Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< April 08 April 10 >

Purge server cache

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

The result was delete. There is consensus that this shouldn't remain. Whether a dab or a redirect is needed can be handled editorially as there's no indication this history is needed. Star Mississippi 00:27, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Eye On Sports

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

Does not appear to be notable. Nothing found in a BEFORE. Tagged for notability since 2017 DonaldD23 talk to me 23:31, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion: previously PRODded.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete a generic sports-news program with a generic name. Apart from the station's website, I don't see substantial coverage. The name is too generic to consider a redirect; CBS had a show of this name in 1994. Walt Yoder ( talk) 01:03, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Either Redirect to Television Jamaica or delete and create a disambiguation page to include this show and the 1990s CBS show (I would suggest a link to CBS Sports Spectacular). The TVJ show lacks standalone notability. However, the fact that the name is too generic to consider a redirect is not a valid argument against a redirect/DAB page. Frank Anchor 16:41, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete or create disambig page Unsourced article. MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:44, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


The result was no consensus to delete. Participation in the discussion is leaning closer to a "keep" outcome than a "delete" outcome, and the sources cited in support of this outcome are not clearly barred for this purpose. BD2412 T 00:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Tevin Slater

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

Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 20:15, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments Reference
Nothing 1. FIFA.com
Social media 2. ^ "Parham". Caribbean Transfers. Retrieved 14 November 2015.
Failed V 404 3. ^ "Dominica suffers second defeat in football tournament". Dominican News Online. 3 May 2014. Retrieved 11 June 2015.
Single sentence about a game 4. ^ "Barbados, SVG play to dramatic draw in friendly". CONCACAF. 9 March 2015. Archived from the original on 2 May 2015. Retrieved 11 June 2015.
Single sentence about a game 5. ^ "Golden Jaguars, St Vincent draw 2-2". Guyana Times. 11 June 2015. Archived from the original on 11 June 2015. Retrieved 11 June 2015.
database 6. ^ "CFD Profile". Caribbean Football Database. Retrieved 5 September 2015.
Promo for football awards https://www.iwnsvg.com/2015/07/21/striker-tevin-slater-nets-heavy-catch-at-football-awards/
Promo from Government tourism site, Interview http://www.tourism.gov.vc/tourism/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=445:vincentian-striker-is-top-scorer-in-concacaf-qualifying-round-for-the-2018-world-cup&catid=41:latest-news&Itemid=115hhere
BLPs need clearly IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability to avoid abuse per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV).  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:28, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:36, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:51, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment I disagree that iwnsvg.com story is a promo for football awards, it is a story about him being named Senior Football of the Year by the Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Football Federation. Him winning the award is also covered in a story in Searchlight.vc. Besides these two articles, the best I could find is a story from The Vincentian about his goal scoring prowness in recent national team matches. However, all three sources are from the span of July-September 2015 so they aren't exactly WP:SUSTAINED coverage so in my opinion additional SIGCOV is needed. Alvaldi ( talk) 13:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • keep with Alvaldi's added sources. Pelmeen10 ( talk) 16:36, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • keep with Alvaldi's added sources. Helps with the notability of the article. Justwatchmee ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:53, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep feels subject scrapes though WP:GNG.Subject has ongoing international career see little point in deleting it. Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 08:35, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Having an "international career" means nothing on Wikipedia. Our notability standards are not based on stuff like that. Of the sources listed here and on the article, one source doesn't mention Slater, one is a passing mentions, one is a Facebook link ( WP:SPS), two are databases, and two are routine event coverages. That leaves four sources that could confer notability ( 1, 2, 3, 4), but together they do not meet the bar of notability. SWinxy ( talk) 22:01, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. I find that the sources SWinxy lists barely meet WP:SIGCOV; they are sufficient to support a reliable albeit short article on the subject. The fact that they span a period of three years makes me think WP:SUSTAINED is satisfied (barely). Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 14:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Despite being relisted twice no substantial discussion regarding the available sources took place. But clearly there is currently no consensus to delete the article. Pax:Vobiscum ( talk) 11:08, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

2023 Wests Tigers season

2023 Wests Tigers season (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested redirect. Zero independent sources, but redirecting is no longer an option. Currently fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 11:58, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Oppose: WP:NSEASONS qualifies this and almost every other NRL team season article nominated or draftified by this editor. Yes some teams have more active editors than others to ensure full WP:GNG compliance, but I fail to see the point of the back-and-forward nature of what's happening to a few different articles in the rugby league space. Storm machine ( talk) 23:09, 27 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:44, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:48, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

*Keep: adheres to WP:NSEASONS and there's more than enough presumed and significant coverage available for editors to expand upon the article in time using simple searches, aka WP:NEXISTS. Storm machine ( talk) 06:42, 13 April 2023 (UTC) Striking second !vote by the same user. MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete Lacks non-routine coverage supporting that WP:GNG is met (WP:NSPORT doesn't automatically establish notability). MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Is clearly notable as a top-level professional team with plenty of coverage, see for example the numerous results on GNews just published in the last few days! BeanieFan11 ( talk) 01:47, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: as noted in my struck out comment, WP:NEXISTS – there's more than enough presumed and significant coverage available for editors to expand upon the article in time using simple searches. Storm machine ( talk) 22:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Aoidh ( talk) 02:24, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Phil Simon

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

This article about a writer of books about technology is mostly referenced to primary sources. I have carried out WP:BEFORE and have not been able to find any non-primary sources to add. I did cut a section before deciding to nominate this, as it read promotional and was referenced to a primary source which is now a deadlink. Of the existing 17 references, 4 are links to books written by Simon. 3 are references to his website. One (current ref number 7) is an interview, three look as if they all link to one interview on a NYT podcast (one of these is an MP3 file which I haven't listened to), one is a deadlink (current ref 11), three are author pages on various publications, and two relate to the Axiom Business Book Awards. These last two did make me wonder whether he is notable, but I don't think they are notable awards - 70+ were awarded in both of the years his books won an award, and both his awards were at the Silver level. Doesn't look like he meets either WP:GNG or WP:AUTHOR to me. Tacyarg ( talk) 23:16, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 14:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Arbër Vokrri

Arbër Vokrri (  | 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)

Was deprodded with the rationale, "easily verifiable that he's deputy minister". Which is true. However, deputy ministers do not qualify under WP:NPOL, and searches did not turn up enough to meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 21:37, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure that applies to NPOL so easily. That guideline is for politicians or judges, typically elected positions and not necessarily appointed positions. At least it's not an obvious keep in that sense. There are a lots of government agencies where even the head wouldn't be notable, much less a #2. I think this is more of a case were WP:GNG would need to be satisfied. KoA ( talk) 16:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 23:02, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete possibly TOOSOON. It wasn't immediately clear, but Vokrri is not an elected member of the Assembly of the Republic of Kosovo. Merely being a government employee is insufficient to meet WP:NPOL. There are a few Google hits about a person of this name in the context of a group called INSID ( NBC News quoting him in a story about managing former ISIS fighters), but I am not sure it is the same person as the deputy minister. Walt Yoder ( talk) 00:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:POLOUTCOMES. Deputy ministers in European countries are usually the highest-ranking civil servant, and not a cabinet minister nor a parliamentarian. Please ping me if I am incorrect. Bearian ( talk) 17:33, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete My understanding is that being a deputy minister isn't sufficient to meet WP:NPOL. Happy to revise my !vote if this is not correct. MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:50, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Heartbeat (video game)

Heartbeat (video game) (  | 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)

Game appears to fail WP:GNG. While it got decent mentions in both Rock Paper Shotgun and PCGamesN, both are by the same author at the same time. The only other major coverage it received was in 4Gamer. There is an article about a controversy regarding the game's developers that happened about a year after release, but it is debatable whether it really addresses the game, being almost entirely about the developers' views. This is a highly unusual case, but I don't think it passes the notability bar. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 22:39, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 22:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Jannik Olander (jewelry designer)

Jannik Olander (jewelry designer) (  | 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)

BLP doesn't seem to meet WP:NBIO - lacks in-depth coverage in reliable sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 22:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Ingress cancellation

Ingress cancellation (  | 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)

A WP:DICTDEF that has been tagged for rewriting since 2009. Apart from some Cisco patents and marketing material, the term does not appear to be in use. Not sure if deletion, a soft-redirect to Wiktionary, or a redirect to some article on signal processing is best. Walt Yoder ( talk) 22:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Walt Yoder ( talk) 22:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, meh, it passes WP:GNG and could be expanded per the available sources. I suspect that this type of filtering is also known by another name and may be better merged elsewhere or turned into a broader article on ingress noise. SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 00:59, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep — the term seems to be used enough to be considered notable. PopoDameron ⁠ talk 01:17, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Week keep or merge I have next to no understanding of this technical topic. However, a web search indicates that the topic has some coverage. Maybe it is best covered as a redirect to a section in another article, however I don't think that deletion is beneficial here. MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:06, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Aoidh ( talk) 02:25, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Sabih Arca

Sabih Arca (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • Delete: Fails GNG and BIO. BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.
Sources:
  • Photo :: 1.  "cache-v2". donanimhaber.
  • Database record :: 2. ^ "National football team player Sabih Arca". EU Football. Retrieved 2022-08-15.
  • Turkish content provider article, not IS RS with SIGCOV :: 3. ^ "Sabih Arca". Retrieved 2022-08-15.
  • bout Fenerbahçe, does not mention subject :: 4. ^ Hay Eytan Cohen Yanarocak (2012-05-28). "The Last Stronghold: The Fenerbahçe Sports Club and Turkish Politics". Dayan. Retrieved 2022-08-15.
  • Team History, nothing about subject :: 5. ^ "A Milli Takım Tarihçesi" (in Turkish). Turkiye Futbol Federasyonu. n.d. Retrieved 2022-08-15.
  • Failed V, 404 :: 6. ^ "Sabih Arca Efsane Forvet" (in Turkish). mujdatyetkiner.com. Retrieved 2022-08-15.
  • Database record :: 7. ^ "Sabih Arca". Olympedia. Retrieved 25 August 2021.

No sources in article are IS RS SIGCOV. BEFORE showed nothing with IS RS SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  //  Timothy ::  talk  21:15, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Turkey. Shellwood ( talk) 21:36, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:48, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:07, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • This looks like someone who is highly, highly—very highly likely notable. Arca played literally 200+ games for one of the best teams in Turkish history over 100 years ago, scoring 64 goals (showing he was not just some career-long bench player) and was on the first Turkish national team in history, earning nine caps and additionally being on the team at two Olympics. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 22:42, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    This would be an enormous shame to delete – it looks like Arca was one of the best players of his era and I'm 99.999999999999999999999% certain there's offline coverage somewhere. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 22:46, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Looking for sources, I see this piece from a Turkish bio website (which mentions him as one of the most successful players in the early era of Turkish soccer, also seems to be at [2]), and then this seems to be a list of articles mentioning him? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 22:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    de.wikipedia has a very decent biography on him with several offline references. Also, I requested at the Turkish Wikipedia help in finding sources. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 23:31, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Per above. Clearly significant figure in Turkish football. Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk) 05:04, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per sources above which show notability. Giant Snowman 11:55, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Source eval Nonne of the sources above shows IS RS with SIGCOV.
Nothing with IS RS SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  //  Timothy ::  talk  08:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
TimothyBlue: did you attempt to access the ample offline sources in the German-language article in your BEFORE or source eval? GGT ( talk) 11:31, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • @ GGT:: There aren't any offline sources in the de.wp. [3]; All are available online. More promo and ROUTINE, nothing is IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  //  Timothy ::  talk  11:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Pretty broad-stroke statements on part of the nom here that show a deficient evaluation of the sources and the subject matter. I'm not talking about non-RS like turkcebilgi.com here. Anyone familiar with the history of Turkish press knows that for flagship publications like Milliyet or Hürriyet, promo pieces didn't exist until essentially the last 10-15 years (due to changes in ownership/media dynamics, one may wish to read Emin Çölaşan's memoirs to understand this process), so no way that those sources from the 1960s are "promo". The Milliyet sources are pretty difficult to access as they require Flash Player, but I'm able to access at least two: a piece from 21 March 1967 that discusses the new board of Fenerbahçe and gives a brief biography of Arca, and an obituary published on 25 April 1979. Now the fact remains that even these are decades after this guy's active football career. That was a time when Turkish surnames had not yet been introduced, so any mention of this person is more likely to be as "Sabih" only, making it even more difficult to locate. Furthermore, the Turkish alphabet was only Latinised in 1928, and of course, all of the sports publications of that era (particularly Spor Alemi) remain fully offline. We do, however, have modern coverage such as this article in Sabah about the history of Fenerbahçe which gives a one-paragraph biography of Arca as a "legendary forward". This is a very strong indicator that this guy had such lasting notability that he would be listed as a legend in articles a full century after his football career. As such, 1) the posthumous coverage on its own is sufficient to meet GNG in the barest of terms (but this is bearing in mind that we're looking at the archives of only one newspaper...) and 2) more importantly, it indicates that contemporary in-depth coverage is almost certain to exist. If someone does end up browsing through magazines in a Turkish library, please do ping me. -- GGT ( talk) 12:12, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, per GGT. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 13:47, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per GGT. Aintabli ( talk) 06:11, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. The nominator actually sought a selective merge, and there are some legitimate questions raised as to the overall quality of the sourcing. Nevertheless, there is consensus to keep the article. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 03:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Selina Tobaccowala

Selina Tobaccowala (  | 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)

Page exists as WP:RESUME - minimal SIGCOV exists that are not interviews/primary sourcing. Proposing a merge of relevant aspects of this page to various company pages (Evite, Ticketmaster, SurveyMonkey, Beachbody). Attempted PROD, it was removed by Thilsebatti. 30Four ( talk) 20:50, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Women. Shellwood ( talk) 21:35, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Keep - as the person meets the requirements of WP:GNG 1keyhole ( talk) 02:58, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • keep She meets WP:BASIC with existing articles and in additions she was featured in INC and there are these additional articles: NPR, Club Industry, Popsugar and Geek Wire. Royal88888 ( talk) 00:35, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    • NPR link is summary of a podcast: “How I Built This Podcast with Guy Raz, Evite: Selina Tobaccowala, Episode 182”
    • INC magazine is quite literally Selina’s words told through an author. ("As told to Yasmin Gagné" per article)
    • Club Industry contains no true author/byline, creating a profile of her for the Club Industry Executive Summit advertised by this article, a Summit she spoke at: “Tobaccowala’s presentation will be a general session at lunch on Nov. 9 and will be attended by all three tracks of the event: the Club and Studio Summit, the Not-for-Profit Summit and the CEO Summit (the invitation-only portion of the event for the highest revenue-generating club companies in the country).”
    • PopSugar, while not in the traditional interview format, presents their bio of Tobaccowala before a Q&A. It’s fairly easy to argue a Q&A is an interview.
    • Geekwire is the only source here that establishes something outside a company bio/interview, although the main piece from this article is that Tobaccowala joined the board of Redfin. If you consider this to be notable, I really question if I know the guidelines surrounding notability on Wikipedia at this point. It seems ridiculous to me. This source also already exists on the page, citation 10. 30Four ( talk) 06:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep ( edit conflict) New sources: Trip to India changed her life, article about her as a high school student; 2015 Women in tech (paragraph feature in Elle); Selina Tobaccowala/Gixo: How losing my mentor inspired a business interview feature in Inc.; The Inside Story on How SurveyMonkey Cracked the International Market is largely about her, largely based on interview but seemingly not entirely (but I'm not sure how reliable we see the source); there seems to have multiple paragraphs about her in the books Masters of Scale and Blitzscaling (which seem pretty related books so probably counts as a single source); Join Our Board: Companies Hotly Pursue New Wave of Women in Tech passing mention in NYT. Those plus the existing sources seem to meet WP:GNG, even more so with a somewhat higher number of interviews with higher profile podcasts. Skynxnex ( talk) 01:25, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    • Newspaper article “Trip to India changed her life”: builds out early bio but doesn’t establish her notability within her space. There are tons of exceptional high schoolers, which is great, although this again contains the same WP:RESUME issues that I posted this AfD with.
    • ELLE feature helps for GNG, although contains the very same WP:RESUME info that is all held in the article. It addresses none of the concern that this could easily be held in the company pages which already exist, not to mention the use of quotation within the article, implying that this was partially based on an interview.
    • Inc interview feature (I do not have access to Wikilibrary, but I see the feature from the direct link): Tobaccowala's words are being told through an author - "As told to Yasmin Gagné", who is the author of the article. This serves as an interview, as you've pointed out.
    • The Inside Story on How SurveyMonkey Cracked the International Market: “largely based on interview” - your own words. It seems as though this is more of a presentation of SurveyMonkey’s operations, giving credit to Tobaccowala for her work. While that’s great, the main presentable piece of info from this source is Tobaccowala was the CTO of SurveyMonkey.
    • NYT - a passing mention of Tobaccowala “who runs the start-up Gixo” and the 2014 addition of Tobaccowala to Redfin’s board of directors.
    • As for the books Masters of Scale and Blitzscaling, they each detail aspects of her career per the page previews you’ve linked. Is this not the same WP:RESUME issue? Each of these details can be held by the respective company page, stating that she led the company at one time. (This doesn’t change the outcome of the AfD/source listing, although the Masters of Scale podcast attempted to spam links to their podcast with Tobaccowala, which can be seen in the edit history of Tobaccowala’s page here) 30Four ( talk) 06:47, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
      I don't think WP:RESUME is on-point as you are claiming since it seems primarily about auto-biographies, which this doesn't seem to be, even if there has been some promotional editing. The sources covering her do lean heavily on interviews so the primary reason I voted keep is because, in general, co-founding a company like Evite and then continuing to be in the similar space while getting interviewed across many platforms is often a sign of notability. I was leaning between a weak and normal keep, but ended up on a normal keep because I think the totality and length of coverage (even on the edge because of interviews) makes me think that she meets the spirit of WP:N and basically the letter. Many of the sources are: significant coverage, reliable, partly secondary, and independent of the subject.
      I don't quite understand your issue with the book coverage: if a person is significantly covered, as opposed to their company with occasional mentions of the person, it is considered a source counting toward notability. Skynxnex ( talk) 21:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
      Masters of Scale was published in 2021 and is a summary of each episode of the mentioned podcast per the books description. "Behind the scenes in Silicon Valley, Reid Hoffman (founder of LinkedIn, investor at Greylock) is a sought-after adviser to heads of companies and heads of state. On each episode of his podcast, Masters of Scale, he sits down with a guest from an all-star list of visionary founders and leaders, digging into the surprising strategies that power their company’s growth. In this book, he draws on their most riveting, revealing stories—as well as his own experience as a founder and investor—to distill the secrets behind the most extraordinary success stories of our times."
      Blitzscaling (co-written by Reid Hoffman, the same author as Masters of Scale) I have less of an issue with, although it seems to speak to the same job title-based language. The book itself may establish itself as a good source, however I don't believe it covers anything outside of WP:ROUTINE, that being routine coverage of Tobaccowala's jobs (which to me, boils down to WP:RESUME). I believe the same of the good sources used on her page currently. 30Four ( talk) 18:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: There is also in-depth coverage from [4] along with additional sources listed above. She passes GNG. Thilsebatti ( talk) 11:28, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    See my replies to the comments above which have also posted the same source you've linked. 30Four ( talk) 06:48, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Leaning keep, or move to draft for further development. Given the prominence of Evite, I would expect sources supporting the notability of the co-founders to be findable. The sources cited thus far in this discussion are on the edge, but there are thousands of search results to consider. BD2412 T 00:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to CHERUB#The Fall. Star Mississippi 00:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

The Fall (Robert Muchamore novel)

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

Another contested redirect, using an WP:OSE argument - zero independent sources, fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 09:36, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and United Kingdom. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:43, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: it seems unlikely that this book wouldn't meet WP:NBOOK, but there's an obvious redirect target at CHERUB. I think the outcome that would be most helpful to readers would be to expand the plot summaries presently in CHERUB from one or two sentences to a short paragraph, and then to redirect all the books that only have an infobox and plot summary to CHERUB. -- asilvering ( talk) 23:41, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 19:39, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:53, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Billabong Pro Tahiti 2014

Billabong Pro Tahiti 2014 (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Champion and standings are listed on 2014 ASP World Tour. – Aidan721 ( talk) 19:32, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. Consensus is that this fails WP:V. Any sourceable content about a military engagement in this place and time should first be added, with appropriate references, to an existing or broader-scoped article. Sandstein 10:56, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Battle of Al-Adabiya port

Battle of Al-Adabiya port (  | 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)

Recent article about a battle that didn't actually happen. No credible source. Piouche ( talk) 19:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Algeria, and Israel. Shellwood ( talk) 19:39, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment it may have been a small engagement, and it may sit better in the article about the Battle for Suez, but there clearly was a battle at Adabiya. Mccapra ( talk) 20:11, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    This article is about a battle that supposedly happened from October 25 to 28, that involved the algerian army, and that ended as an algerian victory.
    That clearly never happened. The algerian land army didn't even fight at all during the war, as correctly stated on the main Yom Kippur War article. Piouche ( talk) 20:42, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Egypt. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:39, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, it simply didn't happen. ---Lilach5 ( לילך5) discuss 19:30, 11 April 2023

(UTC)

The battle happened Algeria is hard to source and almost impossible in English. The French article is longer, but not all that much help. It does say that the Algerians, yes, definitely were there, but that the account of the battle was from the general's memoirs. As reported by an Algerian nationalist newspaper. They were there, with armored vehicles. I could, actually, conceive of such a battle being ignored since Algeria would have been newly independent and probably wasn't expected to stand a chance against Israel. The French were probably also still smarting over Algerian independence. Also, French Wikipedia may discount that, but should we?

That doesn't mean that that's what happened, though. But it's sourced infirmation and I am not seeing why the source would not be treatec as reliable, though certainly biased since he would have an incentive to inflate its importance. As far as the author goes, he was a wartime general who saw action in this war. How is that not notable? I think you must be getting that assessment by looking for book reviews or something. I also strongly suggest checking in Arabic. Hth

  • Delete: Fails GNG and EVENT. There was fighting but nothing significant in the context of the war, and no IS RS seem to consider it a significant military engagement or mention it as a separate topic from the events surrounding it. Article seems to exist to highlight that the 8th Algerian was involved. No idea where most of the detail comes from and is probably all OR or SYNTH. Since most of the article fails V, all that would be left is a questionably notable microstub if the article was cleaned up.  //  Timothy ::  talk  09:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I’ve searched in Arabic and found nothing. Mccapra ( talk) 11:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Abstain - if Mccapra is correct that there is no support for this in Arabic sources, then I don't really care enough about this to argue against its deletion. However, as a report on the fr-wikipedia article, I am noting that Jeune Afrique is generally RS and a couple of the other sources look like books. Throw out Jewish Virtual Library, which I've been told is not RS, and arguably the "nationalist" Algerian source (which may simply mean that it opposed French colonialism), but let's throw that out too for the sake of the argument. We would still have apparently RS secondary sources based on the account of an eyewitness, even though admittedly one with an agenda. Seems like that should fall into the category of a controversy to be explained, not deleted. But if there are no Arabic sources, I am not going to argue the matter after this post, since Boumedienne was an authoritarian that I don't want to champion anyway. But the French article is quite firmly saying that the Algerian 8th Armored Division was there in support of the Egyptian Army and so, such as it was, was the sum total of the Algerian Air Force. Elinruby ( talk) 21:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I note the fr.wiki article is up for deletion too, for the same reasons. There was some fighting as the Israelis took Adabiya, but that in itself does not seem sufficient to warrant an article. Whether or not Moshe Dayan talked about Algerian forces I don’t know, but I haven’t been able to find it. Mccapra ( talk) 02:57, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
I noticed that too. I am just saying that we appear to be ignoring RS, but I don't care enough about whether the Israelis consider this a battle to oppose deletion. I just don't see why it's their call, but I have other fish to fry Elinruby ( talk) 14:54, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The other quoted sources than the AlgeriePatriotique article don't actually support what's written in the article. Piouche ( talk) 06:31, 15 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment -- Having read the main article on the Yom Kippur War, it is not obvious to me that this article is a hoax. It is clear there was fighting at Adabiya after the ceasefire, but it ended with the Egyptians holding the town centre and the Israelis some suburbs. That sounds to me like a stalemate, where Israel attacked but was driven off. If anyone was victorious, it would be Egypt not Algeria, since any Algerians forces would be fighting as allies of Egypt to defend Egypt. The battlebox thus needs amendment. The article seeks to make this a separate engagement following another battle of Adabiya (no article). I would prefer to see a single article on the whole of the battle(s) or perhaps on the Adabiya aspects of the whole war. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

1988–89 Bracknell Bees season

AfDs for this article:
1988–89 Bracknell Bees season (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NHOCKEY. It is a season summary of a second-tier British ice hockey team, which falls below notability standards. Kaiser matias ( talk) 17:11, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Dimitris Tsourekas

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

One of Lugnuts' articles. I've looked up this person's name and very few independent sources showed up. One single result showed up when searching his name in the Greek alphabet. Does not seem to be a notable individual. Super Ψ Dro 17:02, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I was wrong. There's a hundred results to the search "Δημήτρης Τσουρέκας". But few seem related to this skier. Super Ψ Dro 17:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to List of programs aired by TV5 (Philippine TV network)#Reality shows. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Philippines Scariest Challenge

Philippines Scariest Challenge (  | 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)

Appears to fail notability, nothing found in a BEFORE. Tagged for notability since 2016.

PROD removed with little improvement, and nothing to help it pass notability requirements. DonaldD23 talk to me 15:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:41, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

List of electoral wards in Greater London

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

Not a particularly useful list of lists. The lists for each local authority would be more appropriate on the local elections article for their respective local authorities, e.g. the list of wards in Barking and Dagenham should be included instead on Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council elections. These articles currently lack key topics, and the lists of wards are long and unwieldy without including any insight.  dummelaksen  ( talk • contribs) 15:44, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I am also nominating the lists for the other ceremonial counties of England (except Wards of the City of London) for the same reason:

List of electoral divisions and wards in Cornwall (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral divisions and wards in Wiltshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral divisions in the Isle of Wight (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Bedfordshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Berkshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Bristol (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Buckinghamshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Cambridgeshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Cheshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in County Durham (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Cumbria (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Derbyshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Devon (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Dorset (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in East Riding of Yorkshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in East Sussex (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Essex (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Gloucestershire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Greater Manchester (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Hampshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Herefordshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Hertfordshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Kent (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Lancashire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Leicestershire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Lincolnshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Merseyside (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Norfolk (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in North Yorkshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Northamptonshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Northumberland (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Nottinghamshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Oxfordshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Rutland (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Shropshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Somerset (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in South Yorkshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Staffordshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Suffolk (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Surrey (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Tyne and Wear (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Warwickshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in the West Midlands (county) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in West Sussex (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in West Yorkshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Worcestershire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)  dummelaksen  ( talk • contribs) 16:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Lists, and United Kingdom. Shellwood ( talk) 15:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep I’m not sure there is a strong deletion rationale here, and to delete in such a scale I’d want to be persuaded there was something fundamentally wrong with these articles. If nothing else these lists are useful for tracking changes to both constituencies and the local authorities they fall within iver time. I’m open to persuasion if I’ve missed something of course. Mccapra ( talk) 17:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Mccapra: I'm in favour of keeping the actual content of the articles, but I don't think this is the right way to present it: district wards have very little to do with the ceremonial counties they're in, or with the wards in other districts in the same county. I agree, it is useful for keeping track of changes to the local authorities they're in, but in that case, they would be more effective in that regard – and easier to find – in articles about those authorities.  dummelaksen  ( talk • contribs) 17:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
ok well I’m not sure whether AfD is the best place to discuss that proposal. Mccapra ( talk) 20:12, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - This is a whole lot of info to be proposing to delete and I'm not hugely convinced that putting it into the elections article for each council will work well. With Cornwall, the council has already gone through three different sets of ward maps since 2009 and I think just lumping them (plus future wards) at the end of the Cornwall Council elections page will make it ungainly. In any case, this is so many different articles with so many different things to think about that deleting them all at once would do much more harm than good IMO. Gazamp ( talk) 02:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The number of wards, both concurrently and over time, means that very quickly they will need to be split out from the elections pages for size and comprehension reasons so we'd be right back here. I might support a split of List of electoral wards in Greater London to separate lists per borough, but that's not an AfD matter. Thryduulf ( talk) 13:04, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete all This is the sort of thing that belongs on the respective council articles or relevant election pages, not grouped for each county. Reywas92 Talk 04:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 10:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep listing at ceremonial county is probably most useful. Articles appear to have sufficient sources and wards are likely notable. Crouch, Swale ( talk) 15:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Randykitty ( talk) 17:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Kudumbashree Sharada

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

Contested redirect - not nearly enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 13:10, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Promo photos :: 1.   https://malayalam.filmibeat.com/photos/malayalam-tv-actress-mersheena-neenu-stunning-instagram-stills-fb78595.html
  • Promo :: 2. ^ "Zee keralam brodcasting new serial Kudumbashree Sharada will start from april 11 | പതിവു സീരിയൽ ശൈലികളെ പാടെ മറക്കാം; പെൺകരുത്തിന്റെ കഥയുമായി "കുടുംബശ്രീ ശാരദ" സീ കേരളത്തിൽ എത്തുന്നു| Movies News in Malayalam".
  • Blog post, not SIGCOV :: 3. ^ "നൂറിന്റെ നിറവില്‍ പ്രിയപരമ്പര 'കുടുംബശ്രീ ശാരദ'".
  • ROUTINE, promo, not SIGCOV :: 4. ^ "Radhamma Kuthuru Serial Remade in Other Languages - Zee Telugu Serial". 3 August 2022.
BEFORE showed promos, database records, nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  //  Timothy ::  talk  07:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 15:27, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. Probably WP:TOOSOON. Randykitty ( talk) 17:22, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Joe McGlynn

Joe McGlynn (  | 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)

Was draftified, and was improved before returning to mainspace. Unfortunately, there's not a single in-depth piece about this footballer from an independent, reliable, secondary source. Still fails WP:GNG. There are several local articles which mention him, but all but one are not in-depth, and all are routine sports coverage. Onel5969 TT me 13:33, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, England, and Scotland. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:49, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:26, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Clearly meets WP:SPORTSBASIC based on the article and the sources on it. Very young player with ongoing career who has played for a Premier League club. Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk) 20:31, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    • @ Das osmnezz: - for clarity, he's never played in the Premier League. He has played for Burnley's under-age teams in the youth leagues, but the highest level of senior football he has played at is the National League (level 5) -- ChrisTheDude ( talk)
  • Keep there is sufficient sourcing to show notability. Giant Snowman 10:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep clearly passes GNG with sources already on pae, lazy nomination.-- Ortizesp ( talk) 19:31, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - not a single in-depth source from an independent, reliable reference = "clearly passes GNG"? Onel5969 TT me 19:43, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Fails GNG. Outta the six sources that are independent of Joe McGlynn, The Guardian is a paragraph, the Burnley Express is a routine contract signing story, this contains a single sentence on him, this is a routine match report, this has one sentence on him and this is that he scored a couple of goals. Dougal18 ( talk) 13:57, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The first source gooes into his background and even provides yearly updates on his progress, the second source defiantly does not merely contain a "single sentence on him", and the third and fourth sources also goes into more detail about him and his prospects for the first team. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Das osmnezz ( talk • contribs)
  • Delete: BLP Fails GNG and BIO. Sources in the article do not show N. BEFORE didn't show anything that is IS RS with SIGCOV showing N, just promom, ROUTINE, primary. Source eval table:
  • Primary, not SIGCOV :: 1.  "Premier League clubs publish 2021/22 retained lists". www.premierleague.com. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Primary, not SIGCOV :: 2. ^ "Premier League clubs publish 2020/21 retained lists". www.premierleague.com. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Prome opinion list :: 3. ^ Jump up to:a b c d "20 of the best talents at Premier League clubs". theguardian.com.
  • Database record :: 4. ^ Jump up to:a b "Joe McGlynn – Hyde United". hydeunited.co.uk. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Database record :: 5. ^ InCrowd. "Joe McGlynn". Burnley Football Club. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Primary, not SIGCOV :: 6. ^ "Burnley duo pen first professional contracts". burnleyexpress.net.
  • ROUTINE, mention, not SIGCOV :: 7. ^ "The exciting next generation of Burnley talent as clutch of strikers emerge on scene". lancs.live.
  • ROUTINE, mention, not SIGCOV :: 8. ^ "Burnley's goalscoring generation hint at bright future and will hope to capitalise on ALK vision". lancs.live.
  • ROUTINE, mention, not SIGCOV :: 9. ^ "Five of Burnley's next generation to keep an eye on ahead of FA Youth Cup tie". lancs.live.
  • Interview :: 10. ^ "Joe McGlynn's First Interview".
  • ROUTINE, not SIGCOV :: 11. ^ "Striker McGlynn Signs On Loan". www.oldhamathletic.co.uk. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Primary, not SIGCOV :: 12. ^ "Joe McGlynn". Official Website of the Harriers - Kidderminster Harriers FC. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Game story, mention, ROUTINE :: 13. ^ "Cameroon U20 v Scotland U20". www.scottishfa.co.uk. Retrieved 2023-03-19.
  • ROUTINE, not SIGCOV :: 14. ^ "Gifted, grafters and goalscorers - The Burnley strike force of the future". lancs.live.
WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"'; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability to avoid abuse per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV).  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:59, 8 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete As per source analysis by Timothy. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:02, 8 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - Many of the sources are not necessarily routine... he gets this coverage due to his reputation and performances. All the sources combined make a Wikipedia page that meets WP:SPORTSBASIC. Wikipedia is supposed to be a source of knowledge, and this article is a "yes" to Wikipedia:The one question. McGlynn is clearly a topic of interest, having been listed in The Guardian's "Next Generation 2019" (The Guardian has tracked his progress since that year as well, which shows the level of interest) and the topic of many other sources, which combined, make for a decent sized article. Very young player with ongoing career. On a side note, I find the double standard of the most consistent pro-deletion users very frustrating since most of them either support Wikipedia:SNG for another topic where the article doesn't need to meet WP:GNG or have sometimes created articles with less coverage than this one... (I support article creation, but their double standard is very frustrating). Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk) 18:28, 8 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 15:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - This is a case of WP:TOOSOON as the article fails WP:GNG; the 9th and 14th links above contain some useful prose from a publisher that is actually independent of McGlynn, but it's nowhere near significant coverage. Probably after McGlynn plays a bit of professional senior football, this will change so draftifying is an option as well. Jogurney ( talk) 17:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus the article is ineligible for soft deletion and a merge (or even a WP:BLAR) can be discussed on the article's talk page Salvio giuliano 15:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

News Vanguard

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

I did not find any primary sources or secondary sources conforming to this article directly in particular. Khorang 06:58, 18 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:12, 25 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shawn Teller (he/her) ( talk) 14:47, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: the last relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 15:24, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete/Merge - The article is one sentence and the website is unavailable. Virtually no reader value as is for over 5 years of existence. Already mentioned on Tripura and Sudip Datta Bhaumik. Web archive for reference.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 15:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Monsieur R

AfDs for this article:
Monsieur R (  | 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)

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku ( talk) 14:27, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Belgium, and France. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:28, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - I was surprised to see that I voted "Weak Keep" in the first AfD for this rapper way back in 2010. At the time, the rapper had recently been in the news for a political controversy, which informed another person's "Keep" vote as well. So I'm partially responsible for the article still being here today. Since 2010, the notability rules for musicians have gotten tighter, and more reliable media coverage is needed. I can find no pro previews for any of the rapper's albums nor any coverage of his career overall, and a few stories about that old controversy are all that come up today. Per 2023 requirements, I hereby overrule my younger self. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 15:48, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above. Our standards have gotten much more rigorous in the past 13 years. For the record, a friend of mine writes for The Indypendent, and it's not a reliable source. Bearian ( talk) 18:28, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Sandstein 13:51, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

XGC88000 crawler crane

XGC88000 crawler crane (  | 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. Article was prod'd as advertising and promotional but deproded. Article has not been improved. Souce eval:

1.  "XGC88000 Crawler Crane". XCMG. Sales page fails IS RS
2. ^ "Crane Capacity Record Breaker: XCMG Crawler Crane XGC88000 Completes Installation of 2600-ton Hydrogenation Reactor in China 10 Days Ahead of Schedule". PR News Wire. PR News Wire.
3. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f "2017 Manufacturer Xgc88000 Crawler Crane with 3c". Made-in-China. Promo
4. ^ "XCMG XGC88000 crane - load chart, specs (2021 - 2023)". Lectura Specs. Spec sheet
5. ^ "XCMG XGC88000 Crawler Crane". Cranepedia. database listing, not SIGCOV
6. ^ "XCMG XGC88000 Crawler Crane". Vertikal. database listing, not SIGCOV
7. ^ "XCMG and Sinopec Strengthen Partnership to Bring Star Crawler Cranes". Business Insider. Promo
8. ^ "Crane Capacity Record Breaker: XCMG Crawler Crane XGC88000 Completes Installation of 2600-ton Hydrogenation Reactor in China 10 Days Ahead of Schedule". Asia One. Promo
9. ^ "XCMG claims world lifting record with 2,600-ton hoist in China". Crane and Hoist Canada. Promo
10. ^ "Sinopec exhibits new crane technology with washing tower lift". Hydrocarbon Engineering. Promo
11. ^ "World's largest crawler crane in action at Duqm Refinery site". Oman Observer. Promo
12. ^ "XGC88000 sets new record". Vertikal. Promo
13. ^ "XCMG's 4,000 tonne class crawler record". 3 January 2013. Promo
14. ^ "Sinopec builds the largest crawler crane in Saudi Arabia". NS Energy. Promo
15. ^ "XCMG Official Xgc88000 Crawler Crane Price for Sale". Made-in-China. Sales page fails IS RS
16. ^ Jump up to:a b "XCMG XGC88000 Crawler Crane". Finbond Heavy Machinery Sdn Bhd. Promo

BEFORE from PROD showed nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth from IS RS.  //  Timothy ::  talk   //  Timothy ::  talk  06:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 09:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:39, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: third relist in hopes of generating further discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 13:38, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. I don't think the sources that the nominator calls "promo" are unduly promotional. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 09:11, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. The sources I put in were intentionally the most technical and non-exaggerated sources I can find. There is nothing 'promotional' about literally stating the technical and engineering facts on that vehicle. Like seriously, what is so promotional in posting the length, height, weight, power generated and lift capacity of that machine? I have seen wikipedia pages with only three to four sources that still somehow exist. 42Grunt ( talk) 06:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Concur with Eastmain and Thebiguglyalien. Resonant Distortion 08:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 13:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Jorge Aiello

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

Not seeing enough to meet WP:SPORTBASIC or WP:GNG. Searches, including this Argentine source search, yielded nothing decent. Web del Viola ( translated) has a transfer announcement relating to him but it only has one paragraph about him and SPORTBASIC requires multiple sources showing significant coverage. Since it is the official website of Villa Dálmine, it also isn't an independent source. SPORTBASIC itself states that team sites are generally not regarded as independent of the subject. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was redirect to List of Cambridge University Cricket Club players#T. Eddie891 Talk Work 13:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Patrick Tice

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

Does not meet notability criteria. Raised with Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket who suggested delete/redirect. Only played at university. Secretlondon ( talk) 11:15, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Secretlondon ( talk) 11:15, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Ireland. Shellwood ( talk) 11:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to List of Cambridge University Cricket Club players#T While there is some coverage of the subject, it is mainly WP:ROUTINE in match reports and squad announcements, so fails WP:GNG. However, there is a suitable redirect here per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 ( talk) 09:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. The list proposed as a redirect target needs deleting itself - and many of the cricketers on that list because they are sourced to directories. Desertarun ( talk) 11:10, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Lists like these are the common targets for players who passed old WP:NCRIC notability (such as this player who was notable for his appearances for Cambridge) before the change in guidelines last year. It's been a commonly accepted practice for years now. Sure, some of these lists need improving, and some still need created, but redirects like this allow us to preserve the history if information is found or turns up in the future and links to the article direct somewhere. Rugbyfan22 ( talk) 12:06, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect. The above comment is nonsense regarding lists. This is suitable for a redirect per Rugbyfan22. StickyWicket ( talk) 11:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect as above. This is the best option in this case as he played most of his significant cricket for CU. If he does play for other teams in the future the redirect can be retargeted. Lists such as the one in place are used in a variety of contexts to deal with precisely his sort of case - and, fwiw, if we wanted to have multiple sources for each person on that list we could do; there is excellent coverage of most matches in The Times and other newspapers of record, as well as sourcing to Cambridge internal sources; we could, literally, have over 1,000 sources added to the article with time and effort. Blue Square Thing ( talk) 10:00, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Onel5969 TT me 18:30, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Costa (Pante Macassar)

Costa (Pante Macassar) (  | 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)

Single source does not support current information in article, just simply mentions that someplace of this name exists. Was draftified in hopes of improvement, but was returned to mainspace without improvement. Searches did not turn up enough to show that it passes WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 10:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Akshay Chandrashekhar

Akshay Chandrashekhar (  | 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)

PROMO. One small role in a film, only sources found are Imdb. Award doesn't appear notable. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:58, 17 March 2023 (UTC) reply

He played a major role in a movie which was nominated for National Awards, he heads a production company.
I think these two points are enough for him to be on wiki 2406:7400:73:83A1:E8C4:D8AC:6E04:D941 ( talk) 16:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Comment : "He won the National Award" - The award is won by the producer and National Award is the most important award in India. But I doubt if it satisfies the notability as only single factor notability can be verified. Couldn't find anything else for two factor notability Christopheronthemove ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:49, 22 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles ( talk) 17:49, 24 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero Parlez Moi 15:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete Fails GNG and ACTOR. The subject did not win a national award, it was a special mention for a non feature film not the subject. :BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs need clearly high quality (per WP:BLP) IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability per V, BLP and BIO.  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:22, 8 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:19, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. As remarked during the discussion, the "keep" !votes (termed "oppose" here) are not policy-based: OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and ITSNOTABLE are not good arguments. The "delete" !votes, however, have valid policy-based rationales. No prejudice against recreating the article if independent reliable sources become available in the future. Randykitty ( talk) 17:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

2023 Rugby League European Championship B

2023 Rugby League European Championship B (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another contested redirect. Zero independent sourcing. Should probably be drafted or redirected until appropriate sourcing is added, but that's no longer an option. Currently fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 14:19, 25 March 2023 (UTC) reply


Strong Oppose: Every previous Rugby League European Championship B tournament has its own article. This edition is as notable as any of the others. The article is written in more depth than the 2023 Rugby League European Championship with fixtures and tournament schedule being known for Euro B yet Euro A is apparently fit for Wikipedia. The same with the sources, the same for sources are used in both articles yet Euro B has apparently too poor a coverage whist the Euro A article is fine. Also if you look at previous Euro B articles, most of the citations are ERL and IRL articles. I don't understand why this article is being specially targeted for removal based on notability. It's a major international rugby league tournament, how is that not a notable subject? Mn1548 ( talk) 14:59, 27 March 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose: seems a standard start class article for an upcoming international sporting tournament. Perhaps a very mild case of WP:TOOSOON, but not in any egregious sense. Storm machine ( talk) 22:59, 27 March 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Strong Oppose: This is for an International Rugby League competition that has had previous articles. This is a qualification event for the 2025 Rugby League World Cup which is the biggest International Rugby League competition. As Mn1548 pointed out other articles from Euro B are often just from the IRL, ERL or related bodies. Outside of IRL and ERL, an article from the NRL and Guardian have also been cited. Alex333manly ( talk) 09:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - just a note that none of the oppose !votes above are based on policy. Onel5969 TT me 16:33, 31 March 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Counter comment: The policy you have linked that you claim this article currently fails is the article does not have "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". This divides into 5 catagories:

1. Presumed - purely subjective 2. Significant coverage - IRL, ERL, NRL, and Guardian souces give this. 3. Reliable - again all for are reliable 4. Secondary - NRL and Guardian are 5. Independent - Guardian definitely has nothing to do with rugby league

I, not in exact words, has definitely bought up significant coverage from IRL and ERL, and another editor has commented on the inclusion of NRL and Guardian as references. Mn1548 ( talk) 10:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 22:16, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:57, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete We need to be careful to consider the sourcing specifically for the European Group B qualifying division, not the overall World Cup itself or the other qualifying divisions. None of the independent sources meet WP:SIGCOV regarding this group, therefore WP:GNG is not met. MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good rationale for keeping. I would go as far as saying the other things are likely not notable either. The references do not demonstrate notability to me. SWinxy ( talk) 23:45, 15 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Salvio giuliano 08:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Shyam Sunder Bansal

Shyam Sunder Bansal (  | 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)

Coverage is based on press releases: Ref 1 is FPJ Web Desk report, Ref 2 is The Week Focus, Ref 4 is Tribune News Service, Ref 8 Express News Service, photo was uploaded by the creator [6] from Flickr account named after the subject of this article, so there is some connection between two. Fails WP:SIGCOV. US-Verified ( talk) 08:36, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was no consensus. Closing this as "no consensus" per the close 3 (three!) days before this AfD was opened. A trout for the nom. After a no-consensus close, wait 2-3 months at least before nominating again. Randykitty ( talk) 17:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Leher

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

The last AFD was marked as having no consequences based on votes, not based on sources. There was not a single notable source was shared. Fails notability Lordofhunter ( talk) 06:57, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment The sources shared in the previous afds were not meeting WP:ORG.
Gadgets360 news is about how to sign up, and clearly a PR Driven material. ET News, quint [7] are generic about the Indian app Industry not Leher. TOI source is not independent, the article is full of quotes of the companies' spokesperson and no journalist independent research. Other sources like RepublicWorld, Everythingexperiemential & podcast sources are far from reliability. Please read WP:ORG and share reliable, independent sources which are significant.
PLEASE write keep, but with supporting sources also. Lordofhunter ( talk) 19:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Alexander Grigoryants

Alexander Grigoryants (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • Delete: Fails GNG and BIO. BEFORE showed promos, database records, nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Sources in article are from the Great Soviet Encyclopedia (Not a RS), and an article which does not mention the subject. No entry in ru.wp. BEFORE showed nothing with IS RS SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Someone by this name (Александр Григорьянц) is a visual artist and is still alive in Russia, but they are not the subject. Article uses past tense, but I was not able to confirm whether they are alive or deceased.  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:43, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, Armenia, and Russia. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:51, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Fails WP:GNG. Rugbyfan22 ( talk) 10:31, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Mahmoud Al-Aswad

Mahmoud Al-Aswad (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • Delete: BLP, Fails GNG and BIO. BEFORE showed promos, database records, nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Source eval:
  • Database record :: 1.  Mahmoud Al-Aswad at National-Football-Teams.com
  • ROUTINE article about an event, no SIGCOV about subject :: 2. ^ "المجموعة الرابعة: انتصارات لسوريا وتركمانستان" [Group D: victories for Syria and Turkmenistan]. the-afc.com (in Arabic). 10 September 2022. Retrieved 17 December 2022.
  • ROUTINE article about an event, no SIGCOV about subject :: 3. ^ "منتخب سورية لكرة القدم يفوز على منتخب السعودية ببطولة غرب آسيا لفئة تحت 23 عاماً" [The Syrian national football team defeated the Saudi national team in the West Asian Championship for the U-23 category]. dampress.net (in Arabic). 7 November 2022. Retrieved 17 December 2022.
  • ROUTINE article about an event, no SIGCOV about subject :: 4. ^ "ودياً..منتخب سورية الوطني يواجه بيلاروسيا في دبي" [Friendly... The Syrian national team faces Belarus in Dubai]. damas-times.com (in Arabic). 17 November 2022. Retrieved 17 December 2022.
Oppose Draft, its just a back door to deletion and there is no excuse to keep poorly sourced BLPs. WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"'; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability to avoid abuse per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV).  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:19, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 14:06, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Ethical Journalism Network

Ethical Journalism Network (  | 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)

Hardly anything in coverage, fails WP:NORG. US-Verified ( talk) 00:31, 19 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:23, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Strong keep. gNews shows some media coverage, both deep and trivial [8] [9] [10], apart from the fact that the news aggregator shows a lot of news from EJN itself. Wiki also has the page of the organization founder: Aidan White (journalist) and some articles use EJN as a source. Suitskvarts ( talk) 18:59, 28 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:50, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. As usual, we need more participation here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:02, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete as while there are some sources reporting on the organisation's outputs, we lack in-depth coverage of the organisation itself to base a viable article on. Cordless Larry ( talk) 18:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, sadly. This sounds exactly like the sort of organization I'd like to see on Wikipedia. Any bias I have is strongly towards this sort of thing, but I found no reliable sources in my searches. It seems to fail WP:GNG CT55555( talk) 03:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Sandstein 13:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

IOWN Global Forum

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

Promotional article, also seems to lack sources meeting the WP:ORGDEPTH thresholds. MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:44, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:44, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

This article describes a newer trade group. It would be common in early stage to not have a large variety of sources. This article does cite prominent corporations in the marketplace working on these standards. In this regard this page is no different to the early startup period of many other similar groups on Wikipedia including to name a few:
/info/en/?search=Bluetooth_Special_Interest_Group
/info/en/?search=Wi-Fi_Alliance
/info/en/?search=GSMA
/info/en/?search=Connectivity_Standards_Alliance
/info/en/?search=Institute_of_Electrical_and_Electronics_Engineers
/info/en/?search=The_Apache_Software_Foundation Mccamon ( talk) 18:16, 5 April 2023 (UTC) reply
And I should have added, I used the Wi-Fi Alliance and Bluetooth pages as my template outline to create the page in the first place. Mccamon ( talk) 18:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Would you consider Draftification as a resolution?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment Hello Liz, thank you for the suggestion. Yes, I would consider draftification as an appropriate WP:ATD here. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:10, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Leaning to keep - a relatively new nonprofit organisation formed by several notable organisations. Being new - not a huge amount of secondary sources however there are some available with sigcov - this is a good example. I've started to clean up some of the article but it does need more work. I would concur draftify preferable in the event of a deletion result. Resonant Distortion 09:53, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep ResonantDistortion is correct, meets our guidelines for inclusion. Lightburst ( talk) 23:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Star Mississippi 13:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Balkrishan Goenka

Balkrishan Goenka (  | 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)

BLP doesn't seem to meet WP:NBIO - there are many citations, but the individual seems to be lacking in-depth coverage in sources that are reliable. MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:09, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Could you provide an example in the article where the sources you find are not reliable. Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 07:21, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Anything that he's written or gives an interview, or talks about himself. We need things that aren't promotional. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:00, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Could you help us with some reference wiki pages on how are the correct ways to use citations Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 09:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Hello, Could you help me on citation. Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 10:03, 31 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Please respond to the multiple requests on your Talk Page regarding COI concerns. Also, who is "us" that you mention? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 11:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Your use of the citations seems ok, you've correctly used the template. The items you've used for citations aren't notable. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:01, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
I am trying to get feedback from you on my page citations. we need to understand how can we stop our page from deletion. Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 05:54, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete There are no reliable sources found, the COI concerns are a red flag here. Oaktree b ( talk) 14:59, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Hi, Could you help me with where I can post my work for proofreading? Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 09:26, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:55, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi, There is no answer to my previous questions. Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 08:29, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 06:38, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Benito Juarez Community Academy shooting

Benito Juarez Community Academy shooting (  | 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)

Routine shooting, no lasting coverage. Sadly, not that different than most other shootings in the USA. No coverage found beyond local news, telling us that the event happened. Oaktree b ( talk) 05:30, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 04:59, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

New River Valley rivalry

New River Valley rivalry (  | 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 rivalry. Of all of the links cited here, only one uses the name "New River Valley rivalry" at all - the rest just state that these teams have played each other a number of times in a variety of sports, which is natural when both schools are 12 miles away from one another. A WP:BEFORE search turned up mostly primary sources and Wikipedia mirrors. fuzzy510 ( talk) 03:56, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete per nom. Passing mentions of rivalry from sources, nothing in-depth on topic. Skipple ☎ 04:47, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 04:58, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

ICEDQ

ICEDQ (  | 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)

Software platform doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG - in-depth coverage largely consists of press releases. MrsSnoozyTurtle 03:12, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:00, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Ken Welch

Ken Welch (  | 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)

Notability.

I do not believe that St. Pete's mayoralty is notable enough itself to award Welch his noteworthiness, nor that Welch has otherwise garnered sufficient notability SecretName101 ( talk) 01:58, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

 Comment: Notability needs to be demonstrated in the article itself, and the article does not indicate he did anything of significant note. If he indeed did notable work on the Pinellas County Commission or as mayor, the article should say so. SecretName101 ( talk) 09:21, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

SecretName101, Could you point to a Wikipedia policy that states that notability needs to be demonstrated in the article itself? Is that a brand-new policy? Jacona ( talk) 12:31, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Au contraire, WP:NEXIST. Curbon7 ( talk) 15:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Correct. For added emphasis, Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article", SecretName101 –  Muboshgu ( talk) 16:07, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
If the notability is neither established by the article itself, nor is otherwise illustrated here in this deletion discussion, then it does not exist though for all intents and purposes. "Trust me brah, he's notable" is not sufficient. lay out a case of noteworthiness here, because the article is not making the case itself. SecretName101 ( talk) 16:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Nobody is saying "trust me brah", we're saying this is why you're supposed to do WP:BEFORE. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 19:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Passes WP:POLITICIAN, many sources, found lots of material on Google and in the newspaper database. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 10:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Is that material trivial or does it establish notability. Please provide examples of material you found on google and in the newspaper database that establish individual notability. Since these sources are not present in the article itself, for them to contribute to making the case for keeping this article, you'd need to outline them here. Other words, you are just saying "trust me brah, I found some stuff" without giving any ability for that material to actually be evaluated. SecretName101 ( talk) 17:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Dr vulpes forgot to ping SecretName101 ( talk) 17:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Sure @ SecretName101 here's a break down of the sources that are already used in the article for establishing notability. Just search google with "Ken Welch" and you'll get a lot of sources, I also when on newspapers.com and was able to get hits there. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 18:08, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Your table illustrates that nearly all of the coverage you are citing is indeed routine local election coverage from local news outlets. Which do not establish that he is notable independently. SecretName101 ( talk) 18:21, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
You asked me to lay out the sources and I think I've shown that they pass WP:GNG and WP:POLITICIAN. I'm not sure what standard of evidence you are looking for here, maybe if you could help me out and walk me through your thought process a bit it would help me understand your point of view better. Because to me this looks fine, and going over my WP:NPP materials again it again looks like it passes. Just incase context gets lost over the internet I am being serious when asking for help understanding and I'm not trying to make fun of you, be sarcastic or be a jerk. Because if I am this off base then I want to learn why and how I got there. I do respect the amount of time and energy you've put into this project. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 08:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
opss forgot to ping @ SecretName101 sorry about that. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 08:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Dr vulpes I think you don't have a firm grasp on either of those.
The sources you provided in your table actually don't establish the notability needed for those standards. See my previous comment. It's pretty basic that the existence of standard election coverage is not enough for WP:Politician or WP:GNG SecretName101 ( talk) 22:22, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Dr vulpes Here and other places you have asserted that the existence of reliable independent sources covering an individual alone is enough for notability. That is untrue. You have to assess what the coverage is and if it indeed outlines a case for notability.
Independent reliable sources publish millions of stories every day on subjects that don't meet notability standards. SecretName101 ( talk) 22:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Coverage is about Welch gearing up to run for Mayor ✔ Yes
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Article is about Welch winning an election ✔ Yes
Fox 13 Yes Local TV news stations Yes Local Fox affiliates are considered distinct from Fox News, and are covered by WP:NEWSORG Yes Article is about Welch winning an election ✔ Yes
Pinellas County Website No 404 Error ~ 404 Error ? 404 Error ✘ No
University of South Florida No 404 Error ~ 404 Error ? 404 Error ✘ No
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Article is about Welch running for election ✔ Yes
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Article is about Welch ✔ Yes
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Article is about Welch ✔ Yes
Catalyst Yes Website appears to not have ties to Welch or other groups ~ Some articles might be but others might not. Website says that they are "powered by community sourced content" Yes Article is about Welch announcing his candidacy ~ Partial
WFLA Channel 8 News (NBC) Yes Local TV news stations Yes Local TV news stations are generally reliable and this one is affiliated with NBC Yes Election results and video about Welch ✔ Yes
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Article is about Welch being first black mayor ✔ Yes
WFTS News (ABC) Yes Local TV news stations Yes Local TV news stations are generally reliable and this one is affiliated with NBC Yes Article is about Welch being first black mayor ✔ Yes
WUSF (NPR) Yes Affiliated with USF and NPR, this is a local public radio station Yes Content appears reliable Yes Article is about Welch and plans with Tropicana Field ✔ Yes
Bay News 9 Yes Local cable news owned by Charter Communications Yes Article appears reliable and in line with other sources Yes Article is about Welch running for mayor ✔ Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}.
  • Keep. First black mayor of a major US City, there are tens of thousands of sources available. Google search of "ken welch" + "st petersburg" yielded 32,000 results, FWIW, and reading into them they provide SIGCOV in multiple, reliable sources, meeting WP:GNG hundreds of times over. This should be a SNOW close, IMO. Jacona ( talk) 12:48, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Meets WP:BASIC and is presumed notable per WP:NPOL's "major local political figures who have received significant press coverage". Significant coverage abounds and is sustained, especially in sources from the Tampa Bay area:
  • "St. Pete Mayor Ken Welch says he can't imagine Grand Prix with open carry". Tampa Bay Times.
  • "St. Petersburg Mayor Ken Welch restarts bidding process for Tropicana Field". Tampa Bay Times.
  • Brezina, Veronica (29 June 2022). "Sugar Hill, Midtown react to Welch's Trop announcement". St Pete Catalyst.
  • "Here's what they're saying about Mayor Ken Welch's pick to redevelop the Trop". Tampa Bay Times.
  • "Meet incoming St. Petersburg Mayor Ken Welch's top City Hall administrators". Tampa Bay Times.
  • "Circus-themed St. Petersburg mayoral ball canceled after Ken Welch declines invite". Tampa Bay Times.
gobonobo + c 16:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
None of these stories establish individual notability. It is expected that anyplace a local news paper would publish stories on a mayor. None of these establish significant news coverage, this is run-of-the-mill. Nor are any of these stories that distinguish Welch as having done work as mayor of particular note yet. Perhaps such stories that distinguish him as notable do exist (please find them if they do), but these are not them. SecretName101 ( talk) 16:54, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Reminder, BASIC states "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability." Five of your six articles are Tampa Bay Times articles. That is the opposite of presenting multiple independent sources SecretName101 ( talk) 16:56, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm okay if we do keep this at this point. But I don't think any of the arguments laid out point to sources or actions that afford him notability. I'll try to enhance the article proper with some stuff that could arguably, but there is an absence at the moment. SecretName101 ( talk) 00:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was merge to Varsity team. Sources exist, which is a problem with millions of schools having JV teams and newspapers.com indexing them. But sources haven't been established for notability independent of the broader concept. Star Mississippi 13:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Junior varsity team

Junior varsity team (  | 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)

Broad concept that doesn't seem to be broken down and discussed by any reliable source. One citation in the whole article. An anonymous username, not my real name 01:20, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

A quick search for sources finds:
PK-WIKI ( talk) 02:32, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • PK-WIKI (it's helpful to sign your posts if you remember), I am well aware of WP:NEXIST, but as I explained, this didn't appear to apply based on my searches. Now that sources have been provided, I would still argue that this doesn't need to be its own article; rather, it would make sense to have this explained within varsity team, while specific sports (college baseball, American football, etc.) can have their own articles if sourcing is sufficient. An anonymous username, not my real name 02:29, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Merge for now to Varsity team, with no prejudice towards its recreation at a later time. The article subject is notable, but it generally exists in relationship with varsity sports in the United States looking at both the above sources and from my own search (I'm only looking at this from an American perspective, to be clear). I could see a world where an editor would take the plethora of coverage about JV sports in the US and draw out a larger article, but this current one would be better served with merging information into the target for now. I'd recommend that it should be a sub-section of "varsity sports". Nomader ( talk) 03:30, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment So many pages link here that we really need to keep it as a redirect, at least. It may be possible to write an independent article about this topic, but I think this concept would make the most sense if discussed alongside varsity sports. There are surely hundreds of sources about individual JV teams, JV competitions, etc, but weaving that information into a coherent article could be challenging. Zagalejo ( talk) 07:09, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Merge into 'Varsity team', leaving the redirect. However, that article itself is a mess, and seems to overlap various articles listed at Varsity. (Having seen that mess, I must keep reminding myself that I have other things I am supposed to be working on.) - Donald Albury 11:59, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • keep notable subject matter, sources that exist and have been shown in this discussion need to be incorporated in the article. AFD is not cleanup.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 15:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per above. Therapyisgood ( talk) 04:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Is most certainly notable. Newspapers.com brings up over 2,000,000 results for "junior varsity," and there's even whole books making comparisons between varsity and JV [11]. AFDISNOTCLEANUP. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 15:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    So Newspapers.com *does* bring over millions of articles. But after spotchecking just a couple dozen of them, it's all stuff like this ( [12]), just schedules and random notes about how games went -- no actual coverage of the topic. And the book that you link to (which I found as well) actually discusses the subject of the fitness of junior varsity athletes in the context of varsity ones! Clearly they exist as a topic together and this redirect should be allowed to be recreated without prejudice, but I think it makes a ton of sense for the subjects to be merged together (as they exist in relation to each other). Nomader ( talk) 13:56, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Still, the fact that it is used millions and millions of times clearly shows it is a major concept and should be kept. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 15:40, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Some coverage about the term "jv" itself: [13] ( p2) [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 15:51, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    But again, these all discuss the subject in the context of... varsity sports and the resources given to both of them. A merge makes so much sense here -- a well-sourced article would be able to discuss the different levels of varsity sports (of which JV is one of them clearly based on the sources you have given here) and would be able to discuss it in context appropriately. Nomader ( talk) 17:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Merge The sources do not outweigh the fact that Varsity team is quite short and this can easily be merged there to better show the context of how these sports work, as most of what defines junior varsity is simply complementary to varsity. Even if a notable concept, per WP:NOPAGE, there is no need for a separate article here for closely related terms. The length of the article is misleading, being largely unsourced original research. Reywas92 Talk 13:28, 5 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided between Keep and Merge. Remember to base judgments on souces and policy guidelines, not on whether or not you believe the subject is "worthy" (or "unworthy").
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:50, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Keep per PK-WIKI's listed sources. Clearly demonstrate notability and in-depth analysis on the topic. Skipple ☎ 04:51, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Merge, because where length is not a concern readers are better served by a coherent summary at a single page than partially redundant content in multiple places. Yes, the concept is notable; but the vast majority of content that crops up in a search is about specific teams, which doesn't belong here; indeed using them would likely be original research. What coverage there is of the concept is easily handled, and more coherently handled, at Varsity team. Vanamonde ( Talk) 05:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Vanamonde ( Talk) 05:02, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Brigette Peterson

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

Lacks notability. Being mayor of Gilbert does not itself make a subject notable enough for an article.

One reason is that Gilbert is an overgrown suburb in effect. It is a tertiary population center within its metro area. Mayors of Gilbert do not tend to carry widespread political influence or over their metro area, unlike mayors of similarly-populous communities that are the primary anchor of metro areas. This should be evidenced by the fact that other mayors of Gilbert largely lack articles and many mayors of similar suburban cities also lack articles.

Another reason is that, on top of the aforementioned dynamic, Gilbert most resembles a weak mayor government. Day-to-day administrating is actually the city managers' role, not the mayor. This further weakens the notability of the mayor, as they don't actually have all that much power over city policy. [19]

If Peterson does something that garners her particular note within her office or outside of it, then she would warrant an article. But she hasn't, as far as I know.

I think that there is no particularly notability, and therefore a deletion is warranted. SecretName101 ( talk) 01:37, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Arizona. SecretName101 ( talk) 01:37, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Pinging contributors to the previous (no consensus) deletion discussion so they can respond to this proposal and the arguments laid out.@ Bearcat: @ LordVoldemort728: @ MB: @ Bbraxtonlee: @ Liz: SecretName101 ( talk) 02:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Pinging a key article contributor as well @ Jamiebuba SecretName101 ( talk) 03:00, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex ( talk) 03:18, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Well, the decision that will be made at this AFD (and others you have made) don't rely on the nominator's belief in the notability (or lack of notability) of the article subject but on whether reliable sources, either in the article now or ones that are found through the course of this discussion, can establish a subject's notability. In my time closing AFD discussions, I've seen lots of articles on subjects I thought were not notable Kept because sources found demonstrate that they are, in fact, believed to be notable. What did you find in your BEFORE search for additional sources? Liz Read! Talk! 03:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Liz For starters, it is not a promising sign that among the early results in a google search are trivial pages about random people with the same name. Should be a major red flag for lack of notability. After sixteen results that include several of her social media accounts, a few routine local articles on her, as well as her campaign website I was given results that have nothing to do with her and which are of ridiculously low-notability. Results that would never pop up within the first hundred-plus (probably thousand-plus) results for a incumbent officeholder with actual notability. These include (within the next sixteen results:
    • a wedding site for another person of her name (congrats those two, hope it all goes well in September)
    • Some other Bridgette Peterson's Pinterest page with whopping 92 followers
    • the Charity Water fundraising page of a young girl with the same name that has raised $250 dollars from 13 donations all made a decade ago in 2013 (good for that girl)
    • The ScottsdaleRealtors.org page for a realtor with the same name
    • the website of DundasDome (no clear discernible connection to the term "Bridgette Peterson" is present on that webpage, which is like fifty more red flags that it was an early result for that search term
    • A Flickr account belonging to another person of her name with zero followers and only twenty pictures all uploaded on June 4 and June 5, 2010
    • A University of Minnesota college student's report on nutrition of competitive swimmers, which google says has been cited by a single other person.
    and also:
    SecretName101 ( talk) 09:08, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Also, even routine local coverage articles on her can barely muster anything to say. Look at this AZ Central article. It's clear the newspaper could muster anything actually notable on her, so called it a day. (also worth noting that this article appears twice in the first 16 results, also appearing through Yahoo's syndication reprinting of it SecretName101 ( talk) 09:14, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep It was really easy to find sources for this article. Was able to get some newspaper stories about her that I've added as well as some controversies that are not tranisant. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 10:19, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Please provide examples of non-routine coverage that illustrates/establishes notability. Without outlining receipts, your ability to "get some newspaper stories" cannot be evaluated as establishing notability. The existence of "some stories" that are accessible does not inherently grant a subject notability. SecretName101 ( talk) 17:05, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Dr vulpes Pinging SecretName101 ( talk) 14:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep due to significant coverage in reliable sources that demonstrate meeting the criteria detailed in WP:GNG. Examples include:
  1. https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/gilbert-mayor-under-fire-for-proposed-limits-to-public-comments-11734354
  2. https://www.gilbertsunnews.com/news/for-new-mayor-gilbert-was-love-at-first-sight/article_f0928608-4c87-11eb-b810-bb0f5e48876d.html
  3. https://www.yourvalley.net/stories/gilbert-mayor-answers-anonymous-text-campaign-against-commuter-rail,316362 (I wasn't able to get past the paywall, but I'm satisfied from what I saw that it provides significant coverage)
  4. https://www-newspapers-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/clip/113469977/gilbert-mayor-did-not-violate-ethics/ CT55555( talk) 13:11, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ CT55555 These are run-of-the-mill local news stories. Millions of clearly non-notable local officials have similar coverage. SecretName101 ( talk) 17:10, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    I disagree. Suggestions of ethics violations and limiting freedom of speech are interesting and unusual pieces of news coverage, not routine. That they are local has no negative bearing on notability, I am aware of no policy that discounts local news coverage. Having considered your comment, it does not persuade me to change my !vote. CT55555( talk) 20:40, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ CT55555 suggestions of ethics violation are "not routine"? Are you saying that it's not routine to find politician being potentially ethically sketch? I hate to be a cynic, but I'd call that incredibly commonplace.
    And limiting public comment at forums in the manner she proposed might be reprehensible and a big deal to local residents, but it's definitely not something that gives her any broader notability. SecretName101 ( talk) 00:29, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Mindful of WP:BLUDGEON and also WP:COAL I'm not going to keep repeating myself to justify my !vote. CT55555( talk) 14:30, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ CT55555 Also the headline is literally "Gilbert mayor did not violate ethics", so you are you literally saying the mere allegation of run-of-the-mill ethics violations makes her notable?
    I'm bewildered how you think these are the stories to illustrate notability. SecretName101 ( talk) 00:30, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • We don't have a rule that local coverage is ineligible for use. We do, however, have a rule that local coverage isn't necessarily enough to clinch inclusion all by itself if the person can show absolutely no evidence of having a wider range of coverage beyond the purely local. (For instance, a high school athlete who has accomplished nothing that would satisfy our inclusion criteria for sportspeople is not going to be exempted from them just because he has two or three pieces of local coverage in his own hometown media in run of the mill local interest contexts, and a child actor who hasn't otherwise passed WP:NACTOR is not going to be exempted from it just because he gets a couple of pieces of "local kid gets bit part in movie" in his hometown local media.) Bearcat ( talk) 11:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Bearcat all that is being provided is local coverage of things that do not establish any distinguish meant or notability.
    when all you can point to are non-distinguishing stories in local media, you have not established notability SecretName101 ( talk) 14:21, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Why are you addressing this comment to me, when it doesn't contradict what I said? I'm not the one who was trying to argue that the existing sources established notability, I was trying to provide context for why they don't. Bearcat ( talk) 14:23, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Bearcat I am agreeing with you SecretName101 ( talk) 14:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Then why did you ping me as if you were replying to me with a counterargument? Bearcat ( talk) 14:26, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Sufficient sources to meet WP:GNG and to expand article. See, per User:CT55555: Gilbert Sun News and others. Jaireeodell ( talk) 15:00, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jaireeodell expound on how they meet the criteria. The news source you point to is routine coverage. A local paper publishing a piece on a newly-elected official does not make them notable. Otherwise, every longtime elementary school teacher that received an in-depth profile in a local newspaper when they retired would be notable enough for a Wikpedia article (not to insult the great value of teachers' work) SecretName101 ( talk) 17:08, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ SecretName101 I think the source I point to is reliable and provides information that could be used to expand the entry. Notability is met, in my opinion, by the fact that she was elected to be mayor of city of more than a 100,000 people. Non-local media coverage includes The Arizona Republic (state wide coverage). (I believe this is more than what a longtime elementary school teacher would receive.) Jaireeodell ( talk) 13:36, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jaireeodell
    the source you provided does not cover anything about her that makes her actually NOTABLE. Reliability of a source does not make the article’s subject inherently notable: reliable sources routinely cover stories/subjects that do not themselves meet notability standards.
    Population in excess of 100,000 still does not give the officeholder inherent notability. It is a “weak mayoralty” in a suburban city that is a tertiary community within its metro area. That’s not a position which holds inherent political influence at broad. I have already stated this. Also, see my postings at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Carmel mayoral election for why political office in such overgrown suburbs don’t carry inherent broader notability.
    I have already stated why population alone is not a signifier of importance of a suburban city’s population. She holds a “weak mayor” position in a suburban municipality that is lower than a tertiary municipality in its metro area even in terms population. Not really a position that holds inherent broad political note/influence. For more arguments on why government offices in overgrown suburbs like this are not inherently politically notable, see my postings at Carmel mayoral deletion nom
    Also Arizona Republic is local coverage. Just as the Chicago Tribune is local coverage of the happenings in Chicago’s suburbs, the Phoenix-based Arizona Republic is local coverage for Phoenix suburbs. SecretName101 ( talk) 14:14, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Re: The Arizona Republic ... "Circulated throughout Arizona, it is the state's largest newspaper." ... "twenty-first largest, by circulation" in the United States. As for the concept of a "weak mayoralty," I'm not sure that it matters. One can hold an office of public interest even if that office is ceremonial. -- Jaireeodell ( talk) 14:28, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Bearcat It is a Phoenix-based paper. Its coverage of Phoenix suburbs is local coverage.
    Just as the Chicago Tribune is distributed broadly and among the 10-most circulated paper in the United States but still publishes local-coverage for Chicagoland. Just as the Star Tribune is distributed broadly, top-ten US newspaper, still provides local coverage of Twin Cities metro. Just as the Los Angeles Times is distributed broadly, top-ten U.S. newspaper, and still provides local coverage of LA metro. Just as the Boston Globe is a top-ten US paper, and still publishes local coverage on the Boston metro. Same with the Washington Post and local Washington coverage. Same with the New York Post and local coverage as well. SecretName101 ( talk) 15:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    You pinged me to reply to somebody else again Bearcat ( talk) 15:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Pinging @ Jaireeodell: SecretName101 ( talk) 15:35, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jaireeodell Additionally, holding a local office that has no inherent notability itself ("ceremonial" as you state) would not confer notability in and of itself. You'd need to do something(s) to establish note. SecretName101 ( talk) 15:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: Local news media is always going to cover local politicians, as that is a routine part of their duty. In the absence of regional or national-level sources, the question should thus be not whether local sources cover this person, but whether they do so to such a degree as to cross the threshold of significance. Curbon7 ( talk) 15:57, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Sources are reliable and independent. Mayor of one of the largest cities in Arizona. Scanlan ( talk) 14:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Scanlan The reliability and independence of sources do not confer notability to a subject. Every day, independent and reliable sources publish millions of pieces on subjects that would not meet notability standards
    Also, you did not address the crux of nomination made about how the population of this municipality does not make the officeholder inherently notable. Municipality is a mere suburb that is less than even tertiary in populace within its own metro area. The mayoralty in this city is created by a "weak mayor" system, which does not confer much power to the mayor. There is little ground to argue that she holds an office that confers automatic notability. SecretName101 ( talk) 15:27, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Starting with the obvious, the subject does not pass WP:NPOL so the question is whether the subject meets GNG. The community's expectation of local elected officials is the article must be more than "the mayor exists" (see WP:POLOUTCOMES). Size of a jurisdiction has largely been discounted by the community as a reason for keeping (or deleting) an article. The expectation is that articles about local officials contain and the sources illustrate specific projects the official spearheaded or the specific effects the subject had on the development of the city (this is often reflective of an official's career or the sources suggest is novel {that is saying an official championed a local development is not sufficient, but recognized as championing a novel policy may {see the deletion discussion for Tina Podlodowski}}). It is helpful that the sources are national, and not entirely local because because those national sources provide context for what the subject accomplished in office (see the deletion discussion of Denis Law. As is, I do not see any source for this subject that goes beyond saying "she exists." There is no obvious redirect target as her mention in Gilbert is temporary (there is not a list of mayors). -- Enos733 ( talk) 16:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep passes WP:GNG and WP:BASIC.-- User:Namiba 17:38, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Namiba please give specifics on how. What establishes here general notability in your opinion? What significant coverage has she received?
    Asserting that it meets these without elaborating at all on how is not helpful or persuasive. SecretName101 ( talk) 18:59, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

 Comment: it still hasn't been effectively established by anyone that she meets notability. The coverage that is provided does not establish her as holding a notable office or being a notable individual. Local officials do not inherently meet WP:POLITICIAN. Being mayor of Gilbert is a very local office, with only a local impact. And on top of that, the "weak mayor" system generally weakens the inherent range of impact of its holder has even at the local level. Holding this office is not enough to establish notability. As a result, she would need to have done something that is notable in particular to be of enough note. Nothing has been established that what she has done in her office (or outside) is distinct and noteworthy. If actual coverage that establishes significance could be provided, there'd be a case to keep here, but none has. SecretName101 ( talk) 19:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I see your passion for deleting articles about certain politicians, but try not to dominate deletion discussions. This system is intended to produce widespread community input. As User:CT55555 wrote above, the sources provided are, in the estimation of those arguing for a keep result, sufficient per Wikipedia's policies. It's on you to prove that the article doesn't meet those standards.-- User:Namiba 11:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Namiba You are telling me not to litigate/respond to counterpoints.......yet also telling me I have to prove the article doesn't meet those standards.
Those are contradictory commands.
By explaining to why sources others provide are failing to establish notability, I am properly engaging in this discussion as well as enforcing my case. SecretName101 ( talk) 19:20, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. There are plenty of sources available to meet WP:GNG. Whether the editor likes suburbs is unimportant, the sources exist. Whether the mayor is weak or strong, the sources cover them. notability has nothing to do with whether one particular editor has snobbish feelings against smaller cities in major metros, but that seems to be what this set of nominations is about. Jacona ( talk) 18:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jacona That's a mischaracterization of my rationale. It's not that I don't like suburbs: it's that this particular city's mayoralty is not enough to confer notability, and notability is not otherwise established.
    Please actually read my rationale and substantively respond to it, as well as my previous points of why GNG is not established by sources.
    This individual does not meet notability standards.
    It's clear you were not careful in considering what has been laid out before responding, since you so inaccurately characterized it.
    And please do not call me "snobbish" towards smaller cities. My argument is about whether the office she holds is notable enough to infer her immediate notability. It isn't. I have edited and created numerous articles on this project about/relating to smaller-cities and even small suburbs. That is a false and unwarranted personal character attack that should not be hurled here, and I'd appreciate an apology if you have it in you. SecretName101 ( talk) 19:16, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    SecretName101, How is your characterization of Gilbert as "an overgrown suburb in effect" anything but snobbishness? I am sorry that you feel that calling your snobbish statement snobbish is a false and unwarranted personal character attack. —  Jacona ( talk) 21:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Maybe familiarize yourself with what a suburb is and look to the rest of what I said for context of that statement. A suburb is an a descriptor for an outlying area, rather than the central anchors, of a metro area. Gilbert is populous by virtue of its broad boundaries (a hulking 68.79 square miles), encompassing a large area of suburban land. But it is still just an amalgamation of suburban area, rather than than the central force within its metro area. Holding mayoralties in the primary center of a metro area is notable, in part, due to the dynamic where political decisions within such centers have impacts felt on the surrounding metro area. On the other hand, individual suburbs generally don't have such an impact on the rest of their metro area, because the area's economy and politics is not tied to them in quite the same way.
    It is not a commentary on how I feel about suburbs. It is just how the dynamics of metropolitan economies and politics generally work. SecretName101 ( talk) 22:10, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jacona Furthermore, it is worth noting that Gilbert's mayoralty is not just a weak mayoralty in a municipally that is of below- tertiary population within its metro area, but that it is also weak mayoralty within an Arizona town government.
    Per Gilbert: "Since Gilbert remains incorporated as a town, it lacks the additional powers possessed by nearby Mesa and Chandler, which are incorporated as cities. For instance, Arizona towns do not have as much power to regulate utilities and construction within their borders as cities possess."
    Being mayor of Gilbert, quite simply, is not a position that carries inherently broad influence. SecretName101 ( talk) 22:17, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    It doesn't matter whether or not the town or position carries inherently broad influence, what matters is that Brigette Peterson, the subject of the article has received WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS, and is therefore WP:N. —  Jacona ( talk) 23:20, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jacona And how has she? Nothing has been pointed that actually does. News coverage that has been pointed to is local and largely goes as far as "she exists". SecretName101 ( talk) 02:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: Since there is a heated debate going on here, I had to study the sources very carefully. From my observations, I must say that she passess WP:GNG. Thilsebatti ( talk) 00:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Thilsebatti It would be useful to explain what your observations were, if you could spare some more time. SecretName101 ( talk) 02:18, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 04:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Minas Halaj

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

I can't seem to find reliable secondary sources about this artist. Does not pass WP:GNG or WP:ARTIST. This entire BLP also contains no inline citations. PopoDameron ⁠ talk 01:33, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2023_April_9&oldid=1152995435"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< April 08 April 10 >

Purge server cache

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

The result was delete. There is consensus that this shouldn't remain. Whether a dab or a redirect is needed can be handled editorially as there's no indication this history is needed. Star Mississippi 00:27, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Eye On Sports

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

Does not appear to be notable. Nothing found in a BEFORE. Tagged for notability since 2017 DonaldD23 talk to me 23:31, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion: previously PRODded.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete a generic sports-news program with a generic name. Apart from the station's website, I don't see substantial coverage. The name is too generic to consider a redirect; CBS had a show of this name in 1994. Walt Yoder ( talk) 01:03, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Either Redirect to Television Jamaica or delete and create a disambiguation page to include this show and the 1990s CBS show (I would suggest a link to CBS Sports Spectacular). The TVJ show lacks standalone notability. However, the fact that the name is too generic to consider a redirect is not a valid argument against a redirect/DAB page. Frank Anchor 16:41, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete or create disambig page Unsourced article. MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:44, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


The result was no consensus to delete. Participation in the discussion is leaning closer to a "keep" outcome than a "delete" outcome, and the sources cited in support of this outcome are not clearly barred for this purpose. BD2412 T 00:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Tevin Slater

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

Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 20:15, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments Reference
Nothing 1. FIFA.com
Social media 2. ^ "Parham". Caribbean Transfers. Retrieved 14 November 2015.
Failed V 404 3. ^ "Dominica suffers second defeat in football tournament". Dominican News Online. 3 May 2014. Retrieved 11 June 2015.
Single sentence about a game 4. ^ "Barbados, SVG play to dramatic draw in friendly". CONCACAF. 9 March 2015. Archived from the original on 2 May 2015. Retrieved 11 June 2015.
Single sentence about a game 5. ^ "Golden Jaguars, St Vincent draw 2-2". Guyana Times. 11 June 2015. Archived from the original on 11 June 2015. Retrieved 11 June 2015.
database 6. ^ "CFD Profile". Caribbean Football Database. Retrieved 5 September 2015.
Promo for football awards https://www.iwnsvg.com/2015/07/21/striker-tevin-slater-nets-heavy-catch-at-football-awards/
Promo from Government tourism site, Interview http://www.tourism.gov.vc/tourism/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=445:vincentian-striker-is-top-scorer-in-concacaf-qualifying-round-for-the-2018-world-cup&catid=41:latest-news&Itemid=115hhere
BLPs need clearly IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability to avoid abuse per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV).  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:28, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:36, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:51, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment I disagree that iwnsvg.com story is a promo for football awards, it is a story about him being named Senior Football of the Year by the Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Football Federation. Him winning the award is also covered in a story in Searchlight.vc. Besides these two articles, the best I could find is a story from The Vincentian about his goal scoring prowness in recent national team matches. However, all three sources are from the span of July-September 2015 so they aren't exactly WP:SUSTAINED coverage so in my opinion additional SIGCOV is needed. Alvaldi ( talk) 13:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • keep with Alvaldi's added sources. Pelmeen10 ( talk) 16:36, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • keep with Alvaldi's added sources. Helps with the notability of the article. Justwatchmee ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:53, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep feels subject scrapes though WP:GNG.Subject has ongoing international career see little point in deleting it. Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 08:35, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Having an "international career" means nothing on Wikipedia. Our notability standards are not based on stuff like that. Of the sources listed here and on the article, one source doesn't mention Slater, one is a passing mentions, one is a Facebook link ( WP:SPS), two are databases, and two are routine event coverages. That leaves four sources that could confer notability ( 1, 2, 3, 4), but together they do not meet the bar of notability. SWinxy ( talk) 22:01, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. I find that the sources SWinxy lists barely meet WP:SIGCOV; they are sufficient to support a reliable albeit short article on the subject. The fact that they span a period of three years makes me think WP:SUSTAINED is satisfied (barely). Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 14:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Despite being relisted twice no substantial discussion regarding the available sources took place. But clearly there is currently no consensus to delete the article. Pax:Vobiscum ( talk) 11:08, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

2023 Wests Tigers season

2023 Wests Tigers season (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested redirect. Zero independent sources, but redirecting is no longer an option. Currently fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 11:58, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Oppose: WP:NSEASONS qualifies this and almost every other NRL team season article nominated or draftified by this editor. Yes some teams have more active editors than others to ensure full WP:GNG compliance, but I fail to see the point of the back-and-forward nature of what's happening to a few different articles in the rugby league space. Storm machine ( talk) 23:09, 27 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:44, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:48, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

*Keep: adheres to WP:NSEASONS and there's more than enough presumed and significant coverage available for editors to expand upon the article in time using simple searches, aka WP:NEXISTS. Storm machine ( talk) 06:42, 13 April 2023 (UTC) Striking second !vote by the same user. MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete Lacks non-routine coverage supporting that WP:GNG is met (WP:NSPORT doesn't automatically establish notability). MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Is clearly notable as a top-level professional team with plenty of coverage, see for example the numerous results on GNews just published in the last few days! BeanieFan11 ( talk) 01:47, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: as noted in my struck out comment, WP:NEXISTS – there's more than enough presumed and significant coverage available for editors to expand upon the article in time using simple searches. Storm machine ( talk) 22:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Aoidh ( talk) 02:24, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Phil Simon

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

This article about a writer of books about technology is mostly referenced to primary sources. I have carried out WP:BEFORE and have not been able to find any non-primary sources to add. I did cut a section before deciding to nominate this, as it read promotional and was referenced to a primary source which is now a deadlink. Of the existing 17 references, 4 are links to books written by Simon. 3 are references to his website. One (current ref number 7) is an interview, three look as if they all link to one interview on a NYT podcast (one of these is an MP3 file which I haven't listened to), one is a deadlink (current ref 11), three are author pages on various publications, and two relate to the Axiom Business Book Awards. These last two did make me wonder whether he is notable, but I don't think they are notable awards - 70+ were awarded in both of the years his books won an award, and both his awards were at the Silver level. Doesn't look like he meets either WP:GNG or WP:AUTHOR to me. Tacyarg ( talk) 23:16, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 14:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Arbër Vokrri

Arbër Vokrri (  | 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)

Was deprodded with the rationale, "easily verifiable that he's deputy minister". Which is true. However, deputy ministers do not qualify under WP:NPOL, and searches did not turn up enough to meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 21:37, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure that applies to NPOL so easily. That guideline is for politicians or judges, typically elected positions and not necessarily appointed positions. At least it's not an obvious keep in that sense. There are a lots of government agencies where even the head wouldn't be notable, much less a #2. I think this is more of a case were WP:GNG would need to be satisfied. KoA ( talk) 16:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 23:02, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete possibly TOOSOON. It wasn't immediately clear, but Vokrri is not an elected member of the Assembly of the Republic of Kosovo. Merely being a government employee is insufficient to meet WP:NPOL. There are a few Google hits about a person of this name in the context of a group called INSID ( NBC News quoting him in a story about managing former ISIS fighters), but I am not sure it is the same person as the deputy minister. Walt Yoder ( talk) 00:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:POLOUTCOMES. Deputy ministers in European countries are usually the highest-ranking civil servant, and not a cabinet minister nor a parliamentarian. Please ping me if I am incorrect. Bearian ( talk) 17:33, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete My understanding is that being a deputy minister isn't sufficient to meet WP:NPOL. Happy to revise my !vote if this is not correct. MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. ✗ plicit 23:50, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Heartbeat (video game)

Heartbeat (video game) (  | 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)

Game appears to fail WP:GNG. While it got decent mentions in both Rock Paper Shotgun and PCGamesN, both are by the same author at the same time. The only other major coverage it received was in 4Gamer. There is an article about a controversy regarding the game's developers that happened about a year after release, but it is debatable whether it really addresses the game, being almost entirely about the developers' views. This is a highly unusual case, but I don't think it passes the notability bar. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 22:39, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 22:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Jannik Olander (jewelry designer)

Jannik Olander (jewelry designer) (  | 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)

BLP doesn't seem to meet WP:NBIO - lacks in-depth coverage in reliable sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 22:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Ingress cancellation

Ingress cancellation (  | 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)

A WP:DICTDEF that has been tagged for rewriting since 2009. Apart from some Cisco patents and marketing material, the term does not appear to be in use. Not sure if deletion, a soft-redirect to Wiktionary, or a redirect to some article on signal processing is best. Walt Yoder ( talk) 22:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Walt Yoder ( talk) 22:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, meh, it passes WP:GNG and could be expanded per the available sources. I suspect that this type of filtering is also known by another name and may be better merged elsewhere or turned into a broader article on ingress noise. SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 00:59, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep — the term seems to be used enough to be considered notable. PopoDameron ⁠ talk 01:17, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Week keep or merge I have next to no understanding of this technical topic. However, a web search indicates that the topic has some coverage. Maybe it is best covered as a redirect to a section in another article, however I don't think that deletion is beneficial here. MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:06, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Aoidh ( talk) 02:25, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Sabih Arca

Sabih Arca (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • Delete: Fails GNG and BIO. BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.
Sources:
  • Photo :: 1.  "cache-v2". donanimhaber.
  • Database record :: 2. ^ "National football team player Sabih Arca". EU Football. Retrieved 2022-08-15.
  • Turkish content provider article, not IS RS with SIGCOV :: 3. ^ "Sabih Arca". Retrieved 2022-08-15.
  • bout Fenerbahçe, does not mention subject :: 4. ^ Hay Eytan Cohen Yanarocak (2012-05-28). "The Last Stronghold: The Fenerbahçe Sports Club and Turkish Politics". Dayan. Retrieved 2022-08-15.
  • Team History, nothing about subject :: 5. ^ "A Milli Takım Tarihçesi" (in Turkish). Turkiye Futbol Federasyonu. n.d. Retrieved 2022-08-15.
  • Failed V, 404 :: 6. ^ "Sabih Arca Efsane Forvet" (in Turkish). mujdatyetkiner.com. Retrieved 2022-08-15.
  • Database record :: 7. ^ "Sabih Arca". Olympedia. Retrieved 25 August 2021.

No sources in article are IS RS SIGCOV. BEFORE showed nothing with IS RS SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  //  Timothy ::  talk  21:15, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Turkey. Shellwood ( talk) 21:36, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:48, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:07, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • This looks like someone who is highly, highly—very highly likely notable. Arca played literally 200+ games for one of the best teams in Turkish history over 100 years ago, scoring 64 goals (showing he was not just some career-long bench player) and was on the first Turkish national team in history, earning nine caps and additionally being on the team at two Olympics. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 22:42, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    This would be an enormous shame to delete – it looks like Arca was one of the best players of his era and I'm 99.999999999999999999999% certain there's offline coverage somewhere. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 22:46, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Looking for sources, I see this piece from a Turkish bio website (which mentions him as one of the most successful players in the early era of Turkish soccer, also seems to be at [2]), and then this seems to be a list of articles mentioning him? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 22:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    de.wikipedia has a very decent biography on him with several offline references. Also, I requested at the Turkish Wikipedia help in finding sources. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 23:31, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Per above. Clearly significant figure in Turkish football. Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk) 05:04, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per sources above which show notability. Giant Snowman 11:55, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Source eval Nonne of the sources above shows IS RS with SIGCOV.
Nothing with IS RS SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  //  Timothy ::  talk  08:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
TimothyBlue: did you attempt to access the ample offline sources in the German-language article in your BEFORE or source eval? GGT ( talk) 11:31, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • @ GGT:: There aren't any offline sources in the de.wp. [3]; All are available online. More promo and ROUTINE, nothing is IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  //  Timothy ::  talk  11:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Pretty broad-stroke statements on part of the nom here that show a deficient evaluation of the sources and the subject matter. I'm not talking about non-RS like turkcebilgi.com here. Anyone familiar with the history of Turkish press knows that for flagship publications like Milliyet or Hürriyet, promo pieces didn't exist until essentially the last 10-15 years (due to changes in ownership/media dynamics, one may wish to read Emin Çölaşan's memoirs to understand this process), so no way that those sources from the 1960s are "promo". The Milliyet sources are pretty difficult to access as they require Flash Player, but I'm able to access at least two: a piece from 21 March 1967 that discusses the new board of Fenerbahçe and gives a brief biography of Arca, and an obituary published on 25 April 1979. Now the fact remains that even these are decades after this guy's active football career. That was a time when Turkish surnames had not yet been introduced, so any mention of this person is more likely to be as "Sabih" only, making it even more difficult to locate. Furthermore, the Turkish alphabet was only Latinised in 1928, and of course, all of the sports publications of that era (particularly Spor Alemi) remain fully offline. We do, however, have modern coverage such as this article in Sabah about the history of Fenerbahçe which gives a one-paragraph biography of Arca as a "legendary forward". This is a very strong indicator that this guy had such lasting notability that he would be listed as a legend in articles a full century after his football career. As such, 1) the posthumous coverage on its own is sufficient to meet GNG in the barest of terms (but this is bearing in mind that we're looking at the archives of only one newspaper...) and 2) more importantly, it indicates that contemporary in-depth coverage is almost certain to exist. If someone does end up browsing through magazines in a Turkish library, please do ping me. -- GGT ( talk) 12:12, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, per GGT. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 13:47, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per GGT. Aintabli ( talk) 06:11, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. The nominator actually sought a selective merge, and there are some legitimate questions raised as to the overall quality of the sourcing. Nevertheless, there is consensus to keep the article. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 03:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Selina Tobaccowala

Selina Tobaccowala (  | 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)

Page exists as WP:RESUME - minimal SIGCOV exists that are not interviews/primary sourcing. Proposing a merge of relevant aspects of this page to various company pages (Evite, Ticketmaster, SurveyMonkey, Beachbody). Attempted PROD, it was removed by Thilsebatti. 30Four ( talk) 20:50, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Women. Shellwood ( talk) 21:35, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Keep - as the person meets the requirements of WP:GNG 1keyhole ( talk) 02:58, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • keep She meets WP:BASIC with existing articles and in additions she was featured in INC and there are these additional articles: NPR, Club Industry, Popsugar and Geek Wire. Royal88888 ( talk) 00:35, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    • NPR link is summary of a podcast: “How I Built This Podcast with Guy Raz, Evite: Selina Tobaccowala, Episode 182”
    • INC magazine is quite literally Selina’s words told through an author. ("As told to Yasmin Gagné" per article)
    • Club Industry contains no true author/byline, creating a profile of her for the Club Industry Executive Summit advertised by this article, a Summit she spoke at: “Tobaccowala’s presentation will be a general session at lunch on Nov. 9 and will be attended by all three tracks of the event: the Club and Studio Summit, the Not-for-Profit Summit and the CEO Summit (the invitation-only portion of the event for the highest revenue-generating club companies in the country).”
    • PopSugar, while not in the traditional interview format, presents their bio of Tobaccowala before a Q&A. It’s fairly easy to argue a Q&A is an interview.
    • Geekwire is the only source here that establishes something outside a company bio/interview, although the main piece from this article is that Tobaccowala joined the board of Redfin. If you consider this to be notable, I really question if I know the guidelines surrounding notability on Wikipedia at this point. It seems ridiculous to me. This source also already exists on the page, citation 10. 30Four ( talk) 06:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep ( edit conflict) New sources: Trip to India changed her life, article about her as a high school student; 2015 Women in tech (paragraph feature in Elle); Selina Tobaccowala/Gixo: How losing my mentor inspired a business interview feature in Inc.; The Inside Story on How SurveyMonkey Cracked the International Market is largely about her, largely based on interview but seemingly not entirely (but I'm not sure how reliable we see the source); there seems to have multiple paragraphs about her in the books Masters of Scale and Blitzscaling (which seem pretty related books so probably counts as a single source); Join Our Board: Companies Hotly Pursue New Wave of Women in Tech passing mention in NYT. Those plus the existing sources seem to meet WP:GNG, even more so with a somewhat higher number of interviews with higher profile podcasts. Skynxnex ( talk) 01:25, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    • Newspaper article “Trip to India changed her life”: builds out early bio but doesn’t establish her notability within her space. There are tons of exceptional high schoolers, which is great, although this again contains the same WP:RESUME issues that I posted this AfD with.
    • ELLE feature helps for GNG, although contains the very same WP:RESUME info that is all held in the article. It addresses none of the concern that this could easily be held in the company pages which already exist, not to mention the use of quotation within the article, implying that this was partially based on an interview.
    • Inc interview feature (I do not have access to Wikilibrary, but I see the feature from the direct link): Tobaccowala's words are being told through an author - "As told to Yasmin Gagné", who is the author of the article. This serves as an interview, as you've pointed out.
    • The Inside Story on How SurveyMonkey Cracked the International Market: “largely based on interview” - your own words. It seems as though this is more of a presentation of SurveyMonkey’s operations, giving credit to Tobaccowala for her work. While that’s great, the main presentable piece of info from this source is Tobaccowala was the CTO of SurveyMonkey.
    • NYT - a passing mention of Tobaccowala “who runs the start-up Gixo” and the 2014 addition of Tobaccowala to Redfin’s board of directors.
    • As for the books Masters of Scale and Blitzscaling, they each detail aspects of her career per the page previews you’ve linked. Is this not the same WP:RESUME issue? Each of these details can be held by the respective company page, stating that she led the company at one time. (This doesn’t change the outcome of the AfD/source listing, although the Masters of Scale podcast attempted to spam links to their podcast with Tobaccowala, which can be seen in the edit history of Tobaccowala’s page here) 30Four ( talk) 06:47, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
      I don't think WP:RESUME is on-point as you are claiming since it seems primarily about auto-biographies, which this doesn't seem to be, even if there has been some promotional editing. The sources covering her do lean heavily on interviews so the primary reason I voted keep is because, in general, co-founding a company like Evite and then continuing to be in the similar space while getting interviewed across many platforms is often a sign of notability. I was leaning between a weak and normal keep, but ended up on a normal keep because I think the totality and length of coverage (even on the edge because of interviews) makes me think that she meets the spirit of WP:N and basically the letter. Many of the sources are: significant coverage, reliable, partly secondary, and independent of the subject.
      I don't quite understand your issue with the book coverage: if a person is significantly covered, as opposed to their company with occasional mentions of the person, it is considered a source counting toward notability. Skynxnex ( talk) 21:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
      Masters of Scale was published in 2021 and is a summary of each episode of the mentioned podcast per the books description. "Behind the scenes in Silicon Valley, Reid Hoffman (founder of LinkedIn, investor at Greylock) is a sought-after adviser to heads of companies and heads of state. On each episode of his podcast, Masters of Scale, he sits down with a guest from an all-star list of visionary founders and leaders, digging into the surprising strategies that power their company’s growth. In this book, he draws on their most riveting, revealing stories—as well as his own experience as a founder and investor—to distill the secrets behind the most extraordinary success stories of our times."
      Blitzscaling (co-written by Reid Hoffman, the same author as Masters of Scale) I have less of an issue with, although it seems to speak to the same job title-based language. The book itself may establish itself as a good source, however I don't believe it covers anything outside of WP:ROUTINE, that being routine coverage of Tobaccowala's jobs (which to me, boils down to WP:RESUME). I believe the same of the good sources used on her page currently. 30Four ( talk) 18:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: There is also in-depth coverage from [4] along with additional sources listed above. She passes GNG. Thilsebatti ( talk) 11:28, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    See my replies to the comments above which have also posted the same source you've linked. 30Four ( talk) 06:48, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Leaning keep, or move to draft for further development. Given the prominence of Evite, I would expect sources supporting the notability of the co-founders to be findable. The sources cited thus far in this discussion are on the edge, but there are thousands of search results to consider. BD2412 T 00:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to CHERUB#The Fall. Star Mississippi 00:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

The Fall (Robert Muchamore novel)

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

Another contested redirect, using an WP:OSE argument - zero independent sources, fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 09:36, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and United Kingdom. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:43, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: it seems unlikely that this book wouldn't meet WP:NBOOK, but there's an obvious redirect target at CHERUB. I think the outcome that would be most helpful to readers would be to expand the plot summaries presently in CHERUB from one or two sentences to a short paragraph, and then to redirect all the books that only have an infobox and plot summary to CHERUB. -- asilvering ( talk) 23:41, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 19:39, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:53, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Billabong Pro Tahiti 2014

Billabong Pro Tahiti 2014 (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Champion and standings are listed on 2014 ASP World Tour. – Aidan721 ( talk) 19:32, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. Consensus is that this fails WP:V. Any sourceable content about a military engagement in this place and time should first be added, with appropriate references, to an existing or broader-scoped article. Sandstein 10:56, 17 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Battle of Al-Adabiya port

Battle of Al-Adabiya port (  | 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)

Recent article about a battle that didn't actually happen. No credible source. Piouche ( talk) 19:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Algeria, and Israel. Shellwood ( talk) 19:39, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment it may have been a small engagement, and it may sit better in the article about the Battle for Suez, but there clearly was a battle at Adabiya. Mccapra ( talk) 20:11, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    This article is about a battle that supposedly happened from October 25 to 28, that involved the algerian army, and that ended as an algerian victory.
    That clearly never happened. The algerian land army didn't even fight at all during the war, as correctly stated on the main Yom Kippur War article. Piouche ( talk) 20:42, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Egypt. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:39, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, it simply didn't happen. ---Lilach5 ( לילך5) discuss 19:30, 11 April 2023

(UTC)

The battle happened Algeria is hard to source and almost impossible in English. The French article is longer, but not all that much help. It does say that the Algerians, yes, definitely were there, but that the account of the battle was from the general's memoirs. As reported by an Algerian nationalist newspaper. They were there, with armored vehicles. I could, actually, conceive of such a battle being ignored since Algeria would have been newly independent and probably wasn't expected to stand a chance against Israel. The French were probably also still smarting over Algerian independence. Also, French Wikipedia may discount that, but should we?

That doesn't mean that that's what happened, though. But it's sourced infirmation and I am not seeing why the source would not be treatec as reliable, though certainly biased since he would have an incentive to inflate its importance. As far as the author goes, he was a wartime general who saw action in this war. How is that not notable? I think you must be getting that assessment by looking for book reviews or something. I also strongly suggest checking in Arabic. Hth

  • Delete: Fails GNG and EVENT. There was fighting but nothing significant in the context of the war, and no IS RS seem to consider it a significant military engagement or mention it as a separate topic from the events surrounding it. Article seems to exist to highlight that the 8th Algerian was involved. No idea where most of the detail comes from and is probably all OR or SYNTH. Since most of the article fails V, all that would be left is a questionably notable microstub if the article was cleaned up.  //  Timothy ::  talk  09:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I’ve searched in Arabic and found nothing. Mccapra ( talk) 11:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Abstain - if Mccapra is correct that there is no support for this in Arabic sources, then I don't really care enough about this to argue against its deletion. However, as a report on the fr-wikipedia article, I am noting that Jeune Afrique is generally RS and a couple of the other sources look like books. Throw out Jewish Virtual Library, which I've been told is not RS, and arguably the "nationalist" Algerian source (which may simply mean that it opposed French colonialism), but let's throw that out too for the sake of the argument. We would still have apparently RS secondary sources based on the account of an eyewitness, even though admittedly one with an agenda. Seems like that should fall into the category of a controversy to be explained, not deleted. But if there are no Arabic sources, I am not going to argue the matter after this post, since Boumedienne was an authoritarian that I don't want to champion anyway. But the French article is quite firmly saying that the Algerian 8th Armored Division was there in support of the Egyptian Army and so, such as it was, was the sum total of the Algerian Air Force. Elinruby ( talk) 21:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I note the fr.wiki article is up for deletion too, for the same reasons. There was some fighting as the Israelis took Adabiya, but that in itself does not seem sufficient to warrant an article. Whether or not Moshe Dayan talked about Algerian forces I don’t know, but I haven’t been able to find it. Mccapra ( talk) 02:57, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
I noticed that too. I am just saying that we appear to be ignoring RS, but I don't care enough about whether the Israelis consider this a battle to oppose deletion. I just don't see why it's their call, but I have other fish to fry Elinruby ( talk) 14:54, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The other quoted sources than the AlgeriePatriotique article don't actually support what's written in the article. Piouche ( talk) 06:31, 15 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment -- Having read the main article on the Yom Kippur War, it is not obvious to me that this article is a hoax. It is clear there was fighting at Adabiya after the ceasefire, but it ended with the Egyptians holding the town centre and the Israelis some suburbs. That sounds to me like a stalemate, where Israel attacked but was driven off. If anyone was victorious, it would be Egypt not Algeria, since any Algerians forces would be fighting as allies of Egypt to defend Egypt. The battlebox thus needs amendment. The article seeks to make this a separate engagement following another battle of Adabiya (no article). I would prefer to see a single article on the whole of the battle(s) or perhaps on the Adabiya aspects of the whole war. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

1988–89 Bracknell Bees season

AfDs for this article:
1988–89 Bracknell Bees season (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NHOCKEY. It is a season summary of a second-tier British ice hockey team, which falls below notability standards. Kaiser matias ( talk) 17:11, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Dimitris Tsourekas

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

One of Lugnuts' articles. I've looked up this person's name and very few independent sources showed up. One single result showed up when searching his name in the Greek alphabet. Does not seem to be a notable individual. Super Ψ Dro 17:02, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I was wrong. There's a hundred results to the search "Δημήτρης Τσουρέκας". But few seem related to this skier. Super Ψ Dro 17:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to List of programs aired by TV5 (Philippine TV network)#Reality shows. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Philippines Scariest Challenge

Philippines Scariest Challenge (  | 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)

Appears to fail notability, nothing found in a BEFORE. Tagged for notability since 2016.

PROD removed with little improvement, and nothing to help it pass notability requirements. DonaldD23 talk to me 15:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:41, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

List of electoral wards in Greater London

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

Not a particularly useful list of lists. The lists for each local authority would be more appropriate on the local elections article for their respective local authorities, e.g. the list of wards in Barking and Dagenham should be included instead on Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council elections. These articles currently lack key topics, and the lists of wards are long and unwieldy without including any insight.  dummelaksen  ( talk • contribs) 15:44, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I am also nominating the lists for the other ceremonial counties of England (except Wards of the City of London) for the same reason:

List of electoral divisions and wards in Cornwall (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral divisions and wards in Wiltshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral divisions in the Isle of Wight (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Bedfordshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Berkshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Bristol (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Buckinghamshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Cambridgeshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Cheshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in County Durham (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Cumbria (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Derbyshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Devon (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Dorset (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in East Riding of Yorkshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in East Sussex (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Essex (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Gloucestershire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Greater Manchester (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Hampshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Herefordshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Hertfordshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Kent (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Lancashire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Leicestershire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Lincolnshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Merseyside (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Norfolk (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in North Yorkshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Northamptonshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Northumberland (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Nottinghamshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Oxfordshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Rutland (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Shropshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Somerset (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in South Yorkshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Staffordshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Suffolk (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Surrey (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Tyne and Wear (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Warwickshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in the West Midlands (county) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in West Sussex (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in West Yorkshire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of electoral wards in Worcestershire (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)  dummelaksen  ( talk • contribs) 16:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Lists, and United Kingdom. Shellwood ( talk) 15:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep I’m not sure there is a strong deletion rationale here, and to delete in such a scale I’d want to be persuaded there was something fundamentally wrong with these articles. If nothing else these lists are useful for tracking changes to both constituencies and the local authorities they fall within iver time. I’m open to persuasion if I’ve missed something of course. Mccapra ( talk) 17:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Mccapra: I'm in favour of keeping the actual content of the articles, but I don't think this is the right way to present it: district wards have very little to do with the ceremonial counties they're in, or with the wards in other districts in the same county. I agree, it is useful for keeping track of changes to the local authorities they're in, but in that case, they would be more effective in that regard – and easier to find – in articles about those authorities.  dummelaksen  ( talk • contribs) 17:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
ok well I’m not sure whether AfD is the best place to discuss that proposal. Mccapra ( talk) 20:12, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - This is a whole lot of info to be proposing to delete and I'm not hugely convinced that putting it into the elections article for each council will work well. With Cornwall, the council has already gone through three different sets of ward maps since 2009 and I think just lumping them (plus future wards) at the end of the Cornwall Council elections page will make it ungainly. In any case, this is so many different articles with so many different things to think about that deleting them all at once would do much more harm than good IMO. Gazamp ( talk) 02:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The number of wards, both concurrently and over time, means that very quickly they will need to be split out from the elections pages for size and comprehension reasons so we'd be right back here. I might support a split of List of electoral wards in Greater London to separate lists per borough, but that's not an AfD matter. Thryduulf ( talk) 13:04, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete all This is the sort of thing that belongs on the respective council articles or relevant election pages, not grouped for each county. Reywas92 Talk 04:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 10:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep listing at ceremonial county is probably most useful. Articles appear to have sufficient sources and wards are likely notable. Crouch, Swale ( talk) 15:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Randykitty ( talk) 17:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Kudumbashree Sharada

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

Contested redirect - not nearly enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 13:10, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Promo photos :: 1.   https://malayalam.filmibeat.com/photos/malayalam-tv-actress-mersheena-neenu-stunning-instagram-stills-fb78595.html
  • Promo :: 2. ^ "Zee keralam brodcasting new serial Kudumbashree Sharada will start from april 11 | പതിവു സീരിയൽ ശൈലികളെ പാടെ മറക്കാം; പെൺകരുത്തിന്റെ കഥയുമായി "കുടുംബശ്രീ ശാരദ" സീ കേരളത്തിൽ എത്തുന്നു| Movies News in Malayalam".
  • Blog post, not SIGCOV :: 3. ^ "നൂറിന്റെ നിറവില്‍ പ്രിയപരമ്പര 'കുടുംബശ്രീ ശാരദ'".
  • ROUTINE, promo, not SIGCOV :: 4. ^ "Radhamma Kuthuru Serial Remade in Other Languages - Zee Telugu Serial". 3 August 2022.
BEFORE showed promos, database records, nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  //  Timothy ::  talk  07:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 15:27, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. Probably WP:TOOSOON. Randykitty ( talk) 17:22, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Joe McGlynn

Joe McGlynn (  | 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)

Was draftified, and was improved before returning to mainspace. Unfortunately, there's not a single in-depth piece about this footballer from an independent, reliable, secondary source. Still fails WP:GNG. There are several local articles which mention him, but all but one are not in-depth, and all are routine sports coverage. Onel5969 TT me 13:33, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, England, and Scotland. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:49, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:26, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Clearly meets WP:SPORTSBASIC based on the article and the sources on it. Very young player with ongoing career who has played for a Premier League club. Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk) 20:31, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    • @ Das osmnezz: - for clarity, he's never played in the Premier League. He has played for Burnley's under-age teams in the youth leagues, but the highest level of senior football he has played at is the National League (level 5) -- ChrisTheDude ( talk)
  • Keep there is sufficient sourcing to show notability. Giant Snowman 10:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep clearly passes GNG with sources already on pae, lazy nomination.-- Ortizesp ( talk) 19:31, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - not a single in-depth source from an independent, reliable reference = "clearly passes GNG"? Onel5969 TT me 19:43, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Fails GNG. Outta the six sources that are independent of Joe McGlynn, The Guardian is a paragraph, the Burnley Express is a routine contract signing story, this contains a single sentence on him, this is a routine match report, this has one sentence on him and this is that he scored a couple of goals. Dougal18 ( talk) 13:57, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The first source gooes into his background and even provides yearly updates on his progress, the second source defiantly does not merely contain a "single sentence on him", and the third and fourth sources also goes into more detail about him and his prospects for the first team. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Das osmnezz ( talk • contribs)
  • Delete: BLP Fails GNG and BIO. Sources in the article do not show N. BEFORE didn't show anything that is IS RS with SIGCOV showing N, just promom, ROUTINE, primary. Source eval table:
  • Primary, not SIGCOV :: 1.  "Premier League clubs publish 2021/22 retained lists". www.premierleague.com. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Primary, not SIGCOV :: 2. ^ "Premier League clubs publish 2020/21 retained lists". www.premierleague.com. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Prome opinion list :: 3. ^ Jump up to:a b c d "20 of the best talents at Premier League clubs". theguardian.com.
  • Database record :: 4. ^ Jump up to:a b "Joe McGlynn – Hyde United". hydeunited.co.uk. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Database record :: 5. ^ InCrowd. "Joe McGlynn". Burnley Football Club. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Primary, not SIGCOV :: 6. ^ "Burnley duo pen first professional contracts". burnleyexpress.net.
  • ROUTINE, mention, not SIGCOV :: 7. ^ "The exciting next generation of Burnley talent as clutch of strikers emerge on scene". lancs.live.
  • ROUTINE, mention, not SIGCOV :: 8. ^ "Burnley's goalscoring generation hint at bright future and will hope to capitalise on ALK vision". lancs.live.
  • ROUTINE, mention, not SIGCOV :: 9. ^ "Five of Burnley's next generation to keep an eye on ahead of FA Youth Cup tie". lancs.live.
  • Interview :: 10. ^ "Joe McGlynn's First Interview".
  • ROUTINE, not SIGCOV :: 11. ^ "Striker McGlynn Signs On Loan". www.oldhamathletic.co.uk. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Primary, not SIGCOV :: 12. ^ "Joe McGlynn". Official Website of the Harriers - Kidderminster Harriers FC. Retrieved 2023-03-04.
  • Game story, mention, ROUTINE :: 13. ^ "Cameroon U20 v Scotland U20". www.scottishfa.co.uk. Retrieved 2023-03-19.
  • ROUTINE, not SIGCOV :: 14. ^ "Gifted, grafters and goalscorers - The Burnley strike force of the future". lancs.live.
WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"'; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability to avoid abuse per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV).  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:59, 8 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete As per source analysis by Timothy. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:02, 8 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - Many of the sources are not necessarily routine... he gets this coverage due to his reputation and performances. All the sources combined make a Wikipedia page that meets WP:SPORTSBASIC. Wikipedia is supposed to be a source of knowledge, and this article is a "yes" to Wikipedia:The one question. McGlynn is clearly a topic of interest, having been listed in The Guardian's "Next Generation 2019" (The Guardian has tracked his progress since that year as well, which shows the level of interest) and the topic of many other sources, which combined, make for a decent sized article. Very young player with ongoing career. On a side note, I find the double standard of the most consistent pro-deletion users very frustrating since most of them either support Wikipedia:SNG for another topic where the article doesn't need to meet WP:GNG or have sometimes created articles with less coverage than this one... (I support article creation, but their double standard is very frustrating). Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk) 18:28, 8 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 15:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - This is a case of WP:TOOSOON as the article fails WP:GNG; the 9th and 14th links above contain some useful prose from a publisher that is actually independent of McGlynn, but it's nowhere near significant coverage. Probably after McGlynn plays a bit of professional senior football, this will change so draftifying is an option as well. Jogurney ( talk) 17:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus the article is ineligible for soft deletion and a merge (or even a WP:BLAR) can be discussed on the article's talk page Salvio giuliano 15:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

News Vanguard

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

I did not find any primary sources or secondary sources conforming to this article directly in particular. Khorang 06:58, 18 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:12, 25 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shawn Teller (he/her) ( talk) 14:47, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: the last relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 15:24, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete/Merge - The article is one sentence and the website is unavailable. Virtually no reader value as is for over 5 years of existence. Already mentioned on Tripura and Sudip Datta Bhaumik. Web archive for reference.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 15:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Monsieur R

AfDs for this article:
Monsieur R (  | 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)

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku ( talk) 14:27, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Belgium, and France. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:28, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - I was surprised to see that I voted "Weak Keep" in the first AfD for this rapper way back in 2010. At the time, the rapper had recently been in the news for a political controversy, which informed another person's "Keep" vote as well. So I'm partially responsible for the article still being here today. Since 2010, the notability rules for musicians have gotten tighter, and more reliable media coverage is needed. I can find no pro previews for any of the rapper's albums nor any coverage of his career overall, and a few stories about that old controversy are all that come up today. Per 2023 requirements, I hereby overrule my younger self. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 15:48, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above. Our standards have gotten much more rigorous in the past 13 years. For the record, a friend of mine writes for The Indypendent, and it's not a reliable source. Bearian ( talk) 18:28, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Sandstein 13:51, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

XGC88000 crawler crane

XGC88000 crawler crane (  | 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. Article was prod'd as advertising and promotional but deproded. Article has not been improved. Souce eval:

1.  "XGC88000 Crawler Crane". XCMG. Sales page fails IS RS
2. ^ "Crane Capacity Record Breaker: XCMG Crawler Crane XGC88000 Completes Installation of 2600-ton Hydrogenation Reactor in China 10 Days Ahead of Schedule". PR News Wire. PR News Wire.
3. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f "2017 Manufacturer Xgc88000 Crawler Crane with 3c". Made-in-China. Promo
4. ^ "XCMG XGC88000 crane - load chart, specs (2021 - 2023)". Lectura Specs. Spec sheet
5. ^ "XCMG XGC88000 Crawler Crane". Cranepedia. database listing, not SIGCOV
6. ^ "XCMG XGC88000 Crawler Crane". Vertikal. database listing, not SIGCOV
7. ^ "XCMG and Sinopec Strengthen Partnership to Bring Star Crawler Cranes". Business Insider. Promo
8. ^ "Crane Capacity Record Breaker: XCMG Crawler Crane XGC88000 Completes Installation of 2600-ton Hydrogenation Reactor in China 10 Days Ahead of Schedule". Asia One. Promo
9. ^ "XCMG claims world lifting record with 2,600-ton hoist in China". Crane and Hoist Canada. Promo
10. ^ "Sinopec exhibits new crane technology with washing tower lift". Hydrocarbon Engineering. Promo
11. ^ "World's largest crawler crane in action at Duqm Refinery site". Oman Observer. Promo
12. ^ "XGC88000 sets new record". Vertikal. Promo
13. ^ "XCMG's 4,000 tonne class crawler record". 3 January 2013. Promo
14. ^ "Sinopec builds the largest crawler crane in Saudi Arabia". NS Energy. Promo
15. ^ "XCMG Official Xgc88000 Crawler Crane Price for Sale". Made-in-China. Sales page fails IS RS
16. ^ Jump up to:a b "XCMG XGC88000 Crawler Crane". Finbond Heavy Machinery Sdn Bhd. Promo

BEFORE from PROD showed nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth from IS RS.  //  Timothy ::  talk   //  Timothy ::  talk  06:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 09:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:39, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: third relist in hopes of generating further discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 13:38, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. I don't think the sources that the nominator calls "promo" are unduly promotional. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 09:11, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. The sources I put in were intentionally the most technical and non-exaggerated sources I can find. There is nothing 'promotional' about literally stating the technical and engineering facts on that vehicle. Like seriously, what is so promotional in posting the length, height, weight, power generated and lift capacity of that machine? I have seen wikipedia pages with only three to four sources that still somehow exist. 42Grunt ( talk) 06:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Concur with Eastmain and Thebiguglyalien. Resonant Distortion 08:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 13:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Jorge Aiello

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

Not seeing enough to meet WP:SPORTBASIC or WP:GNG. Searches, including this Argentine source search, yielded nothing decent. Web del Viola ( translated) has a transfer announcement relating to him but it only has one paragraph about him and SPORTBASIC requires multiple sources showing significant coverage. Since it is the official website of Villa Dálmine, it also isn't an independent source. SPORTBASIC itself states that team sites are generally not regarded as independent of the subject. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was redirect to List of Cambridge University Cricket Club players#T. Eddie891 Talk Work 13:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Patrick Tice

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

Does not meet notability criteria. Raised with Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket who suggested delete/redirect. Only played at university. Secretlondon ( talk) 11:15, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Secretlondon ( talk) 11:15, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Ireland. Shellwood ( talk) 11:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to List of Cambridge University Cricket Club players#T While there is some coverage of the subject, it is mainly WP:ROUTINE in match reports and squad announcements, so fails WP:GNG. However, there is a suitable redirect here per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 ( talk) 09:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. The list proposed as a redirect target needs deleting itself - and many of the cricketers on that list because they are sourced to directories. Desertarun ( talk) 11:10, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Lists like these are the common targets for players who passed old WP:NCRIC notability (such as this player who was notable for his appearances for Cambridge) before the change in guidelines last year. It's been a commonly accepted practice for years now. Sure, some of these lists need improving, and some still need created, but redirects like this allow us to preserve the history if information is found or turns up in the future and links to the article direct somewhere. Rugbyfan22 ( talk) 12:06, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect. The above comment is nonsense regarding lists. This is suitable for a redirect per Rugbyfan22. StickyWicket ( talk) 11:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect as above. This is the best option in this case as he played most of his significant cricket for CU. If he does play for other teams in the future the redirect can be retargeted. Lists such as the one in place are used in a variety of contexts to deal with precisely his sort of case - and, fwiw, if we wanted to have multiple sources for each person on that list we could do; there is excellent coverage of most matches in The Times and other newspapers of record, as well as sourcing to Cambridge internal sources; we could, literally, have over 1,000 sources added to the article with time and effort. Blue Square Thing ( talk) 10:00, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Onel5969 TT me 18:30, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Costa (Pante Macassar)

Costa (Pante Macassar) (  | 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)

Single source does not support current information in article, just simply mentions that someplace of this name exists. Was draftified in hopes of improvement, but was returned to mainspace without improvement. Searches did not turn up enough to show that it passes WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 10:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde ( Talk) 18:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Akshay Chandrashekhar

Akshay Chandrashekhar (  | 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)

PROMO. One small role in a film, only sources found are Imdb. Award doesn't appear notable. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:58, 17 March 2023 (UTC) reply

He played a major role in a movie which was nominated for National Awards, he heads a production company.
I think these two points are enough for him to be on wiki 2406:7400:73:83A1:E8C4:D8AC:6E04:D941 ( talk) 16:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Comment : "He won the National Award" - The award is won by the producer and National Award is the most important award in India. But I doubt if it satisfies the notability as only single factor notability can be verified. Couldn't find anything else for two factor notability Christopheronthemove ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:49, 22 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles ( talk) 17:49, 24 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero Parlez Moi 15:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete Fails GNG and ACTOR. The subject did not win a national award, it was a special mention for a non feature film not the subject. :BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs need clearly high quality (per WP:BLP) IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability per V, BLP and BIO.  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:22, 8 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:19, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. As remarked during the discussion, the "keep" !votes (termed "oppose" here) are not policy-based: OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and ITSNOTABLE are not good arguments. The "delete" !votes, however, have valid policy-based rationales. No prejudice against recreating the article if independent reliable sources become available in the future. Randykitty ( talk) 17:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

2023 Rugby League European Championship B

2023 Rugby League European Championship B (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another contested redirect. Zero independent sourcing. Should probably be drafted or redirected until appropriate sourcing is added, but that's no longer an option. Currently fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 14:19, 25 March 2023 (UTC) reply


Strong Oppose: Every previous Rugby League European Championship B tournament has its own article. This edition is as notable as any of the others. The article is written in more depth than the 2023 Rugby League European Championship with fixtures and tournament schedule being known for Euro B yet Euro A is apparently fit for Wikipedia. The same with the sources, the same for sources are used in both articles yet Euro B has apparently too poor a coverage whist the Euro A article is fine. Also if you look at previous Euro B articles, most of the citations are ERL and IRL articles. I don't understand why this article is being specially targeted for removal based on notability. It's a major international rugby league tournament, how is that not a notable subject? Mn1548 ( talk) 14:59, 27 March 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose: seems a standard start class article for an upcoming international sporting tournament. Perhaps a very mild case of WP:TOOSOON, but not in any egregious sense. Storm machine ( talk) 22:59, 27 March 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Strong Oppose: This is for an International Rugby League competition that has had previous articles. This is a qualification event for the 2025 Rugby League World Cup which is the biggest International Rugby League competition. As Mn1548 pointed out other articles from Euro B are often just from the IRL, ERL or related bodies. Outside of IRL and ERL, an article from the NRL and Guardian have also been cited. Alex333manly ( talk) 09:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - just a note that none of the oppose !votes above are based on policy. Onel5969 TT me 16:33, 31 March 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Counter comment: The policy you have linked that you claim this article currently fails is the article does not have "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". This divides into 5 catagories:

1. Presumed - purely subjective 2. Significant coverage - IRL, ERL, NRL, and Guardian souces give this. 3. Reliable - again all for are reliable 4. Secondary - NRL and Guardian are 5. Independent - Guardian definitely has nothing to do with rugby league

I, not in exact words, has definitely bought up significant coverage from IRL and ERL, and another editor has commented on the inclusion of NRL and Guardian as references. Mn1548 ( talk) 10:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 22:16, 1 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:57, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete We need to be careful to consider the sourcing specifically for the European Group B qualifying division, not the overall World Cup itself or the other qualifying divisions. None of the independent sources meet WP:SIGCOV regarding this group, therefore WP:GNG is not met. MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good rationale for keeping. I would go as far as saying the other things are likely not notable either. The references do not demonstrate notability to me. SWinxy ( talk) 23:45, 15 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Salvio giuliano 08:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Shyam Sunder Bansal

Shyam Sunder Bansal (  | 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)

Coverage is based on press releases: Ref 1 is FPJ Web Desk report, Ref 2 is The Week Focus, Ref 4 is Tribune News Service, Ref 8 Express News Service, photo was uploaded by the creator [6] from Flickr account named after the subject of this article, so there is some connection between two. Fails WP:SIGCOV. US-Verified ( talk) 08:36, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was no consensus. Closing this as "no consensus" per the close 3 (three!) days before this AfD was opened. A trout for the nom. After a no-consensus close, wait 2-3 months at least before nominating again. Randykitty ( talk) 17:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Leher

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

The last AFD was marked as having no consequences based on votes, not based on sources. There was not a single notable source was shared. Fails notability Lordofhunter ( talk) 06:57, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment The sources shared in the previous afds were not meeting WP:ORG.
Gadgets360 news is about how to sign up, and clearly a PR Driven material. ET News, quint [7] are generic about the Indian app Industry not Leher. TOI source is not independent, the article is full of quotes of the companies' spokesperson and no journalist independent research. Other sources like RepublicWorld, Everythingexperiemential & podcast sources are far from reliability. Please read WP:ORG and share reliable, independent sources which are significant.
PLEASE write keep, but with supporting sources also. Lordofhunter ( talk) 19:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Alexander Grigoryants

Alexander Grigoryants (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • Delete: Fails GNG and BIO. BEFORE showed promos, database records, nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Sources in article are from the Great Soviet Encyclopedia (Not a RS), and an article which does not mention the subject. No entry in ru.wp. BEFORE showed nothing with IS RS SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Someone by this name (Александр Григорьянц) is a visual artist and is still alive in Russia, but they are not the subject. Article uses past tense, but I was not able to confirm whether they are alive or deceased.  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:43, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, Armenia, and Russia. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:51, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Fails WP:GNG. Rugbyfan22 ( talk) 10:31, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Mahmoud Al-Aswad

Mahmoud Al-Aswad (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • Delete: BLP, Fails GNG and BIO. BEFORE showed promos, database records, nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Source eval:
  • Database record :: 1.  Mahmoud Al-Aswad at National-Football-Teams.com
  • ROUTINE article about an event, no SIGCOV about subject :: 2. ^ "المجموعة الرابعة: انتصارات لسوريا وتركمانستان" [Group D: victories for Syria and Turkmenistan]. the-afc.com (in Arabic). 10 September 2022. Retrieved 17 December 2022.
  • ROUTINE article about an event, no SIGCOV about subject :: 3. ^ "منتخب سورية لكرة القدم يفوز على منتخب السعودية ببطولة غرب آسيا لفئة تحت 23 عاماً" [The Syrian national football team defeated the Saudi national team in the West Asian Championship for the U-23 category]. dampress.net (in Arabic). 7 November 2022. Retrieved 17 December 2022.
  • ROUTINE article about an event, no SIGCOV about subject :: 4. ^ "ودياً..منتخب سورية الوطني يواجه بيلاروسيا في دبي" [Friendly... The Syrian national team faces Belarus in Dubai]. damas-times.com (in Arabic). 17 November 2022. Retrieved 17 December 2022.
Oppose Draft, its just a back door to deletion and there is no excuse to keep poorly sourced BLPs. WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"'; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability to avoid abuse per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV).  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:19, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Courcelles ( talk) 14:06, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Ethical Journalism Network

Ethical Journalism Network (  | 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)

Hardly anything in coverage, fails WP:NORG. US-Verified ( talk) 00:31, 19 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:23, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Strong keep. gNews shows some media coverage, both deep and trivial [8] [9] [10], apart from the fact that the news aggregator shows a lot of news from EJN itself. Wiki also has the page of the organization founder: Aidan White (journalist) and some articles use EJN as a source. Suitskvarts ( talk) 18:59, 28 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:50, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. As usual, we need more participation here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:02, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Delete as while there are some sources reporting on the organisation's outputs, we lack in-depth coverage of the organisation itself to base a viable article on. Cordless Larry ( talk) 18:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, sadly. This sounds exactly like the sort of organization I'd like to see on Wikipedia. Any bias I have is strongly towards this sort of thing, but I found no reliable sources in my searches. It seems to fail WP:GNG CT55555( talk) 03:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Sandstein 13:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

IOWN Global Forum

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

Promotional article, also seems to lack sources meeting the WP:ORGDEPTH thresholds. MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:44, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:44, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

This article describes a newer trade group. It would be common in early stage to not have a large variety of sources. This article does cite prominent corporations in the marketplace working on these standards. In this regard this page is no different to the early startup period of many other similar groups on Wikipedia including to name a few:
/info/en/?search=Bluetooth_Special_Interest_Group
/info/en/?search=Wi-Fi_Alliance
/info/en/?search=GSMA
/info/en/?search=Connectivity_Standards_Alliance
/info/en/?search=Institute_of_Electrical_and_Electronics_Engineers
/info/en/?search=The_Apache_Software_Foundation Mccamon ( talk) 18:16, 5 April 2023 (UTC) reply
And I should have added, I used the Wi-Fi Alliance and Bluetooth pages as my template outline to create the page in the first place. Mccamon ( talk) 18:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Would you consider Draftification as a resolution?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment Hello Liz, thank you for the suggestion. Yes, I would consider draftification as an appropriate WP:ATD here. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:10, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Leaning to keep - a relatively new nonprofit organisation formed by several notable organisations. Being new - not a huge amount of secondary sources however there are some available with sigcov - this is a good example. I've started to clean up some of the article but it does need more work. I would concur draftify preferable in the event of a deletion result. Resonant Distortion 09:53, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep ResonantDistortion is correct, meets our guidelines for inclusion. Lightburst ( talk) 23:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Star Mississippi 13:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Balkrishan Goenka

Balkrishan Goenka (  | 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)

BLP doesn't seem to meet WP:NBIO - there are many citations, but the individual seems to be lacking in-depth coverage in sources that are reliable. MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:09, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Could you provide an example in the article where the sources you find are not reliable. Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 07:21, 26 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Anything that he's written or gives an interview, or talks about himself. We need things that aren't promotional. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:00, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Could you help us with some reference wiki pages on how are the correct ways to use citations Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 09:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Hello, Could you help me on citation. Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 10:03, 31 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Please respond to the multiple requests on your Talk Page regarding COI concerns. Also, who is "us" that you mention? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 11:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Your use of the citations seems ok, you've correctly used the template. The items you've used for citations aren't notable. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:01, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
I am trying to get feedback from you on my page citations. we need to understand how can we stop our page from deletion. Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 05:54, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete There are no reliable sources found, the COI concerns are a red flag here. Oaktree b ( talk) 14:59, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Hi, Could you help me with where I can post my work for proofreading? Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 09:26, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:55, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi, There is no answer to my previous questions. Tezaswiniisrani ( talk) 08:29, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 06:38, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Benito Juarez Community Academy shooting

Benito Juarez Community Academy shooting (  | 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)

Routine shooting, no lasting coverage. Sadly, not that different than most other shootings in the USA. No coverage found beyond local news, telling us that the event happened. Oaktree b ( talk) 05:30, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 04:59, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

New River Valley rivalry

New River Valley rivalry (  | 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 rivalry. Of all of the links cited here, only one uses the name "New River Valley rivalry" at all - the rest just state that these teams have played each other a number of times in a variety of sports, which is natural when both schools are 12 miles away from one another. A WP:BEFORE search turned up mostly primary sources and Wikipedia mirrors. fuzzy510 ( talk) 03:56, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete per nom. Passing mentions of rivalry from sources, nothing in-depth on topic. Skipple ☎ 04:47, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 04:58, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

ICEDQ

ICEDQ (  | 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)

Software platform doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG - in-depth coverage largely consists of press releases. MrsSnoozyTurtle 03:12, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:00, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Ken Welch

Ken Welch (  | 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)

Notability.

I do not believe that St. Pete's mayoralty is notable enough itself to award Welch his noteworthiness, nor that Welch has otherwise garnered sufficient notability SecretName101 ( talk) 01:58, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

 Comment: Notability needs to be demonstrated in the article itself, and the article does not indicate he did anything of significant note. If he indeed did notable work on the Pinellas County Commission or as mayor, the article should say so. SecretName101 ( talk) 09:21, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

SecretName101, Could you point to a Wikipedia policy that states that notability needs to be demonstrated in the article itself? Is that a brand-new policy? Jacona ( talk) 12:31, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Au contraire, WP:NEXIST. Curbon7 ( talk) 15:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Correct. For added emphasis, Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article", SecretName101 –  Muboshgu ( talk) 16:07, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
If the notability is neither established by the article itself, nor is otherwise illustrated here in this deletion discussion, then it does not exist though for all intents and purposes. "Trust me brah, he's notable" is not sufficient. lay out a case of noteworthiness here, because the article is not making the case itself. SecretName101 ( talk) 16:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Nobody is saying "trust me brah", we're saying this is why you're supposed to do WP:BEFORE. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 19:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Passes WP:POLITICIAN, many sources, found lots of material on Google and in the newspaper database. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 10:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Is that material trivial or does it establish notability. Please provide examples of material you found on google and in the newspaper database that establish individual notability. Since these sources are not present in the article itself, for them to contribute to making the case for keeping this article, you'd need to outline them here. Other words, you are just saying "trust me brah, I found some stuff" without giving any ability for that material to actually be evaluated. SecretName101 ( talk) 17:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Dr vulpes forgot to ping SecretName101 ( talk) 17:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Sure @ SecretName101 here's a break down of the sources that are already used in the article for establishing notability. Just search google with "Ken Welch" and you'll get a lot of sources, I also when on newspapers.com and was able to get hits there. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 18:08, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Your table illustrates that nearly all of the coverage you are citing is indeed routine local election coverage from local news outlets. Which do not establish that he is notable independently. SecretName101 ( talk) 18:21, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
You asked me to lay out the sources and I think I've shown that they pass WP:GNG and WP:POLITICIAN. I'm not sure what standard of evidence you are looking for here, maybe if you could help me out and walk me through your thought process a bit it would help me understand your point of view better. Because to me this looks fine, and going over my WP:NPP materials again it again looks like it passes. Just incase context gets lost over the internet I am being serious when asking for help understanding and I'm not trying to make fun of you, be sarcastic or be a jerk. Because if I am this off base then I want to learn why and how I got there. I do respect the amount of time and energy you've put into this project. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 08:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
opss forgot to ping @ SecretName101 sorry about that. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 08:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Dr vulpes I think you don't have a firm grasp on either of those.
The sources you provided in your table actually don't establish the notability needed for those standards. See my previous comment. It's pretty basic that the existence of standard election coverage is not enough for WP:Politician or WP:GNG SecretName101 ( talk) 22:22, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Dr vulpes Here and other places you have asserted that the existence of reliable independent sources covering an individual alone is enough for notability. That is untrue. You have to assess what the coverage is and if it indeed outlines a case for notability.
Independent reliable sources publish millions of stories every day on subjects that don't meet notability standards. SecretName101 ( talk) 22:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Coverage is about Welch gearing up to run for Mayor ✔ Yes
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Article is about Welch winning an election ✔ Yes
Fox 13 Yes Local TV news stations Yes Local Fox affiliates are considered distinct from Fox News, and are covered by WP:NEWSORG Yes Article is about Welch winning an election ✔ Yes
Pinellas County Website No 404 Error ~ 404 Error ? 404 Error ✘ No
University of South Florida No 404 Error ~ 404 Error ? 404 Error ✘ No
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Article is about Welch running for election ✔ Yes
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Article is about Welch ✔ Yes
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Article is about Welch ✔ Yes
Catalyst Yes Website appears to not have ties to Welch or other groups ~ Some articles might be but others might not. Website says that they are "powered by community sourced content" Yes Article is about Welch announcing his candidacy ~ Partial
WFLA Channel 8 News (NBC) Yes Local TV news stations Yes Local TV news stations are generally reliable and this one is affiliated with NBC Yes Election results and video about Welch ✔ Yes
Tampa Bay Times Yes Does not appear to be tied to the source Yes Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper owned by a nonprofit org Yes Article is about Welch being first black mayor ✔ Yes
WFTS News (ABC) Yes Local TV news stations Yes Local TV news stations are generally reliable and this one is affiliated with NBC Yes Article is about Welch being first black mayor ✔ Yes
WUSF (NPR) Yes Affiliated with USF and NPR, this is a local public radio station Yes Content appears reliable Yes Article is about Welch and plans with Tropicana Field ✔ Yes
Bay News 9 Yes Local cable news owned by Charter Communications Yes Article appears reliable and in line with other sources Yes Article is about Welch running for mayor ✔ Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}.
  • Keep. First black mayor of a major US City, there are tens of thousands of sources available. Google search of "ken welch" + "st petersburg" yielded 32,000 results, FWIW, and reading into them they provide SIGCOV in multiple, reliable sources, meeting WP:GNG hundreds of times over. This should be a SNOW close, IMO. Jacona ( talk) 12:48, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Meets WP:BASIC and is presumed notable per WP:NPOL's "major local political figures who have received significant press coverage". Significant coverage abounds and is sustained, especially in sources from the Tampa Bay area:
  • "St. Pete Mayor Ken Welch says he can't imagine Grand Prix with open carry". Tampa Bay Times.
  • "St. Petersburg Mayor Ken Welch restarts bidding process for Tropicana Field". Tampa Bay Times.
  • Brezina, Veronica (29 June 2022). "Sugar Hill, Midtown react to Welch's Trop announcement". St Pete Catalyst.
  • "Here's what they're saying about Mayor Ken Welch's pick to redevelop the Trop". Tampa Bay Times.
  • "Meet incoming St. Petersburg Mayor Ken Welch's top City Hall administrators". Tampa Bay Times.
  • "Circus-themed St. Petersburg mayoral ball canceled after Ken Welch declines invite". Tampa Bay Times.
gobonobo + c 16:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
None of these stories establish individual notability. It is expected that anyplace a local news paper would publish stories on a mayor. None of these establish significant news coverage, this is run-of-the-mill. Nor are any of these stories that distinguish Welch as having done work as mayor of particular note yet. Perhaps such stories that distinguish him as notable do exist (please find them if they do), but these are not them. SecretName101 ( talk) 16:54, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Reminder, BASIC states "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability." Five of your six articles are Tampa Bay Times articles. That is the opposite of presenting multiple independent sources SecretName101 ( talk) 16:56, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm okay if we do keep this at this point. But I don't think any of the arguments laid out point to sources or actions that afford him notability. I'll try to enhance the article proper with some stuff that could arguably, but there is an absence at the moment. SecretName101 ( talk) 00:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

The result was merge to Varsity team. Sources exist, which is a problem with millions of schools having JV teams and newspapers.com indexing them. But sources haven't been established for notability independent of the broader concept. Star Mississippi 13:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Junior varsity team

Junior varsity team (  | 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)

Broad concept that doesn't seem to be broken down and discussed by any reliable source. One citation in the whole article. An anonymous username, not my real name 01:20, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply

A quick search for sources finds:
PK-WIKI ( talk) 02:32, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • PK-WIKI (it's helpful to sign your posts if you remember), I am well aware of WP:NEXIST, but as I explained, this didn't appear to apply based on my searches. Now that sources have been provided, I would still argue that this doesn't need to be its own article; rather, it would make sense to have this explained within varsity team, while specific sports (college baseball, American football, etc.) can have their own articles if sourcing is sufficient. An anonymous username, not my real name 02:29, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Merge for now to Varsity team, with no prejudice towards its recreation at a later time. The article subject is notable, but it generally exists in relationship with varsity sports in the United States looking at both the above sources and from my own search (I'm only looking at this from an American perspective, to be clear). I could see a world where an editor would take the plethora of coverage about JV sports in the US and draw out a larger article, but this current one would be better served with merging information into the target for now. I'd recommend that it should be a sub-section of "varsity sports". Nomader ( talk) 03:30, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment So many pages link here that we really need to keep it as a redirect, at least. It may be possible to write an independent article about this topic, but I think this concept would make the most sense if discussed alongside varsity sports. There are surely hundreds of sources about individual JV teams, JV competitions, etc, but weaving that information into a coherent article could be challenging. Zagalejo ( talk) 07:09, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Merge into 'Varsity team', leaving the redirect. However, that article itself is a mess, and seems to overlap various articles listed at Varsity. (Having seen that mess, I must keep reminding myself that I have other things I am supposed to be working on.) - Donald Albury 11:59, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • keep notable subject matter, sources that exist and have been shown in this discussion need to be incorporated in the article. AFD is not cleanup.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 15:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per above. Therapyisgood ( talk) 04:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Is most certainly notable. Newspapers.com brings up over 2,000,000 results for "junior varsity," and there's even whole books making comparisons between varsity and JV [11]. AFDISNOTCLEANUP. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 15:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    So Newspapers.com *does* bring over millions of articles. But after spotchecking just a couple dozen of them, it's all stuff like this ( [12]), just schedules and random notes about how games went -- no actual coverage of the topic. And the book that you link to (which I found as well) actually discusses the subject of the fitness of junior varsity athletes in the context of varsity ones! Clearly they exist as a topic together and this redirect should be allowed to be recreated without prejudice, but I think it makes a ton of sense for the subjects to be merged together (as they exist in relation to each other). Nomader ( talk) 13:56, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Still, the fact that it is used millions and millions of times clearly shows it is a major concept and should be kept. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 15:40, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Some coverage about the term "jv" itself: [13] ( p2) [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 15:51, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    But again, these all discuss the subject in the context of... varsity sports and the resources given to both of them. A merge makes so much sense here -- a well-sourced article would be able to discuss the different levels of varsity sports (of which JV is one of them clearly based on the sources you have given here) and would be able to discuss it in context appropriately. Nomader ( talk) 17:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Merge The sources do not outweigh the fact that Varsity team is quite short and this can easily be merged there to better show the context of how these sports work, as most of what defines junior varsity is simply complementary to varsity. Even if a notable concept, per WP:NOPAGE, there is no need for a separate article here for closely related terms. The length of the article is misleading, being largely unsourced original research. Reywas92 Talk 13:28, 5 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided between Keep and Merge. Remember to base judgments on souces and policy guidelines, not on whether or not you believe the subject is "worthy" (or "unworthy").
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:50, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Keep per PK-WIKI's listed sources. Clearly demonstrate notability and in-depth analysis on the topic. Skipple ☎ 04:51, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Merge, because where length is not a concern readers are better served by a coherent summary at a single page than partially redundant content in multiple places. Yes, the concept is notable; but the vast majority of content that crops up in a search is about specific teams, which doesn't belong here; indeed using them would likely be original research. What coverage there is of the concept is easily handled, and more coherently handled, at Varsity team. Vanamonde ( Talk) 05:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Vanamonde ( Talk) 05:02, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Brigette Peterson

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

Lacks notability. Being mayor of Gilbert does not itself make a subject notable enough for an article.

One reason is that Gilbert is an overgrown suburb in effect. It is a tertiary population center within its metro area. Mayors of Gilbert do not tend to carry widespread political influence or over their metro area, unlike mayors of similarly-populous communities that are the primary anchor of metro areas. This should be evidenced by the fact that other mayors of Gilbert largely lack articles and many mayors of similar suburban cities also lack articles.

Another reason is that, on top of the aforementioned dynamic, Gilbert most resembles a weak mayor government. Day-to-day administrating is actually the city managers' role, not the mayor. This further weakens the notability of the mayor, as they don't actually have all that much power over city policy. [19]

If Peterson does something that garners her particular note within her office or outside of it, then she would warrant an article. But she hasn't, as far as I know.

I think that there is no particularly notability, and therefore a deletion is warranted. SecretName101 ( talk) 01:37, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Arizona. SecretName101 ( talk) 01:37, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Pinging contributors to the previous (no consensus) deletion discussion so they can respond to this proposal and the arguments laid out.@ Bearcat: @ LordVoldemort728: @ MB: @ Bbraxtonlee: @ Liz: SecretName101 ( talk) 02:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Pinging a key article contributor as well @ Jamiebuba SecretName101 ( talk) 03:00, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex ( talk) 03:18, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Well, the decision that will be made at this AFD (and others you have made) don't rely on the nominator's belief in the notability (or lack of notability) of the article subject but on whether reliable sources, either in the article now or ones that are found through the course of this discussion, can establish a subject's notability. In my time closing AFD discussions, I've seen lots of articles on subjects I thought were not notable Kept because sources found demonstrate that they are, in fact, believed to be notable. What did you find in your BEFORE search for additional sources? Liz Read! Talk! 03:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Liz For starters, it is not a promising sign that among the early results in a google search are trivial pages about random people with the same name. Should be a major red flag for lack of notability. After sixteen results that include several of her social media accounts, a few routine local articles on her, as well as her campaign website I was given results that have nothing to do with her and which are of ridiculously low-notability. Results that would never pop up within the first hundred-plus (probably thousand-plus) results for a incumbent officeholder with actual notability. These include (within the next sixteen results:
    • a wedding site for another person of her name (congrats those two, hope it all goes well in September)
    • Some other Bridgette Peterson's Pinterest page with whopping 92 followers
    • the Charity Water fundraising page of a young girl with the same name that has raised $250 dollars from 13 donations all made a decade ago in 2013 (good for that girl)
    • The ScottsdaleRealtors.org page for a realtor with the same name
    • the website of DundasDome (no clear discernible connection to the term "Bridgette Peterson" is present on that webpage, which is like fifty more red flags that it was an early result for that search term
    • A Flickr account belonging to another person of her name with zero followers and only twenty pictures all uploaded on June 4 and June 5, 2010
    • A University of Minnesota college student's report on nutrition of competitive swimmers, which google says has been cited by a single other person.
    and also:
    SecretName101 ( talk) 09:08, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Also, even routine local coverage articles on her can barely muster anything to say. Look at this AZ Central article. It's clear the newspaper could muster anything actually notable on her, so called it a day. (also worth noting that this article appears twice in the first 16 results, also appearing through Yahoo's syndication reprinting of it SecretName101 ( talk) 09:14, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep It was really easy to find sources for this article. Was able to get some newspaper stories about her that I've added as well as some controversies that are not tranisant. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝) 10:19, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Please provide examples of non-routine coverage that illustrates/establishes notability. Without outlining receipts, your ability to "get some newspaper stories" cannot be evaluated as establishing notability. The existence of "some stories" that are accessible does not inherently grant a subject notability. SecretName101 ( talk) 17:05, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Dr vulpes Pinging SecretName101 ( talk) 14:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep due to significant coverage in reliable sources that demonstrate meeting the criteria detailed in WP:GNG. Examples include:
  1. https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/gilbert-mayor-under-fire-for-proposed-limits-to-public-comments-11734354
  2. https://www.gilbertsunnews.com/news/for-new-mayor-gilbert-was-love-at-first-sight/article_f0928608-4c87-11eb-b810-bb0f5e48876d.html
  3. https://www.yourvalley.net/stories/gilbert-mayor-answers-anonymous-text-campaign-against-commuter-rail,316362 (I wasn't able to get past the paywall, but I'm satisfied from what I saw that it provides significant coverage)
  4. https://www-newspapers-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/clip/113469977/gilbert-mayor-did-not-violate-ethics/ CT55555( talk) 13:11, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ CT55555 These are run-of-the-mill local news stories. Millions of clearly non-notable local officials have similar coverage. SecretName101 ( talk) 17:10, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    I disagree. Suggestions of ethics violations and limiting freedom of speech are interesting and unusual pieces of news coverage, not routine. That they are local has no negative bearing on notability, I am aware of no policy that discounts local news coverage. Having considered your comment, it does not persuade me to change my !vote. CT55555( talk) 20:40, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ CT55555 suggestions of ethics violation are "not routine"? Are you saying that it's not routine to find politician being potentially ethically sketch? I hate to be a cynic, but I'd call that incredibly commonplace.
    And limiting public comment at forums in the manner she proposed might be reprehensible and a big deal to local residents, but it's definitely not something that gives her any broader notability. SecretName101 ( talk) 00:29, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Mindful of WP:BLUDGEON and also WP:COAL I'm not going to keep repeating myself to justify my !vote. CT55555( talk) 14:30, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ CT55555 Also the headline is literally "Gilbert mayor did not violate ethics", so you are you literally saying the mere allegation of run-of-the-mill ethics violations makes her notable?
    I'm bewildered how you think these are the stories to illustrate notability. SecretName101 ( talk) 00:30, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • We don't have a rule that local coverage is ineligible for use. We do, however, have a rule that local coverage isn't necessarily enough to clinch inclusion all by itself if the person can show absolutely no evidence of having a wider range of coverage beyond the purely local. (For instance, a high school athlete who has accomplished nothing that would satisfy our inclusion criteria for sportspeople is not going to be exempted from them just because he has two or three pieces of local coverage in his own hometown media in run of the mill local interest contexts, and a child actor who hasn't otherwise passed WP:NACTOR is not going to be exempted from it just because he gets a couple of pieces of "local kid gets bit part in movie" in his hometown local media.) Bearcat ( talk) 11:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Bearcat all that is being provided is local coverage of things that do not establish any distinguish meant or notability.
    when all you can point to are non-distinguishing stories in local media, you have not established notability SecretName101 ( talk) 14:21, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Why are you addressing this comment to me, when it doesn't contradict what I said? I'm not the one who was trying to argue that the existing sources established notability, I was trying to provide context for why they don't. Bearcat ( talk) 14:23, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Bearcat I am agreeing with you SecretName101 ( talk) 14:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Then why did you ping me as if you were replying to me with a counterargument? Bearcat ( talk) 14:26, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Sufficient sources to meet WP:GNG and to expand article. See, per User:CT55555: Gilbert Sun News and others. Jaireeodell ( talk) 15:00, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jaireeodell expound on how they meet the criteria. The news source you point to is routine coverage. A local paper publishing a piece on a newly-elected official does not make them notable. Otherwise, every longtime elementary school teacher that received an in-depth profile in a local newspaper when they retired would be notable enough for a Wikpedia article (not to insult the great value of teachers' work) SecretName101 ( talk) 17:08, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ SecretName101 I think the source I point to is reliable and provides information that could be used to expand the entry. Notability is met, in my opinion, by the fact that she was elected to be mayor of city of more than a 100,000 people. Non-local media coverage includes The Arizona Republic (state wide coverage). (I believe this is more than what a longtime elementary school teacher would receive.) Jaireeodell ( talk) 13:36, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jaireeodell
    the source you provided does not cover anything about her that makes her actually NOTABLE. Reliability of a source does not make the article’s subject inherently notable: reliable sources routinely cover stories/subjects that do not themselves meet notability standards.
    Population in excess of 100,000 still does not give the officeholder inherent notability. It is a “weak mayoralty” in a suburban city that is a tertiary community within its metro area. That’s not a position which holds inherent political influence at broad. I have already stated this. Also, see my postings at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Carmel mayoral election for why political office in such overgrown suburbs don’t carry inherent broader notability.
    I have already stated why population alone is not a signifier of importance of a suburban city’s population. She holds a “weak mayor” position in a suburban municipality that is lower than a tertiary municipality in its metro area even in terms population. Not really a position that holds inherent broad political note/influence. For more arguments on why government offices in overgrown suburbs like this are not inherently politically notable, see my postings at Carmel mayoral deletion nom
    Also Arizona Republic is local coverage. Just as the Chicago Tribune is local coverage of the happenings in Chicago’s suburbs, the Phoenix-based Arizona Republic is local coverage for Phoenix suburbs. SecretName101 ( talk) 14:14, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Re: The Arizona Republic ... "Circulated throughout Arizona, it is the state's largest newspaper." ... "twenty-first largest, by circulation" in the United States. As for the concept of a "weak mayoralty," I'm not sure that it matters. One can hold an office of public interest even if that office is ceremonial. -- Jaireeodell ( talk) 14:28, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Bearcat It is a Phoenix-based paper. Its coverage of Phoenix suburbs is local coverage.
    Just as the Chicago Tribune is distributed broadly and among the 10-most circulated paper in the United States but still publishes local-coverage for Chicagoland. Just as the Star Tribune is distributed broadly, top-ten US newspaper, still provides local coverage of Twin Cities metro. Just as the Los Angeles Times is distributed broadly, top-ten U.S. newspaper, and still provides local coverage of LA metro. Just as the Boston Globe is a top-ten US paper, and still publishes local coverage on the Boston metro. Same with the Washington Post and local Washington coverage. Same with the New York Post and local coverage as well. SecretName101 ( talk) 15:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    You pinged me to reply to somebody else again Bearcat ( talk) 15:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Pinging @ Jaireeodell: SecretName101 ( talk) 15:35, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jaireeodell Additionally, holding a local office that has no inherent notability itself ("ceremonial" as you state) would not confer notability in and of itself. You'd need to do something(s) to establish note. SecretName101 ( talk) 15:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: Local news media is always going to cover local politicians, as that is a routine part of their duty. In the absence of regional or national-level sources, the question should thus be not whether local sources cover this person, but whether they do so to such a degree as to cross the threshold of significance. Curbon7 ( talk) 15:57, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Sources are reliable and independent. Mayor of one of the largest cities in Arizona. Scanlan ( talk) 14:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Scanlan The reliability and independence of sources do not confer notability to a subject. Every day, independent and reliable sources publish millions of pieces on subjects that would not meet notability standards
    Also, you did not address the crux of nomination made about how the population of this municipality does not make the officeholder inherently notable. Municipality is a mere suburb that is less than even tertiary in populace within its own metro area. The mayoralty in this city is created by a "weak mayor" system, which does not confer much power to the mayor. There is little ground to argue that she holds an office that confers automatic notability. SecretName101 ( talk) 15:27, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Starting with the obvious, the subject does not pass WP:NPOL so the question is whether the subject meets GNG. The community's expectation of local elected officials is the article must be more than "the mayor exists" (see WP:POLOUTCOMES). Size of a jurisdiction has largely been discounted by the community as a reason for keeping (or deleting) an article. The expectation is that articles about local officials contain and the sources illustrate specific projects the official spearheaded or the specific effects the subject had on the development of the city (this is often reflective of an official's career or the sources suggest is novel {that is saying an official championed a local development is not sufficient, but recognized as championing a novel policy may {see the deletion discussion for Tina Podlodowski}}). It is helpful that the sources are national, and not entirely local because because those national sources provide context for what the subject accomplished in office (see the deletion discussion of Denis Law. As is, I do not see any source for this subject that goes beyond saying "she exists." There is no obvious redirect target as her mention in Gilbert is temporary (there is not a list of mayors). -- Enos733 ( talk) 16:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep passes WP:GNG and WP:BASIC.-- User:Namiba 17:38, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Namiba please give specifics on how. What establishes here general notability in your opinion? What significant coverage has she received?
    Asserting that it meets these without elaborating at all on how is not helpful or persuasive. SecretName101 ( talk) 18:59, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

 Comment: it still hasn't been effectively established by anyone that she meets notability. The coverage that is provided does not establish her as holding a notable office or being a notable individual. Local officials do not inherently meet WP:POLITICIAN. Being mayor of Gilbert is a very local office, with only a local impact. And on top of that, the "weak mayor" system generally weakens the inherent range of impact of its holder has even at the local level. Holding this office is not enough to establish notability. As a result, she would need to have done something that is notable in particular to be of enough note. Nothing has been established that what she has done in her office (or outside) is distinct and noteworthy. If actual coverage that establishes significance could be provided, there'd be a case to keep here, but none has. SecretName101 ( talk) 19:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I see your passion for deleting articles about certain politicians, but try not to dominate deletion discussions. This system is intended to produce widespread community input. As User:CT55555 wrote above, the sources provided are, in the estimation of those arguing for a keep result, sufficient per Wikipedia's policies. It's on you to prove that the article doesn't meet those standards.-- User:Namiba 11:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Namiba You are telling me not to litigate/respond to counterpoints.......yet also telling me I have to prove the article doesn't meet those standards.
Those are contradictory commands.
By explaining to why sources others provide are failing to establish notability, I am properly engaging in this discussion as well as enforcing my case. SecretName101 ( talk) 19:20, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. There are plenty of sources available to meet WP:GNG. Whether the editor likes suburbs is unimportant, the sources exist. Whether the mayor is weak or strong, the sources cover them. notability has nothing to do with whether one particular editor has snobbish feelings against smaller cities in major metros, but that seems to be what this set of nominations is about. Jacona ( talk) 18:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jacona That's a mischaracterization of my rationale. It's not that I don't like suburbs: it's that this particular city's mayoralty is not enough to confer notability, and notability is not otherwise established.
    Please actually read my rationale and substantively respond to it, as well as my previous points of why GNG is not established by sources.
    This individual does not meet notability standards.
    It's clear you were not careful in considering what has been laid out before responding, since you so inaccurately characterized it.
    And please do not call me "snobbish" towards smaller cities. My argument is about whether the office she holds is notable enough to infer her immediate notability. It isn't. I have edited and created numerous articles on this project about/relating to smaller-cities and even small suburbs. That is a false and unwarranted personal character attack that should not be hurled here, and I'd appreciate an apology if you have it in you. SecretName101 ( talk) 19:16, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    SecretName101, How is your characterization of Gilbert as "an overgrown suburb in effect" anything but snobbishness? I am sorry that you feel that calling your snobbish statement snobbish is a false and unwarranted personal character attack. —  Jacona ( talk) 21:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    Maybe familiarize yourself with what a suburb is and look to the rest of what I said for context of that statement. A suburb is an a descriptor for an outlying area, rather than the central anchors, of a metro area. Gilbert is populous by virtue of its broad boundaries (a hulking 68.79 square miles), encompassing a large area of suburban land. But it is still just an amalgamation of suburban area, rather than than the central force within its metro area. Holding mayoralties in the primary center of a metro area is notable, in part, due to the dynamic where political decisions within such centers have impacts felt on the surrounding metro area. On the other hand, individual suburbs generally don't have such an impact on the rest of their metro area, because the area's economy and politics is not tied to them in quite the same way.
    It is not a commentary on how I feel about suburbs. It is just how the dynamics of metropolitan economies and politics generally work. SecretName101 ( talk) 22:10, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jacona Furthermore, it is worth noting that Gilbert's mayoralty is not just a weak mayoralty in a municipally that is of below- tertiary population within its metro area, but that it is also weak mayoralty within an Arizona town government.
    Per Gilbert: "Since Gilbert remains incorporated as a town, it lacks the additional powers possessed by nearby Mesa and Chandler, which are incorporated as cities. For instance, Arizona towns do not have as much power to regulate utilities and construction within their borders as cities possess."
    Being mayor of Gilbert, quite simply, is not a position that carries inherently broad influence. SecretName101 ( talk) 22:17, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    It doesn't matter whether or not the town or position carries inherently broad influence, what matters is that Brigette Peterson, the subject of the article has received WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS, and is therefore WP:N. —  Jacona ( talk) 23:20, 12 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Jacona And how has she? Nothing has been pointed that actually does. News coverage that has been pointed to is local and largely goes as far as "she exists". SecretName101 ( talk) 02:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: Since there is a heated debate going on here, I had to study the sources very carefully. From my observations, I must say that she passess WP:GNG. Thilsebatti ( talk) 00:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Thilsebatti It would be useful to explain what your observations were, if you could spare some more time. SecretName101 ( talk) 02:18, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 04:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Minas Halaj

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

I can't seem to find reliable secondary sources about this artist. Does not pass WP:GNG or WP:ARTIST. This entire BLP also contains no inline citations. PopoDameron ⁠ talk 01:33, 9 April 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2023_April_9&oldid=1152995435"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE