![]() |
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet GNG, no coverage in secondary sources. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 23:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Corrugated fiberboard. Liz Read! Talk! 22:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Appears to be just a stage in the production of corrugated fiberboard. The picture at the top of both articles is identical, just with different captions. Article is unreferenced and includes two citation needed tags. Could possibly be merged with corrugated fiberboard rather than deleted, but does not appear to me to add anything not already in that article. Adam Black talk • contributions 23:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards. Liz Read! Talk! 22:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Main page Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards exists which is also likely not notable so not seeing how this would meet notability guidelines. Cannot find enough coverage to establish it for this specific year. Will likely add the other years as a global discussion as well. CNMall41 ( talk) 22:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 22:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
A nice little bit of WP:SYNTH going on here, as the cite for the origin of the name (which has the wrong page number, BTW) doesn't mention this town, and Baker gives a completely different origin story for the township name and says this place was named after it. Anyway, we have another "no there there" issue. I'm not confident that this was a town per se. Mangoe ( talk) 22:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Sushma Swaraj#Personal life. Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Not elected in any office. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 22:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Hans-Joachim Roedelius. Liz Read! Talk! 22:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Rejected PROD. I initially PRODded due to a lack of reliable sourcing on Google and a total lack of sourcing in the article; the PROD was removed by the same person who added the discogs link. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 21:19, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. If an editor wants to work on this article as a draft, let me know. Liz Read! Talk! 21:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Subject fails WP:GNG: this is a fictional character from a non-notable book; a search finds no significant coverage in independent reliable sources; article was created by the book author against policy on WP:PROMO and self-promotion. — cactuswriter (talk) 21:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Rugby player who played a handful of games 7 years ago and hasn't returned to the sport since. The subject fails WP:GNG as the closest to WP:SIGCOV I found was this transactional announcement. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Essentially a conspiracy fork ( WP:POVFORK) that this person's suicide was either faked, a murder, due to a love triangle or due to demonic possession. Leslie Cheung#Death and legacy already covers what needs to be said on the subject. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 20:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep the content. This does not preclude a rescope, redirect or rename to be about the Garage. A consensus to delete is not going to emerge here Star Mississippi 02:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The article only has one source that says it's a populated place (GNIS, source 1). GNIS is not considered reliable by the Wikipedia community for the classification of places. The Second source is a coat hanger for the garage. Unfortunately, notability of the Garage is not transferable per WP:GNG. Both commonly used Washington place name books don't list this place
[1]
[2]. The Washington newspapers contain articles about a farming district named cloverland and state that it is the farmland surrounded by the forks of Asotin creek. Basically, Orchards
[3]. There are a couple of google hits implying it's a town, but looking at the actual sources, you see that it's just a rural area. This source, helps by explaining that it was the name of the voting precinct at one time
[4]. There is a website claiming it's a ghost town that looks convincing but it is copied from one of the sources that misrepresented the place, and there was only a cemetery and a garage which isn't the makings of a town. It also uses several pictures of the garage from different angles to make it look like there are more buildings. The fruit operation mentioned in the newspapers failed to pan out, and the area became wheat fields instead of a town. That Garage seems to be all that was ever there. Basically, reliable sources say it was a failed orchard development, that got converted to wheat fields, and there may have been some plans for a town that didn't work out.
James.folsom (
talk) 20:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
@ Maile66:: FYI we have found that GNIS is reliable for names and usually locations of places, but not for their character. See WP:GNIS for the gory details. Mangoe ( talk) 14:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Let'srun ( talk) 20:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The disambiguation page fails WP:DAB as it only lists one topic and not many topics, thus not making it a valid DAB. It's also a good idea to delete the dab pages that redirect to that page as well. kpgamingz ( rant me) 19:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough in-depth coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 19:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Let'srun ( talk) 20:30, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Falls under WP:TRIVIA and possibly WP:FAN. Also, fails WP:V. kpgamingz ( rant me) 18:58, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
References
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! 21:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All that came up were trivial mentions ( 1, 2, 3, etc.) JTtheOG ( talk) 18:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Namibia national rugby union players. Liz Read! Talk! 21:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a Namibian rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The most I found was a handful of sentences here after being named his club's player of the year, but no sustained or in-depth coverage. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC) Changing my recommendation to Redirect to List of Namibia national rugby union players. JTtheOG ( talk) 16:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Not notable on its own; could be merged into another article; suggested by User:Sammi Brie Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 18:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Unnecessary fork. No secondary sources. Fails WP:GNG. Many of these articles have already been deleted, see AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dominica at the 2010 Commonwealth Games. AusLondonder ( talk) 17:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Mojo Hand ( talk) 20:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:NCORP/ WP:NBUILD/ WP:GNG. All coverage online is trivial. Can't find any reliable, independent in-depth sources on the subject. Clear friend a 💬 17:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 00:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails the notability guideline for people. Should have been deleted at the previous AfD four years ago. As one of the article's own sources reveals, the article was written by O'Connor's colleagues and the AfD was influenced by off-wiki canvassing. – Tera tix ₵ 16:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Germantown Friends School as a natural ATD. Owen× ☎ 00:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails NLIST, sources not found showing this has been discussed as a group by independent reliable sources. // Timothy :: talk 15:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was Procedural close. This has been G5ed already. (non-admin closure) Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 01:32, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:NBOOK. All the sources I can find seem to be interviews and mainly focus on the author rather than the book. -- Ferien ( talk) 15:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. which does not preclude a talk page discussion to identify a target to which to merge Star Mississippi 02:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
An honorary consulate located in a residential house. No suitable secondary sources, only sources are a government diplomatic list and Embassypages.com. Fails WP:GNG. AusLondonder ( talk) 07:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We cannot close without consensus on a target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:58, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Owen× ☎ 00:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Despite the title the article is primarily about the representative office of Montserrat in London. Lacking secondary sources to demonstrate notability per WP:GNG. AusLondonder ( talk) 10:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:58, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Star Mississippi 02:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable mountain guiding company in Canada (per N:CORP). There are some scraps of articles in local old Canadian newspapers, but nothing nationally or internationally (and zero SIGCOV anywhere). Some famous Canadian climbers have worked there, but the company never appears in any of main climbing RS (per WP:NCLIMB). Article had a lot of unreferenced promotional material, which I removed, but ultimately it has no future on Wikipedia. Aszx5000 ( talk) 10:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are announcements and does not help to assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are announcments and does not help to assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 16:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, the only source is primary and does not help to assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Reason Sarcastathon ( talk) 08:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
