As this is one of the first AfDs I've participated in, and I'm doing so in part so I can observe discussions and learn more about evaluating RSes, I am probably not a good person to judge these, so I will eagerly await input from our other peers you've tagged.
That being said, these *look* like decently significant coverage to my "newbie" eyes, and particularly your find about the Qing general! Looking forward to see what others think, if they concur with your assessment I'd love to help you in patching these sources in to build article content from them. (Also, apologies, I'm trying to indent this as a response in sourcecode but I'm not sure I did so properly) Cheers! Chiselinccc ( talk) 11:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Thank you for reviewing the sources, Chiselinccc ( talk · contribs), and for your interest in patching the sources in to build article content from them! I participate in many AfDs so don't always have time to add the sources to the article since searching for sources is time-consuming. (I've adjusted the indentation of your comment so that it's nested under my comment.) Cunard ( talk) 06:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Editors can create a redirect if they choose to do so. Liz Read! Talk! 23:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Milroy Goes

Milroy Goes (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This appears to be a non-notable filmmaker with no significant coverage in reliable third-party sources. He has directed several non-notable films, ad films, and music videos, including Welcome M1LL10NS, a non-theatrical release whose notability is questionable. The currently cited sources offer nothing beyond passing mentions, and a Google News search yields no helpful results. This fails to meet the criteria of WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. GSS  💬 04:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, India, and Goa. GSS  💬 04:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. GSS  💬 04:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Based on my check, I found no in-depth coverage from multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. This means the subject completely fails to meet WP:GNG. The majority of the sources are around his films. GrabUp - Talk 05:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: Significant coverage in independent (although some articles include interviews), reliable sources. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    (and if the majority of sources is considered to be around his films (not sure that can be said, but let's assume it is the case, it means that the films may be considered notable, so that he would meet WP:DIRECTOR). - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:54, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don’t think the article about his film meets WP:GNG as it requires in-depth coverage from multiple sources. The cited sources seem unreliable to me or are full of quotations from connected individuals. It fails WP:NFILM as no reviews were found and WP:NFO because the film only received coverage at the time of its release. To pass, it requires “publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film’s initial release.” I can nominate that article anytime soon. GrabUp - Talk 09:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Mushy Yank, could you point out sources that provide "significant coverage"? WP:SIGCOV requires coverage that "addresses the topic directly and in detail." Unfortunately, as mentioned earlier, almost all the sources are merely name drops. Additionally, I agree with Grabup that the film they directed appears to be non-notable as it lacks the coverage required by WP:GNG and shows no evidence of notability under WP:NFILM.
    Regarding your claim of meeting WP:NDIRECTOR, it is weak for two reasons: first, the film is likely not notable, and second, there is no coverage that discusses the subject in detail. WP:BIOSPECIAL states that "If neither a satisfying explanation nor appropriate sources can be found for a standalone article, but the person meets one or more of the additional criteria: Merge the article into a broader article providing context." However, this is likely not possible due to the weak notability of the film. GSS  💬 09:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    At random, for example:
    Perhaps the film producer with the most interesting experience is Milroy Goes whose film Welcome Millions is being shown on Amazon Prime in Europe and America after being dubbed in the local language. It is expected to be available for viewership in India shortly. Made in three languages and shot in Goa, Punjab, and the UK, the movie was meant to have its premiere at the IFFI 2019 but was turned down because it had been one of two Indian film selected by the Oscar committee. ( https://www.heraldgoa.in/Cafe/It’s-time-to-go-‘Over-the-Top’-for-Konkani-cinema/161417)
    In 2012, director Milroy Goes brought about a whole new change in Konkani cinema by introducing his digital theatrical film, (as was mentioned in the Afd about The Victim) ( https://www.heraldgoa.in/Cafe/Good-days-ahead-for-Goan-cinema/108329)
    Pervis Milroy Goes, known better as Milroy Goes is an Indian film director from Goa. He hails from the beautiful village of Cuncolim in South Goa. He ventured into the Film Industry in 2007 with his first short film “Vengeance”. Milroy gained a lot of recognition as a film director soon after the release of his second short film “Unexpected” in 2009. Milroy was mentored by a French film enthusiast named Anthony Coombs-Humphreys, who not only believed in Milroy’s potential as a filmmaker but also assisted him in producing a remake of his short film “Unexpected” for the international audience. The movie, which was titled “Expect the Unexpected”, featured a Bollywood actor named Deepraj Rana. The movie was released in 2011 and received very good reviews. Milroy Goes’ film “Welcome Millions”, which was released in 2018, was eligible for the Best Picture Award in the General Entry category at the 91st Academy Awards (Oscars) in 2019, but was not nominated. Milroy Goes is credited with being the person to introduce digital cinema in Goa with his debut theatrical film “The Victim” (2012).Besides filmmaking, Milroy Goes also has various other business ventures including a coffee shop, an artist management firm and a Portuguese passport consultancy firm. ( It's Goa)
    These are just examples, it's +- short but significant imv, and there are many of those. If really everyone agrees this is not enough, nor for the film(s) nor for him, may I suggest a redirect for all of them to Konkani cinema (another guideline might apply if one considers the regional scope), that might help add prose to the page, which is very listy. I'm not that interested in this filmmaker, to be honest, and will probably leave it at that (I am not watching this), Best, - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don’t think Heraldgoa’s covarage can establish notability. And Itsgoa is a self-proclaimed blog based site according to their about us page. As it says “ ItsGoa was started in 2015, with the aim of becoming the premier portal for all things Goa. Today with thousands of visitors a month from across the world, our blog based website has transcended the virtual space, with the ItsGoa magazine – a sought after resource for visitors to Goa.” GrabUp - Talk 11:29, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    It's Goa: A blog, yes, technically, but not a personal one and that is what matters ( WP:EXPERTSPS). As for O Heraldo, not sure what you mean, but it's one of the (if not the, in English) main newspapers in Goa!! Again, a redirect to Konkani cinema might be considered. Really no time to make any further comments, sorry. Decide what you think is best. Thanks. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    It's Goa is not only a blog, but the article you mentioned above is an interview, and such articles are not accepted for establishing notability. Additionally, there is no evidence of who runs that blog or their background, nor are there details on their editorial policies. Such sources fall under WP:QUESTIONABLE. The section "The Folks Behind The Jokes" on their about us page states, "Our writers come from all walks of life, and through our social media handles," confirming that they lack real editorial control. They also encourage people to send in their stories and experiences, share their events and happenings, or create discussions around the articles they post, further undermining their reliability. The other two sources you mentioned are just passing mentions and are not even close to WP:INDEPTH. GSS  💬 12:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is any more support Redirection as it looks like the sourcing doesn't hold up for scrutiny.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Pyewacket (novel)

Pyewacket (novel) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage of this book. Fails WP:BK. SL93 ( talk) 04:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Lockridge, Richard (1967-11-05). "Cat Tales ...". The New York Times. p. BR24. ProQuest  118057210.

      The review noters: "Rosemary Weir's Pyewacket (Abelard-Schuman, $3.25. illustrated by Charles Pickard) is about a group of varied cats who live in a run-down street called Pig Lane and who, under the leadership of Pyewacket (himself 2 semi-magic cat), decide to evict the humans who also inhabit the street and are inclined to get in the way of cats. The humans do go, although not precisely in accordance with Pyewacket's plan—which involves an alliance with rats. The story for 6 to 9's is ingenious, well-plotted and pretty funny. The cats talk only to one another."

    2. "Pyewacket review". Kirkus Reviews. 1967. p. 1210. Retrieved 2024-05-25 – via Internet Archive.

      The page verifies that Kirkus Reviews reviewed Pyewacket in 1967.

    3. Martin, Pat (1968-09-21). "Pat Martin Scans Books for the Young". Redwood City Tribune. Archived from the original on 2024-05-25. Retrieved 2024-05-25 – via Newspapers.com.

      The review notes: "For those boys and girls who would like to hear about a coterie of conniving cats, here is one-eyed Pyewacket with his gang, in a most amusing story. Living in Pig Lane, the cats decide to drive out their unworthy owners and so take over the disreputable homes in which they live. When the owners are legally dispossessed, one can understand that the cats are entitled to think their plan is succeeding. What actually happens provides a satisfactory solution and the cats find exactly the spot for a gang of good ratters. The things that make this special are illustrations of Pyewacket by Charles Pickard and a very fine characterization of a very tough cat. (Ages 10-12.)"

    4. Van Fleet, Virginia (1968-04-28). "Young Readers: Cat Tale Excellent". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Archived from the original on 2024-05-25. Retrieved 2024-05-25 – via Newspapers.com.

      The review notes: "For all who enjoy cats and their unpredictable antics, "Pyewacket" by Rosemary Weir (Abelard-Schuman, New York, 13.25) will (although it was written for children from 6 to 9; be a delightful tidbit. The story concerns a colony of cats, led by a redoubtable fighter, Pyewacket, whose owners live in shacks in a slum district in a British city, called Pig Lane. ... At their leader's suggestion, they decide to get rid of their people by making a peace treaty with the rats. ... What happens then shouldn't happen to a cat, even a rebel feline, but the author contrives a most ingenious and satisfying solution."

    5. Less significant coverage:
      1. Blishen, Edward (1967-07-07). "Books for children: History and imagination". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 2024-05-25. Retrieved 2024-05-25 – via Newspapers.com.

        The review notes: "Finally, for younger readers, there's Pyewacket, by Rosemary Weir (Abelard-Schuman, 15s), also about the East End and demolition; the heroes here are cats, who set out to drive the humans from Pig Lane. I take off at once at the behest of almost any fantasy and especially one about cats: but this seemed heavy and calculated, and I just found myself being bumped gloomily along the ground."

    6. Article about a sequel:
      1. "The World of Books". Manchester Evening News. 1981-03-06. Archived from the original on 2024-05-25. Retrieved 2024-05-25 – via Newspapers.com .

        The review is about a sequel. The review notes: "Pyewacket and Son by Rosemary Weir (Grasshopper, 95p). Feline fantasy about a pack of cats who work as rat-catchers in a cat-food factory. Their leader, the one-eyed, torn-eared Pyewacket, declares war on a gang of alley-cats when his son is accused of stealing fish by the workers, How he traps the villains makes a perfectly delightful tale. Magnificent moggy madness."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Pyewacket to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard ( talk) 07:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 00:57, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Korry Howell

Korry Howell (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 22:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 00:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Martín Gaitán

Martín Gaitán (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All citations are profiles. No news coverage can be found. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina ( talk) 20:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: I find a bit of coverage for a blind football player [54], but there is no coverage for this rugby person. Delete for a lack of sourcing. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:32, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: French wiki article lists what seem to be newspaper stories about this person, but there are no online links to them, so I can't evaluate how good they are. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Lean Keep, per the offline sources at the French Wikipedia and per Rugbyfan22. The titles seem to translate to "Gaïtan: 'hope'", "The pleasure of Gaïtan", "Martin Gaitan, the miraculous", and "The eye of Martin Gaitan", all of which, based on the titles, appear to be highly likely significant coverage. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 19:20, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Gonçalo Foro

Gonçalo Foro (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Shinadamina ( talk) 19:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 08:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Puerta Real (Granada)

Puerta Real (Granada) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced since 2014 and does not seem to meet notability criteria per WP:NPLACE. I can't find non-trivial coverage in independent and reliable sources, only mentions of the name in the context of directions and addresses, but never descriptions in detail (not in English, at any rate). The article defines it as a neighbourhood, but it is not an official district I can identify: downtown Granada is called simply Centro (e.g. see Spanish Wiki articles Distrito Centro (Granada) or Distritos de Granada). Even the Spanish version of the article isn't promising: the only somewhat detailed sources are a tour agency website and a blog post, neither of which counts as reliable. This topic could be mentioned in another overview article or a future article about the Centro district, but unlikely to be helpful and verifiable on its own. R Prazeres ( talk) 20:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:26, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of South Africa national rugby sevens players. Liz Read! Talk! 04:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Milo Nqoro

Milo Nqoro (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to List of South Africa national rugby sevens players as I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG ( talk) 03:26, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:29, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Baker Ninan Fenn

Baker Ninan Fenn (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure. Half of the hits I get from searching for sources (string:"baker ninan fenn") are non-responsive; the other half are useless as sources for Fenn. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:29, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Yakob Elias

Yakob Elias (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure. Source search (string:"yakob elias") returns nothing. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per above. This church is a part of the wider Orthodox church and there is no reason why its bishops would not be notable. Keralan bishops of all denominations seem to be challenged more than European ones, presumably because most sources will be in the local languages and/or offline. Here are some additional Eng lang ones, searching on "Yakob Mar Elias": [59], [60], [61]. Ingratis ( talk) 05:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:28, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Anthonios Yaqu'b

