 | Points of interest related to
Arizona on Wikipedia: Outline – History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – To-do |
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Arizona. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at
WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at
WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
- Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Arizona|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove links to other discussions ( prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Arizona.
- Further information
- For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:| watch |
Stuart Goodman
- Stuart Goodman ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Essentially a resume in prose form. He's held some sub-cabinet state government posts and been the Arizona lobbyist for some companies. No notable accomplishments in those positions are listed. List of military service, education, job history. The references are all directory type listings confirming he held those positions but nothing more, except one ~100 word prose article saying his firm was hired to represent Apple. This wouldn't seem to meet the "significant coverage" standard of WP:GNG.
Article was created 10 years ago by an account that never did anything else, and hasn't gotten any content edits or inbound links in a decade. Those are not criteria for deletion, of course, but they do suggest that there's just nothing to add to take this beyond prose resume form into encyclopedia article. Which is what is suggested by the apparent lack of sources with non-routine coverage which could be cited. Here2rewrite ( talk) 01:25, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, no indicia of encyclopedic notability here. BD2412 T 01:35, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Most of what is claimed in the lead, was during his late 20s-early 30s. He was 23 when he was "Associate Director of Government Affairs for the Arizona Multihousing Association" Most likely titles that were non-notable - and possible volunteer - positions. User:Arizonapolitical never wrote anything else for Wikipedia, but this article. Possibly the same person as the article subject. — Maile ( talk) 02:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete No significant coverage (but a bunch of quotes and cursory mentions) in the Arizona Republic. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete No SIGCOV, no independent, secondary, reliable sources. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 03:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Politics, and Arizona. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Just directories/lists as references. Three of them don't even work anymore. Sadustu Tau ( talk) 21:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Conor O'Callaghan (businessman)
- Conor O'Callaghan (businessman) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable congressional candidate. He received some attention from national outlets right when he announced his campaign in August of last year, but that's to be expected of any candidate in a competitive House race. From what I can see, he's received zero national news coverage since September 2023. All of the articles cited on the page are campaign-related, and I can't find any non-campaign-related coverage of him on Google from any time, so I don't think he meets GNG. Very much reminiscent of Kellen Curry, another 2024 congressional candidate who got national news attention right when he launched and promptly faded from view. I'd support a redirect to 2024 United States House of Representatives elections in Arizona#District 1. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 02:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Ireland, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support either redirect or outright deleteing, as even with the bit of coverage he has received more recently (he appears to be running a generally more negative campaign rel. to the other 5 in the race) I don't believe he meets notability standards. Buggie111 ( talk) 14:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: not meeting criminal notability; simply being a political candidate isn't notable. Can be re-created if he wins the political seat, otherwise, not meeting notability. Oaktree b ( talk) 14:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect/Weak keep: I support a redirect to
2024 United States House of Representatives elections in Arizona. That being said, while he doesn't meet
WP:NPOL for being a candidate, it's possible he meets
WP:BASIC. What makes this different from other cases, in my opinion, is that the candidature coverage is not
WP:MILL. He's received a significant amount of coverage that specifically goes into detail about his career before running for office. For example,
this Bloomberg article and
this MSNBC article.
C F A
💬 01:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that the national coverage of him isn't run of the mill, but the problem is that the only non-ROTM coverage he ever received came right when he announced his campaign. As I said in the nomination, he's received no national attention since September 2023. It seems like he made a splash right when he announced because he's running in a competitive congressional race, but I don't think that translates to lasting notability. If he loses this race, will anyone be searching his name in 5-10 years? BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 04:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hi! I made this article...I lost my login for AZVoter so I'll go in my thought process here. Conor has the most cash on hand out of any candidate other than the incumbent in this race. He is polling alright and has four endorsements from people in the US house of reps. So he definitely is getting national recognition. But you are correct, if he loses he will probably be irrelevant. The negative campaigning is something I wanted to add but this was my first article so I did not really know what to write about.
JustMadeThis4Discussion (
talk) 02:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Raising money and getting a couple endorsements from members of Congress is not what I meant by "national attention" (we're talking about news coverage here) and does not establish notability. See WP:NPOL. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 02:41, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Daniel Ruiz II
- Daniel Ruiz II ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Chiefs of staff do not count as a political office for purposes of NPOL, and it doesn't seem like there is sufficient coverage to meet the standards of WP:BASIC unfortunately. Deprod by Clearfrienda, not sure which sources they were referring to, perhaps the AP? Alpha3031 ( t • c) 15:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and Arizona. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 15:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: In cases where there is some substantial coverage I usually object with PRODs in case there's a chance they can be kept. In this case, there's this local 12news.com article and this ktar.com article which both go WP:INDEPTH. There are some less-significant mentions in this NYT article, this kold.com article, and this azcentral.com article. I'd lean towards delete but it's a close call. Clear friend a 💬 16:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
KLHU-CD
- KLHU-CD ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 17:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Arizona. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 17:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)- I have no idea why articles are deleted, but I found this article in “Edge” search and it provided the information I was looking for. If it had been deleted I would still be looking! The reason I use “Wikipedia” is I almost always find something about what I’m searching for and why I on an annual basis contribute to its support, Thank DWE! 172.56.84.213 ( talk) 00:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
List of stamp clubs and philatelic societies in the United States
- List of stamp clubs and philatelic societies in the United States ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Most likely fails WP:NLIST, consists of 60% red links. WP:NOTDIRECTORY also applies, and I didn't find WP:RS describing this list besides third-party directories. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 13:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:36, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Collapsed list of notified projects for AFD readability
|
|---|
|
- Comment The links I clicked on had no references at all, or none that would count as reliable sources. Didn't check all of them. Dream Focus 19:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Most of the listed clubs are local organizations which would be unlikely to satisfy the notability criteria of WP:ORG. Hence, this looks mostly like a directory, which Wikipedia isn't. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. This list is self-defining, and does not require extensive documentation. So far around twenty entries are individually notable, and the reasons suggested for deletion are not persuasive: 1) the number of redlinks is irrelevant; there is potential for expansion, and the list would be perfectly valid if the items were not linked, as long as it's possible to verify the existence of items that don't have their own articles; for this, third-party directories are fine. That said, some effort to document them is necessary, but fixing that is part of the normal editing process, not a valid reason for deletion. There is no deadline for locating sources.
- 2) none of the criteria of the cited WP:NOTDIRECTORY apply; this seems to be one of those policies that people cite because it sounds like it would apply, apparently without bothering to read and understand it. Specifically: this is not a "simple listing without contextual information"; the context is clearly given. It is not a list or repository of loosely associated topics; the items on the list are all closely connected by subject matter. It is not a cross-categorization. It has nothing to do with genealogy. It is not a program guide. It is not a business resource. WP:NOTDIRECTORY is about collections of information that have no encyclopedic value for readers; this list clearly has value. "This list is full of redlinks and doesn't have enough sources" is not a valid rationale for deletion. It's a reason to improve the list.
P Aculeius (
talk) 13:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
-
P Aculeius, those are all very good points, thanks for pointing them out. However, you have not addressed how this list meets
WP:NLIST, do you think you could explain how it would to justify a speedy keep, as the fact that the entries themselves are notable does not guaranty the list itself being notable? Cheers,
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 14:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Even if hypothetically NLIST was not met (which I believe it is), WP:LISTPURP suggests that there would still be other grounds to keep.
- As prodder and nom, you have not shown any evidence of having demonstrated WP:BEFORE due diligence. The plethora of Google results for searches like "stamp clubs in America" suggests that this was not done. It isn’t really the most GF behavior to simply, since the burden of proof generally lies with the “keep” side once process has begun, make a prod or AfD nomination without actually determining if there’s a prima facie case for a notability or verifiability challenge.
- Sorry for the sharpness, but sometimes it’s necessary.
- RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk) 07:41, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
-
P Aculeius, those are all very good points, thanks for pointing them out. However, you have not addressed how this list meets
WP:NLIST, do you think you could explain how it would to justify a speedy keep, as the fact that the entries themselves are notable does not guaranty the list itself being notable? Cheers,
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 14:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Strong keep as deprodder. In my view it meets WP:LISTPURP and WP:NLIST and I feel this is a commonsensical call. RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk) 07:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- delete I'm just not seeing this. The NY society's building is historic, but when you look at sources about these places, even the few with articles really don't seem notable. And anyway, what are the sources for this list? I'm looking at the listing from Linn's Stamp News, and it's far more complete and is up-to-date; it's also clear that most of the listings would never garner an article. I don't see the point of duplicating a not-very-useful subset of thei info (just the names), and once we go past that, we're in WP:NOTDIRECTORY territory. Mangoe ( talk) 02:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Raza Development Fund
- Raza Development Fund ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails GNG and NORG. Non-notable CFORK. Source eval:
| Comments | Source |
|---|---|
| Subject homepage, fails WP:IS | 1. "Homepage". Raza Development Fund. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
| Database profile, appears to be self sourced, fails WP:SIRS | 2. ^ "Raza Development Fund, Inc. - GuideStar Profile". www.guidestar.org. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
| Service provider page, appears to be self sourced, fails WP:SIRS | 3. ^ "Raza Development Fund, Inc". Housing Partnership Network. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
| Primary, fails WP:IS | 4. ^ "Annie Donovan". Raza Development Fund. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
| From prnewswire, promotional routine news, fails WP:SIRS | 5. ^ UnidosUS. "Raza Development Fund (RDF) names Annie Donovan as its new President and CEO". www.prnewswire.com. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
| Linkedin profile, fails WP:SIRS | LinkedIn". www.linkedin.com. 2023-05-10. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
BEFORE found nothing that meets WP:SIRS. No objection to a consensus redirect/merge of properly sourced content to UnidosUS (I would have boldly done so but it would have been reverted). // Timothy :: talk 22:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Arizona. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:36, 20 May 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
2008 Scottsdale mayoral election
- 2008 Scottsdale mayoral election ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Slightly more extensive than 2012 Scottsdale mayoral election. Still probably falls under WP:MILL. Okmrman ( talk) 23:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Okmrman ( talk) 23:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Arizona. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, Scottsdale is large enough, being one of the 100 largest cities in the United States that its elections are almost certainly notable. I'm not sure how someone can argue the politics of a large city like this one aren't at all notable.
- - Samoht27 ( talk) 19:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Not a particularly notable election (no non-local coverage, so WP:MILL), and only sourced to election results - fails GNG. SportingFlyer T· C 00:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 04:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - It stands alone as the only Scottsdale mayoral election listed in Wikipedia. You should also delete the categories only associated with it and not other elections - Category:Mayoral elections in Scottsdale, Arizona and Category:Government of Scottsdale, Arizona — Maile ( talk) 16:16, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
| Points of interest related to
Arizona on Wikipedia: Outline – History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – To-do |
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Arizona. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at
WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at
WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
- Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Arizona|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove links to other discussions ( prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Arizona.
- Further information
- For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:| watch |
Stuart Goodman
- Stuart Goodman ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Essentially a resume in prose form. He's held some sub-cabinet state government posts and been the Arizona lobbyist for some companies. No notable accomplishments in those positions are listed. List of military service, education, job history. The references are all directory type listings confirming he held those positions but nothing more, except one ~100 word prose article saying his firm was hired to represent Apple. This wouldn't seem to meet the "significant coverage" standard of WP:GNG.
Article was created 10 years ago by an account that never did anything else, and hasn't gotten any content edits or inbound links in a decade. Those are not criteria for deletion, of course, but they do suggest that there's just nothing to add to take this beyond prose resume form into encyclopedia article. Which is what is suggested by the apparent lack of sources with non-routine coverage which could be cited. Here2rewrite ( talk) 01:25, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, no indicia of encyclopedic notability here. BD2412 T 01:35, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Most of what is claimed in the lead, was during his late 20s-early 30s. He was 23 when he was "Associate Director of Government Affairs for the Arizona Multihousing Association" Most likely titles that were non-notable - and possible volunteer - positions. User:Arizonapolitical never wrote anything else for Wikipedia, but this article. Possibly the same person as the article subject. — Maile ( talk) 02:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete No significant coverage (but a bunch of quotes and cursory mentions) in the Arizona Republic. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete No SIGCOV, no independent, secondary, reliable sources. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 03:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Politics, and Arizona. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Just directories/lists as references. Three of them don't even work anymore. Sadustu Tau ( talk) 21:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Conor O'Callaghan (businessman)
- Conor O'Callaghan (businessman) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable congressional candidate. He received some attention from national outlets right when he announced his campaign in August of last year, but that's to be expected of any candidate in a competitive House race. From what I can see, he's received zero national news coverage since September 2023. All of the articles cited on the page are campaign-related, and I can't find any non-campaign-related coverage of him on Google from any time, so I don't think he meets GNG. Very much reminiscent of Kellen Curry, another 2024 congressional candidate who got national news attention right when he launched and promptly faded from view. I'd support a redirect to 2024 United States House of Representatives elections in Arizona#District 1. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 02:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Ireland, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support either redirect or outright deleteing, as even with the bit of coverage he has received more recently (he appears to be running a generally more negative campaign rel. to the other 5 in the race) I don't believe he meets notability standards. Buggie111 ( talk) 14:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: not meeting criminal notability; simply being a political candidate isn't notable. Can be re-created if he wins the political seat, otherwise, not meeting notability. Oaktree b ( talk) 14:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect/Weak keep: I support a redirect to
2024 United States House of Representatives elections in Arizona. That being said, while he doesn't meet
WP:NPOL for being a candidate, it's possible he meets
WP:BASIC. What makes this different from other cases, in my opinion, is that the candidature coverage is not
WP:MILL. He's received a significant amount of coverage that specifically goes into detail about his career before running for office. For example,
this Bloomberg article and
this MSNBC article.
C F A
💬 01:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that the national coverage of him isn't run of the mill, but the problem is that the only non-ROTM coverage he ever received came right when he announced his campaign. As I said in the nomination, he's received no national attention since September 2023. It seems like he made a splash right when he announced because he's running in a competitive congressional race, but I don't think that translates to lasting notability. If he loses this race, will anyone be searching his name in 5-10 years? BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 04:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hi! I made this article...I lost my login for AZVoter so I'll go in my thought process here. Conor has the most cash on hand out of any candidate other than the incumbent in this race. He is polling alright and has four endorsements from people in the US house of reps. So he definitely is getting national recognition. But you are correct, if he loses he will probably be irrelevant. The negative campaigning is something I wanted to add but this was my first article so I did not really know what to write about.
JustMadeThis4Discussion (
talk) 02:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Raising money and getting a couple endorsements from members of Congress is not what I meant by "national attention" (we're talking about news coverage here) and does not establish notability. See WP:NPOL. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 02:41, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Daniel Ruiz II
- Daniel Ruiz II ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Chiefs of staff do not count as a political office for purposes of NPOL, and it doesn't seem like there is sufficient coverage to meet the standards of WP:BASIC unfortunately. Deprod by Clearfrienda, not sure which sources they were referring to, perhaps the AP? Alpha3031 ( t • c) 15:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and Arizona. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 15:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: In cases where there is some substantial coverage I usually object with PRODs in case there's a chance they can be kept. In this case, there's this local 12news.com article and this ktar.com article which both go WP:INDEPTH. There are some less-significant mentions in this NYT article, this kold.com article, and this azcentral.com article. I'd lean towards delete but it's a close call. Clear friend a 💬 16:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
KLHU-CD
- KLHU-CD ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 17:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Arizona. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 17:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)- I have no idea why articles are deleted, but I found this article in “Edge” search and it provided the information I was looking for. If it had been deleted I would still be looking! The reason I use “Wikipedia” is I almost always find something about what I’m searching for and why I on an annual basis contribute to its support, Thank DWE! 172.56.84.213 ( talk) 00:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
List of stamp clubs and philatelic societies in the United States
- List of stamp clubs and philatelic societies in the United States ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Most likely fails WP:NLIST, consists of 60% red links. WP:NOTDIRECTORY also applies, and I didn't find WP:RS describing this list besides third-party directories. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 13:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:36, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Collapsed list of notified projects for AFD readability
|
|---|
|
- Comment The links I clicked on had no references at all, or none that would count as reliable sources. Didn't check all of them. Dream Focus 19:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Most of the listed clubs are local organizations which would be unlikely to satisfy the notability criteria of WP:ORG. Hence, this looks mostly like a directory, which Wikipedia isn't. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. This list is self-defining, and does not require extensive documentation. So far around twenty entries are individually notable, and the reasons suggested for deletion are not persuasive: 1) the number of redlinks is irrelevant; there is potential for expansion, and the list would be perfectly valid if the items were not linked, as long as it's possible to verify the existence of items that don't have their own articles; for this, third-party directories are fine. That said, some effort to document them is necessary, but fixing that is part of the normal editing process, not a valid reason for deletion. There is no deadline for locating sources.
- 2) none of the criteria of the cited WP:NOTDIRECTORY apply; this seems to be one of those policies that people cite because it sounds like it would apply, apparently without bothering to read and understand it. Specifically: this is not a "simple listing without contextual information"; the context is clearly given. It is not a list or repository of loosely associated topics; the items on the list are all closely connected by subject matter. It is not a cross-categorization. It has nothing to do with genealogy. It is not a program guide. It is not a business resource. WP:NOTDIRECTORY is about collections of information that have no encyclopedic value for readers; this list clearly has value. "This list is full of redlinks and doesn't have enough sources" is not a valid rationale for deletion. It's a reason to improve the list.
P Aculeius (
talk) 13:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
-
P Aculeius, those are all very good points, thanks for pointing them out. However, you have not addressed how this list meets
WP:NLIST, do you think you could explain how it would to justify a speedy keep, as the fact that the entries themselves are notable does not guaranty the list itself being notable? Cheers,
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 14:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Even if hypothetically NLIST was not met (which I believe it is), WP:LISTPURP suggests that there would still be other grounds to keep.
- As prodder and nom, you have not shown any evidence of having demonstrated WP:BEFORE due diligence. The plethora of Google results for searches like "stamp clubs in America" suggests that this was not done. It isn’t really the most GF behavior to simply, since the burden of proof generally lies with the “keep” side once process has begun, make a prod or AfD nomination without actually determining if there’s a prima facie case for a notability or verifiability challenge.
- Sorry for the sharpness, but sometimes it’s necessary.
- RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk) 07:41, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
-
P Aculeius, those are all very good points, thanks for pointing them out. However, you have not addressed how this list meets
WP:NLIST, do you think you could explain how it would to justify a speedy keep, as the fact that the entries themselves are notable does not guaranty the list itself being notable? Cheers,
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 14:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Strong keep as deprodder. In my view it meets WP:LISTPURP and WP:NLIST and I feel this is a commonsensical call. RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk) 07:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- delete I'm just not seeing this. The NY society's building is historic, but when you look at sources about these places, even the few with articles really don't seem notable. And anyway, what are the sources for this list? I'm looking at the listing from Linn's Stamp News, and it's far more complete and is up-to-date; it's also clear that most of the listings would never garner an article. I don't see the point of duplicating a not-very-useful subset of thei info (just the names), and once we go past that, we're in WP:NOTDIRECTORY territory. Mangoe ( talk) 02:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Raza Development Fund
- Raza Development Fund ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails GNG and NORG. Non-notable CFORK. Source eval:
| Comments | Source |
|---|---|
| Subject homepage, fails WP:IS | 1. "Homepage". Raza Development Fund. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
| Database profile, appears to be self sourced, fails WP:SIRS | 2. ^ "Raza Development Fund, Inc. - GuideStar Profile". www.guidestar.org. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
| Service provider page, appears to be self sourced, fails WP:SIRS | 3. ^ "Raza Development Fund, Inc". Housing Partnership Network. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
| Primary, fails WP:IS | 4. ^ "Annie Donovan". Raza Development Fund. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
| From prnewswire, promotional routine news, fails WP:SIRS | 5. ^ UnidosUS. "Raza Development Fund (RDF) names Annie Donovan as its new President and CEO". www.prnewswire.com. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
| Linkedin profile, fails WP:SIRS | LinkedIn". www.linkedin.com. 2023-05-10. Retrieved 2024-05-13. |
BEFORE found nothing that meets WP:SIRS. No objection to a consensus redirect/merge of properly sourced content to UnidosUS (I would have boldly done so but it would have been reverted). // Timothy :: talk 22:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Arizona. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:36, 20 May 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
2008 Scottsdale mayoral election
- 2008 Scottsdale mayoral election ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Slightly more extensive than 2012 Scottsdale mayoral election. Still probably falls under WP:MILL. Okmrman ( talk) 23:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Okmrman ( talk) 23:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Arizona. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, Scottsdale is large enough, being one of the 100 largest cities in the United States that its elections are almost certainly notable. I'm not sure how someone can argue the politics of a large city like this one aren't at all notable.
- - Samoht27 ( talk) 19:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Not a particularly notable election (no non-local coverage, so WP:MILL), and only sourced to election results - fails GNG. SportingFlyer T· C 00:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 04:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - It stands alone as the only Scottsdale mayoral election listed in Wikipedia. You should also delete the categories only associated with it and not other elections - Category:Mayoral elections in Scottsdale, Arizona and Category:Government of Scottsdale, Arizona — Maile ( talk) 16:16, 26 May 2024 (UTC)