it doesn’t meet the criteria for notability. 1. Out of 4 references, 2 are links to artist’s own pages. 2 are PR pieces. 2. They have never had any single or album chart in their home country or abroad. 3. Nor have they had a record certified as gold. 4. They’ve never ‘had important coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country’ 5. Not released any albums. 6. Hasn’t been a member of 2 or more notable groups. 7. Hasn’t become one of the most important representatives of a notable style or the most important of the local scene of a city 8 & 9. Hasn’t won any awards 10. Not made music for any notable other media 11. Hasn’t been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network 12. Nor have they been subject of any documentaries etc Sarcastathon ( talk) 08:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. I find the arguments to delete, especially the nomination and Mccapra, the most persuasive in this discussion. Would be open to draftying upon request. Daniel ( talk) 11:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
I know it is unusual to delete a University - but I cannot find any online information about the University (except the bare fact that it is on Yemeni University lists - although I am not sure how old these lists are). It appears no longer to have a website. Links are either not orking or provide no helpful info. No obvious lkinks to anything else. The wiki page suggests the unbioversity is strong in nutrition - but https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9517972/ suggests it is not on the 2022 list of Yemeni universities awarding decrees in nutrition. Perhaps it has changed its name or amalgamated? Newhaven lad ( talk) 09:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:51, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For policy based input. "It exists" is not a valid argument in favor of retention, especially when we haven't verified that.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The subject fails to meet the criteria outlined in both WP:JOURNALIST and WP:GNG. While the subject has received some press coverage, but it's too common for journalists to get some sort of press attention on every one of them. WP:ROTM coverage is not sufficient to pass WP:N — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 14:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 00:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The sources on this page almost all deal with WP:RAJ, with many of the sources (including Singh), tracing back to the Panth Prakash, which fails WP:RAJ. Some of these sources don't even state that such a thing happened, and nor do any other major sources regarding this campaign such as Hari Ram Gupta. Noorullah ( talk) 22:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 14:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Notability isn’t inherited. The father being an assembly member, herself being a candidate of a party for an election that is to come doesn’t qualify for NPOL. This is one of the many articles I’ve found about Indian politicians who are participating in the coming general election. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 13:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:SINGER as well basic WP:GNG - existing coverge is WP:ROTM — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 13:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Neutral I did the NPP review and noted at the time that I considered it to be an edge case regarding wp:notability. By "edge case" I meant the norms at AFD, not the most rigorous possible interpretations. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 14:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. ( non-admin closure) Geschichte ( talk) 17:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Unsupported Tyytthtyyyyuyj ( talk) 12:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails the general notability guideline but I would appreciate a sanity check from someone more experienced in videogames. – Tera tix ₵ 12:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails the notability guideline for companies. Just wanted a second or third pair of eyes on these sources [16] [17] [18] - I don't think any are suitably reliable or independent, but their coverage would be significant. – Tera tix ₵ 11:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Not notable. I have been unable to find enough references. TheSwamphen ( talk) 10:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 12:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
While airlines are generally notable, I'm not sure that the assumption holds for virtual airlines -- particularly with such thin sourcing. Avgeekamfot ( talk) 09:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Sources are all just database entries. No evidence of notability. Not eligible for proposed deletion due to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dyfuca * Pppery * it has begun... 15:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 17:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep without prejudice against renomination in three months if sourcing isn't improved. Owen× ☎ 11:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. Previously deleted via AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beenish Chohan — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 17:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Renowned actress of Pakistan's showbiz industry. This, combined with other citations in the article, move me to keeping the article. By way of aside, the text of the OP is nearly identical to that of multiple other AfDs Saqib has nominated (examples: [19] [20] [21]. While this behavior seems to be out of good faith concern for the benefit of the project, I'm starting to worry that some of these AfDs are veering into low-effort WP:IDONTLIKEIT territory. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 21:21, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Nominator and Mccapra offer the most persuasive P&G-related arguments, which have not been adequately refuted. Daniel ( talk) 11:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
As noted in WP:NPOL and WP:NSUBPOL, Wikipedia doesn't normally consider municipal councillors notable enough for a separate article, unless they've received significant press coverage in that role. The rest of his roles have been low-to-mid-level party leader jobs and a political appointment as chair of Skill Development Board, Government of Rajasthan. No significant coverage of him per WP:GNG or WP:BIO in reliable secondary sources; what I can find on him in a WP:BEFORE search in English and Hindi (रामगोपाल सुथार) is routine coverage of his recent appointment as chair, and some WP:PRIMARY source quotes from his speeches. Wikishovel ( talk) 17:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. However note it is already at Death of Umm Fahad Star Mississippi 12:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
A Iraqi TikTok personality who was recently shot. Seems to lack any notability or sources while alive, a violation of WP:VICTIM and WP:GNG. BlakeIsHereStudios ( talk | contributions) 21:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't usually think Internet "personalities" are worth the time of day. However, she seems noteworthy as it further highlights the ludicrous things that people will fall foul of the morality police in the middle east. Salty1984 ( talk) 23:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. The concerns raised about how the article is currently written are valid and need to be addressed editorially, but there's no consensus that they amount to a need for draftification. Owen× ☎ 13:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
This article is largely primary sources and WP:SYNTH of these sources. The first half is mostly just explianing what hyperlinks and framing is (mostly unnecessary WP:HOWTO), and the 2nd half largely acknowledges there really aren't copyright issues in US/Germany and other contexts. Why does this even exist? ZimZalaBim talk 19:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The issues about linking and framing have become so intertwined under copyright law that it is impractical to attempt to address them separately. As will appear, some decisions confuse them with one another, while other decisions involve and therefore address both.Likewise, this section is 100% OR:
Related issues arise from use of inline links (also called image-source or img-src links because the HTML code begins with "img src=") on Web pages. An inline link places material — usually an image such as a JPEG or GIF — from a distant website into the Web page being viewed. For example, the adjacent image is the seal of the USPTO, as shown on some of its pages at the USPTO website.Additionally, the "History of copyright litigation in field" section is also OR, as it lists several cases without providing reliable secondary sources that establish that the cases listed are significant and provides unsourced analysis of the state of the law. Several of the sections lack citations and make arguments, rather than describe what RSes say about this topic. We should not allow an article that draws legal conclusions to remain in mainspace without adequate sourcing; this would be uncontroversial if the article had MEDRS issues and the standard should be the same when we have legal information on wiki. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 14:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: relist due to an even split between keep and draft
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of radio stations in Pennsylvania. Liz Read! Talk! 17:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Not many articles have been attempted to be
prodded three times; in that sense alone, this AfD is long overdue. The article itself is a remnant of the looser standards in this topic area in the 2000s, but according to
the talk page there was a failed prod that was followed by an
A7 speedy deletion in 2007. It was recreated in 2009; a 2010 prod tagging was contested because of the prior article. (The contesting rationale notes that at the time, licensed radio stations are generally held to be notable
, but with the caveat that
consensus can change. In this topic area, that happened with this
2021 RfC; we now require
significant coverage and cannot source solely to FCC records and other databases.) I just had to procedurally contest a third prod because of the prior prods. I had been considering a redirect to the
list of radio stations in Pennsylvania as an
alternative to deletion, and I still think that is the best course of action (I do not support retaining the article as it is), but the triple-prod means this is as much a procedural nomination as anything else.
WCQuidditch
☎
✎ 19:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Curbon7 ( talk) 20:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPROF. Notability is a bit shaky here. I found a review of her work at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071020600906925, but I doubt it that is enough, I am really more inclined to combine this and several other things to establish the notability of this professor though, if anyone can help. Her Dean-ship doesn’t count, Joukowsky Family Dissertation Award does not appear to be a notable one, etc. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 09:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cotabato City#Education. ✗ plicit 13:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Notability is in question. Could not find reliable sources that sufficiently cover this school. Sanglahi86 ( talk) 09:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. The Keep arguments, while thoroughly researched, do not address the P&G-based issues raised by the Delete views. Owen× ☎ 13:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:BOOK, only 5 citations in google scholar, none of which are reviews and 3 of which are by the author himself. Appears to be a vanity page. Psychastes ( talk) 17:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The book is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools, colleges, universities or post-graduate programs. Toh59, 50.78.191.225, if you are able to provide syllabi or course listings of classes at multiple schools which have used this book, that would provide a rationale to keep the article. ~ L 🌸 ( talk) 02:29, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoris
talk! 09:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Bartlett's doctoral dissertation A Relativistic Theory of Phenomenological Constitution: A Self-referential, Transcendental Approach to Conceptual Pathology. This work presents within a phenomenological framework a logically compelling method that makes it possible to identify and correct conceptual transgressions that are self-undermining. This is the first work in which Bartlett describes the project of a "critique of impure reason."There are two footnotes here - both to the dissertation itself. There is no secondary source linking the dissertation to the book that is the subject of the article; the article isn't even citing Critique of Impuree Reason itself for the idea that this book grew out of these sources. Much of the rest of the article is only sourced to the book itself, and has strongly non-npov phrases like
the book proposes a new and revisionary philosophical understanding. The entire last section appears to be back-cover blurbs and other marketing material - these are not acceptable for wikipedia articles on books.
The result was keep. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 08:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
This does not appear to be a notable person. The article lists he is a history professor and that he appeared before a Congressional committee (the cited source for the latter is about a completely different person and does not mention him at all, so I am not sure this is correct). He is not a public figure, not well known, nor an especially prominent scholar. SantasLittleHelper123 ( talk) 08:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NLIST - I cannot find any independent reliable sources talking about this set of rolling stock as a group. The current sources are all self-published and of questionable reliability. A simplified, well-sourced table at Portland and Western Railroad that simply lists the quantity of each locomotive class would be more appropriate. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 07:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. The topic is an award given by a local newspaper. The contents is a list of recipients, and the sourcing is just about recipients of it. Nothing approaching even 1/4 of GNG coverage of the topic. North8000 ( talk) 13:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to nobody but the small minority of ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are announcements and does not help to assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Unref BLP; I couldn't find sources to establish she can meet WP:NACTOR / WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 15:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
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! 06:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Failure of WP:ORG; the article subject is a small, non-notable organisation. The article has been unsourced for over a decade. I could not find any reliable sources in English, and a translation of the name to Spanish yielded no results either. Yue 🌙 04:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to List of Doctor Who supporting characters. I'm not seeing any clear SIGCOV; all sources presented have been rebutted as insufficient. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 08:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable character, incredibly minor side character who appears as in three episodes. Fails WP:NCHARACTER and GNG Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
seen in their fan-generated reviews and creative productions), establishing the character's real-world notability. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 09:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to SM Supermalls#Locations in a reduced state. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Article is pretty much an apparent violation of NOTDIRECTORY, containing nothing more than a laundry list of SM Supermalls and their branches. If people really needed a directory, it can easily be found on the company's own website. The article already needed a massive clean-up by removing a lot of those supposed proposed and future malls without verifiable and independent sources.
Not proposing yet to remove the other notable SM Supermalls that have own separate articles (such as SM North EDSA, Megamall, Mall of Asia, etc). GrayFullbuster ( talk) 05:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
If I may add, a large chunk (if not majority of the sources) are from the corporation SM Prime Holdings itself, not necessarily independent. If not delete, I at least propose that it be re-directed back to the main SM Supermalls article. GrayFullbuster ( talk) 06:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NOTABILITY, this is a relatively new and regional political party that has never had a Lok Sabha member outside the state of Punjab. Even the larger, national and older mainstream political parties like the Indian National Congress, the Bharatiya Janata Party, and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) don't have the list of their Lok Sabha members here. — Hemant Dabral ( 📞 • ✒) 05:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Daniel ( talk) 11:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The article states they have 375 students, which is not a university. Many of the claims look too much, and none are verified. From their own web page the number of faculty is very small. Making a Beowulf cluster is not notable. More significant coverage is needed, this fails almost everything. Ldm1954 ( talk) 00:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy based input would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 02:27, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist for consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2023#April. Liz Read! Talk! 07:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
All the sources provided are from the time of event. No lasting coverage or impact to meet WP:EVENT. Whilst it may be terrorism, the sources do not definitively establish that. LibStar ( talk) 02:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 04:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:35, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP. Insufficient independent significant coverage. Uhooep ( talk) 08:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 01:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 04:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:35, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Article is a collection of 77 unsourced genealogies, with four footnotes. There is probably a notable list for this topic, but in its current state, WP:TNT is needed to make room; if all the unsourced genealogy material was removed, there would a a title and categories. Wikipedia is not a genealogy site. // Timothy :: talk 13:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 03:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 11:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Non- notable – many MP3 players that have been reviewed by "big" magazine websites like CNET do not (and should not) have their own articles. The articles nominated just contain technical specification of the product (or products, if you consider them to be separate).
The only reason for notability seems to be the claim that this is the "world's smallest" MP3 player, but the citation for that goes to a PCMag page which says "... billed as the "world's smallest" digital audio player, and we're pretty sure that's true" which is not any form of proof of the claim. Furthermore, "billed" seems to imply that these are the words of the manufacturer only, and indeed I have not been able to find any sort of official confirmation of the claim. AlexGallon ( talk) 21:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 03:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Animonsta Studios#Filmography. Owen× ☎ 13:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed during NPP. This is basically a catalog of a particular company's products. AFD nomination per no GNG sourcing of the topic per se and numerous wp:not issues. North8000 ( talk) 22:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
a catalog of a particular company's productsand I have added more sources. Someonewhoisusinginternet ( talk) 08:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Deleting rather than redirecting as there are no RS presented that indicate "gating" is a common term for detention in any area. No prejudice against someone creating the redirect if sources are found. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
seems to be just a dictionary definition Chidgk1 ( talk) 19:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
2008-08 (closed as ✓ keep)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Kennedys Law. Daniel ( talk) 10:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Unclear that notability has been established. Beland ( talk) 04:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Kennedys Law, also agree, don't think the sourcing for the redirect target meets NCORP either but that isn't the topic at AfD. HighKing ++ 12:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
The only reliable source for this fishing ship / unarmed military transport ship is a massive 10-book encyclopedia of all German warships no matter how small or insignificant. The other source, netmarine.net, is more of a large hobby site / semi wiki than anything else ("Si vous souhaitez compléter ces pages par des récits, illustrations ou autres documents, écrivez nous."). Fram ( talk) 07:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
fishing ship / unarmed transport ship, is technically correct but is a misleading strawman. I'm not arguing for or against deletion because I don't know if there is a separate method for assessing the notability of ships, but that statement just irked me. Curbon7 ( talk) 09:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎ 17:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A "no consensus, leaning keep" closure was overturned per
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 May 9
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
* Pppery *
it has begun... 17:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Slim participation, but the author appears to agree so not calling this Soft Star Mississippi 11:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The entire article is original research, specifically
WP:SYNTH. There are many instances of stating opinions as facts (
WP:VOICE), e.g., "The roots of current Russian youth culture can be traced back to ancient Russia, but more readily apparent signs of modern Russian youth culture are due to the reactionary influence because of both the Soviet Union's formation and its dissolution"
, and riddled with
weasel words, e.g., "Some observers noted what they described as a "generational struggle" among Russians"
. Generally, these are not the basis for an article to be deleted when the article can be fixed or tagged, but the idea of the article itself is based on collating different sources to present a personal reflection, i.e.,
Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought.
Pleas note that the sources cited mostly do not support claims being asserted, with the statement being more of a conjecture rather than an encyclopaedic one.
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 13:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:16, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 04:24, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Apparently a short-lived 4th class post office in Mr. Runyan's store, the latter being the only thing approaching a substantial mention of the place. GHits are all clickbait, fed gazetteer listings, or Google's AI throwing out every Indiana history book in an attempt to offer something relevant. THe map location given is obviously wrong, but even the more likely spot a bit to the east has almost nothing there. Mangoe ( talk) 04:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 04:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Duplicated content of List of Clube de Regatas do Flamengo players, which is more developed and properly referenced. Svartner ( talk) 04:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was Merger without tags since Canada convoy protest class action lawsuit, Canada_convoy_protest#Lawsuits have similar arguments behind them. Note Freedom Convoy... is a redirect so not viable as a target. Editors can discuss the best target without a further relist. No case has been made for why the content cannot be retained as there aren't BLP or CV issues, just that it should not be a standalone. Star Mississippi 11:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Pretty clear
WP:BLP1E as this person is only notable for post-event legalities regarding the
Canada convoy protest. All sources in the article and found in a
WP:BEFORE check are in regards to the protest. Subject has otherwise demonstrated a consistent pattern of
low-profile activity
, while the article has been repeatedly vandalized in
attack-page style. Pinging @
Bueller 007: who initially raised BLP1E concerns. ―
"Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 03:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard ( talk) 09:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)When the role played by an individual in the event is less significant, and little or no other information is available to use in the writing of a balanced biography, an independent article may not be needed. That person should be covered in an article regarding the event, and the person's name should be redirected to it.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting because although there is a consensus that this shouldn't be a standalone article, there are several different target articles suggested here. Can we narrow this down to one to Redirect or Merge to?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
"...on behalf of downtown Ottawa residents over continuous air horn and train horn noise."and her specific testimony (paragraph four) is not relevant when looked at in the context of the article (it's obvious and well-sourced that Ottawa residents experienced varying levels of distress during the event).
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 04:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
This exact page already exists at Treatment of women by the Taliban. Noorullah ( talk) 03:42, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 04:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet GNG and no longer meets NMMA under its revised criteria Nswix ( talk) 03:21, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 04:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The most I found was three sentences of coverage here, but no sustained or in-depth coverage. JTtheOG ( talk) 03:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. A reminder to look for foreign language sources when appropriate in nominator's BEFORE. Liz Read! Talk! 02:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFILM Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. If an editor wants to create a redirect, feel free to do so. Liz Read! Talk! 02:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
See Wikipedia_talk:List_of_hoaxes_on_Wikipedia#Kalloor (" the place in Tamil Nadu, India, where the Apostle Thomas, one of the 12 disciples of Jesus, is believed to have been killed"). Possible hoax, and unreferenced. Fails WP:V. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Let'srun ( talk) 01:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTSPERSON Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
This is not related to the well known plumbing company, but a not so commonly known specialty business who makes laboratory test equipment and offer test services to the oil and gas industry. I see articles authored by "Dr. Raj Shah is a Director at Koehler Instrument Company in New York, where he has worked for the last 28 years." but I'm not seeing much coverage on the company in news or books and does not appear to pass WP:NCORP Graywalls ( talk) 00:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
![]() |
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 22:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet GNG, no coverage in secondary sources. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 23:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Corrugated fiberboard. Liz Read! Talk! 22:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Appears to be just a stage in the production of corrugated fiberboard. The picture at the top of both articles is identical, just with different captions. Article is unreferenced and includes two citation needed tags. Could possibly be merged with corrugated fiberboard rather than deleted, but does not appear to me to add anything not already in that article. Adam Black talk • contributions 23:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards. Liz Read! Talk! 22:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Main page Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards exists which is also likely not notable so not seeing how this would meet notability guidelines. Cannot find enough coverage to establish it for this specific year. Will likely add the other years as a global discussion as well. CNMall41 ( talk) 22:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 22:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
A nice little bit of WP:SYNTH going on here, as the cite for the origin of the name (which has the wrong page number, BTW) doesn't mention this town, and Baker gives a completely different origin story for the township name and says this place was named after it. Anyway, we have another "no there there" issue. I'm not confident that this was a town per se. Mangoe ( talk) 22:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Sushma Swaraj#Personal life. Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Not elected in any office. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 22:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Hans-Joachim Roedelius. Liz Read! Talk! 22:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Rejected PROD. I initially PRODded due to a lack of reliable sourcing on Google and a total lack of sourcing in the article; the PROD was removed by the same person who added the discogs link. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 21:19, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. If an editor wants to work on this article as a draft, let me know. Liz Read! Talk! 21:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Subject fails WP:GNG: this is a fictional character from a non-notable book; a search finds no significant coverage in independent reliable sources; article was created by the book author against policy on WP:PROMO and self-promotion. — cactuswriter (talk) 21:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Rugby player who played a handful of games 7 years ago and hasn't returned to the sport since. The subject fails WP:GNG as the closest to WP:SIGCOV I found was this transactional announcement. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 21:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Essentially a conspiracy fork ( WP:POVFORK) that this person's suicide was either faked, a murder, due to a love triangle or due to demonic possession. Leslie Cheung#Death and legacy already covers what needs to be said on the subject. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 20:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep the content. This does not preclude a rescope, redirect or rename to be about the Garage. A consensus to delete is not going to emerge here Star Mississippi 02:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The article only has one source that says it's a populated place (GNIS, source 1). GNIS is not considered reliable by the Wikipedia community for the classification of places. The Second source is a coat hanger for the garage. Unfortunately, notability of the Garage is not transferable per WP:GNG. Both commonly used Washington place name books don't list this place
[1]
[2]. The Washington newspapers contain articles about a farming district named cloverland and state that it is the farmland surrounded by the forks of Asotin creek. Basically, Orchards
[3]. There are a couple of google hits implying it's a town, but looking at the actual sources, you see that it's just a rural area. This source, helps by explaining that it was the name of the voting precinct at one time
[4]. There is a website claiming it's a ghost town that looks convincing but it is copied from one of the sources that misrepresented the place, and there was only a cemetery and a garage which isn't the makings of a town. It also uses several pictures of the garage from different angles to make it look like there are more buildings. The fruit operation mentioned in the newspapers failed to pan out, and the area became wheat fields instead of a town. That Garage seems to be all that was ever there. Basically, reliable sources say it was a failed orchard development, that got converted to wheat fields, and there may have been some plans for a town that didn't work out.
James.folsom (
talk) 20:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
@ Maile66:: FYI we have found that GNIS is reliable for names and usually locations of places, but not for their character. See WP:GNIS for the gory details. Mangoe ( talk) 14:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Let'srun ( talk) 20:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The disambiguation page fails WP:DAB as it only lists one topic and not many topics, thus not making it a valid DAB. It's also a good idea to delete the dab pages that redirect to that page as well. kpgamingz ( rant me) 19:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough in-depth coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 19:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Let'srun ( talk) 20:30, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Falls under WP:TRIVIA and possibly WP:FAN. Also, fails WP:V. kpgamingz ( rant me) 18:58, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
References
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! 21:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All that came up were trivial mentions ( 1, 2, 3, etc.) JTtheOG ( talk) 18:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Namibia national rugby union players. Liz Read! Talk! 21:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a Namibian rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The most I found was a handful of sentences here after being named his club's player of the year, but no sustained or in-depth coverage. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC) Changing my recommendation to Redirect to List of Namibia national rugby union players. JTtheOG ( talk) 16:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Not notable on its own; could be merged into another article; suggested by User:Sammi Brie Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 18:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Unnecessary fork. No secondary sources. Fails WP:GNG. Many of these articles have already been deleted, see AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dominica at the 2010 Commonwealth Games. AusLondonder ( talk) 17:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Mojo Hand ( talk) 20:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:NCORP/ WP:NBUILD/ WP:GNG. All coverage online is trivial. Can't find any reliable, independent in-depth sources on the subject. Clear friend a 💬 17:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 00:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails the notability guideline for people. Should have been deleted at the previous AfD four years ago. As one of the article's own sources reveals, the article was written by O'Connor's colleagues and the AfD was influenced by off-wiki canvassing. – Tera tix ₵ 16:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to Germantown Friends School as a natural ATD. Owen× ☎ 00:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails NLIST, sources not found showing this has been discussed as a group by independent reliable sources. // Timothy :: talk 15:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was Procedural close. This has been G5ed already. (non-admin closure) Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 01:32, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:NBOOK. All the sources I can find seem to be interviews and mainly focus on the author rather than the book. -- Ferien ( talk) 15:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. which does not preclude a talk page discussion to identify a target to which to merge Star Mississippi 02:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
An honorary consulate located in a residential house. No suitable secondary sources, only sources are a government diplomatic list and Embassypages.com. Fails WP:GNG. AusLondonder ( talk) 07:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We cannot close without consensus on a target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:58, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Owen× ☎ 00:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Despite the title the article is primarily about the representative office of Montserrat in London. Lacking secondary sources to demonstrate notability per WP:GNG. AusLondonder ( talk) 10:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 12:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:58, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Star Mississippi 02:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable mountain guiding company in Canada (per N:CORP). There are some scraps of articles in local old Canadian newspapers, but nothing nationally or internationally (and zero SIGCOV anywhere). Some famous Canadian climbers have worked there, but the company never appears in any of main climbing RS (per WP:NCLIMB). Article had a lot of unreferenced promotional material, which I removed, but ultimately it has no future on Wikipedia. Aszx5000 ( talk) 10:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are announcements and does not help to assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are announcments and does not help to assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 16:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, the only source is primary and does not help to assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Reason Sarcastathon ( talk) 08:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
it doesn’t meet the criteria for notability. 1. Out of 4 references, 2 are links to artist’s own pages. 2 are PR pieces. 2. They have never had any single or album chart in their home country or abroad. 3. Nor have they had a record certified as gold. 4. They’ve never ‘had important coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country’ 5. Not released any albums. 6. Hasn’t been a member of 2 or more notable groups. 7. Hasn’t become one of the most important representatives of a notable style or the most important of the local scene of a city 8 & 9. Hasn’t won any awards 10. Not made music for any notable other media 11. Hasn’t been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network 12. Nor have they been subject of any documentaries etc Sarcastathon ( talk) 08:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. I find the arguments to delete, especially the nomination and Mccapra, the most persuasive in this discussion. Would be open to draftying upon request. Daniel ( talk) 11:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
I know it is unusual to delete a University - but I cannot find any online information about the University (except the bare fact that it is on Yemeni University lists - although I am not sure how old these lists are). It appears no longer to have a website. Links are either not orking or provide no helpful info. No obvious lkinks to anything else. The wiki page suggests the unbioversity is strong in nutrition - but https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9517972/ suggests it is not on the 2022 list of Yemeni universities awarding decrees in nutrition. Perhaps it has changed its name or amalgamated? Newhaven lad ( talk) 09:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:51, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For policy based input. "It exists" is not a valid argument in favor of retention, especially when we haven't verified that.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The subject fails to meet the criteria outlined in both WP:JOURNALIST and WP:GNG. While the subject has received some press coverage, but it's too common for journalists to get some sort of press attention on every one of them. WP:ROTM coverage is not sufficient to pass WP:N — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 14:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Owen× ☎ 00:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The sources on this page almost all deal with WP:RAJ, with many of the sources (including Singh), tracing back to the Panth Prakash, which fails WP:RAJ. Some of these sources don't even state that such a thing happened, and nor do any other major sources regarding this campaign such as Hari Ram Gupta. Noorullah ( talk) 22:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 14:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Notability isn’t inherited. The father being an assembly member, herself being a candidate of a party for an election that is to come doesn’t qualify for NPOL. This is one of the many articles I’ve found about Indian politicians who are participating in the coming general election. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 13:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 14:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:SINGER as well basic WP:GNG - existing coverge is WP:ROTM — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 13:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Neutral I did the NPP review and noted at the time that I considered it to be an edge case regarding wp:notability. By "edge case" I meant the norms at AFD, not the most rigorous possible interpretations. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 14:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. ( non-admin closure) Geschichte ( talk) 17:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Unsupported Tyytthtyyyyuyj ( talk) 12:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails the general notability guideline but I would appreciate a sanity check from someone more experienced in videogames. – Tera tix ₵ 12:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails the notability guideline for companies. Just wanted a second or third pair of eyes on these sources [16] [17] [18] - I don't think any are suitably reliable or independent, but their coverage would be significant. – Tera tix ₵ 11:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 12:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Not notable. I have been unable to find enough references. TheSwamphen ( talk) 10:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 12:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
While airlines are generally notable, I'm not sure that the assumption holds for virtual airlines -- particularly with such thin sourcing. Avgeekamfot ( talk) 09:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Sources are all just database entries. No evidence of notability. Not eligible for proposed deletion due to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dyfuca * Pppery * it has begun... 15:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 17:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep without prejudice against renomination in three months if sourcing isn't improved. Owen× ☎ 11:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. Previously deleted via AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beenish Chohan — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 17:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Renowned actress of Pakistan's showbiz industry. This, combined with other citations in the article, move me to keeping the article. By way of aside, the text of the OP is nearly identical to that of multiple other AfDs Saqib has nominated (examples: [19] [20] [21]. While this behavior seems to be out of good faith concern for the benefit of the project, I'm starting to worry that some of these AfDs are veering into low-effort WP:IDONTLIKEIT territory. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 21:21, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Nominator and Mccapra offer the most persuasive P&G-related arguments, which have not been adequately refuted. Daniel ( talk) 11:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
As noted in WP:NPOL and WP:NSUBPOL, Wikipedia doesn't normally consider municipal councillors notable enough for a separate article, unless they've received significant press coverage in that role. The rest of his roles have been low-to-mid-level party leader jobs and a political appointment as chair of Skill Development Board, Government of Rajasthan. No significant coverage of him per WP:GNG or WP:BIO in reliable secondary sources; what I can find on him in a WP:BEFORE search in English and Hindi (रामगोपाल सुथार) is routine coverage of his recent appointment as chair, and some WP:PRIMARY source quotes from his speeches. Wikishovel ( talk) 17:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. However note it is already at Death of Umm Fahad Star Mississippi 12:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
A Iraqi TikTok personality who was recently shot. Seems to lack any notability or sources while alive, a violation of WP:VICTIM and WP:GNG. BlakeIsHereStudios ( talk | contributions) 21:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't usually think Internet "personalities" are worth the time of day. However, she seems noteworthy as it further highlights the ludicrous things that people will fall foul of the morality police in the middle east. Salty1984 ( talk) 23:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. The concerns raised about how the article is currently written are valid and need to be addressed editorially, but there's no consensus that they amount to a need for draftification. Owen× ☎ 13:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
This article is largely primary sources and WP:SYNTH of these sources. The first half is mostly just explianing what hyperlinks and framing is (mostly unnecessary WP:HOWTO), and the 2nd half largely acknowledges there really aren't copyright issues in US/Germany and other contexts. Why does this even exist? ZimZalaBim talk 19:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The issues about linking and framing have become so intertwined under copyright law that it is impractical to attempt to address them separately. As will appear, some decisions confuse them with one another, while other decisions involve and therefore address both.Likewise, this section is 100% OR:
Related issues arise from use of inline links (also called image-source or img-src links because the HTML code begins with "img src=") on Web pages. An inline link places material — usually an image such as a JPEG or GIF — from a distant website into the Web page being viewed. For example, the adjacent image is the seal of the USPTO, as shown on some of its pages at the USPTO website.Additionally, the "History of copyright litigation in field" section is also OR, as it lists several cases without providing reliable secondary sources that establish that the cases listed are significant and provides unsourced analysis of the state of the law. Several of the sections lack citations and make arguments, rather than describe what RSes say about this topic. We should not allow an article that draws legal conclusions to remain in mainspace without adequate sourcing; this would be uncontroversial if the article had MEDRS issues and the standard should be the same when we have legal information on wiki. voorts ( talk/ contributions) 14:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: relist due to an even split between keep and draft
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of radio stations in Pennsylvania. Liz Read! Talk! 17:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Not many articles have been attempted to be
prodded three times; in that sense alone, this AfD is long overdue. The article itself is a remnant of the looser standards in this topic area in the 2000s, but according to
the talk page there was a failed prod that was followed by an
A7 speedy deletion in 2007. It was recreated in 2009; a 2010 prod tagging was contested because of the prior article. (The contesting rationale notes that at the time, licensed radio stations are generally held to be notable
, but with the caveat that
consensus can change. In this topic area, that happened with this
2021 RfC; we now require
significant coverage and cannot source solely to FCC records and other databases.) I just had to procedurally contest a third prod because of the prior prods. I had been considering a redirect to the
list of radio stations in Pennsylvania as an
alternative to deletion, and I still think that is the best course of action (I do not support retaining the article as it is), but the triple-prod means this is as much a procedural nomination as anything else.