Anthonios Yaqu'b (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure; both sources in the article are 404-compliant. Search for sources (string: "anthonios yaqub") turns up nothing. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

information Note: The sources have been fixed to not be dead; the first is of unknown authorship and the second doesn't discuss Yaqu'b in depth (though "Yaq'ub" gets name-dropped a fair bit). — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 22:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Abraham Julios

Abraham Julios (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure. Google search (string:"abraham julios") turns up barely anything, and the lot of it is unusable as sources. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:32, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:36, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: Maybe this is one of the deprecated places needing attention I. Wikipedia. That doesn't mean a clergy if such office won't be entered. By the Merit of the office, he is notable. I don't seem the nominator took this in or maybe had been nominated generally with others. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 11:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Mathew Moolakkatt

Mathew Moolakkatt (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure. The only sources I can find that discuss him at length (string: "Mathew Moolakkatt") are tied to a controversy and legal case about Catholic marriage practises. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Thomas Koorilos

Thomas Koorilos (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable religious figure. Google search (string:"thomas koorilos") turns up no usable sources what-so-ever, mainly profiles and name-drops. — Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 04:32, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Kerala Gazetted Officers' Federation

Kerala Gazetted Officers' Federation (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. A google news search found only 3 sources of routine coverage. Fails WP:ORG and GNG. LibStar ( talk) 23:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Tonga national rugby union players. Liz Read! Talk! 01:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lotu Filipine

Lotu Filipine (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All available citations are profiles. Does not meet WP:NSPORT. Only one brief article exists [here https://www.looptonga.com/business/lotu-filipine-wins-500-cash-digicel-tonga-easter-promotion-91903], which is not enough. Shinadamina ( talk) 19:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: the article I linked to, is not even about his career and may not be him. Shinadamina ( talk) 19:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply
There's also a sexual harassment incident when he was captain of the Tonga under-21 team [76]. There should be more on this, but it would require digging in NewzText, which I don't have access to. IdiotSavant ( talk) 13:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep World Cup player and a simple search is bringing up WP:GNG passing coverage. There is likely more coverage offline also from the time of his career and locations of his playing career. Rugbyfan22 ( talk) 18:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Please share 2 or 3 reliable sources that have in-depth coverage on the person. We cannot assume reliable sources from the past can be found. We need to find them. Appearances in World Cup are not sufficient, unless there is such a WP policy which I am not aware of. If so, please link to the said policy. Shinadamina ( talk) 04:22, 8 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 03:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Shady Lane, Indiana

Shady Lane, Indiana (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

According to Baker, this was... a shady lane. Supposedly they used excessively green sycamore logs to make a stretch of corduroy road, and the ends sprouted and produced a line of sycamores on either side of the road. YMMV, as they say, but at any rate he says nothing about "tree-lined streets" or about streets at all. And he certainly doesn't identify it as a settlement in any way. The maps are of no particular help since I couldn't find one that had the name on it until it was back-added from GNIS, so it's hard to say where exactly this was supposed to have been. The one dominant feature on all maps and aerials I saw was a substantial factory complex south of the area; it's now a bulldozed ruin, so I have no idea what it was. Searching hits lots of other Shady Lanes but although there's a geological reference to it, there's no such road name in the vicinity that I can find. So I don't think this is a real place. Mangoe ( talk) 02:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Skynxnex ( talk) 04:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete No information found, other than the cited source, which is completely misrepresented by saying this is a community. WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk) 14:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • General note: I've noticed a lot of these settlements I created ages ago coming up for deletion. I believe at the time I was just creating articles for red links in the county-level "Municipalities and communities" templates. I have no opinion on whether they are notable or not (or whether they get deleted or not); I assume you all are already removing the communities from the templates when these items are deleted. Thanks! Sweet kate ( talk) 17:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete The tree story is plausible, I've seen fence lines that grew a tree from the posts. Presumably for the same reason. And while Shady lane locale may be notable its not a community of any kind as is made clear in "From Needmore to Prosperity : Hoosier place names in folklore and history" page 298-299 [77] James.folsom ( talk) 21:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 04:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Alexandre Castaing

Alexandre Castaing (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Several searches in both English and French came up with nothing but match reports, databases, and bit references with no substance. This player certainly exists, but he lacks WP:SIGCOV. Anwegmann ( talk) 02:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Yazman Tehsil. If you disagree with the redirect target, please discuss it on the talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 04:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Chak 15 DNB

Chak 15 DNB (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested PROD. Non-notable village. Article is completely unsourced, and there isn't any evidence of notability either. CycloneYoris talk! 01:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 03:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 03:46, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment I have added the GPS coordinates from Google Maps. The place does exist (and has buildings), but I can't find any good online sources about the location. Walsh90210 ( talk) 23:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, without other sources than a map, it is not an encyclopedic article. Looking at the category, there is no precedent to create individual articles about the chaks in the district. If anything, they could be covered in a list. Geschichte ( talk) 03:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Redirect to Bahawalpur as an ATD. Only one of the villages in this category has sources, so a separate list seems inappropriate. Better to redirect them each to the main article until the subjects draw sourcing requiring their expansion. BusterD ( talk) 07:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Comment: I have boldly redirected two (both wholly unsourced) of the four village articles in the category as I've asserted above. I have left Channan Pir alone because it seems to have some sourcing. In the event this page is deleted, I propose to redirect the pagespace as I've suggested above. BusterD ( talk) 07:52, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Is anyone concerned these redirects are not mentioned in Bahawalpur? ~ Kvng ( talk) 16:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
It isn't in the city of Bahawalpur; it's in Yazman Tehsil (where it is mentioned) in Bahawalpur district. A redirect to the tehsil would be appropriate. Peter James ( talk) 20:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 02:28, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Prabodhan Vidyalaya School

Prabodhan Vidyalaya School (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Zero coverage in independent sources,fails WP:NSCHOOL Ratnahastin ( talk) 02:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:19, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Italy national rugby union players. Liz Read! Talk! 04:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Matteo Zanusso

Matteo Zanusso (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to List of Italy national rugby union players as I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG. The most I found was a few sentences here, which would not suffice. JTtheOG ( talk) 17:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

List of songs about Bangalore

AfDs for this article:
List of songs about Bangalore (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previous AFD was a mass nomination that ended in keep, for many reasons, except for the article's actual merits. Because there are none.

The deletion reason is the same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about Ahmedabad, Madras, Oslo etc.: The list fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:LISTN and WP:OR. There is little to nothing worthwhile in this list, be it content or context. Geschichte ( talk) 08:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Neutral None of these songs have their own articles, but some of the people singing them do, and the films they are in do as well. Dream Focus 03:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 ( talk) 19:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Article has changed, discussion has clear direction and no "deleters". ( non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte ( talk) 20:48, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Instagram face

Instagram face (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

"Instagram Face" is something very abstract and unverifiable, ie. two reliable sources may define it differently. It may also be inherently derogatory, as it is based on negative opinions about women's appearances. With Love from Cassie Schebel ( talk) 01:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Why? Since these are reasons to delete the article entirely, I would think this is where it belongs. This is a genuine question, I've never nominated an article for deletion before, and I am probably doing at least two things wrong. With Love from Cassie Schebel ( talk) 01:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, divided between those editors arguing for Draftification and those advocating Keep as is.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

James Garcia

AfDs for this article:
James Garcia (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable baseball player. Article was deleted by discussion in 2007 and then recreated in 2014. It's different enough to not be speedily deleted, I think. Subject does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NSPORTS. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 00:57, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete, as per nom. - Samoht27 ( talk) 19:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously at AFD, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. If an editor wants to work on a version of this article in Draft or User space, contact me or make a request at WP:REFUND. Liz Read! Talk! 00:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Lauren King (actress)

Lauren King (actress) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability under WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. All available sources are primary sources, trivial mentions, or affiliated with this actress's agency. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 00:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, User:Dclemens1971, I've moved the article back to main space from User space. The editor clearly wants the article to be draftified or userfied. Liz Read! Talk! 23:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Thanks for moving it back @ Liz. I'm OK with draftify as an AtD if others are. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 00:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Since the creator has not requested it, I am switching my !vote back to delete. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 15:21, 30 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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! 00:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Shah Zanuriman Nuar Paras Khan

Shah Zanuriman Nuar Paras Khan (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't see how this meets WP:NPOL. He doesn't appear to actually have national/state-wide office, and is rather just a member of his party's youth division. Not enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:BASIC. C F A 💬 00:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2024_May_28&oldid=1227308270"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE