The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
This article fails WP:GNG. None of the sources in the article satisfy the necessary criteria. I've also searched for sources online and none of them seem to satisfy these criteria either. Please review the source assessment table below. Nythar ( 💬- ❄️) 23:34, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:Nythar
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
The Grand Rapids Press | ? I don't know if MLive is a reliable source and it's difficult to determine. | The source barely focuses on or describes who he is. The article mostly focuses on Henry Payne's contributions to ArtPrize, which seems to be a contest. The article is 100% trivial WP:ROUTINE coverage of local events. | ✘ No | |
The Item | This source represents a newspaper publishing a story about itself. The Item's "stable of national commentary and opinion" is apparently being joined by three columnists, namely David Broder, Mike Royko, Walter Williams, and Henry Payne. | The coverage is not significant. There's a very short general history of Henry Payne, introducing him and three others to a commentary panel. | ✘ No | |
Michigan Capitol Confidential | ? The website itself isn't major so it's difficult to tell if it's reliable. However, upon reviewing it's main page, you can see a clear pro-Republican and anti-Democrat lean, with most article focusing on Michigan politics. | The article mentions Henry Payne's contributions as a speaker to to a climate change forum, but does not focus on him. | ✘ No | |
Michigan Messenger | Although there is a section in the article that focuses on Henry Payne's contributions as a speaker to a climate change deniers forum, its coverage of him is not significant and the article focuses on the forum, simply mentioning him and using one of his statements as an example. | ✘ No | ||
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}}. |
made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field". Like I said, none of the sources provided are acceptable according to GNG (I'll probably make the assessment table tomorrow), so the claim that he meets #2 can't be taken as a fact. Nythar ( 💬- ❄️) 01:13, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. North America 1000 11:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:NFILM. No reviews found in a BEFORE. Tagged for notability.
PROD removed with "noted work of a notable filmmaker, deprodded", but notability isn't inherited WP:NOTINHERITED. The work must stand on it's own. DonaldD23 talk to me 13:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting because the RS mentioned in the discussion that I checked on looked less than reliable. The first one listed had a paywall (which doesn't rule it out) but then wouldn't let me back out of the site without displaying more screens of clickbait journalism.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 18:41, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 23:32, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 23:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Article about a person that fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Practically unsourced since its creation, apart from links to her official website. Jamiebuba ( talk) 23:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
I'm not finding significant coverage for him. Australian search engine Trove yields namesakes and a few mentions of his memorial lecture but nothing indepth about him. LibStar ( talk) 23:09, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Quito Metro. I realize that some content might already have been merged during the discussion but Merge appears to be the consensus here. Liz Read! Talk! 23:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
List of unclear necessity. All of the stations listed here are already listed in the head article as it is, meaning that this is just a
content fork reduplicating content we already have in another article. And all of the stations listed here exist solely as redirects back to the same head article, with absolutely none of them having their own separate standalone articles about the stations themselves -- which means it's a list with only one outbound target, because every single link in the list is going to the same place.
Furthermore, even if the stations did have their own articles, the head article could just directly link to them as it is — the article isn't particularly long even with the list of stations already embedded in it, so the list doesn't need to be spun off to its own standalone page on article size management grounds.
There's just no pressing need for this to be its own separate topic, if the exact same information is already present in the parent article anyway.
Bearcat (
talk) 21:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. Salvio giuliano 22:01, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON article about a film in the production pipeline, not yet
reliably sourced as the subject of sufficient production coverage to exempt it from the principal notability criteria at
WP:NFILM. As always, the "future films" section of NFILM is not an automatic "every film that enters the production pipeline is automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article right then and there" pass -- it's for films that generate a very large volume of production coverage that marks them out as special cases of significantly greater notability than the norm, such as Marvel or Star Wars films, while most films are not notable until they're actually released and getting reviewed by professional film critics.
But this just has a couple of stray production and casting announcements, which is not enough coverage to deem it a special case of greater notability than other as yet unreleased films -- and both the fact that we don't even know a title yet, and the fact that I can't even get it out of the container-only
Category:American films because we don't even have a confirmed genre for it to be recategorized to yet, both mean it's too soon for us to have an article about this yet. Even if we sometimes permit articles about films prior to release if they have sufficient coverage, we should still never start an article about a film before we even know a title or a genre.
Bearcat (
talk) 20:39, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. and salt. Courcelles ( talk) 18:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
The article which was created by a sock and heavily relied on refbombing does not have sufficient coverage from independent and reliable secondary sources to meet the requirements of WP:GNG. Akevsharma ( talk) 14:29, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 16:46, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 20:38, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not an address book of non-notable amateur sports clubs — Preceding unsigned comment added by DovaModaal ( talk • contribs) 15:19, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 16:46, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Eddie891
Talk
Work 20:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG A09 ( talk) 20:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Can't find the multiple examples of significant, detailed coverage for WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC. Best I can find is Phile News, which contains one sentence about him being injured, Sport FM, a contract renewal announcement with no independent content (copied from club website), and Kerkida (translated), a basic announcement of his release from AEK Larnaca. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 20:18, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 04:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG. A Google search for "African Congress of People" return the Wikipedia article, a Facebook page, a Twitter account and this article which mentions it in passing. There's literally nothing else. The current references in the article are actually copied from an article about a different Zimbabwean party, the Mthwakazi Republic Party. Pichpich ( talk) 18:44, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 20:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:26, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
It's a resume. Can't find any reliable sources relating to this person. LegalSmeagolian ( talk) 19:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 18:43, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
written like advertisement and cannot be seen notability Endrabcwizart ( talk) 17:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 18:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to meet the notability criteria under WP:ORGCRIT. Would propose merging, however there is no ECLBS article and thus nowhere to merge the page into. Opal|zukor( discuss) 16:57, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 18:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
He is a student leader and a failed political candidate on the state level, he doesn't have significant coverage. Mvqr ( talk) 16:53, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 18:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:NOTABLE: this seems to be some completely irrelevant prize given out by some irrelevant non-profit organization called the US Peace Memorial Foundation (which doesn't even have its own article page). The sources are really poor, and the award's dreadful website seems to suggest this isn't anything serious. I'm struggling to find any even remotely popular media outlet talking about it. BeŻet ( talk) 16:52, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 16:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Could not locate reliable sources with SIGCOV to establish notability. References just mention a his name without much other detail. Does not fulfill general notability guidelines, and is written in somewhat promotional manner. LegalSmeagolian ( talk) 16:27, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 16:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. This appears to be an article on a minor cargo airliner that operated for six years in Indonesia. The only sources in the article are this database entry on "airline history", an apparently self-published website, and this primary source photograph. Neither of these contribute towards WP:SIRS, and I am likewise not able to find sources in an online search that would contribute towards SIRS. As such, this article should be deleted in line with WP:DEL-REASON#8 for failing to meet the relevant notability guideline of NCORP. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. While there is not a consensus that this would never be an appropriate subject, the consensus is that at this time, there is not sufficient source material available to support an article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:34, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
This page should be deleted as per WP:DEL-REASON 6.: Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and hoaxes. A previous deletion discussion in 2007 resulted in no consensus. This article has only two sources. The first source is incomplete and consists only of a title, publisher, and year. From what I can tell this source is referring to “한국적 신학형성과 단군신화 연구” (단군학회 편 자료집, 1999) by 박영규. This is from a Daejongism conference (see details at this website) that makes no mention of Cheonson/천손, the topic of the Wikipedia article. The second source, What does the national holiday mean? by Park In-Taek and Han Chang-soo, is only used as a reference for the etymology of the holiday Gaecheonjeol which is not the topic of the article. The contents of the present article are therefore supported by no sources. What's more, I was not able to find any reliable sources for Cheonson in the academic literature, or more broadly in reliable sources indexed on the web. Yannn 11 15:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Human beings are considered the descendants of Dan'gun and are considered the posterity of Heaven (Cheonson, 천손天孫).Considering the Wikipedia article has existed since 2006, this book was published in 2018, the sentence in the book is unsourced, and the sentence uses similar wording as the article, this could likely be a circular reference. Yannn 11 14:46, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Delete for absence of significant coverage in RS. See WP:NONENG - if the sources given are to be pushed forward as the justification for claiming WP:GNG then there's a great deal of work to be done. Springnuts ( talk) 17:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Keep While the state of this article is appalling, there are definitely more than enough reliable sources (albeit mostly in the Korean language) to establish both its notability. Just FYI that this originated (contested by some Korean scholars who argue that it was exported to Japan from Korea) from the Tenson kōrin mythology of Japan, and English-language sources may also use the Japanese term Tenson when referring to the Gaya Confederacy founding myth. I'll clean it up when I get some time to work on it. Freedom4U ( talk) 06:11, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
FYI that this originatedyou are referring to aspects of Korean mythology that share similarities with the Tenson kōrin myth (천손강림신화). These may be appropriate or already found in Korean mythology#Gaya or Dangun. I do not think you will be able to find a source for the topic of this article (
Posterity of Heaven or Cheonson (천손, 天孫) designates the Korean people because they are considered the descendants of Heaven or the heavenly god.). If you can find such a source please add it to this discussion. Yannn 11 15:21, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 15:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
@
Freedom4U: Do you have any additional comments? To summarize the current discussion, Springnuts and Rkieferbaum are also in favor of deletion. Freedom4U is in favor of keep or merge, but finds that the state of this article is appalling
. The article in it's current form is unsourced. Freedom4U has provided sources for Tenson kōrin/천손강림; however, these sources do not support the current article subject of "Posterity of Heaven".
Yannn
11 22:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Joyous! Noise! 23:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Unreferenced list of cities and towns in an unofficial region with subjective boundaries. This explicitly defines itself as using a "narrow" definition, as opposed to a "wider" one, which means that the basic boundaries of what's even in the region in the first place are up for debate and dispute -- which, in turn, means that it's effectively unmaintainable in a Wikipedia context, if there are such open questions about what should or shouldn't even be listed here. And, indeed, this came to my attention because the page recently got decategorized in the process of an attempt to strip the Michigan subsection from the article entirely, which seems like an intentionally targeted content dispute rather than just for-the-lulz vandalism.
Since we already have a head article about
Michiana which already links to all the counties in it, and the counties in it in turn already link to all the communities in the counties, that means we already have the same information in other places anyway -- so it's just not clear that there's any pressing need to also maintain an omnibus list of all the individual communities in the region as its own standalone topic, especially if there isn't one objective universal definition of what the proper boundaries of the region even are.
Bearcat (
talk) 13:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Joyous! Noise! 23:12, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable lobby group. Article has been unsourced for 17 years and a WP:BEFORE search turned up next to nothing. Lacks WP:SIGCOV and fails to meet WP:ORG. Hey man im josh ( talk) 12:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Tally Hall per WP:SNOW --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 20:14, 7 March 2023 (UTC) ( non-admin closure)
Non notable genre. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme ( talk) 12:49, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 16:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:BLP, started in draftspace and then immediately moved to mainspace by its own creator without
WP:AFC review, of a musician not
properly sourced as passing
WP:NMUSIC. The notability claim here basically amounts to "musician who exists", with the article documenting nothing about his career that would even be measurable against any of NMUSIC's accomplishment-based criteria -- and there are just four references (one of which has been redundantly reduplicated as two separate cites, for five footnotes but only four actual sources), of which two are Q&A interviews in which he's talking about himself in the first person rather than having his significance analyzed in the third, one is just one of his own songs metaverifying its own existence on YouTube, and one is a short blurb not substantive enough to carry him over
WP:GNG all by itself if it's the most GNG-worthy source on the table.
This is not enough to get him over the "notable because media coverage exists" hump, but nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have stronger referencing than this either.
Bearcat (
talk) 12:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
We apologize- uh, who's "we"? - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ( work / talk) 13:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 🐱 13:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Per WP:GNG and WP:NARENA. This article has very few mentions on the Internet:
Searching "Herrgärdets IP" -wikipedia on Google only yields seven results: the first being the aforementioned blog post; three links giving the same level of coverage as the source given in the article; and three irrelevant links. The same query on Google Books and Google News yield no results.
The article on the Swedish Wikipedia uses the same source as this article and the article on the Dutch Wikipedia gives another link (which seems to be dead) whose archived version (as of 2 January 2014) only makes a passing mention of the stadium.
I suggest either deleting the article or redirecting to Västerås IK. -- Kzkzb ( talk) 09:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Krakoa. As this is the second AfD with this result, the redirect has been protected. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 🐱 12:31, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
This article was redirected by consensus ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quiet Council of Krakoa) two months ago but has been restored and User:Ringardiumleviossa thinks it should not be redirected again. There is no agreement and no point in further edit warring over this so bringing it here for resolution. Mccapra ( talk) 09:10, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Reynard Motorsport cars. This seems to be the redirect target that has more support from participants here. Liz Read! Talk! 08:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Disputed redirect. Sources are a Geocities / Oocities blog and Linkedin, and no better sources found (database entries like this or this). Not a notable car, but a redirect to List of Reynard Motorsport cars seemed a good solution. Fram ( talk) 08:16, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Vision Gran Turismo#Ferrari Vision Gran Turismo. Liz Read! Talk! 08:08, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't pass WP:LASTING. Sources all from a period of a couple of days. Tried G7 but apparently 98.5% authorship isn't enough. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 07:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
fucks sake alright you win) they tried to G7 the article because Piotrus edit warred to add a notability tag. Neither of them discussed this tag on the talk page, which should have been done before coming here. The nominator clearly thinks the article is notable, but has given up because of the behavior of Piotrus. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ( work / talk) 15:52, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 07:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Article is largely based on the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Coverage is rather routine like this rather than meaningful bilateral relations like significant trade, numerous state visits. LibStar ( talk) 05:57, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 06:52, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 08:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable actor/singer. Sources appear to be puff pieces/paid PR. KH-1 ( talk) 05:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Plagiarism. This seems to be the preferred Merge target. Of course, if an editor believes content from this article would be appropriate in a different article, additional Merge edits can be undertaken. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Basically, it's fake news, which is also used to promote the author. After almost ten years, this hypothetical neologism is not listed in any real dictionaries. Besides, some of the (few) Web sources actually used this article as a source. IJustNeedToMessageYou ( talk) 04:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
t
c
11:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Inglis, 2008for its typology of paraphrase. The first and third describe the behaviour in second language English writers, while the Rogeting article is focused on plagiarism. small jars
t
c
12:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
t
c
12:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 08:21, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If merged, should the destination be plagiarism or paraphrase? (Or possibly both I suppose)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Legoktm (
talk) 05:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. On a straight nose count, this would seem to veer toward "no consensus". However, as always, AfD is not a vote. The two individuals who argue to keep cite, essentially, their personal standards for what would make someone notable, rather than actual notability guidelines agreed upon by community consensus. This causes the arguments to carry substantially less weight, and tips into "delete". Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:39, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Per WP:USCJN, state appellate judges are not inherently notable. BD2412 T 21:25, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Keep So shouldn't the criteria for keeping or deleting be more than just the title or office of the person, and instead what she/he did while in the office? A minor officeholder can make a big impact (good or bad) (for example, Rosemarie Aquilina is a low level state court trial judge, but she made a major impact during the Nassar trial). Judge Schwartz, in his almost 30 years on the bench, authored 944 opinions. To dismiss him as delete-ably routine simply because he was just an appellate judge really glosses over what he did as an appellate judge. In 3 minutes of looking at some of his decisions and sorting by the number of times those decisions were cited by other courts, I was able to find 2 significant and interesting (well, at least interesting to lawyers) decisions that made law. His decisions, his reasoning and writings will continue to influence the application of law for likely decades to come. Significance and notability should be more than surface level deep, and the contributions a person makes should be a factor just as much as a person's perceived social importance. Today's flash-in-the-pan celebrity will be gone in 15 seconds; this man's work will live on and impact real people. The article needs work and more research, no doubt, to identify and analyze decisions and the impact of those decisions. But aborting the notion of his notability on what might be cursory research (hopefully more than just a google search...), favors the potentially less-serious-more-notorious people over those who are serious and impactful but not flashy. Judge Schwartz seems serious and impactful. Let this article live on; maybe somebody will fill it out more oneday. Leglamp123 ( talk) 00:48, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Keep - as a totality, this judge passes my standards, especially as the chief judge of an intermediate court. Bearian ( talk) 18:42, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Legoktm (
talk) 05:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:52, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Per WP:USCJN, state appellate judges are not inherently notable. BD2412 T 21:25, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Legoktm (
talk) 05:43, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) LibStar ( talk) 22:30, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
No significant coverage, fails WP:BIO. Ambassadors are not inherently notable. LibStar ( talk) 23:01, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Legoktm (
talk) 05:39, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Yoshihiro Akiyama#Personal life. I accept this as an ATD although I dislike how many times a woman's biography is turned into a redirect to her spouse's article. Seems to mainly happen with historical figures. Liz Read! Talk! 04:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't meet notability, married to a celebrity and done some modeling. That's it. Nswix ( talk) 04:45, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:02, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. I see a consensus to Keep this article. Editors are encouraged to work on improving NPOV in this article and increasing reliable sources. Liz Read! Talk! 03:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Extremely biased article. I would recommend deletion of this page and adding a section to Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan. Controversies section states that "Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba has been continuously speaking against campus violence in the name of ethnicity" yet three of the four sources are clearly *about* members of IJT carrying out violence; many claims throughout the article have no sources; uses QUORA as a source and more TokiSixskins ( talk) 03:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. I see a consensus to Delete this page. I'm less sure about a future DAB page but since on the current page "improper" is being used as an adjective to modify a noun and not article subjects, I think that potential is dim. Liz Read! Talk! 03:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:NOTDICTIONARY applies This is not a disambiguation page though it looks like one at first sight.The draft was accepted at AFC by a sockpuppet - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Harttyny which is rather disappointing all round. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 23:29, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk) 00:44, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shawn Teller (
talk) 02:47, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 02:14, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Serious WP:CRYSTAL issues here, as the most Gates has done is acquire land without turning over a single shovelful of dirt. Could be recreated in the event of actual construction, but right now it's a press-release palace and not a reality. It's extremely common for failed projects of this type to buy up property and then sell it all off, so I don't count the current coverage as notable even if some of it isn't local (and that latter, from Seattle, is local for him, and is just routine "don't build anything" response mongering anyway). Mangoe ( talk) 01:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 01:34, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. News coverage on the subject is almost non-existent. ABHammad ( talk) 01:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC) Withdrawn by nominator ABHammad ( talk) 02:30, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete per G11 by Jimfbleak. ( non-admin closure) Shellwood ( talk) 12:56, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Obvious paid/promo, no GNG sources. Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs) 01:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 01:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
No citations. Unclear if it meets the GNG or is just a SYNTH collection of facts. (If it does, the article title should be changed.) Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:53, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 01:30, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review:
Also seems like WP:DUCK paid... Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs) 00:46, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
This article fails WP:GNG. None of the sources in the article satisfy the necessary criteria. I've also searched for sources online and none of them seem to satisfy these criteria either. Please review the source assessment table below. Nythar ( 💬- ❄️) 23:34, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Source assessment table: prepared by
User:Nythar
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
The Grand Rapids Press | ? I don't know if MLive is a reliable source and it's difficult to determine. | The source barely focuses on or describes who he is. The article mostly focuses on Henry Payne's contributions to ArtPrize, which seems to be a contest. The article is 100% trivial WP:ROUTINE coverage of local events. | ✘ No | |
The Item | This source represents a newspaper publishing a story about itself. The Item's "stable of national commentary and opinion" is apparently being joined by three columnists, namely David Broder, Mike Royko, Walter Williams, and Henry Payne. | The coverage is not significant. There's a very short general history of Henry Payne, introducing him and three others to a commentary panel. | ✘ No | |
Michigan Capitol Confidential | ? The website itself isn't major so it's difficult to tell if it's reliable. However, upon reviewing it's main page, you can see a clear pro-Republican and anti-Democrat lean, with most article focusing on Michigan politics. | The article mentions Henry Payne's contributions as a speaker to to a climate change forum, but does not focus on him. | ✘ No | |
Michigan Messenger | Although there is a section in the article that focuses on Henry Payne's contributions as a speaker to a climate change deniers forum, its coverage of him is not significant and the article focuses on the forum, simply mentioning him and using one of his statements as an example. | ✘ No | ||
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}}. |
made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field". Like I said, none of the sources provided are acceptable according to GNG (I'll probably make the assessment table tomorrow), so the claim that he meets #2 can't be taken as a fact. Nythar ( 💬- ❄️) 01:13, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. North America 1000 11:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Appears to fail WP:NFILM. No reviews found in a BEFORE. Tagged for notability.
PROD removed with "noted work of a notable filmmaker, deprodded", but notability isn't inherited WP:NOTINHERITED. The work must stand on it's own. DonaldD23 talk to me 13:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting because the RS mentioned in the discussion that I checked on looked less than reliable. The first one listed had a paywall (which doesn't rule it out) but then wouldn't let me back out of the site without displaying more screens of clickbait journalism.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 18:41, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 23:32, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 23:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Article about a person that fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Practically unsourced since its creation, apart from links to her official website. Jamiebuba ( talk) 23:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
I'm not finding significant coverage for him. Australian search engine Trove yields namesakes and a few mentions of his memorial lecture but nothing indepth about him. LibStar ( talk) 23:09, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Quito Metro. I realize that some content might already have been merged during the discussion but Merge appears to be the consensus here. Liz Read! Talk! 23:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
List of unclear necessity. All of the stations listed here are already listed in the head article as it is, meaning that this is just a
content fork reduplicating content we already have in another article. And all of the stations listed here exist solely as redirects back to the same head article, with absolutely none of them having their own separate standalone articles about the stations themselves -- which means it's a list with only one outbound target, because every single link in the list is going to the same place.
Furthermore, even if the stations did have their own articles, the head article could just directly link to them as it is — the article isn't particularly long even with the list of stations already embedded in it, so the list doesn't need to be spun off to its own standalone page on article size management grounds.
There's just no pressing need for this to be its own separate topic, if the exact same information is already present in the parent article anyway.
Bearcat (
talk) 21:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was Draftify. Salvio giuliano 22:01, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:TOOSOON article about a film in the production pipeline, not yet
reliably sourced as the subject of sufficient production coverage to exempt it from the principal notability criteria at
WP:NFILM. As always, the "future films" section of NFILM is not an automatic "every film that enters the production pipeline is automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article right then and there" pass -- it's for films that generate a very large volume of production coverage that marks them out as special cases of significantly greater notability than the norm, such as Marvel or Star Wars films, while most films are not notable until they're actually released and getting reviewed by professional film critics.
But this just has a couple of stray production and casting announcements, which is not enough coverage to deem it a special case of greater notability than other as yet unreleased films -- and both the fact that we don't even know a title yet, and the fact that I can't even get it out of the container-only
Category:American films because we don't even have a confirmed genre for it to be recategorized to yet, both mean it's too soon for us to have an article about this yet. Even if we sometimes permit articles about films prior to release if they have sufficient coverage, we should still never start an article about a film before we even know a title or a genre.
Bearcat (
talk) 20:39, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. and salt. Courcelles ( talk) 18:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
The article which was created by a sock and heavily relied on refbombing does not have sufficient coverage from independent and reliable secondary sources to meet the requirements of WP:GNG. Akevsharma ( talk) 14:29, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 16:46, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 20:38, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not an address book of non-notable amateur sports clubs — Preceding unsigned comment added by DovaModaal ( talk • contribs) 15:19, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 16:46, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Eddie891
Talk
Work 20:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG A09 ( talk) 20:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 07:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Can't find the multiple examples of significant, detailed coverage for WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC. Best I can find is Phile News, which contains one sentence about him being injured, Sport FM, a contract renewal announcement with no independent content (copied from club website), and Kerkida (translated), a basic announcement of his release from AEK Larnaca. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 20:18, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Liz Read! Talk! 04:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:GNG. A Google search for "African Congress of People" return the Wikipedia article, a Facebook page, a Twitter account and this article which mentions it in passing. There's literally nothing else. The current references in the article are actually copied from an article about a different Zimbabwean party, the Mthwakazi Republic Party. Pichpich ( talk) 18:44, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 20:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:26, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
It's a resume. Can't find any reliable sources relating to this person. LegalSmeagolian ( talk) 19:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 18:43, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
written like advertisement and cannot be seen notability Endrabcwizart ( talk) 17:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 18:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to meet the notability criteria under WP:ORGCRIT. Would propose merging, however there is no ECLBS article and thus nowhere to merge the page into. Opal|zukor( discuss) 16:57, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 18:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
He is a student leader and a failed political candidate on the state level, he doesn't have significant coverage. Mvqr ( talk) 16:53, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 18:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:NOTABLE: this seems to be some completely irrelevant prize given out by some irrelevant non-profit organization called the US Peace Memorial Foundation (which doesn't even have its own article page). The sources are really poor, and the award's dreadful website seems to suggest this isn't anything serious. I'm struggling to find any even remotely popular media outlet talking about it. BeŻet ( talk) 16:52, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 16:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Could not locate reliable sources with SIGCOV to establish notability. References just mention a his name without much other detail. Does not fulfill general notability guidelines, and is written in somewhat promotional manner. LegalSmeagolian ( talk) 16:27, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 16:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:NCORP. This appears to be an article on a minor cargo airliner that operated for six years in Indonesia. The only sources in the article are this database entry on "airline history", an apparently self-published website, and this primary source photograph. Neither of these contribute towards WP:SIRS, and I am likewise not able to find sources in an online search that would contribute towards SIRS. As such, this article should be deleted in line with WP:DEL-REASON#8 for failing to meet the relevant notability guideline of NCORP. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. While there is not a consensus that this would never be an appropriate subject, the consensus is that at this time, there is not sufficient source material available to support an article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:34, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
This page should be deleted as per WP:DEL-REASON 6.: Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and hoaxes. A previous deletion discussion in 2007 resulted in no consensus. This article has only two sources. The first source is incomplete and consists only of a title, publisher, and year. From what I can tell this source is referring to “한국적 신학형성과 단군신화 연구” (단군학회 편 자료집, 1999) by 박영규. This is from a Daejongism conference (see details at this website) that makes no mention of Cheonson/천손, the topic of the Wikipedia article. The second source, What does the national holiday mean? by Park In-Taek and Han Chang-soo, is only used as a reference for the etymology of the holiday Gaecheonjeol which is not the topic of the article. The contents of the present article are therefore supported by no sources. What's more, I was not able to find any reliable sources for Cheonson in the academic literature, or more broadly in reliable sources indexed on the web. Yannn 11 15:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Human beings are considered the descendants of Dan'gun and are considered the posterity of Heaven (Cheonson, 천손天孫).Considering the Wikipedia article has existed since 2006, this book was published in 2018, the sentence in the book is unsourced, and the sentence uses similar wording as the article, this could likely be a circular reference. Yannn 11 14:46, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Delete for absence of significant coverage in RS. See WP:NONENG - if the sources given are to be pushed forward as the justification for claiming WP:GNG then there's a great deal of work to be done. Springnuts ( talk) 17:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Keep While the state of this article is appalling, there are definitely more than enough reliable sources (albeit mostly in the Korean language) to establish both its notability. Just FYI that this originated (contested by some Korean scholars who argue that it was exported to Japan from Korea) from the Tenson kōrin mythology of Japan, and English-language sources may also use the Japanese term Tenson when referring to the Gaya Confederacy founding myth. I'll clean it up when I get some time to work on it. Freedom4U ( talk) 06:11, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
FYI that this originatedyou are referring to aspects of Korean mythology that share similarities with the Tenson kōrin myth (천손강림신화). These may be appropriate or already found in Korean mythology#Gaya or Dangun. I do not think you will be able to find a source for the topic of this article (
Posterity of Heaven or Cheonson (천손, 天孫) designates the Korean people because they are considered the descendants of Heaven or the heavenly god.). If you can find such a source please add it to this discussion. Yannn 11 15:21, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 15:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
@
Freedom4U: Do you have any additional comments? To summarize the current discussion, Springnuts and Rkieferbaum are also in favor of deletion. Freedom4U is in favor of keep or merge, but finds that the state of this article is appalling
. The article in it's current form is unsourced. Freedom4U has provided sources for Tenson kōrin/천손강림; however, these sources do not support the current article subject of "Posterity of Heaven".
Yannn
11 22:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Joyous! Noise! 23:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Unreferenced list of cities and towns in an unofficial region with subjective boundaries. This explicitly defines itself as using a "narrow" definition, as opposed to a "wider" one, which means that the basic boundaries of what's even in the region in the first place are up for debate and dispute -- which, in turn, means that it's effectively unmaintainable in a Wikipedia context, if there are such open questions about what should or shouldn't even be listed here. And, indeed, this came to my attention because the page recently got decategorized in the process of an attempt to strip the Michigan subsection from the article entirely, which seems like an intentionally targeted content dispute rather than just for-the-lulz vandalism.
Since we already have a head article about
Michiana which already links to all the counties in it, and the counties in it in turn already link to all the communities in the counties, that means we already have the same information in other places anyway -- so it's just not clear that there's any pressing need to also maintain an omnibus list of all the individual communities in the region as its own standalone topic, especially if there isn't one objective universal definition of what the proper boundaries of the region even are.
Bearcat (
talk) 13:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Joyous! Noise! 23:12, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable lobby group. Article has been unsourced for 17 years and a WP:BEFORE search turned up next to nothing. Lacks WP:SIGCOV and fails to meet WP:ORG. Hey man im josh ( talk) 12:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Tally Hall per WP:SNOW --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 20:14, 7 March 2023 (UTC) ( non-admin closure)
Non notable genre. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme ( talk) 12:49, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 16:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:BLP, started in draftspace and then immediately moved to mainspace by its own creator without
WP:AFC review, of a musician not
properly sourced as passing
WP:NMUSIC. The notability claim here basically amounts to "musician who exists", with the article documenting nothing about his career that would even be measurable against any of NMUSIC's accomplishment-based criteria -- and there are just four references (one of which has been redundantly reduplicated as two separate cites, for five footnotes but only four actual sources), of which two are Q&A interviews in which he's talking about himself in the first person rather than having his significance analyzed in the third, one is just one of his own songs metaverifying its own existence on YouTube, and one is a short blurb not substantive enough to carry him over
WP:GNG all by itself if it's the most GNG-worthy source on the table.
This is not enough to get him over the "notable because media coverage exists" hump, but nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have stronger referencing than this either.
Bearcat (
talk) 12:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
We apologize- uh, who's "we"? - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ( work / talk) 13:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 🐱 13:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Per WP:GNG and WP:NARENA. This article has very few mentions on the Internet:
Searching "Herrgärdets IP" -wikipedia on Google only yields seven results: the first being the aforementioned blog post; three links giving the same level of coverage as the source given in the article; and three irrelevant links. The same query on Google Books and Google News yield no results.
The article on the Swedish Wikipedia uses the same source as this article and the article on the Dutch Wikipedia gives another link (which seems to be dead) whose archived version (as of 2 January 2014) only makes a passing mention of the stadium.
I suggest either deleting the article or redirecting to Västerås IK. -- Kzkzb ( talk) 09:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Krakoa. As this is the second AfD with this result, the redirect has been protected. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 🐱 12:31, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
This article was redirected by consensus ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quiet Council of Krakoa) two months ago but has been restored and User:Ringardiumleviossa thinks it should not be redirected again. There is no agreement and no point in further edit warring over this so bringing it here for resolution. Mccapra ( talk) 09:10, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to List of Reynard Motorsport cars. This seems to be the redirect target that has more support from participants here. Liz Read! Talk! 08:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Disputed redirect. Sources are a Geocities / Oocities blog and Linkedin, and no better sources found (database entries like this or this). Not a notable car, but a redirect to List of Reynard Motorsport cars seemed a good solution. Fram ( talk) 08:16, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Vision Gran Turismo#Ferrari Vision Gran Turismo. Liz Read! Talk! 08:08, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't pass WP:LASTING. Sources all from a period of a couple of days. Tried G7 but apparently 98.5% authorship isn't enough. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 07:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
fucks sake alright you win) they tried to G7 the article because Piotrus edit warred to add a notability tag. Neither of them discussed this tag on the talk page, which should have been done before coming here. The nominator clearly thinks the article is notable, but has given up because of the behavior of Piotrus. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ( work / talk) 15:52, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 07:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. Article is largely based on the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Coverage is rather routine like this rather than meaningful bilateral relations like significant trade, numerous state visits. LibStar ( talk) 05:57, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Salvio
giuliano 06:52, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 08:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Non-notable actor/singer. Sources appear to be puff pieces/paid PR. KH-1 ( talk) 05:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was merge to Plagiarism. This seems to be the preferred Merge target. Of course, if an editor believes content from this article would be appropriate in a different article, additional Merge edits can be undertaken. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Basically, it's fake news, which is also used to promote the author. After almost ten years, this hypothetical neologism is not listed in any real dictionaries. Besides, some of the (few) Web sources actually used this article as a source. IJustNeedToMessageYou ( talk) 04:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
t
c
11:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Inglis, 2008for its typology of paraphrase. The first and third describe the behaviour in second language English writers, while the Rogeting article is focused on plagiarism. small jars
t
c
12:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
t
c
12:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 08:21, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If merged, should the destination be plagiarism or paraphrase? (Or possibly both I suppose)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Legoktm (
talk) 05:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. On a straight nose count, this would seem to veer toward "no consensus". However, as always, AfD is not a vote. The two individuals who argue to keep cite, essentially, their personal standards for what would make someone notable, rather than actual notability guidelines agreed upon by community consensus. This causes the arguments to carry substantially less weight, and tips into "delete". Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:39, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Per WP:USCJN, state appellate judges are not inherently notable. BD2412 T 21:25, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Keep So shouldn't the criteria for keeping or deleting be more than just the title or office of the person, and instead what she/he did while in the office? A minor officeholder can make a big impact (good or bad) (for example, Rosemarie Aquilina is a low level state court trial judge, but she made a major impact during the Nassar trial). Judge Schwartz, in his almost 30 years on the bench, authored 944 opinions. To dismiss him as delete-ably routine simply because he was just an appellate judge really glosses over what he did as an appellate judge. In 3 minutes of looking at some of his decisions and sorting by the number of times those decisions were cited by other courts, I was able to find 2 significant and interesting (well, at least interesting to lawyers) decisions that made law. His decisions, his reasoning and writings will continue to influence the application of law for likely decades to come. Significance and notability should be more than surface level deep, and the contributions a person makes should be a factor just as much as a person's perceived social importance. Today's flash-in-the-pan celebrity will be gone in 15 seconds; this man's work will live on and impact real people. The article needs work and more research, no doubt, to identify and analyze decisions and the impact of those decisions. But aborting the notion of his notability on what might be cursory research (hopefully more than just a google search...), favors the potentially less-serious-more-notorious people over those who are serious and impactful but not flashy. Judge Schwartz seems serious and impactful. Let this article live on; maybe somebody will fill it out more oneday. Leglamp123 ( talk) 00:48, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Keep - as a totality, this judge passes my standards, especially as the chief judge of an intermediate court. Bearian ( talk) 18:42, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Legoktm (
talk) 05:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:52, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Per WP:USCJN, state appellate judges are not inherently notable. BD2412 T 21:25, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Legoktm (
talk) 05:43, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) LibStar ( talk) 22:30, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
No significant coverage, fails WP:BIO. Ambassadors are not inherently notable. LibStar ( talk) 23:01, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Legoktm (
talk) 05:39, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was redirect to Yoshihiro Akiyama#Personal life. I accept this as an ATD although I dislike how many times a woman's biography is turned into a redirect to her spouse's article. Seems to mainly happen with historical figures. Liz Read! Talk! 04:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't meet notability, married to a celebrity and done some modeling. That's it. Nswix ( talk) 04:45, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 05:02, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. I see a consensus to Keep this article. Editors are encouraged to work on improving NPOV in this article and increasing reliable sources. Liz Read! Talk! 03:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Extremely biased article. I would recommend deletion of this page and adding a section to Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan. Controversies section states that "Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba has been continuously speaking against campus violence in the name of ethnicity" yet three of the four sources are clearly *about* members of IJT carrying out violence; many claims throughout the article have no sources; uses QUORA as a source and more TokiSixskins ( talk) 03:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. I see a consensus to Delete this page. I'm less sure about a future DAB page but since on the current page "improper" is being used as an adjective to modify a noun and not article subjects, I think that potential is dim. Liz Read! Talk! 03:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:NOTDICTIONARY applies This is not a disambiguation page though it looks like one at first sight.The draft was accepted at AFC by a sockpuppet - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Harttyny which is rather disappointing all round. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 23:29, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timothytyy (
talk) 00:44, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shawn Teller (
talk) 02:47, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 02:14, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Serious WP:CRYSTAL issues here, as the most Gates has done is acquire land without turning over a single shovelful of dirt. Could be recreated in the event of actual construction, but right now it's a press-release palace and not a reality. It's extremely common for failed projects of this type to buy up property and then sell it all off, so I don't count the current coverage as notable even if some of it isn't local (and that latter, from Seattle, is local for him, and is just routine "don't build anything" response mongering anyway). Mangoe ( talk) 01:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was keep. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 01:34, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG. News coverage on the subject is almost non-existent. ABHammad ( talk) 01:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC) Withdrawn by nominator ABHammad ( talk) 02:30, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was speedy delete per G11 by Jimfbleak. ( non-admin closure) Shellwood ( talk) 12:56, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Obvious paid/promo, no GNG sources. Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs) 01:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 01:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
No citations. Unclear if it meets the GNG or is just a SYNTH collection of facts. (If it does, the article title should be changed.) Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:53, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 01:30, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review:
Also seems like WP:DUCK paid... Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs) 00:46, 2 March 2023 (UTC)