WCQuidditch
☎
✎ 19:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Guerillero
Parlez Moi 09:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Curbon7 ( talk) 20:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPROF. Notability is a bit shaky here. I found a review of her work at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071020600906925, but I doubt it that is enough, I am really more inclined to combine this and several other things to establish the notability of this professor though, if anyone can help. Her Dean-ship doesn’t count, Joukowsky Family Dissertation Award does not appear to be a notable one, etc. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 09:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Cotabato City#Education. ✗ plicit 13:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Notability is in question. Could not find reliable sources that sufficiently cover this school. Sanglahi86 ( talk) 09:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. The Keep arguments, while thoroughly researched, do not address the P&G-based issues raised by the Delete views. Owen× ☎ 13:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:BOOK, only 5 citations in google scholar, none of which are reviews and 3 of which are by the author himself. Appears to be a vanity page. Psychastes ( talk) 17:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The book is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools, colleges, universities or post-graduate programs. Toh59, 50.78.191.225, if you are able to provide syllabi or course listings of classes at multiple schools which have used this book, that would provide a rationale to keep the article. ~ L 🌸 ( talk) 02:29, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoris
talk! 09:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Bartlett's doctoral dissertation A Relativistic Theory of Phenomenological Constitution: A Self-referential, Transcendental Approach to Conceptual Pathology. This work presents within a phenomenological framework a logically compelling method that makes it possible to identify and correct conceptual transgressions that are self-undermining. This is the first work in which Bartlett describes the project of a "critique of impure reason."There are two footnotes here - both to the dissertation itself. There is no secondary source linking the dissertation to the book that is the subject of the article; the article isn't even citing Critique of Impuree Reason itself for the idea that this book grew out of these sources. Much of the rest of the article is only sourced to the book itself, and has strongly non-npov phrases like
the book proposes a new and revisionary philosophical understanding. The entire last section appears to be back-cover blurbs and other marketing material - these are not acceptable for wikipedia articles on books.
The result was keep. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 08:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
This does not appear to be a notable person. The article lists he is a history professor and that he appeared before a Congressional committee (the cited source for the latter is about a completely different person and does not mention him at all, so I am not sure this is correct). He is not a public figure, not well known, nor an especially prominent scholar. SantasLittleHelper123 ( talk) 08:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NLIST - I cannot find any independent reliable sources talking about this set of rolling stock as a group. The current sources are all self-published and of questionable reliability. A simplified, well-sourced table at Portland and Western Railroad that simply lists the quantity of each locomotive class would be more appropriate. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 07:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. The topic is an award given by a local newspaper. The contents is a list of recipients, and the sourcing is just about recipients of it. Nothing approaching even 1/4 of GNG coverage of the topic. North8000 ( talk) 13:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The most fancrufty list to appeal to nobody but the small minority of ardent fans. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are announcements and does not help to assert notability. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Unref BLP; I couldn't find sources to establish she can meet WP:NACTOR / WP:GNG. Boleyn ( talk) 15:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
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! 06:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Failure of WP:ORG; the article subject is a small, non-notable organisation. The article has been unsourced for over a decade. I could not find any reliable sources in English, and a translation of the name to Spanish yielded no results either. Yue 🌙 04:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to List of Doctor Who supporting characters. I'm not seeing any clear SIGCOV; all sources presented have been rebutted as insufficient. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 08:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable character, incredibly minor side character who appears as in three episodes. Fails WP:NCHARACTER and GNG Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
seen in their fan-generated reviews and creative productions), establishing the character's real-world notability. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 09:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was merge to SM Supermalls#Locations in a reduced state. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Article is pretty much an apparent violation of NOTDIRECTORY, containing nothing more than a laundry list of SM Supermalls and their branches. If people really needed a directory, it can easily be found on the company's own website. The article already needed a massive clean-up by removing a lot of those supposed proposed and future malls without verifiable and independent sources.
Not proposing yet to remove the other notable SM Supermalls that have own separate articles (such as SM North EDSA, Megamall, Mall of Asia, etc). GrayFullbuster ( talk) 05:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
If I may add, a large chunk (if not majority of the sources) are from the corporation SM Prime Holdings itself, not necessarily independent. If not delete, I at least propose that it be re-directed back to the main SM Supermalls article. GrayFullbuster ( talk) 06:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NOTABILITY, this is a relatively new and regional political party that has never had a Lok Sabha member outside the state of Punjab. Even the larger, national and older mainstream political parties like the Indian National Congress, the Bharatiya Janata Party, and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) don't have the list of their Lok Sabha members here. — Hemant Dabral ( 📞 • ✒) 05:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Daniel ( talk) 11:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The article states they have 375 students, which is not a university. Many of the claims look too much, and none are verified. From their own web page the number of faculty is very small. Making a Beowulf cluster is not notable. More significant coverage is needed, this fails almost everything. Ldm1954 ( talk) 00:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy based input would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 02:27, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist for consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2023#April. Liz Read! Talk! 07:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
All the sources provided are from the time of event. No lasting coverage or impact to meet WP:EVENT. Whilst it may be terrorism, the sources do not definitively establish that. LibStar ( talk) 02:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 04:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:35, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 00:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP. Insufficient independent significant coverage. Uhooep ( talk) 08:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 01:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 04:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:35, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Article is a collection of 77 unsourced genealogies, with four footnotes. There is probably a notable list for this topic, but in its current state, WP:TNT is needed to make room; if all the unsourced genealogy material was removed, there would a a title and categories. Wikipedia is not a genealogy site. // Timothy :: talk 13:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 14:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 03:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Star Mississippi 11:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Non- notable – many MP3 players that have been reviewed by "big" magazine websites like CNET do not (and should not) have their own articles. The articles nominated just contain technical specification of the product (or products, if you consider them to be separate).
The only reason for notability seems to be the claim that this is the "world's smallest" MP3 player, but the citation for that goes to a PCMag page which says "... billed as the "world's smallest" digital audio player, and we're pretty sure that's true" which is not any form of proof of the claim. Furthermore, "billed" seems to imply that these are the words of the manufacturer only, and indeed I have not been able to find any sort of official confirmation of the claim. AlexGallon ( talk) 21:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 03:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Animonsta Studios#Filmography. Owen× ☎ 13:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed during NPP. This is basically a catalog of a particular company's products. AFD nomination per no GNG sourcing of the topic per se and numerous wp:not issues. North8000 ( talk) 22:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
a catalog of a particular company's productsand I have added more sources. Someonewhoisusinginternet ( talk) 08:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Deleting rather than redirecting as there are no RS presented that indicate "gating" is a common term for detention in any area. No prejudice against someone creating the redirect if sources are found. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
seems to be just a dictionary definition Chidgk1 ( talk) 19:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
2008-08 (closed as ✓ keep)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Kennedys Law. Daniel ( talk) 10:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Unclear that notability has been established. Beland ( talk) 04:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Kennedys Law, also agree, don't think the sourcing for the redirect target meets NCORP either but that isn't the topic at AfD. HighKing ++ 12:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
The only reliable source for this fishing ship / unarmed military transport ship is a massive 10-book encyclopedia of all German warships no matter how small or insignificant. The other source, netmarine.net, is more of a large hobby site / semi wiki than anything else ("Si vous souhaitez compléter ces pages par des récits, illustrations ou autres documents, écrivez nous."). Fram ( talk) 07:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
fishing ship / unarmed transport ship, is technically correct but is a misleading strawman. I'm not arguing for or against deletion because I don't know if there is a separate method for assessing the notability of ships, but that statement just irked me. Curbon7 ( talk) 09:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎ 17:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A "no consensus, leaning keep" closure was overturned per
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 May 9
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
* Pppery *
it has begun... 17:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. Slim participation, but the author appears to agree so not calling this Soft Star Mississippi 11:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The entire article is original research, specifically
WP:SYNTH. There are many instances of stating opinions as facts (
WP:VOICE), e.g., "The roots of current Russian youth culture can be traced back to ancient Russia, but more readily apparent signs of modern Russian youth culture are due to the reactionary influence because of both the Soviet Union's formation and its dissolution"
, and riddled with
weasel words, e.g., "Some observers noted what they described as a "generational struggle" among Russians"
. Generally, these are not the basis for an article to be deleted when the article can be fixed or tagged, but the idea of the article itself is based on collating different sources to present a personal reflection, i.e.,
Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought.
Pleas note that the sources cited mostly do not support claims being asserted, with the statement being more of a conjecture rather than an encyclopaedic one.
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 13:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:16, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 04:24, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Apparently a short-lived 4th class post office in Mr. Runyan's store, the latter being the only thing approaching a substantial mention of the place. GHits are all clickbait, fed gazetteer listings, or Google's AI throwing out every Indiana history book in an attempt to offer something relevant. THe map location given is obviously wrong, but even the more likely spot a bit to the east has almost nothing there. Mangoe ( talk) 04:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 04:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Duplicated content of List of Clube de Regatas do Flamengo players, which is more developed and properly referenced. Svartner ( talk) 04:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was Merger without tags since Canada convoy protest class action lawsuit, Canada_convoy_protest#Lawsuits have similar arguments behind them. Note Freedom Convoy... is a redirect so not viable as a target. Editors can discuss the best target without a further relist. No case has been made for why the content cannot be retained as there aren't BLP or CV issues, just that it should not be a standalone. Star Mississippi 11:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Pretty clear
WP:BLP1E as this person is only notable for post-event legalities regarding the
Canada convoy protest. All sources in the article and found in a
WP:BEFORE check are in regards to the protest. Subject has otherwise demonstrated a consistent pattern of
low-profile activity
, while the article has been repeatedly vandalized in
attack-page style. Pinging @
Bueller 007: who initially raised BLP1E concerns. ―
"Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 03:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard ( talk) 09:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)When the role played by an individual in the event is less significant, and little or no other information is available to use in the writing of a balanced biography, an independent article may not be needed. That person should be covered in an article regarding the event, and the person's name should be redirected to it.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting because although there is a consensus that this shouldn't be a standalone article, there are several different target articles suggested here. Can we narrow this down to one to Redirect or Merge to?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 04:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
"...on behalf of downtown Ottawa residents over continuous air horn and train horn noise."and her specific testimony (paragraph four) is not relevant when looked at in the context of the article (it's obvious and well-sourced that Ottawa residents experienced varying levels of distress during the event).
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 04:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
This exact page already exists at Treatment of women by the Taliban. Noorullah ( talk) 03:42, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 04:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet GNG and no longer meets NMMA under its revised criteria Nswix ( talk) 03:21, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. ✗ plicit 04:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The most I found was three sentences of coverage here, but no sustained or in-depth coverage. JTtheOG ( talk) 03:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. A reminder to look for foreign language sources when appropriate in nominator's BEFORE. Liz Read! Talk! 02:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFILM Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was delete. If an editor wants to create a redirect, feel free to do so. Liz Read! Talk! 02:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
See Wikipedia_talk:List_of_hoaxes_on_Wikipedia#Kalloor (" the place in Tamil Nadu, India, where the Apostle Thomas, one of the 12 disciples of Jesus, is believed to have been killed"). Possible hoax, and unreferenced. Fails WP:V. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Let'srun ( talk) 01:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTSPERSON Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
This is not related to the well known plumbing company, but a not so commonly known specialty business who makes laboratory test equipment and offer test services to the oil and gas industry. I see articles authored by "Dr. Raj Shah is a Director at Koehler Instrument Company in New York, where he has worked for the last 28 years." but I'm not seeing much coverage on the company in news or books and does not appear to pass WP:NCORP Graywalls ( talk) 00:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC)