Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 20 January 22 >

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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:07, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Systems Research Institute (India)

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

It exists but I couldn't find reliable sources to show it meets WP:ORG or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, so hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 21:16, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:57, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • delete - no evidence of notability apart from alumni. Llajwa ( talk) 17:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Minimal participation, but the page does not qualify for a soft-delete as it has undergone a previous AfD. Two relists generated no added participation, so I see little point in going for yet another relist. Owen× ☎ 00:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DYXX-TV

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

In the previous AFD discussion, editors who voted keep provided zero sources. There's certainly listings, and given the age of the Wikipedia article, there are hundreds if not thousands of Wikipedia mirror results. However, I still cannot find significant coverage in reliable sources. And the article still stands mostly unsourced since last AFD. MarioGom ( talk) 20:35, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:00, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was merge‎ to Jack Dempsey (fish). Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Jack Dempsey cichlids in Australia

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

Much of the article appears to duplicate information from the main Jack Dempsey (fish) article, and the rest would fit into the main article just fine. From what I can see, the topic of Rocio octofasciata occurring in a pool in Australia is not notable enough nor the main article big enough to justify having separate articles. Surtsicna ( talk) 17:53, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Merge (partial) as suggested above. A fair amount of useful and reliable material that would make a good addition to the species article. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 12:39, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Kevin Manno

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

Fails WP:BIO. Most of the existing references are about his relationship/marriage with Ali Fedotowsky, falling afoul of WP:NOTINHERITED. The rest are announcements about his job changes or not independent, and I can't find anything better. Clarityfiend ( talk) 17:13, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment. I didn't realize I had nominated this guy last year, to minimal participation. Still, once more unto the breach. Clarityfiend ( talk) 17:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 23:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete per nominator. The only article I can find about him about him that's not actually about his wife Is this short announcement [1] about him starting at WRVW in 2023. Tserton ( talk) 12:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

John Bergstrom

John Bergstrom (  | talk | history | 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 independently notable from the publications for which he writes (primarily PopMatters), no sources to be found except trivial mentions (i.e. "John Bergstrom of PopMatters announced that [huge band who are actually the subject of article] will release their new album in three months." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulie302 ( talk • contribs) 22:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Prash Ladva

Prash Ladva (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Contested PROD.)
The short version: There is no evidence that Prash Ladva satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines, either in the references cited in the article or in anything else I could find anywhere on searching.
A longer version, for anyone wishing to read an account of all the cited references: There are apparently 17 references in the article at present, but two of those are identical copies of the same page on two websites. Not a single one of them is substantial coverage in an independent source, and most of them fail both of those criteria. The references are as follows. Currently a dead link, but it is a URL on Prash Ladva's own web site, so it would not have been an independent source anyway: [2]. Text posted by Prash Ladva himself on LinkedIn: [3]. Web pages which don't mention Prash Ladva, and which even if they did are on the websites of organisations to which he is connected: [4], [5], [6], [7]. A listing on a government company listing site of a company owned by Prash Ladva; the listing doesn't mention Prash Ladva himself: [8]. Another government listing site, this time for a school. It includes Prash Ladva in a list of governors of the school; the only information about him is his name, the start and end dates of his term as a governor, and "Appointed by GB/board" as an explanation of how he came to be appointed to the post: [9]. A page telling us that Prash Ladva's brother is proud of him: [10]. Apparently two references on two websites, but they turn out to be identical; both of them say "SPONSORED" at the top and "In association with LinkMedics International LTD" further down the page. LinkMedics International is a business belonging to Prash Ladva; in other words the "references" are advertisements, and indeed one of the websites carrying it, on another web page, mentions its price for inclusion in its "news" coverage: [11], [12]. Announcements on the web sites of organisations or businesses offering "awards", which include Prash Ladva as a recipient. It's not clear to me how significant the awards are, but in any case they are not substantial coverage of Prash Ladva, and being on the websites of the awarding organisations they aren't independent sources either: [13], [14]. Further pages on the web sites of organisations to which he has a personal connection, including his own business and organisations he works for or has worked for: [15], [16], [17], [18]. JBW ( talk) 22:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Hi there, please could you clarify why reference 12 (UK Top 100 List) is not "noteworthy". I believe this to be an extremely significant accolade, as would many. I think there has to be a clear distinction between searching for "significant coverage" vs "noteworthy" - as then there is subjectivity. Who does this get escalated to?
In any view, this is only my second written article, and I followed a similar structure to the first article. I will move onto creating the next one. But I am curious about the question I have asked above. Journalist0071 ( talk) 00:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Significant coverage is part of the notability criteria, and is about the depth of coverage. As detailed above, the problem with the Top 100 Influential reference is that the depth of coverage on the site (i.e. his biography) is not in-depth (and I suspect it is based on the subject's own submitted bio), and that there is no indication (that I can find) of the significance of this award - other than the organisation and its staff themselves, almost all of the mentions that I can find about the award is either on winners' social media or the winners' employer's social media; I can't find any independent mentions of the awards. There are a lot of 'Top 100 Influential People' awards, in many industries, and most of them would fail to meet the criteria on Wikipedia as reliable sources; in fact the only one I can think of which is considered a notable award in and of itself is Time 100.
As to 'who does this get escalated to?' - the answer is, the community here... which is what is happening on this page! PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 08:34, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Journalist0071, you're in the escalated place already: this is where notability is decided. No one puts much stock in things like "being in a top 100 list". If there were some significant coverage of him somewhere, perhaps something like the top 100 list would be enough to motivate an editor who was on the fence to !vote keep instead of delete, but if that's all we have, and no sigcov anywhere, the chances anyone will make a solid keep argument are basically nil. -- asilvering ( talk) 08:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Although an interesting young person, I agree that there is not enough evidence to show that he meets Wikipedia's notability criteria for inclusion, and the breakdown of sources above is a good indication of the lack of reliable sourcing that is available. PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 08:34, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Southern Broadcasting Network#Radio stations. The Delete and Redirect views are based on policy, which the Keep !votes did not address. Owen× ☎ 00:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DXIP

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

No significant coverage in reliable sources. No clear redirect target. MarioGom ( talk) 19:42, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Philippines. MarioGom ( talk) 19:42, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: The third source is just an aircheck. The rest of the sources are secondary and talk about the station's programming. That said, the article is good enough to pass WP:GNG. ASTIG 😎 🙃 10:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • What sources exactly do you see with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth? Just to be clear what you think is SIGCOV.
  • Keep Meets WP:GNG per Astig's argument. Sources mentioned are reliable enough and secondary, with the ones mentioned by Astig in-depth IMV. SBKSPP ( talk) 23:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Southern Broadcasting Network#Radio stations; all four of the references in the current version fail WP:GNG for one reason or another: #1 name-drops the station once in a series that includes three other stations (fails WP:SIGCOV), #2 mentions the station twice in passing with absolutely no detail or context about the station (also fails WP:SIGCOV), #3 is a WP:UGC since it's a YouTube video authored by "Dante's Enigmatic World", who has no meaningful and established journalistic reputation, and #4 is a WP:BLOG. Left guide ( talk) 00:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:48, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 22:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Source eval:
Comments Source
Nothing about subject. Mentions station merger, but no details, nothing meeting SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth 1. Vice guv to be back soon, daughters say
Interviews that mention the name of the station, no details, nothing meeting SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth 2. ^ FAST BACKWARD: Media in time of Covid-19
Primary 3. ^ DXIP Davao Sign-Off 1988
Mentions an interview from the station, nothing meeting SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth 4. ^ ANAD PARTYLIST STANDS PAT THAT DAVAO CITY IS NOT PEACEFUL
BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. The Delete views are anchored in guidelines, while the Keep !votes merely allude to sources that never materialized. The nom's redir ATD received no support. Owen× ☎ 01:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DYQC

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

No significant coverage in RS. Can be redirected to Aliw Broadcasting Corporation. MarioGom ( talk) 19:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Philippines. MarioGom ( talk) 19:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: All the sources in the article are reliable. The first two source states that the station is licensed. Sources 3 to 6 talk about the station's programming. The last source talks about the station's rebrand. That said, the article is good enough to pass WP:GNG. ASTIG 😎 🙃 09:03, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Mere primary source records are not significant coverage. Please, could you point out which exact secondary sources cover DYQC specifically are in depth? MarioGom ( talk) 23:01, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Sources 3 to 7 are indeed secondary sources. And therefore provides WP:SIGCOV to the subject (or its programming). I have explained more than enough. And I won't respond to this post again. ASTIG 😎 🙃 10:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Meets WP:GNG per Astig's argument. Sources mentioned are reliable enough and secondary, with the ones mentioned by Astig in-depth IMV. SBKSPP ( talk) 23:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Fails GNG and NORG/CORP. Found nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.
Source eval:
Comments Source
404 1. 2019 NTC FM Stations
Name listed in table, no SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth NTC Region 7
No SIGCOV, simply states, "its episodes are aired at 106.7 Home Radio, according to the schedules given to the students and parents concerned." 3. ^ DepEd-7 urges school divisions to come up with other modalities
No SIGCOV, simply states, "Currently one radio station is tapped by the City Government and it is 106.7 Home Radio." 4. ^ Hagit sa mga magtutudlo sa kahanginan
Article does not mention subject 5. ^ Cebu City learners to hear ‘modules on air’ starting January 2021
No SIGCOV, simply states, "Basaha sa ubos ang daily Radio-Based Instruction schedule nga madungog sa 106.7 Home Radio FM Station." 6. ^ PAHIBALO SA TANANG CEBU CITY PARENTS UG LEARNERS
Routine mill news about formatting change. Information from subject, fails WP:IS, fails WP:SIGCOV 7. ^ Celario, Eunice; Cambri, Susan (January 30, 2023). "Pagbabago sa DWIZ Kaabang-abang". Filipino Mirror. Retrieved January 30, 2023.
No objection if a consensus redirect emerges, but I can't find one I think is useful.  //  Timothy ::  talk  14:21, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. Significant coverage in various reliable and independent sources. RomanRaju ( talk) 08:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Which source provides significant coverage? Significant coverage means that a source addresses the topic directly and in detail. MarioGom ( talk) 08:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep per comments above pointing out significant independent coverage. Also I will never stop pointing out that media outlets typically do not cover each other, and this should be taken into account when assessing the notability of subjects that are themselves sources of coverage. WilsonP NYC ( talk) 15:17, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: so far, the "keep" votes above have essentially been hand-waving at WP:SIGCOV without really demonstrating meaningful concrete evidence of such coverage. Meanwhile, the only one in this discussion who appears to have critically dug into the sources is TimothyBlue, and no rebuttals have yet been made against their source evaluation table. Left guide ( talk) 09:58, 19 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: TimothyBlue is currently the most persuasive comment above, relisting to see if there is any response to their comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 22:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete per TimothyBlue. I'm not convinced, not only by sources used in the article, but also by those who voted to keep it. I bet they will not bother finding reliable sources & add them to the article. Israel's  Son 16:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Keep votes provide no sources to eval.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Hot Springs, Montana. Star Mississippi 23:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Alameda's hot springs retreat

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

Has not received significant coverage in multiple sources. 777burger user talk contribs 22:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep - Here are a few sources:
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Keep. I'll add this newspaper article from The Missoulian to the list of sources: [19] [20]. Still, I think this might be better covered in Hot Springs, Montana per WP:NOTGUIDEBOOK. Jfire ( talk) 03:17, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge to Hot Springs, Montana - Think it was known as Camas Hot Springs for a long time. Shining the Hot Springs Bat Signal in the sky for netherzone - I'm going to see what I can do to improve/expand. Any help appreciated. jengod ( talk) 05:11, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - Thanks for the ping, jengod. I'll see what I can find. It may be notable as an establishment, they've been around for 85 years. But I'm also thinking the hot springs as a geological feature probably could meet WP:NATFEAT if that part of the article can be improved through sourcing. Netherzone ( talk) 05:46, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment Yeah from what I'm getting so far the hot springs and the tribal control thereof and the rise and fall of a couple of associated bathhouses/hotels are all encyclopedic for sure, but I suspect that Alameda's per se is a comparatively small part of the story. I expect a name change/move will be called for but still readin'... jengod ( talk) 07:16, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment Changed my vote from keep to merge. Also created Camas Hot Springs. Also note Symes Hotel. I think this particular assemblage of cabins and infrastructure has some minor notability so if it's kept that's fine but a merge probably the best decision on its current state of referencedness, etc. jengod ( talk) 09:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge - agree with other editors above that merging is the best alternative to deletion. Either potential target Hot Springs, Montana or the new article Camas Hot Springs is fine with me. Netherzone ( talk) 17:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge with Hot Springs, Montana: per above eval.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Star Mississippi 23:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Janes Place, California

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

Procedural nomination as closer of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 12 § Janes Place, California. I am neutral. In 2019 Reywas92 BLAR'd this as locality not notable, redir to county. WeirdNAnnoyed took it to RfD, writing Target article never mentions Janes Place, or gives any hint about what or where it was. Very obscure place, unlikely search term. Reywas commented at the RfD Topo map shows it as an isolated cabin. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed ( they|xe) 20:56, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and California. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed ( they|xe) 20:56, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Consensus from RFD already seems pretty clear that the subject fails WP:NPLACE and WP:GNG and my BEFORE didn't uncover anything that would suggest otherwise. Jfire ( talk) 21:08, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Just a single building. No evidence this was ever a "community" of any kind. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per my comments above, from the RfD. WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk) 21:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Whatever this is, it is lost to history. There's nothing in the Service & Hillman Arcadia book on Eureka and Humboldt County. I can make no verifiable connection to Henry F. Janes, founder of Janesville, Wisconsin who came to Humboldt and was its first JP, who stated that he lived near Uniontown (not clear to me which one, but I suspect Arcata rather than Lotus) anyway, some 40km away, and is reported to have ended up "above" (north? upstream of? up a hill from?) Humboldt City, California. Nothing else turns up in the history books that I can find. I cannot say a single verifiable thing about what this even is. Uncle G ( talk) 07:03, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Star Mississippi 23:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Mumbai–Madgaon line

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

This is a contested draftification and proposed deletion. The subject does not appear to be notable. A check before the nomination turned up no useful sources that I could find, and the article currently has no sources either. — TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh) 18:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete non-notable railway line GoldenBootWizard276 ( talk) 19:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

*Comment - Feels like a weird argument to make that suggests a long rail line (I've seen 600km but the page says nearer 2000km) is not notable. I've not looked extensively for sources, but I'd be surprised if nothing exists. JMWt ( talk) 20:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - on further examination, I think this page is inaccurate and unhelpful, because it is describing a "line" when it actually means a "route". The route is covered extensively elsewhere under Konkan Railway zone and Mumbai Suburban Railway which operate the connections. As the topic of the page is not really understood as being a consistent line, might be a reason why finding sources it difficult. I could be wrong so I welcome correction. JMWt ( talk) 08:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Star Mississippi 23:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

How Strategy Shapes Structure

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

This is silly: a lengthy summary of a single article, where the only claim to fame appears to be that it was cited in someone's paper for an economics class. See comments on User talk:Surfdachsie (clearly a COI editor), where the PROD was declined even though there was absolutely no credible evidence of notability. Drmies ( talk) 18:03, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete summary of a non-notable article. GoldenBootWizard276 ( talk) 19:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Cambridge University Cricket Club players. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 18:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Frederick Craven

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

Cricketer who played a single game of cricket at something the page claims was “first class” standard but long before those terms were used. Sources do not exist that indicate the importance of the game; indeed one database shows massive holes in the data - missing player name, the runs don’t add up etc. Nothing much else to suggest this person was notable. JMWt ( talk) 17:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep‎. Owen× ☎ 01:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Minister of Communications (India)

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

Seems like unnecessary duplication of Ministry of Communications (India). Recommend that we Redirect to that article. - MPGuy2824 ( talk) 17:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was redirect‎ to Haze'evot. Star Mississippi 23:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Talia Ishai

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

Should be merged into Haze'evot regardless of notability. Talia Ishai is a CURRENT member of Haze'vot. This band is undisputedly notable and has a too short article. Ishai also did some solo recordings and obviously was born, went to school, and the like. All that can be included in Haze'evot without creating any situation of WP:UNDUE and without creating the need to rehash the entire Haze'evot history ad nausea. The Talia Ishai article is a totally unjustified WP:SPINOFF, creating a user experience from hell, where the user needs to chase after bits and pieces of information, while stuff is unnecessarily repeated. The experience is VERY disrespectful towards our readers. As if they can't hold onto information or be exposed to more information at once. IMPORTANT: I'm purposefully using the AfD track so this article will be debated alongside the similar case of Yifat Balassiano. Please check out that AfD as well! gidonb ( talk) 16:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Can you explain how this notability is demonstrated, in your opinion? Furthermore the suggestion here is to merge rather than to delete. Notability is not an argument against merging, only against deleting. Do you have specific arguments why this article should not be merged? gidonb ( talk) 17:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Hi, Gidon. Pertaining your question, both Yifat Balassiano and Talia Ishai are each notable in their own right. Both are highly active in the Israeli rock music scene, both have released solo albums and are individually sought after by other high-profile artists for musical collaborations in the recording and performing arenas. These two women are literally carrying the torch of the Israeli rock music scene these days. -- Omer Toledano ( talk) 17:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Hi Omer, could you please bring sources for these statements. We cannot just trust you on the colors of your eyes. Plus, even if they would be slightly known, we should still merge. It's EXTREMELY annoying and disrespectful for our readers all this repetition of information and piecemeal release of data. As if our readers lack basic intelligence. You do not address that! gidonb ( talk) 17:58, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Gidonb, I don't think merging is the way to go regardless of notability like you suggested on the nomination, if there's enough RS to establish notability then subject qualifies for standalone article (even a {{ stub}} is acceptable). Notability of the band has nothing to do with that of their individual careers. (ping me) dxneo ( talk) 05:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Sure. We can instead make readers chase after slivers of largely repetative information and create a hellish user experience accross a zillion articles. It's a choice but not my choice. Notability is crucial to keeping and deleting. Redirects, mergers, and category/template operations draw more on knowledge modelling and data governance. gidonb ( talk) 05:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Gidonb, please see GNG and MUSICBIO, i/we don't make rules but we follow and abide by them, I'm sorry. dxneo ( talk) 05:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Don't be sorry. It's difficult to think across multiple dimensions. I get that. There are other articles that deal with the organization of information. Relevant sections of these are linked in the intro that explains the rationale for this merge proposal. gidonb ( talk) 05:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOPAGE, it may be appropriate for information on a notable subject to be merged into a related page. I dunno if that's true in this case, but it's no hard rule. Mach61 ( talk) 16:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge - There is no evidence that the subject meets any of the 12 criteria outlined in WP:SINGER. Marokwitz ( talk) 07:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete or Redirect Shockingly bad article from a fan. I see not reason for a merge. There is no coverage to prove she is notable. Certainly doesn't meet WP:SINGER, but it fails WP:BIO and more importantly it fails WP:SIGCOV. What are you planning to base the article on to satisfy WP:V. There is nothing that I can see that meets that criteria. I'm not keen on merge when there is nothing to base it on. A redirect would be better as a ATD. scope_creep Talk 18:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Haze'evot as AtD. BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing.  //  Timothy ::  talk  16:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Central Reserve Police Force. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Anish Dayal Singh

Anish Dayal Singh (  | talk | history | 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 announcements about a person's appointment to a rank that is not clearly notable. Fails the Anybio criteria Moem-Meom ( talk) 11:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 15:01, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete. Being the head of a police force doesn't confer automatic notability. I've gone through pages and pages of search results and only found routine coverage, so I've given up; happy to reconssider if anyone else has better luck or can come up with more useful search terms. Removing "appointed" didn't help me. -- asilvering ( talk) 04:59, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. High ranking official, also notable because he was appointed head of SSB (CRPF) very recently! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheProEditor11 ( talk • contribs) 10:17, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TLA (talk) 11:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy based input would be helpful
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Source eval:
Comments Source
Mill news about appointment, looks like it is sourced from a gov press release, fail WP:IS 1. "Anish Dayal Singh appointed CRPF chief, Nina Singh to head CISF". The Economic Times. 2023-12-28. ISSN 0013-0389. Retrieved 2023-12-30.
Same article as above, different paper/date, makes me believe even more this was sourced from a gov press release failing WP:IS 2. ^ Jump up to:a b c "Anish Dayal Singh appointed CRPF chief, Nina Singh to head CISF". India Today. Retrieved 2023-12-30.
Routine mill news about appointment. 3. ^ www.ETGovernment.com. "Manipur cadre IPS officer Anish Dayal Singh assumes charge as DG ITBP, SSB - ET Government". ETGovernment.com. Retrieved 2023-12-30.
Same article as above, different paper/date, makes me believe even more this was sourced from a gov press release failing WP:IS 4. ^ "Anish Dayal Singh appointed CRPF chief, Nina Singh to head CISF". The Indian Express. 2023-12-28. Retrieved 2023-12-29.
BEFORE found more routine mill news and more copies of #1 above, but nothing meeting WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Article illustrates the lack of sourcing, it is basically just an appointment annoucement with a lot of wikilinks. Ping me if sources with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth are found.  //  Timothy ::  talk  16:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Arguments on the delete side carried far more weight than those on the (weak) keep side. Owen× ☎ 01:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Fredrik Zanjanchi

Fredrik Zanjanchi (  | talk | history | 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 footballer has never played fully-professionally, so fails WP:SPORTBASIC right off the bat, and would need significant WP:SIGCOV to be eligible. He did score cup goal and was of course signed at one point, but I mean WP:ROUTINE coverage. Regarding transfer news, we also have a piece about him not being signed. Match reports from lower level do not constitute significant coverage. Geschichte ( talk) 15:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Sweden. Deltaspace42 ( talk • contribs) 16:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 12:09, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 12:12, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep – The athlete has 19 appearances for Ögryrte, which is completely professional, in addition to the article on sv.wiki being supported by a satisfactory number of sources. Svartner ( talk) 19:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Keep I am also in agreement with Svartner. When I had a look at sv:Fredrik_Zanjanchi I feel there might be enough to scrape by. Regards. Govvy ( talk) 19:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I think it's pretty clear that every reference in the Swedish article are WP:PRIMARY, database or WP:ROUTINE. Geschichte ( talk) 22:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. sv:Fredrik_Zanjanchi sources are database records and WP:PRIMARY, nothing that meets IS SIGCOV.  //  Timothy ::  talk  16:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Fox toolkit. Star Mississippi 22:57, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

TnFOX

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

Not notable. There are no independent sources Mdggdj ( talk) 14:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep‎. Meets notability and coverage guidelines. Closing per consensus. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 04:36, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Sher Afzal Marwat

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

While this individual gained transient prominence through a televised altercation, his overall notability remains questionable. Primarily identified as a legal practitioner associated with political figures, he finds himself amidst a vast sea of legal professionals in Pakistan. The creation of dedicated articles for every lawyer navigating the political landscape would be an imprudent endeavor. Furthermore, his limited achievements in the political arena, lacking victory in any national or provincial elections, and the absence of a judicial role at the national or provincial level contribute to the deficiency of substantial notability as outlined by Wikipedia's specific guidelines, particularly WP:POLITICIAN and WP:JUDGE. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Also nominator should have waited for some time before renominating the article at once as Renominations in such a manner may be considered disruption. WP:DELAFD Muneebll ( talk) 20:37, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Fails to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, lacks significant achievements in politics or judiciary WP:NBIO, WP:BLP. War Wounded ( talk) 18:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 14:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Cranes (drink)

Cranes (drink) (  | talk | history | 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 product. A WP:BEFORE check only came up with this local news source, and nothing else other than the usual slew of promotional websites and posts. Nick Moyes ( talk) 13:44, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Jonathan Restrepo

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

Footballer who fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT, with playing time limited to 46 minutes and other details failing WP:V. Geschichte ( talk) 12:14, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

List of international marriages among Olympic and Paralympic competitors

List of international marriages among Olympic and Paralympic competitors (  | talk | history | 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 list was created because WP:ILIKEIT and is not a desirable topic for a list because:

  • While marriages between sportspeople is indeed a discussed topic, nobody writes about this as a group of people who are connected together by that fact.
  • It's weird that the marriages have to be transnational. Why?
  • it's also weird that the marriages have to be on an Olympic or Paralympic level. Why are FIFA World Cup players or other World Championship competitors excluded, not to mention Big 4 leagues etc.? Geschichte ( talk) 12:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Lists of people, and Olympics. Owen× ☎ 13:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. This is a weird intersection of categories, a topic of only niche interest, and there doesn't seem to be anything about this group as a notable group. WP:NLIST is failed all around. WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk) 19:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom, clearly falls foul of NLIST. Roger (Dodger67) ( talk) 10:28, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete although "not a desirable topic" is arguably equally IDONTLIKEIT, this very clearly fails WP:LISTN. No one is treating this subject as a group. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 11:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Snow delete per NLIST and also WP:SALAT ("Lists that are too specific are also a problem."). "Weird intersection" pretty much sums it up. Clarityfiend ( talk) 11:36, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete The list criteria seem completely arbitrary, as outlined in the nomination. Feel free to ping me if evidence to the contrary emerges. TompaDompa ( talk) 17:54, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Completely arbitrary, fails WP:NLIST. Let'srun ( talk) 01:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete – Per all above. Svartner ( talk) 02:28, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 12:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Victor Wei

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

Ambassadors are not by default notable, and the sources fail WP:PASSING by a large margin. Geschichte ( talk) 12:23, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete Can't find anything substantial in Korean either. Maybe someone can find something in French? toobigtokale ( talk)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (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 over-the-air HSN affiliates. ✗ plicit 12:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

K29NM-D

K29NM-D (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun ( talk) 03:50, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Washington. Let'srun ( talk) 03:50, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to List of over-the-air HSN affiliates: this appears to be a station that has, for the most part, only ever carried HSN and/or its sister networks, even before coming under HSN-associated ownership groups. (Even now, the only subchannel that isn't an HSN or QVC channel is a Dabl affiliation on 29.6, which a few Ventana stations have for some reason.) There's no separate notability here, and doubtful there's much significant coverage anyway. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Redirect as per WcQuidditch above. Llajwa ( talk) 20:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Golam Rabby

Golam Rabby (  | talk | history | 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 fulfill the notability criteria mentioned at WP:ENT or WP:AUTHOR. Also, it doesn't have WP:SIGCOV that could pass WP:GNG. — MdsShakil ( talk) 12:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. signed, Rosguill talk 14:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

SchoolTool SMS

SchoolTool SMS (  | talk | history | 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 software fails WP:GNG, no coverage outside of local news. Covered only once in a Rochester local interest paper, and in a Rochester business journal. ~ A412 talk! 03:58, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:45, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete Per nom. Sourcing simply isn't there to show this meets WP:NSOFTWARE or WP:GNG. Only local coverage, and even that seems to be regurgitated press releases. - MrOllie ( talk) 20:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:05, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep Democrat & Chronicle: Mindex's schooltool software turns 15 IgelRM ( talk) 13:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: fails NSOFT. And with all due respect to Democrat and Chronicle, a puff piece in a Rochester local newspaper isn't enough to establish notability. Owen× ☎ 23:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: This subject fails to meet the notability criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia; there appears to be a lack of significant coverage PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 08:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Per nom. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 11:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 14:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ilgın (given name)

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

Nominated in May 2022 with no consensus and tagged for notability since June of the same year. This name has no WP:SIGCOV and no Wikipedia articles about people with the name, so therefore fails WP:NNAME. I can't seem to find any reliable sources establishing notability, either. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk) 09:17, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:43, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, namecruft which fails WP:NOTEVERYTHING. No people named Ilgın in Wikipedia today, although that could change. Geschichte ( talk) 21:11, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Useful and referenced. Articles should be expanded and improved rather than deleted. There's no good reason to delete. Bookworm857158367 ( talk) 01:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment Referenced means nothing if the sources don't demonstrate notability, and useful is an arbitrary description. No good reason to delete? How about not meeting basic guidelines?! What if it can't be expanded or improved significantly? Everything you've parroted on all these discussions goes against WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Do you think anything is worthy of deletion? AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk) 03:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment I apologize if I am short with some people. This is not a personal attack and I am assuming good faith. But still. It's like a copy-and-paste response on everything without bothering to look for sources or improvement. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk) 04:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as Wikipedia is not a dictionary. There is barely any coverage of this name and not a single Wikipedia article about a person with this first name. The lack of an entry for this Turkish first name on the Turkish Wikipedia is also a pretty good indication of this. Aintabli ( talk) 05:22, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete per WP:NNAME: "If at least two articles matching the surname or given name of the subject of a name article do not exist, then the surname or given name list article would not be notable and should not be created." All I can find is a fictional character in the Turkish TV series Tatlı Küçük Yalancılar and apparently the same character in a film, both played by Aslı Tandoğan. Clarityfiend ( talk) 11:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was ‎Speedy Keep (nomination withdrawn). Eluchil404 ( talk) 22:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)( non-admin closure) reply

Retro-style automobile

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

Yes, retro-styled cars do exist but do we need a list of such? Do we need a list full of unsourced claims? WP:LISTN, WP:EXAMPLEFARM SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi there, you may have noticed that I have made significant contributions to this article. I could either add sources to the claims or shorten down the featured list (or do both), or just leave the article for admins to discuss / delete if this article is not needed. Thanks. Mustang208 ( talk) 20:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I'm fine with the article with the headings but can you add sources in. Also, I do not think the lists are necessary. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 17:29, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I came across this today while trying to research the Plymouth prowler and it was exactly what I needed, it should definitely stay. It’s an aesthetic phenomenon in car production that was very popular for awhile and still exists today albeit rare. There’s no reason this page shouldn’t exist, and I was sad when I saw the banner saying deleting it was being considered. 72.181.15.133 ( talk) 14:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. If it's nicely referenced there's no harm in it staying now is there? -- Ouro ( blah blah) 14:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Leaning keep. Everything in the list should be sourced (as should everything in Wikipedia). The concept is notable even without the list, and the list itself provides a useful set of examples, if sourced. BD2412 T 01:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per references and per additional information beyond the category. gidonb ( talk) 13:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Nomination withdrawn, very satisfied with the article as it is given that it passes notability guidelines.
SpacedFarmer ( talk) 16:23, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 12:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Mike Hall (musician)

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

Does not meet WP:BLP. Large majority of sources are interview-based. Some of the sources also seem quite promotional, so they may be press releases of some kind. TLA (talk) 10:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

 Comment: The creator's contributions are solely based on Mike. Likely an undisclosed WP:COI or fan. TLA (talk) 10:02, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Marie Wiseborn

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

AFD as PROD is likely to be contested. Not notable enough for inclusion to Wikipedia. Searches showed that she existed, but being a fiancee of someone famous is not enough to pass the WP:GNG. Aside from being the fiancee of Moses Bliss, there are no other notability of the subject of the article. Thank you. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Jacqueline Newman (lawyer)

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

Has a book from 2020 with a bit of coverage, but not convinced that's sufficient for WP:NAUTHOR. Has some accomplishments listed at https://nycdivorcelawyer.com/about/ but I'm not convinced those are sufficient for WP:GNG. A bit more notable than a WP:MILL lawyer though. Plus nothing I can see to warrant a pass of WP:NPROF. Kj cheetham ( talk) 12:04, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:14, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:43, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. The fact the woman is professionally described and extensively cited and quoted as a subject matter expert by the Washington Post on its article “Is the Upper East Side “wife bonus” a real thing?” probably counts for something. But that by itself is probably not enough… until you find out that Simon and Schuster printed her book. So, the subject is not only a subject matter expert by the Bezos Post, but a published author by a premier US editorial. Shouldn’t we go by the sources, here? XavierItzm ( talk) 01:57, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • The Washington Post article is good, but need multiple sources like that to meet WP:GNG. But how does getting a book published count? For WP:NAUTHOR, I don't think it's sufficiently notable by itself to meet #3 (and if it was I'd suggest an article on the book rather than the author). Multiple independent reviews are a more typical way to meet that guideline, but I don't think it's the case here at the moment. - Kj cheetham ( talk) 19:29, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      There are multiple sources that quote her as an expert, e.g. NYT (Oct 10 2023) (one graf); Guardian (Dec 1 2022) (two grafs); CNBC Make It (Sep 8 2023) (five grafs); Business Insider (Dec 12, 2023) (seven-ish grafs). Beccaynr ( talk) 20:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      Good finds! I'm getting less convinced this article should be deleted, but not sure they count as significant enough for GNG? (Also, what is a graf?) - Kj cheetham ( talk) 20:28, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      A graf is shorthand for 'paragraph' with a nod at the news-style version - I referred to BI as 'seven-ish' because some of the grafs are one line. From my view, significant coverage from a combination of sources can help us write a fair and balanced article, and while I agree helpful sources are emerging, I am also not sure we have enough to develop encyclopedic content without more independent/reliable/secondary coverage of her career and/or writing. Beccaynr ( talk) 20:48, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      Ah, makes sense! My current feeling is might be a case of WP:TOOSOON. - Kj cheetham ( talk) 20:56, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - for now, the available sources do not seem sufficient to help us write a fair and balanced article that is not advertising. There is limited secondary coverage available about her career and legal practice; she has been quoted as a subject matter expert in several high-quality sources (WaPo, NYT, Guardian), and some of lower-quality (CNBC Make It, Business Insider), but has not been the focus of the coverage. Her book does not appear to be notable according to the WP:NBOOK guideline and one notable book is typically not enough for WP:AUTHOR notability. The available sources seem to indicate it is WP:TOOSOON to support notability at this time. Beccaynr ( talk) 04:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete the page created by a sock farm, previously blocked. I already reported to a check user: /info/en/?search=User_talk:Callanecc. -- 89.151.38.106 ( talk) 08:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The page should be considered on its own merits, just like I address the anon 89.151.38.106 on his own merits. XavierItzm ( talk) 16:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: The subject does not meet the criteria for inclusion in her own right. With more sources, it is possible that the book could meet the criteria, but even that would not meet the criteria now. Possibly a case of WP:TOOSOON? PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 08:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Mr. Backup Z64

Mr. Backup Z64 (  | talk | history | 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 couldn't establish that this meets WP:N, though it isn't an area I have a lot of knowledge in. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, and I couldn't find a good WP:ATD. Boleyn ( talk) 10:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Non-notable obscure unlicensed N64 hardware. Some of the other unlicensed hardware pages like the CD64 or the DexDrive are also obvious deletion candidates as well. There's not really a merge candidate for these things other than Homebrew_(video_games)#Nintendo_64 which is more in terms of software. But then, other than say, the GameShark I'm just not sure anything about random unlicensed hardware really merits encyclopedic status unless it clearly received significant coverage. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 11:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Not really much to go on about here. There really aren't that many sources discussing about this hardware (per above), and the reliable sources engine only pulls up this. TWOrantulaTM ( enter the web) 04:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Algeria–Morocco relations. Star Mississippi 22:54, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

2023 Saidia incident

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

Although this article is well sourced and there was some international coverage of the events described, I am not sure that the coverage is sustained enough or the events significant enough to make the topic notable. Mccapra ( talk) 07:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Keep: Seems well sourced and sufficient to meet notability criteria. Greenman ( talk) 07:48, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply
There was a sustainable controversy regarding Algeria refusing to send back Abdelali Mchiouer's body: 1 2 3 4
Ismaïl Snabi's still in prison: 1 2 NAADAAN ( talk) 11:14, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Keep: Worldwide coverage as NADAAN explained Riad Salih ( talk) 01:09, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment -- On current showing, I'd have to lean toward deletion based on WP:NEVENT and WP:NCRIME. All of the sources currently cited are WP:PRIMARYNEWS. To by valid for mainspace, there need to be secondary sources that analyse the event in WP:DEPTH or show lasting WP:EFFECTS. It also appears that the coverage is specific to the timeframe of the original incident, which would fail WP:PERSISTENCE. I am not ready to !vote until I see if anyone can resolve those issues with sources that are not accessible to me due to language barriers. Cheers, Last1in ( talk) 13:03, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Selective merge to Algeria–Morocco relations. The sourcing appears to be routine news coverage of the event and its aftermath, so it's not notable in its own right, but there is relevant information for the target article. I wonder if Mccapra or Last1in would be willing to consider this as an alternative to deletion. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 20:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Certainly thank you that sounds very sensible. Mccapra ( talk) 20:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I can support a merge to Algeria–Morocco relations as well. My only concern is that we should be looking for secondary sources there as well, and I still can't find any for this event. Cheers, Last1in ( talk) 14:12, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, leaning towards a merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious ( talk) 08:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Merge if secondary sourcing can be found to support balanced addition to the target page.
JoelleJay ( talk) 19:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge with Algeria–Morocco relations: if the event turns out to have a WP:LASTING effect on the bilateral relations, it can always be spun off. Owen× ☎ 21:43, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge with Algeria–Morocco relations a properly sourced and neutral version per above. Not every incident needs or has the WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS sources to support a stand alone article. There is a good target for the merge, it will be improved, and the content/history will be accessible.  //  Timothy ::  talk  15:28, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Sword Art Online characters. History remains under the redirect to enact the merge, if desired Star Mississippi 22:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Sinon (Sword Art Online)

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

As indicated at first nomination, it already proves that the character is not notable. Since then, the article was still not improved and has no commentary about the character but only passing mentions and listicles/rankings. Those merchandise sources doesn't help either with notability and merely saying "that it just exist". GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 08:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the Fictional elements, list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions and Video games. GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 02:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge/Redirect to List of Sword Art Online characters. This article is very heavily WP:REFBOMBed with sources that mention Sinon trivially, but SIGCOV is not demonstrated. While it obviously does not have to be the subject of the source material, Sinon is mentioned about as much as numerous other characters, and does not particularly get mentioned more than the others. This is an article that is the epitome of trying to force notability from very little. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 09:37, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge/redirect per Zxcvbnm. These references are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs and not WP:SIGCOV, unfortunately. This is more appropriate for a character list. Shooterwalker ( talk) 16:29, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't know why Leafa and Sinon's Wiki needs to be "Deleted", It doesn't make sense and Yuuki Konno's Wiki have been deleted a long time ago, Thus they are still the Main Characters, Lisbeth and Silica doesn't have Wiki. In fact they become minor characters along the way in Underworld. I hope there's a chance for the Original SAO Characters before Leafa and Sinon. (And a small consideration to keep them here for now) Earvinexes21 ( talk) 16:25, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Murderdolls which preserves the history in the event sourcing is IDed Star Mississippi 22:50, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Eric Griffin

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

Ineligible for WP:PROD. Redirection has been contested by an IP address. As far as I can tell no WP:CSD criteria apply. So, article has 1 reference which is primary by nature of it being an interview and the link is dead. Looking for sourcing for a WP:BEFORE is a nightmare due to the name being shared with Eric Griffin (boxer). Narrowing results nets me nothing. I've tried regular Google, Google news, news archive, and the Wikipedia Library - all without success. As such Eric Griffin inherently fails WP:GNG. — Sirdog ( talk) 06:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — Sirdog ( talk) 06:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:14, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Murderdolls, As per nom, finding sources for this individual is a nightmare, but I do believe there are some sources if we look deeper, I found this, this, and this, which appears to be nothing but passing mentions. It seems like the subject is not notable outside of their affiliation with their former band. dxneo ( talk) 12:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete for what? His page was fine before a certain person decided to keep editing it by adding irrelevant information as related to this artist’s personal life on behalf of an old girlfriend. This page is for a legitimate musician who has toured all over the world as part of several notable bands that have their own pages: Murderdolls, Wednesday 13, Genitorturers, Davey Suicide, Pretty Boy Floyd and he toured for 1.5 years with Faster Pussycat. He is an endorsed artist with Dean Guitars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ButchFinger ( talk • contribs) 09:42, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I do believe that they are somehow notable, but your word alone is just not enough, touring the world does not equate to notability as Slim Jxmmi (one half of Rae Sremmurd) has toured the world and even made it here in South Africa but he's still considered non-not able for some reason. Please provide sources. dxneo ( talk) 19:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Weak keep, i actually think this guy is somewhat notable -- FMSky ( talk) 22:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Hello FMSky, so you are basing your vote on "I think"? Would you please provide sources. dxneo ( talk) 19:04, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Hes probably notable per WP:BAND for having having been a "musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles" -- FMSky ( talk) 22:51, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
FMSky, which WP:MUSICBIO are you talking about cause it says "Note that regardless of what notability criterion is being claimed, the claim must be properly verified by reliable sources...", RS illustrating SIGCOV to satisfy GNG must still be provided regardless. dxneo ( talk) 00:05, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Murderdolls: BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. I see nothing properly sourced for a merge.  //  Timothy ::  talk  12:47, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Construction surveying. Star Mississippi 22:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Survey stakes

Survey stakes (  | talk | history | 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 above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (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. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:23, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Martin, Kansas

Martin, Kansas (  | talk | history | 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 short-lived not-a-town post office. Mangoe ( talk) 05:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I don't have a problem with redirecting to the township when it has the same name, but I don't see the point here. Mangoe ( talk) 13:22, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
references
  • Gannett, Henry (1898). A Gazetteer of Kansas. Bulletin. Vol. 154. United States Geological Survey. OL  20596112M.
  • Merge it or delete It's a post office, the local paper for this county goes back to around 1840 at least. There are no mentions of a settlement called Martin. There is a post office called martin along the Saline river. People used it as a stopover between destinations. Purportedly, postmaster Delay's wife was a good cook, and would serve a good meal to those laying over there. There isn't really any one article that tells the story though. You just kind of have read them all. Every mention of this place is of the post office, The most illustrative example being this one. https://www.newspapers.com/article/ellis-county-news-republican-drowned/139266707/. Sorry to bum you guys out. James.folsom ( talk) 22:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • No worries. At this point we have the Kansas Historical Society now, the contemporary Kansas State Board of Agriculture back in the 19th century, and your newspaper clippings, calling this a post office; and only Gannett in 1898 saying that it is a "hamlet", which isn't that great a claim in any event. And on the gripping hand, nothing much to say about it in either form. Especially if we subtract the generic all-Kansas-articles infobox and further reading, and unverifiable ghost town with zero population claim. Uncle G ( talk) 07:48, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I've copied over a couple sentences about the post office at Martin to the Buckeye Township article. People who are really interested in the history of this part of rural Kansas can find it there. No reason for this obscure rural post office to have its own article. Jbt89 ( talk) 06:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to 2022 Bratislava shooting. Editors are free to merge any appropriate content to the target article. Complex/ Rational 14:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Juraj Vankulič

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

While the crime was horrendous, I see no evidence Vankulic is notable for anything but their death. There doesn't appear to be anything to add, rendering Shooting of... not a viable solution. A redirect to 2022 Bratislava shooting would be a fine ATD but expect that this is contentious so wanted broader eyes, especially with folks who have access to non English sourcing. Star Mississippi 03:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Juraj was a very notable and important person in Slovak queer scene. This article is important to their friends and family for keeping their legacy alive. Creating this article was the sole reason why I began an editing account. I beg you, please, do not delete it. Animaeon ( talk) 03:45, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
That's a noble goal, but please read WP:NOTAMEMORIAL and WP:COI if you knew Vankulic or are otherwise connected with their friends and family. Star Mississippi 04:08, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Maybe if any reviews of his performances could be found? -- Ouro ( blah blah) 10:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Baton Rouge, Louisiana#Education. ✗ plicit 04:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Education in Baton Rouge, Louisiana

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

Nothing about Baton Rouge that necessitates a Education page under Notability procedure. 777burger user talk contribs 03:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was Userfy‎ per creator's request Star Mississippi 22:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

January Walker

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

Random congressional candidate who's never received any national news coverage whatsoever. Blatant violation of WP:GNG and WP:NPOL BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 03:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I believe that getting 6.6% as a third party candidate is notable, along with the fact that she has received a substantial amount of Utah-specific coverage and been invited to several debates she is considered notable. Microplastic Consumer ( talk) 13:08, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Getting 6% of the vote most definitely does *not* make you notable. Take a look through the list of notable third-party performances in US elections and see how many of the third-party candidates have Wikipedia pages. I would argue that, based on WP:1E, it's not possible for anyone to be notable solely based on their performance in one election. And no, getting some routine campaign coverage within the state of Utah doesn't make her notable either. As WP:NPOL says: "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability." BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 19:56, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Understandable, I support the deletion- please just allow me to move the page to my userspace Microplastic Consumer ( talk) 00:40, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Consensus was reached to keep the article per adequate sourcing. (non-admin closure) Captain Galaxy 15:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Squirtle

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

Just like what happen to Charmander, this article is also having a problem with notability. Of all the sources cited at this article, only the polygon source [25] is useful. At WP:BEFORE, these are possibly the only good sources [26] and maybe this? [27]. This source [28] is probably just about the gameplay; showing that the article isn't notable despite the popularity (which isn't an argument). GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 02:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Because those are still not enough to pass WP:GNG. GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 04:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Oh well, didn't saw that Vice source coming. But, leaving this afd still open for discussion if the character now barely passes gng. GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 05:08, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect/Merge Greenish Pickle got it right the first time, there's no need for backpedaling. The Polygon article is the only true SIGCOV I can see here. The Squirtle Squad as a group is not to be confused with Squirtle the Pokemon species. If Squirtle Squad is notable, the article ought to be about them, or the episode they appear, but notability is not inherited from the Squirtle Squad. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 05:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I find it a pretty strange assessment that reception for individual Squirtles are irrelevant to the species as a whole. I do not believe that the average person would look at the Squirtle Squad and differentiate it as a separate concept from Squirtle. Virtually all of the reception for Pikachu, for example, is about Ash's Pikachu, should that mean we should redirect Pikachu to the list and make an article called Ash's Pikachu? - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 05:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Is that really strange? We have an article on Mordin Solus but not salarian; they are not obviously notable, or at least people have not found them notable before now. Saying that Squirtle Squad and the individual Squirtle from the anime makes the species notable is like claiming Mordin automatically makes salarians notable.
    Pikachu is somewhat different, because Pikachu and Ash's Pikachu are virtually synonymous. I'm not sure if some people even realize there is a species. I don't think this is the case for any other Pokemon, such is the amount of popularity that Pikachu has. (Addendum: Team Rocket's Meowth may be the only other one I can think of that people know on such a basis) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 05:59, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    There is what I would consider a massive difference between an individual Squirtle named Squirtle and an individual salarian named Mordin Solus. It's also not claiming that the Squirtle Squad (which includes the individual Squirtle) makes the species notable, it's saying that the notability of the Squirtle Squad is directly relevant to Squirtle itself. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 06:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Bulbapedia has a separate page for both Ash's Squirtle and the Squirtle Squad, yet you are arguing that they are the same thing as the species. I don't think that's borne out by anything online.
    I do think that, even if this page is merged, the Squirtle Squad is independently notable. I found a GamesRadar article, which can be combined with Vice and TheGamer. I wouldn't oppose its creation, I just think the species isn't as well-known. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 09:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Of course there is both "Ash's Squirtle" and "Squirtle Squad" pages on Bulbapedia. Bulbapedia would not cover Ash's Squirtle as part of the Squirtle Squad article, and they would not cover the Squirtle Squad as part of the Ash's Squirtle article, because the Squirtle Squad has individual characters that would not make sense to include as part of that article. I have no concept of what you think that separate pages for the Squirtle Squad and Ash's Squirtle on Bulbapedia indicates, because that's just how Bulbapedia works. The leader of the Squirtle Squad has his own article, just like the leader of Team Rocket has his own article, without the groups they lead needing to be a part of their article.
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:59, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I will point out a street in Las Vegas is named after the Pokemon, something that was argued as significant coverage in Snorlax's AfD. Now mind you I personally don't find it much, but consensus shows others including Zx above felt different on that matter, so I think it's fair to argue for some consistency.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 12:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I'm not sure if you're directing that at me, but I never argued that a street name made Snorlax notable. My argument was based on unrelated sources. I don't think the street names have any bearing on the notability of Snorlax, Squirtle, or any Pokemon. It's just too insubstantial to say it confers any notability to anything besides perhaps the cultural impact of Pokemon in general. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 13:38, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    My mistake there, I was certain you'd agreed on that as well. Your reference was the one citing Pokemon GO with the police in that AfD. Still I think an overarching argument in that AfD as a whole was "the character is recognizable enough in commentary to get reaction". There are mutliple articles noting it in light of Ed Sheeran, which while a bit of promotion, does have some discussion over the multiple articles. Then there's weird moments like this with the President Elect of Chile, where Nintendo gifted him a plush of it and he vocally reacted. These are small, but do show there's recognition in pop culture of the character to an extent. And I think after the Snorlax AfD it's worth to consider where that lies with a Pokemon in terms of "should this have an article"?
    In addition regarding the whole squirtle squad thing, I think you may be looking at the forest but missing the tree: the argument isn't being made that "the Squirtle Squad" itself is notable, but that the characterization it gave Squirtle in the anime is, and how long that has endured. It's not a case like with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles for example where as a whole they're notable, because only one Squirtle in this case gets any commentary: Ash's.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 14:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I also believe it's strange to say that discussion of individual Squirtles is not relevant to the species article, considering that the appearances section is halfway composed of discussion about individual Squirtles. The article is clearly meant to encompass Squirtle and every variant, and Bulbapedia doing it differently reflects a completely different philosophy than what Wikipedia uses. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 18:28, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Squirtle already demonstrates notability based on the commentary references that Cukie offered as well as at least some representation within outside media with the references that Kung Fu Man cited. Based on this established precedent as well as how Bulbapedia is ultimately standardized wildly differently from Wikipedia, I see no valid reason why this article should deleted given how its meant to be a discussion on the species at large and not simply say, an article exclusively about Ash's Squirtle. SuperSkaterDude45 ( talk) 00:56, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: I wasn't sure about this, but ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ's claim that "the Squirtle squad" is notable but that "Squirtle" as a species is not strikes me as over-convenient hairsplitting. I don't think that argument holds up. If this article is deleted, no one is planning to raise a "Squirtle squad" article on its ashes. Keep the article that we have. AfD is not cleanup. Toughpigs ( talk) 03:32, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per above sourcing. Jclemens ( talk) 05:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep per the above arguments. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) 14:23, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep and clean-up per above. Some of our Pokemon content is on the edge, but there is WP:SIGCOV about this character. The trivial mentions can be summarized in a more encyclopedic way, and the rest can be figured out through editing. Shooterwalker ( talk) 19:36, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: As Cukie Gherkin and Kung Fu Man have pointed out, there are a couple of articles on the internet discussing the notability of this particular Pokemon species. I strongly agree that in this case, the popularity of the Squirtle Squad has definitely made an impact on the perception of the species as a whole as evidenced in this article from Forbes about Squirtle which was first featured as a Pokemon Go Community Day promotional event. Squirtle has also been promoted as a Funko Pop Vinyl doll, one of several species featured as livery on a commercial airline, and even as a kids meal toy from McDonald's. I believe I could transplant some of the sources from the Meowth, Charizard, and Raichu articles and use it to salvage the article from deletion. I am willing to do the work, but I am currently working on salvaging another featured list from demotion.
-- Birdienest81 talk 08:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Which featured list, out of curiosity? @ Birdienest8: - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 16:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
List of Los Angeles Rams head coaches Birdienest81 talk 21:26, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:36, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Anar Baghirov

AfDs for this article:
Anar Baghirov (  | talk | history | 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 page was deleted in 2017 for failing to meet notability. It was recreated in 2018 and still does not meet notability requirements. It also appears to have been created by a COI account. The subject does not meet notability requirements for academics or officials. The subject is the head of Azerbaijan's Bar Association but that does not seem to give notability to the subject. Thenightaway ( talk) 12:27, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:00, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:45, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 02:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Resume BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. Even a brief look at the article content and sources show the refs do not meet WP:IS. BLPs require strong sourcing. Ping me if WP:THREE sources are found that meet WP:SIGCOV and are not routine mill news.  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: part of a COI/SPA campaign about Azerbaijan topics. This one fails NBIO. Owen× ☎ 21:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. WP:NPASR applies. ✗ plicit 04:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Billy Reil

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

No notable wrestler. Worked on independent level. sources only make passing mentions about him WP:ROUTINE results. No in-deep coverage about him. HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 09:54, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:43, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 02:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. Consensus here is slim, especially with the nom being discounted since having been blocked. However this is a BLP without good sourcing, and therefore edge to delete. Star Mississippi 22:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Jana Amin

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

Failure of WP:BLP and WP:N. Sources are not independent, half are related to her entrepreneur mother, whose biography itself is not notable.

Source evaluation:

  • el Kaliouby, Rana; Coleman, Carol (2000). Girl Decoded. Penguin Random House.
Book from her mother.
  • "Changing the narrative around Muslim Women and supporting girl's education with Jana Amin, Egyptian-American Advocate (#16)"
Podcast involving her.
  • Changing the narrative, one Muslim woman at a time | Jana Amin | TEDxYouth@BeaconStreet
TEDx involving her.
  • "Affectiva Co-Founder Rana el Kaliouby on How She Built a Tech Startup as a Single Mom 5,000 Miles From Home"
Interview of her mother.
  • "Rana el Kaliouby decodes her memoir "Girl Decoded""
Book about her mother.
  • "UNGA 2020: 'I began my activist journey by telling the story of Muslim women I knew'"
Interview with her about her TEDx.
  • Amin, Jana (17 December 2019), Changing the narrative, one Muslim woman at a time, retrieved 2021-03-25
Her TEDx talk.
It is very likely self-published ( https://egyptianstreets.com/submit-an-article/). Also, see an excerpt of the article:
Amin is not just an inspiring women’s rights activist of our time, but also a young woman of action whose life is centered on learning, commitment and determination, and passionately works to ensure that visions, policies and even academia are turned into real tangible solutions..
  • "Protecting progress for girls' education — Assembly | Malala Fund"
Blog post by her.
  • Hung, Madeleine A.; Kim, Joyce E. (September 15, 2023). "Harvard Students Launch Fundraisers for Morocco Earthquake Relief".
One namedrop of her. Local college newspaper.

Given this and the overall interconnection between promotional pages, I think a WP:TNT delete is needed. बिनोद थारू ( talk) 23:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Pretty sure I remember this article having an AfD filed against it before, but I can't seem to find it now. If I didn't dream it, it might be worth checking what arguments were in that. 92.19.111.41 ( talk) 00:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    A PROD has been filed before, and the revert reason were the National and Egyptian Streets sources. [32] I included both in my evaluation above. बिनोद थारू ( talk) 00:27, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I have looked at the sources, and I substantially agree with the assessment that बिनोद थारू has given. There are citations to pages that don't even mention Jana Amin, pages that barely mention her in passing, and pages that are either certainly or probably not independent of her. There is no evidence at all of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines. JBW ( talk) 17:02, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep because The National (Abu Dhabi) is a reputable newspaper and being prominently interviewed in it should be enough to establish WP:N, especially when also backed by Egyptian Streets which is a large blog in Egypt, plus being allowed to write for the Malala Fund and speak at TEDx: OK so not every TEDx speaker automatically has WP:N but a TEDx speaker who's also been in some country's major daily newspaper and another country's major blog is more likely to be. I agree that the article should be improved (we could cite the Borgen Project magazine article instead of just the front of the Collateral Repair Project for a start, although we'd first need to check why Wikipedia is blacklisting Borgen Project URLs, I wonder if this is an error). But I don't see the need to WP:TNT this article. (Potential Wikipedia:CONFLICT disclosure: her mother and I were in the same lab as PhD students. I think the points I made are still valid; a second opinion to check this would be nice) Silas S. Brown ( email, talk) 22:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Add sources to further establish notability: NowThis News - How Nawal El Saadawi Shook Up the Patriarchy in Egypt featured Jana; also the Italian version of Elle (magazine) ran an article on her; also Marie Claire Arabia (which does not currently have a Wikipedia article, but has been cited several times by various Wikipedia articles so appears to be a recognised source) had an Arabic article featuring her. Silas S. Brown ( email, talk) 14:05, 3 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 22:19, 6 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 02:17, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: WP:BLP, Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. As others have said, the sources are about others and only mention the subject, no direct and indepth coverage, or are promo or listings. Ping me if WP:SIGCOV is found.  //  Timothy ::  talk  14:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎ with a side of nomination withdrawn, however consensus is also clear Star Mississippi 22:28, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Conflict of contract laws

Conflict of contract laws (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • Delete This article is a mess and contains huge swaths of unverified content. Seems to violate WP:NOTESSAY and I believe it would be best to WP:TNT. Tooncool64 ( talk) 01:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC) — Tooncool64 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. James500 ( talk) 22:05, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Outside of what? Contract laws??? Tooncool64 ( talk) 22:28, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Outside of the topic of "unreferenced wikipedia articles" (and, to a lesser extent, unreferenced content within largely or allegedly unreferenced articles). As I explained in my edit summary, the contributions of your account consist more or less entirely of a 'campaign' against uncited articles. Your account is also a WP:SLEEPER with no edits for roughly five years, then a massive spike of edits over the Christmas holidays (when most editors were away), that consists entirely of this 'campaign' of PRODs, AfDs, RfCs etc. on unreferenced articles. James500 ( talk) 23:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion. In fact, I find your insinuation that I am a bad faith actor insulting. Tooncool64 ( talk) 23:13, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The reason we have Template:Single-purpose account is because it is relevant to AfD discussions. Further, I have not insinuated anthing. James500 ( talk) 23:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The template usage page specifically states that it should be used in cases of suspected sockpuppetry. Also, if you look at my contributions, I have contributed much more than just nominating articles for deletion. Tooncool64 ( talk) 23:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    That is not exactly what the template says. It roughly loosely says that it should be used if there are sufficient grounds for concern, and in my provisional opinion, the fact that an WP:SPA is also a WP:SLEEPER constitutes sufficient grounds. Yes, I can see that you have been adding sources etc to unreferenced articles, but that is still editing within the single narrow topic of the "unreferenced articles backlog". If you don't like the template, the simplest thing to do would be for you to diversify your editing. There are lots of things that you can do on this project that don't relate to the "unreferenced articles backlog". James500 ( talk) 00:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 01:48, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: no evidence whatsoever of WP:BEFORE. Here is a paper from a law journal I found after literally five seconds of a Google search for the article's name. Here's a book: "Eugene F. Scoles and Peter Hay, Hornbook on Conflict of Laws, West Group (2004)". Is there a reason these aren't viable? jp× g 🗯️ 02:23, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The paper you have found does not seem to mention the concept of "Conflict of contract laws". While the concept of "Conflict of laws" has implications on "contracts" and "contract law" (this is why there is a section titled "Contracts" in our article "Conflict of laws"), I am not familiar with the concept "Conflict of contract laws" as such. It might be that the phrases "Conflict of laws" and "Conflict of contract laws" are quasi-synonymous. I have some sympathy for Tooncool64's proposal to WP:TNT the article, in the absence of any source. In my view, in this specific instance, a sensible way forward would be to improve and expand the section "Contracts" in our article "Conflict of laws", rather than trying to convert a rather long personal essay containing no reference into a proper Wikipedia article. Edcolins ( talk) 11:35, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Satisfies GNG. This concept satisfies GNG easily and by an exceptionally wide margin. It has received significant coverage in many books and periodicals, and there are many entire periodical articles and entire book chapters about it. The expression "conflict of contract laws" does actually appear in numerous books and periodical articles in Google Books and elsewhere, but the expression is entirely synonymous with the chapter on "contract" that appears in every book on conflict of laws (aka private international law), and with that branch of the law of conflict of laws. Any attempt to deny this would violate NOTDICTIONARY, because we don't treat a single topic as multiple topics just because the single topic has multiple names. It may be that the present page name is not the WP:COMMONNAME of this concept, and the page should be moved. This topic has numerous names, such as: conflict of contract laws; conflict of laws in contract; conflict of laws of contract; conflict of laws: contract; conflict of laws and contract; contract in conflict of laws; contract in the conflict of laws; contract and conflict of laws; contract and the conflict of laws; and so on ad nauseum. They are all the same thing. They are not separate topics. There is no indication that the article is a mess, and David91 was not, as far as I can remember, in the habit of writing essays, or huge swaths of unverifiable content. He did make a few mistakes (I should know, because I have corrected some of them over the years), but it was very obvious that he always got his information from law books, and that most of it was reasonably accurate. Further the article is not actually unreferenced or unverified at all. The article cites four sources including one Act of Parliament and three international treaties, all of which are reliable sources. WP:TNT is not applicable, and the deletion of the main article on any broad area of the law would completely disrupt that entire area of the project and would be disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive. James500 ( talk) 21:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The article is now referenced to seven treatises and a periodical article. There are many other sources available. James500 ( talk) 00:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I withdraw my nomination per information above. I made a mistake in not doing enough research. Tooncool64 ( talk) 01:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Speedy Keep‎. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Let'srun ( talk) 03:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Australia's Most Wanted

Australia's Most Wanted (  | talk | history | 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:NTV, WP:NCRIME and WP:GNG, despite being a notable program that aired on the Seven Network from 1989 to 1999, before being cancelled, then the program switched to the Nine Network for 6 weeks, then it was axed. Only refs are from IMDb, tv.com and ovguide.com. Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 ( his talk page) 01:38, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 04:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Suzanne Langlois

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

Questionable notability that does not appear to be established with WP:RS Amigao ( talk) 01:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

She is an important figure in St. Louis, both as founder of Kaldi's and her work at Meds and Food for Kids. M'Laurine ( talk) 18:38, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Sources are needed for that claim. Xxanthippe ( talk) 21:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC). reply
Here are some sources, including podcast interviews and stories in several newspapers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoRqyIZH_4k (The Seed - the Start-up Journey Episode 20)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmM2qClxudU (The Influential Non-profit - Episode 37)
https://www.voxmagazine.com/news/kaldis-coffee-mu-education-expansion/article_cbcb86d4-062a-11ea-9609-ff8bddb79a81.html
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/local/kaldis-makes-four-coffee-shops-near-the-corner-of-ninth-and-cherry-streets/article_4122ea2d-28f9-5bd9-847c-fe469738e061.html
https://www.stltoday.com/life-entertainment/local/food-drink/dining/coffee-is-good-with---and-in---muffins-special-request-bakers-at/article_e83b2d46-f6a5-55e7-9a27-0f17f94e41f4.html
https://urnex.com/blog/kaldis-is-raising-the-coffee-game-in-americas-heartland
https://www.riverfronttimes.com/best-of/2000/food-and-drink/best-place-to-buy-coffee-2507925
https://ethicalstl.org/docs/EthicsInActionAward/ParticiaWolff.pdf
https://newterritorymag.com/about/board/ M'Laurine ( talk) 22:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Commercial adspam of only local interest. If this BIO has been edited by a paid editor the subject should ask for their money back. Xxanthippe ( talk) 23:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC). reply
    I think we must agree to disagree. In my opinion, being a businesswoman sought out by multiple newspapers and bloggers for interviews, and later becoming CEO of an organization that has treated 800,000 Haitian children for malnutrition, amounts to cultural significance. Xxanthippe clearly disagrees. I suggest we let others weigh in.
    I would also request that you refrain from ad hominem attacks. You may disagree with me for believing that various St. Louisians merit Wikipedia pages, but my motivation is informational, not financial. Attacking the poster serves just to maintain the status quo of articles mainly about entertainers, university professors and athletes. M'Laurine ( talk) 16:32, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - based on sources in the article, listed here, and my online search, there does not appear to be significant independent, reliable, and secondary coverage to support WP:BASIC/ WP:GNG notability. For example, the source used to support the article's claim that Langlois "has been credited for changing the coffee landscape in St. Louis" ( URNEX), according to its About Us page, is a company that sells coffee-related products and offers services to coffee shop owners; its blog post source about Kaldi's includes "Josh Ferguson views Urnex less as just a product manufacturer and more as a trusted advisor in all things coffee equipment" etc - this appears to be an advertisement that lacks independence. The 2019 Vox Magazine source focuses on Josh Ferguson, Tricia Zimmer Ferguson, and Kaldi's, and mentions "In 1994, Howard Lerner and Suzanne Langlois founded Kaldi’s in St. Louis" so this is not significant coverage. The 2008 Columbia Missourian source is three lines, announcing a new Kaldi's location, so is not significant or secondary coverage of Langlois. The 2009 St Louis Dispatch source is mostly based on quotes from Langlois, lists Kaldi's locations and includes a muffins recipe, which is not significant, independent, secondary coverage of Langlois. There is also an event announcement that is not significant coverage. There is a post from the Kaldi's website, which is not independent. There is also a high school student newspaper I am not able to access, but this type of source is not strong support for notability. There is a 1994 St. Louis Dispatch source noting a local journalism award for Langlois, which is not significant support for notability. There is also a 2017 Feast magazine recognition for Kaldi's, which is not significant support for notability. Another source is the New Territory Magazine About page, which has a brief profile of Langlois, which is not independent or secondary support for notability. This source review is not saying Langlois has not had a successful career or diminishing the importance of her nonprofit career; there are various reasons why the notability guidelines have us looking for certain types of coverage, and it does not appear that we have those types of sources at this time. Beccaynr ( talk) 22:28, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - She is a successful businessperson who has accomplished various things but does not meet the requirements of WP:N. Llajwa ( talk) 21:54, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 00:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

WQAW-LD

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 01:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 02:21, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft deletion due to prior bundled AfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 01:27, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete Per nom, fails GNG and NCORP. No WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. BEFORE found routine mill news, nothing that meets SIGCOV.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. ✗ plicit 04:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Samsung Galaxy Tab A8

Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 (  | talk | history | 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 has no references. But, this article was moved to mainspace because of old article per WP:DRAFTIFY. Hajoon0102 💬 01:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 00:06, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

KDEO-LD

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 01:09, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete as per nomination. Non-notable TV station. TH1980 ( talk) 03:38, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Per nom, fails GNG and NCORP. No WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:18, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

KHDT-LD

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 01:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep per WP:SNOW and also WP:HEY. ( non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte ( talk) 12:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Lizbeth Goodman

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

Not appearing to meet WP:NOTABILITY standards. Avishai11 ( talk) 00:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 00:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

KADY-LP

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Texas. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Not sure why Let'srun deprodded this, as it's an obvious case. I can't find local coverage about it whatsoever. And I created the article many years ago, probably when LAT TV still existed. Sammi Brie (she/her •  t • c) 00:40, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I thought I had found something approaching SIGCOV (which is why I deprodded my own PROD, but it ended up being for a different station. Let'srun ( talk) 02:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Definitely another remnant article from the much looser "notability guidelines" of 2007. Looks like even then, we didn't have much more than a LAT TV press release, which probably isn't independent or significant coverage anyway. I'm a bit puzzled about the self-contesting of the PROD too (there was an IP edit in 2011 that included a web address that contained "prod", but it was just its entry in an FCC database and that edit, which was purely a content addition, had nothing to do with proposed deletion). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun ( talk) 04:34, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2024_January_21&oldid=1200443956"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 20 January 22 >

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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:07, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Systems Research Institute (India)

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

It exists but I couldn't find reliable sources to show it meets WP:ORG or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, so hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 21:16, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:57, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • delete - no evidence of notability apart from alumni. Llajwa ( talk) 17:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Minimal participation, but the page does not qualify for a soft-delete as it has undergone a previous AfD. Two relists generated no added participation, so I see little point in going for yet another relist. Owen× ☎ 00:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DYXX-TV

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

In the previous AFD discussion, editors who voted keep provided zero sources. There's certainly listings, and given the age of the Wikipedia article, there are hundreds if not thousands of Wikipedia mirror results. However, I still cannot find significant coverage in reliable sources. And the article still stands mostly unsourced since last AFD. MarioGom ( talk) 20:35, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:00, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was merge‎ to Jack Dempsey (fish). Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Jack Dempsey cichlids in Australia

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

Much of the article appears to duplicate information from the main Jack Dempsey (fish) article, and the rest would fit into the main article just fine. From what I can see, the topic of Rocio octofasciata occurring in a pool in Australia is not notable enough nor the main article big enough to justify having separate articles. Surtsicna ( talk) 17:53, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Merge (partial) as suggested above. A fair amount of useful and reliable material that would make a good addition to the species article. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 12:39, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Kevin Manno

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

Fails WP:BIO. Most of the existing references are about his relationship/marriage with Ali Fedotowsky, falling afoul of WP:NOTINHERITED. The rest are announcements about his job changes or not independent, and I can't find anything better. Clarityfiend ( talk) 17:13, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment. I didn't realize I had nominated this guy last year, to minimal participation. Still, once more unto the breach. Clarityfiend ( talk) 17:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 23:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete per nominator. The only article I can find about him about him that's not actually about his wife Is this short announcement [1] about him starting at WRVW in 2023. Tserton ( talk) 12:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

John Bergstrom

John Bergstrom (  | talk | history | 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 independently notable from the publications for which he writes (primarily PopMatters), no sources to be found except trivial mentions (i.e. "John Bergstrom of PopMatters announced that [huge band who are actually the subject of article] will release their new album in three months." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulie302 ( talk • contribs) 22:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Prash Ladva

Prash Ladva (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Contested PROD.)
The short version: There is no evidence that Prash Ladva satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines, either in the references cited in the article or in anything else I could find anywhere on searching.
A longer version, for anyone wishing to read an account of all the cited references: There are apparently 17 references in the article at present, but two of those are identical copies of the same page on two websites. Not a single one of them is substantial coverage in an independent source, and most of them fail both of those criteria. The references are as follows. Currently a dead link, but it is a URL on Prash Ladva's own web site, so it would not have been an independent source anyway: [2]. Text posted by Prash Ladva himself on LinkedIn: [3]. Web pages which don't mention Prash Ladva, and which even if they did are on the websites of organisations to which he is connected: [4], [5], [6], [7]. A listing on a government company listing site of a company owned by Prash Ladva; the listing doesn't mention Prash Ladva himself: [8]. Another government listing site, this time for a school. It includes Prash Ladva in a list of governors of the school; the only information about him is his name, the start and end dates of his term as a governor, and "Appointed by GB/board" as an explanation of how he came to be appointed to the post: [9]. A page telling us that Prash Ladva's brother is proud of him: [10]. Apparently two references on two websites, but they turn out to be identical; both of them say "SPONSORED" at the top and "In association with LinkMedics International LTD" further down the page. LinkMedics International is a business belonging to Prash Ladva; in other words the "references" are advertisements, and indeed one of the websites carrying it, on another web page, mentions its price for inclusion in its "news" coverage: [11], [12]. Announcements on the web sites of organisations or businesses offering "awards", which include Prash Ladva as a recipient. It's not clear to me how significant the awards are, but in any case they are not substantial coverage of Prash Ladva, and being on the websites of the awarding organisations they aren't independent sources either: [13], [14]. Further pages on the web sites of organisations to which he has a personal connection, including his own business and organisations he works for or has worked for: [15], [16], [17], [18]. JBW ( talk) 22:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Hi there, please could you clarify why reference 12 (UK Top 100 List) is not "noteworthy". I believe this to be an extremely significant accolade, as would many. I think there has to be a clear distinction between searching for "significant coverage" vs "noteworthy" - as then there is subjectivity. Who does this get escalated to?
In any view, this is only my second written article, and I followed a similar structure to the first article. I will move onto creating the next one. But I am curious about the question I have asked above. Journalist0071 ( talk) 00:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Significant coverage is part of the notability criteria, and is about the depth of coverage. As detailed above, the problem with the Top 100 Influential reference is that the depth of coverage on the site (i.e. his biography) is not in-depth (and I suspect it is based on the subject's own submitted bio), and that there is no indication (that I can find) of the significance of this award - other than the organisation and its staff themselves, almost all of the mentions that I can find about the award is either on winners' social media or the winners' employer's social media; I can't find any independent mentions of the awards. There are a lot of 'Top 100 Influential People' awards, in many industries, and most of them would fail to meet the criteria on Wikipedia as reliable sources; in fact the only one I can think of which is considered a notable award in and of itself is Time 100.
As to 'who does this get escalated to?' - the answer is, the community here... which is what is happening on this page! PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 08:34, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Journalist0071, you're in the escalated place already: this is where notability is decided. No one puts much stock in things like "being in a top 100 list". If there were some significant coverage of him somewhere, perhaps something like the top 100 list would be enough to motivate an editor who was on the fence to !vote keep instead of delete, but if that's all we have, and no sigcov anywhere, the chances anyone will make a solid keep argument are basically nil. -- asilvering ( talk) 08:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Although an interesting young person, I agree that there is not enough evidence to show that he meets Wikipedia's notability criteria for inclusion, and the breakdown of sources above is a good indication of the lack of reliable sourcing that is available. PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 08:34, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Southern Broadcasting Network#Radio stations. The Delete and Redirect views are based on policy, which the Keep !votes did not address. Owen× ☎ 00:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DXIP

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

No significant coverage in reliable sources. No clear redirect target. MarioGom ( talk) 19:42, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Philippines. MarioGom ( talk) 19:42, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: The third source is just an aircheck. The rest of the sources are secondary and talk about the station's programming. That said, the article is good enough to pass WP:GNG. ASTIG 😎 🙃 10:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • What sources exactly do you see with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth? Just to be clear what you think is SIGCOV.
  • Keep Meets WP:GNG per Astig's argument. Sources mentioned are reliable enough and secondary, with the ones mentioned by Astig in-depth IMV. SBKSPP ( talk) 23:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Southern Broadcasting Network#Radio stations; all four of the references in the current version fail WP:GNG for one reason or another: #1 name-drops the station once in a series that includes three other stations (fails WP:SIGCOV), #2 mentions the station twice in passing with absolutely no detail or context about the station (also fails WP:SIGCOV), #3 is a WP:UGC since it's a YouTube video authored by "Dante's Enigmatic World", who has no meaningful and established journalistic reputation, and #4 is a WP:BLOG. Left guide ( talk) 00:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:48, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 22:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Source eval:
Comments Source
Nothing about subject. Mentions station merger, but no details, nothing meeting SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth 1. Vice guv to be back soon, daughters say
Interviews that mention the name of the station, no details, nothing meeting SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth 2. ^ FAST BACKWARD: Media in time of Covid-19
Primary 3. ^ DXIP Davao Sign-Off 1988
Mentions an interview from the station, nothing meeting SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth 4. ^ ANAD PARTYLIST STANDS PAT THAT DAVAO CITY IS NOT PEACEFUL
BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. The Delete views are anchored in guidelines, while the Keep !votes merely allude to sources that never materialized. The nom's redir ATD received no support. Owen× ☎ 01:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DYQC

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

No significant coverage in RS. Can be redirected to Aliw Broadcasting Corporation. MarioGom ( talk) 19:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Philippines. MarioGom ( talk) 19:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: All the sources in the article are reliable. The first two source states that the station is licensed. Sources 3 to 6 talk about the station's programming. The last source talks about the station's rebrand. That said, the article is good enough to pass WP:GNG. ASTIG 😎 🙃 09:03, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Mere primary source records are not significant coverage. Please, could you point out which exact secondary sources cover DYQC specifically are in depth? MarioGom ( talk) 23:01, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Sources 3 to 7 are indeed secondary sources. And therefore provides WP:SIGCOV to the subject (or its programming). I have explained more than enough. And I won't respond to this post again. ASTIG 😎 🙃 10:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Meets WP:GNG per Astig's argument. Sources mentioned are reliable enough and secondary, with the ones mentioned by Astig in-depth IMV. SBKSPP ( talk) 23:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Fails GNG and NORG/CORP. Found nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.
Source eval:
Comments Source
404 1. 2019 NTC FM Stations
Name listed in table, no SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth NTC Region 7
No SIGCOV, simply states, "its episodes are aired at 106.7 Home Radio, according to the schedules given to the students and parents concerned." 3. ^ DepEd-7 urges school divisions to come up with other modalities
No SIGCOV, simply states, "Currently one radio station is tapped by the City Government and it is 106.7 Home Radio." 4. ^ Hagit sa mga magtutudlo sa kahanginan
Article does not mention subject 5. ^ Cebu City learners to hear ‘modules on air’ starting January 2021
No SIGCOV, simply states, "Basaha sa ubos ang daily Radio-Based Instruction schedule nga madungog sa 106.7 Home Radio FM Station." 6. ^ PAHIBALO SA TANANG CEBU CITY PARENTS UG LEARNERS
Routine mill news about formatting change. Information from subject, fails WP:IS, fails WP:SIGCOV 7. ^ Celario, Eunice; Cambri, Susan (January 30, 2023). "Pagbabago sa DWIZ Kaabang-abang". Filipino Mirror. Retrieved January 30, 2023.
No objection if a consensus redirect emerges, but I can't find one I think is useful.  //  Timothy ::  talk  14:21, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. Significant coverage in various reliable and independent sources. RomanRaju ( talk) 08:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Which source provides significant coverage? Significant coverage means that a source addresses the topic directly and in detail. MarioGom ( talk) 08:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep per comments above pointing out significant independent coverage. Also I will never stop pointing out that media outlets typically do not cover each other, and this should be taken into account when assessing the notability of subjects that are themselves sources of coverage. WilsonP NYC ( talk) 15:17, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: so far, the "keep" votes above have essentially been hand-waving at WP:SIGCOV without really demonstrating meaningful concrete evidence of such coverage. Meanwhile, the only one in this discussion who appears to have critically dug into the sources is TimothyBlue, and no rebuttals have yet been made against their source evaluation table. Left guide ( talk) 09:58, 19 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: TimothyBlue is currently the most persuasive comment above, relisting to see if there is any response to their comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 22:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete per TimothyBlue. I'm not convinced, not only by sources used in the article, but also by those who voted to keep it. I bet they will not bother finding reliable sources & add them to the article. Israel's  Son 16:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Keep votes provide no sources to eval.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Hot Springs, Montana. Star Mississippi 23:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Alameda's hot springs retreat

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

Has not received significant coverage in multiple sources. 777burger user talk contribs 22:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep - Here are a few sources:
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Keep. I'll add this newspaper article from The Missoulian to the list of sources: [19] [20]. Still, I think this might be better covered in Hot Springs, Montana per WP:NOTGUIDEBOOK. Jfire ( talk) 03:17, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge to Hot Springs, Montana - Think it was known as Camas Hot Springs for a long time. Shining the Hot Springs Bat Signal in the sky for netherzone - I'm going to see what I can do to improve/expand. Any help appreciated. jengod ( talk) 05:11, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - Thanks for the ping, jengod. I'll see what I can find. It may be notable as an establishment, they've been around for 85 years. But I'm also thinking the hot springs as a geological feature probably could meet WP:NATFEAT if that part of the article can be improved through sourcing. Netherzone ( talk) 05:46, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment Yeah from what I'm getting so far the hot springs and the tribal control thereof and the rise and fall of a couple of associated bathhouses/hotels are all encyclopedic for sure, but I suspect that Alameda's per se is a comparatively small part of the story. I expect a name change/move will be called for but still readin'... jengod ( talk) 07:16, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment Changed my vote from keep to merge. Also created Camas Hot Springs. Also note Symes Hotel. I think this particular assemblage of cabins and infrastructure has some minor notability so if it's kept that's fine but a merge probably the best decision on its current state of referencedness, etc. jengod ( talk) 09:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge - agree with other editors above that merging is the best alternative to deletion. Either potential target Hot Springs, Montana or the new article Camas Hot Springs is fine with me. Netherzone ( talk) 17:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge with Hot Springs, Montana: per above eval.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Star Mississippi 23:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Janes Place, California

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

Procedural nomination as closer of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 12 § Janes Place, California. I am neutral. In 2019 Reywas92 BLAR'd this as locality not notable, redir to county. WeirdNAnnoyed took it to RfD, writing Target article never mentions Janes Place, or gives any hint about what or where it was. Very obscure place, unlikely search term. Reywas commented at the RfD Topo map shows it as an isolated cabin. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed ( they|xe) 20:56, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and California. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed ( they|xe) 20:56, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Consensus from RFD already seems pretty clear that the subject fails WP:NPLACE and WP:GNG and my BEFORE didn't uncover anything that would suggest otherwise. Jfire ( talk) 21:08, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Just a single building. No evidence this was ever a "community" of any kind. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per my comments above, from the RfD. WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk) 21:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Whatever this is, it is lost to history. There's nothing in the Service & Hillman Arcadia book on Eureka and Humboldt County. I can make no verifiable connection to Henry F. Janes, founder of Janesville, Wisconsin who came to Humboldt and was its first JP, who stated that he lived near Uniontown (not clear to me which one, but I suspect Arcata rather than Lotus) anyway, some 40km away, and is reported to have ended up "above" (north? upstream of? up a hill from?) Humboldt City, California. Nothing else turns up in the history books that I can find. I cannot say a single verifiable thing about what this even is. Uncle G ( talk) 07:03, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Star Mississippi 23:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Mumbai–Madgaon line

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

This is a contested draftification and proposed deletion. The subject does not appear to be notable. A check before the nomination turned up no useful sources that I could find, and the article currently has no sources either. — TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh) 18:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete non-notable railway line GoldenBootWizard276 ( talk) 19:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

*Comment - Feels like a weird argument to make that suggests a long rail line (I've seen 600km but the page says nearer 2000km) is not notable. I've not looked extensively for sources, but I'd be surprised if nothing exists. JMWt ( talk) 20:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - on further examination, I think this page is inaccurate and unhelpful, because it is describing a "line" when it actually means a "route". The route is covered extensively elsewhere under Konkan Railway zone and Mumbai Suburban Railway which operate the connections. As the topic of the page is not really understood as being a consistent line, might be a reason why finding sources it difficult. I could be wrong so I welcome correction. JMWt ( talk) 08:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Star Mississippi 23:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

How Strategy Shapes Structure

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

This is silly: a lengthy summary of a single article, where the only claim to fame appears to be that it was cited in someone's paper for an economics class. See comments on User talk:Surfdachsie (clearly a COI editor), where the PROD was declined even though there was absolutely no credible evidence of notability. Drmies ( talk) 18:03, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete summary of a non-notable article. GoldenBootWizard276 ( talk) 19:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Cambridge University Cricket Club players. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 18:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Frederick Craven

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

Cricketer who played a single game of cricket at something the page claims was “first class” standard but long before those terms were used. Sources do not exist that indicate the importance of the game; indeed one database shows massive holes in the data - missing player name, the runs don’t add up etc. Nothing much else to suggest this person was notable. JMWt ( talk) 17:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep‎. Owen× ☎ 01:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Minister of Communications (India)

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

Seems like unnecessary duplication of Ministry of Communications (India). Recommend that we Redirect to that article. - MPGuy2824 ( talk) 17:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was redirect‎ to Haze'evot. Star Mississippi 23:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Talia Ishai

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

Should be merged into Haze'evot regardless of notability. Talia Ishai is a CURRENT member of Haze'vot. This band is undisputedly notable and has a too short article. Ishai also did some solo recordings and obviously was born, went to school, and the like. All that can be included in Haze'evot without creating any situation of WP:UNDUE and without creating the need to rehash the entire Haze'evot history ad nausea. The Talia Ishai article is a totally unjustified WP:SPINOFF, creating a user experience from hell, where the user needs to chase after bits and pieces of information, while stuff is unnecessarily repeated. The experience is VERY disrespectful towards our readers. As if they can't hold onto information or be exposed to more information at once. IMPORTANT: I'm purposefully using the AfD track so this article will be debated alongside the similar case of Yifat Balassiano. Please check out that AfD as well! gidonb ( talk) 16:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Can you explain how this notability is demonstrated, in your opinion? Furthermore the suggestion here is to merge rather than to delete. Notability is not an argument against merging, only against deleting. Do you have specific arguments why this article should not be merged? gidonb ( talk) 17:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Hi, Gidon. Pertaining your question, both Yifat Balassiano and Talia Ishai are each notable in their own right. Both are highly active in the Israeli rock music scene, both have released solo albums and are individually sought after by other high-profile artists for musical collaborations in the recording and performing arenas. These two women are literally carrying the torch of the Israeli rock music scene these days. -- Omer Toledano ( talk) 17:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Hi Omer, could you please bring sources for these statements. We cannot just trust you on the colors of your eyes. Plus, even if they would be slightly known, we should still merge. It's EXTREMELY annoying and disrespectful for our readers all this repetition of information and piecemeal release of data. As if our readers lack basic intelligence. You do not address that! gidonb ( talk) 17:58, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Gidonb, I don't think merging is the way to go regardless of notability like you suggested on the nomination, if there's enough RS to establish notability then subject qualifies for standalone article (even a {{ stub}} is acceptable). Notability of the band has nothing to do with that of their individual careers. (ping me) dxneo ( talk) 05:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Sure. We can instead make readers chase after slivers of largely repetative information and create a hellish user experience accross a zillion articles. It's a choice but not my choice. Notability is crucial to keeping and deleting. Redirects, mergers, and category/template operations draw more on knowledge modelling and data governance. gidonb ( talk) 05:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Gidonb, please see GNG and MUSICBIO, i/we don't make rules but we follow and abide by them, I'm sorry. dxneo ( talk) 05:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Don't be sorry. It's difficult to think across multiple dimensions. I get that. There are other articles that deal with the organization of information. Relevant sections of these are linked in the intro that explains the rationale for this merge proposal. gidonb ( talk) 05:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Per WP:NOPAGE, it may be appropriate for information on a notable subject to be merged into a related page. I dunno if that's true in this case, but it's no hard rule. Mach61 ( talk) 16:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge - There is no evidence that the subject meets any of the 12 criteria outlined in WP:SINGER. Marokwitz ( talk) 07:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete or Redirect Shockingly bad article from a fan. I see not reason for a merge. There is no coverage to prove she is notable. Certainly doesn't meet WP:SINGER, but it fails WP:BIO and more importantly it fails WP:SIGCOV. What are you planning to base the article on to satisfy WP:V. There is nothing that I can see that meets that criteria. I'm not keen on merge when there is nothing to base it on. A redirect would be better as a ATD. scope_creep Talk 18:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Haze'evot as AtD. BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing.  //  Timothy ::  talk  16:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Central Reserve Police Force. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Anish Dayal Singh

Anish Dayal Singh (  | talk | history | 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 announcements about a person's appointment to a rank that is not clearly notable. Fails the Anybio criteria Moem-Meom ( talk) 11:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 15:01, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete. Being the head of a police force doesn't confer automatic notability. I've gone through pages and pages of search results and only found routine coverage, so I've given up; happy to reconssider if anyone else has better luck or can come up with more useful search terms. Removing "appointed" didn't help me. -- asilvering ( talk) 04:59, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. High ranking official, also notable because he was appointed head of SSB (CRPF) very recently! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheProEditor11 ( talk • contribs) 10:17, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TLA (talk) 11:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy based input would be helpful
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Source eval:
Comments Source
Mill news about appointment, looks like it is sourced from a gov press release, fail WP:IS 1. "Anish Dayal Singh appointed CRPF chief, Nina Singh to head CISF". The Economic Times. 2023-12-28. ISSN 0013-0389. Retrieved 2023-12-30.
Same article as above, different paper/date, makes me believe even more this was sourced from a gov press release failing WP:IS 2. ^ Jump up to:a b c "Anish Dayal Singh appointed CRPF chief, Nina Singh to head CISF". India Today. Retrieved 2023-12-30.
Routine mill news about appointment. 3. ^ www.ETGovernment.com. "Manipur cadre IPS officer Anish Dayal Singh assumes charge as DG ITBP, SSB - ET Government". ETGovernment.com. Retrieved 2023-12-30.
Same article as above, different paper/date, makes me believe even more this was sourced from a gov press release failing WP:IS 4. ^ "Anish Dayal Singh appointed CRPF chief, Nina Singh to head CISF". The Indian Express. 2023-12-28. Retrieved 2023-12-29.
BEFORE found more routine mill news and more copies of #1 above, but nothing meeting WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Article illustrates the lack of sourcing, it is basically just an appointment annoucement with a lot of wikilinks. Ping me if sources with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth are found.  //  Timothy ::  talk  16:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Arguments on the delete side carried far more weight than those on the (weak) keep side. Owen× ☎ 01:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Fredrik Zanjanchi

Fredrik Zanjanchi (  | talk | history | 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 footballer has never played fully-professionally, so fails WP:SPORTBASIC right off the bat, and would need significant WP:SIGCOV to be eligible. He did score cup goal and was of course signed at one point, but I mean WP:ROUTINE coverage. Regarding transfer news, we also have a piece about him not being signed. Match reports from lower level do not constitute significant coverage. Geschichte ( talk) 15:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Sweden. Deltaspace42 ( talk • contribs) 16:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 12:09, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 12:12, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep – The athlete has 19 appearances for Ögryrte, which is completely professional, in addition to the article on sv.wiki being supported by a satisfactory number of sources. Svartner ( talk) 19:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Keep I am also in agreement with Svartner. When I had a look at sv:Fredrik_Zanjanchi I feel there might be enough to scrape by. Regards. Govvy ( talk) 19:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I think it's pretty clear that every reference in the Swedish article are WP:PRIMARY, database or WP:ROUTINE. Geschichte ( talk) 22:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. sv:Fredrik_Zanjanchi sources are database records and WP:PRIMARY, nothing that meets IS SIGCOV.  //  Timothy ::  talk  16:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Fox toolkit. Star Mississippi 22:57, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

TnFOX

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

Not notable. There are no independent sources Mdggdj ( talk) 14:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep‎. Meets notability and coverage guidelines. Closing per consensus. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 04:36, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Sher Afzal Marwat

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

While this individual gained transient prominence through a televised altercation, his overall notability remains questionable. Primarily identified as a legal practitioner associated with political figures, he finds himself amidst a vast sea of legal professionals in Pakistan. The creation of dedicated articles for every lawyer navigating the political landscape would be an imprudent endeavor. Furthermore, his limited achievements in the political arena, lacking victory in any national or provincial elections, and the absence of a judicial role at the national or provincial level contribute to the deficiency of substantial notability as outlined by Wikipedia's specific guidelines, particularly WP:POLITICIAN and WP:JUDGE. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Also nominator should have waited for some time before renominating the article at once as Renominations in such a manner may be considered disruption. WP:DELAFD Muneebll ( talk) 20:37, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Fails to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, lacks significant achievements in politics or judiciary WP:NBIO, WP:BLP. War Wounded ( talk) 18:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 14:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Cranes (drink)

Cranes (drink) (  | talk | history | 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 product. A WP:BEFORE check only came up with this local news source, and nothing else other than the usual slew of promotional websites and posts. Nick Moyes ( talk) 13:44, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Jonathan Restrepo

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

Footballer who fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT, with playing time limited to 46 minutes and other details failing WP:V. Geschichte ( talk) 12:14, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

List of international marriages among Olympic and Paralympic competitors

List of international marriages among Olympic and Paralympic competitors (  | talk | history | 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 list was created because WP:ILIKEIT and is not a desirable topic for a list because:

  • While marriages between sportspeople is indeed a discussed topic, nobody writes about this as a group of people who are connected together by that fact.
  • It's weird that the marriages have to be transnational. Why?
  • it's also weird that the marriages have to be on an Olympic or Paralympic level. Why are FIFA World Cup players or other World Championship competitors excluded, not to mention Big 4 leagues etc.? Geschichte ( talk) 12:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Lists of people, and Olympics. Owen× ☎ 13:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. This is a weird intersection of categories, a topic of only niche interest, and there doesn't seem to be anything about this group as a notable group. WP:NLIST is failed all around. WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk) 19:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom, clearly falls foul of NLIST. Roger (Dodger67) ( talk) 10:28, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete although "not a desirable topic" is arguably equally IDONTLIKEIT, this very clearly fails WP:LISTN. No one is treating this subject as a group. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 11:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Snow delete per NLIST and also WP:SALAT ("Lists that are too specific are also a problem."). "Weird intersection" pretty much sums it up. Clarityfiend ( talk) 11:36, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete The list criteria seem completely arbitrary, as outlined in the nomination. Feel free to ping me if evidence to the contrary emerges. TompaDompa ( talk) 17:54, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Completely arbitrary, fails WP:NLIST. Let'srun ( talk) 01:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete – Per all above. Svartner ( talk) 02:28, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 12:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Victor Wei

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

Ambassadors are not by default notable, and the sources fail WP:PASSING by a large margin. Geschichte ( talk) 12:23, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete Can't find anything substantial in Korean either. Maybe someone can find something in French? toobigtokale ( talk)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (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 over-the-air HSN affiliates. ✗ plicit 12:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

K29NM-D

K29NM-D (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun ( talk) 03:50, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Washington. Let'srun ( talk) 03:50, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to List of over-the-air HSN affiliates: this appears to be a station that has, for the most part, only ever carried HSN and/or its sister networks, even before coming under HSN-associated ownership groups. (Even now, the only subchannel that isn't an HSN or QVC channel is a Dabl affiliation on 29.6, which a few Ventana stations have for some reason.) There's no separate notability here, and doubtful there's much significant coverage anyway. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Redirect as per WcQuidditch above. Llajwa ( talk) 20:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Golam Rabby

Golam Rabby (  | talk | history | 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 fulfill the notability criteria mentioned at WP:ENT or WP:AUTHOR. Also, it doesn't have WP:SIGCOV that could pass WP:GNG. — MdsShakil ( talk) 12:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. signed, Rosguill talk 14:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

SchoolTool SMS

SchoolTool SMS (  | talk | history | 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 software fails WP:GNG, no coverage outside of local news. Covered only once in a Rochester local interest paper, and in a Rochester business journal. ~ A412 talk! 03:58, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:45, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete Per nom. Sourcing simply isn't there to show this meets WP:NSOFTWARE or WP:GNG. Only local coverage, and even that seems to be regurgitated press releases. - MrOllie ( talk) 20:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:05, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep Democrat & Chronicle: Mindex's schooltool software turns 15 IgelRM ( talk) 13:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: fails NSOFT. And with all due respect to Democrat and Chronicle, a puff piece in a Rochester local newspaper isn't enough to establish notability. Owen× ☎ 23:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: This subject fails to meet the notability criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia; there appears to be a lack of significant coverage PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 08:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Per nom. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 11:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 14:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ilgın (given name)

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

Nominated in May 2022 with no consensus and tagged for notability since June of the same year. This name has no WP:SIGCOV and no Wikipedia articles about people with the name, so therefore fails WP:NNAME. I can't seem to find any reliable sources establishing notability, either. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk) 09:17, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:43, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, namecruft which fails WP:NOTEVERYTHING. No people named Ilgın in Wikipedia today, although that could change. Geschichte ( talk) 21:11, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Useful and referenced. Articles should be expanded and improved rather than deleted. There's no good reason to delete. Bookworm857158367 ( talk) 01:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment Referenced means nothing if the sources don't demonstrate notability, and useful is an arbitrary description. No good reason to delete? How about not meeting basic guidelines?! What if it can't be expanded or improved significantly? Everything you've parroted on all these discussions goes against WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Do you think anything is worthy of deletion? AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk) 03:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment I apologize if I am short with some people. This is not a personal attack and I am assuming good faith. But still. It's like a copy-and-paste response on everything without bothering to look for sources or improvement. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk) 04:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as Wikipedia is not a dictionary. There is barely any coverage of this name and not a single Wikipedia article about a person with this first name. The lack of an entry for this Turkish first name on the Turkish Wikipedia is also a pretty good indication of this. Aintabli ( talk) 05:22, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete per WP:NNAME: "If at least two articles matching the surname or given name of the subject of a name article do not exist, then the surname or given name list article would not be notable and should not be created." All I can find is a fictional character in the Turkish TV series Tatlı Küçük Yalancılar and apparently the same character in a film, both played by Aslı Tandoğan. Clarityfiend ( talk) 11:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was ‎Speedy Keep (nomination withdrawn). Eluchil404 ( talk) 22:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)( non-admin closure) reply

Retro-style automobile

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

Yes, retro-styled cars do exist but do we need a list of such? Do we need a list full of unsourced claims? WP:LISTN, WP:EXAMPLEFARM SpacedFarmer ( talk) 10:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi there, you may have noticed that I have made significant contributions to this article. I could either add sources to the claims or shorten down the featured list (or do both), or just leave the article for admins to discuss / delete if this article is not needed. Thanks. Mustang208 ( talk) 20:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I'm fine with the article with the headings but can you add sources in. Also, I do not think the lists are necessary. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 17:29, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I came across this today while trying to research the Plymouth prowler and it was exactly what I needed, it should definitely stay. It’s an aesthetic phenomenon in car production that was very popular for awhile and still exists today albeit rare. There’s no reason this page shouldn’t exist, and I was sad when I saw the banner saying deleting it was being considered. 72.181.15.133 ( talk) 14:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. If it's nicely referenced there's no harm in it staying now is there? -- Ouro ( blah blah) 14:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Leaning keep. Everything in the list should be sourced (as should everything in Wikipedia). The concept is notable even without the list, and the list itself provides a useful set of examples, if sourced. BD2412 T 01:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per references and per additional information beyond the category. gidonb ( talk) 13:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Nomination withdrawn, very satisfied with the article as it is given that it passes notability guidelines.
SpacedFarmer ( talk) 16:23, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 12:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Mike Hall (musician)

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

Does not meet WP:BLP. Large majority of sources are interview-based. Some of the sources also seem quite promotional, so they may be press releases of some kind. TLA (talk) 10:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

 Comment: The creator's contributions are solely based on Mike. Likely an undisclosed WP:COI or fan. TLA (talk) 10:02, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Marie Wiseborn

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

AFD as PROD is likely to be contested. Not notable enough for inclusion to Wikipedia. Searches showed that she existed, but being a fiancee of someone famous is not enough to pass the WP:GNG. Aside from being the fiancee of Moses Bliss, there are no other notability of the subject of the article. Thank you. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Jacqueline Newman (lawyer)

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

Has a book from 2020 with a bit of coverage, but not convinced that's sufficient for WP:NAUTHOR. Has some accomplishments listed at https://nycdivorcelawyer.com/about/ but I'm not convinced those are sufficient for WP:GNG. A bit more notable than a WP:MILL lawyer though. Plus nothing I can see to warrant a pass of WP:NPROF. Kj cheetham ( talk) 12:04, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:14, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:43, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. The fact the woman is professionally described and extensively cited and quoted as a subject matter expert by the Washington Post on its article “Is the Upper East Side “wife bonus” a real thing?” probably counts for something. But that by itself is probably not enough… until you find out that Simon and Schuster printed her book. So, the subject is not only a subject matter expert by the Bezos Post, but a published author by a premier US editorial. Shouldn’t we go by the sources, here? XavierItzm ( talk) 01:57, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • The Washington Post article is good, but need multiple sources like that to meet WP:GNG. But how does getting a book published count? For WP:NAUTHOR, I don't think it's sufficiently notable by itself to meet #3 (and if it was I'd suggest an article on the book rather than the author). Multiple independent reviews are a more typical way to meet that guideline, but I don't think it's the case here at the moment. - Kj cheetham ( talk) 19:29, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      There are multiple sources that quote her as an expert, e.g. NYT (Oct 10 2023) (one graf); Guardian (Dec 1 2022) (two grafs); CNBC Make It (Sep 8 2023) (five grafs); Business Insider (Dec 12, 2023) (seven-ish grafs). Beccaynr ( talk) 20:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      Good finds! I'm getting less convinced this article should be deleted, but not sure they count as significant enough for GNG? (Also, what is a graf?) - Kj cheetham ( talk) 20:28, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      A graf is shorthand for 'paragraph' with a nod at the news-style version - I referred to BI as 'seven-ish' because some of the grafs are one line. From my view, significant coverage from a combination of sources can help us write a fair and balanced article, and while I agree helpful sources are emerging, I am also not sure we have enough to develop encyclopedic content without more independent/reliable/secondary coverage of her career and/or writing. Beccaynr ( talk) 20:48, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      Ah, makes sense! My current feeling is might be a case of WP:TOOSOON. - Kj cheetham ( talk) 20:56, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - for now, the available sources do not seem sufficient to help us write a fair and balanced article that is not advertising. There is limited secondary coverage available about her career and legal practice; she has been quoted as a subject matter expert in several high-quality sources (WaPo, NYT, Guardian), and some of lower-quality (CNBC Make It, Business Insider), but has not been the focus of the coverage. Her book does not appear to be notable according to the WP:NBOOK guideline and one notable book is typically not enough for WP:AUTHOR notability. The available sources seem to indicate it is WP:TOOSOON to support notability at this time. Beccaynr ( talk) 04:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete the page created by a sock farm, previously blocked. I already reported to a check user: /info/en/?search=User_talk:Callanecc. -- 89.151.38.106 ( talk) 08:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The page should be considered on its own merits, just like I address the anon 89.151.38.106 on his own merits. XavierItzm ( talk) 16:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: The subject does not meet the criteria for inclusion in her own right. With more sources, it is possible that the book could meet the criteria, but even that would not meet the criteria now. Possibly a case of WP:TOOSOON? PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 08:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 12:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Mr. Backup Z64

Mr. Backup Z64 (  | talk | history | 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 couldn't establish that this meets WP:N, though it isn't an area I have a lot of knowledge in. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, and I couldn't find a good WP:ATD. Boleyn ( talk) 10:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Non-notable obscure unlicensed N64 hardware. Some of the other unlicensed hardware pages like the CD64 or the DexDrive are also obvious deletion candidates as well. There's not really a merge candidate for these things other than Homebrew_(video_games)#Nintendo_64 which is more in terms of software. But then, other than say, the GameShark I'm just not sure anything about random unlicensed hardware really merits encyclopedic status unless it clearly received significant coverage. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 11:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Not really much to go on about here. There really aren't that many sources discussing about this hardware (per above), and the reliable sources engine only pulls up this. TWOrantulaTM ( enter the web) 04:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Algeria–Morocco relations. Star Mississippi 22:54, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

2023 Saidia incident

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

Although this article is well sourced and there was some international coverage of the events described, I am not sure that the coverage is sustained enough or the events significant enough to make the topic notable. Mccapra ( talk) 07:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Keep: Seems well sourced and sufficient to meet notability criteria. Greenman ( talk) 07:48, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply
There was a sustainable controversy regarding Algeria refusing to send back Abdelali Mchiouer's body: 1 2 3 4
Ismaïl Snabi's still in prison: 1 2 NAADAAN ( talk) 11:14, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Keep: Worldwide coverage as NADAAN explained Riad Salih ( talk) 01:09, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment -- On current showing, I'd have to lean toward deletion based on WP:NEVENT and WP:NCRIME. All of the sources currently cited are WP:PRIMARYNEWS. To by valid for mainspace, there need to be secondary sources that analyse the event in WP:DEPTH or show lasting WP:EFFECTS. It also appears that the coverage is specific to the timeframe of the original incident, which would fail WP:PERSISTENCE. I am not ready to !vote until I see if anyone can resolve those issues with sources that are not accessible to me due to language barriers. Cheers, Last1in ( talk) 13:03, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Selective merge to Algeria–Morocco relations. The sourcing appears to be routine news coverage of the event and its aftermath, so it's not notable in its own right, but there is relevant information for the target article. I wonder if Mccapra or Last1in would be willing to consider this as an alternative to deletion. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 20:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Certainly thank you that sounds very sensible. Mccapra ( talk) 20:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I can support a merge to Algeria–Morocco relations as well. My only concern is that we should be looking for secondary sources there as well, and I still can't find any for this event. Cheers, Last1in ( talk) 14:12, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, leaning towards a merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious ( talk) 08:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Merge if secondary sourcing can be found to support balanced addition to the target page.
JoelleJay ( talk) 19:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge with Algeria–Morocco relations: if the event turns out to have a WP:LASTING effect on the bilateral relations, it can always be spun off. Owen× ☎ 21:43, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge with Algeria–Morocco relations a properly sourced and neutral version per above. Not every incident needs or has the WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS sources to support a stand alone article. There is a good target for the merge, it will be improved, and the content/history will be accessible.  //  Timothy ::  talk  15:28, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Sword Art Online characters. History remains under the redirect to enact the merge, if desired Star Mississippi 22:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Sinon (Sword Art Online)

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

As indicated at first nomination, it already proves that the character is not notable. Since then, the article was still not improved and has no commentary about the character but only passing mentions and listicles/rankings. Those merchandise sources doesn't help either with notability and merely saying "that it just exist". GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 08:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the Fictional elements, list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions and Video games. GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 02:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge/Redirect to List of Sword Art Online characters. This article is very heavily WP:REFBOMBed with sources that mention Sinon trivially, but SIGCOV is not demonstrated. While it obviously does not have to be the subject of the source material, Sinon is mentioned about as much as numerous other characters, and does not particularly get mentioned more than the others. This is an article that is the epitome of trying to force notability from very little. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 09:37, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge/redirect per Zxcvbnm. These references are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs and not WP:SIGCOV, unfortunately. This is more appropriate for a character list. Shooterwalker ( talk) 16:29, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't know why Leafa and Sinon's Wiki needs to be "Deleted", It doesn't make sense and Yuuki Konno's Wiki have been deleted a long time ago, Thus they are still the Main Characters, Lisbeth and Silica doesn't have Wiki. In fact they become minor characters along the way in Underworld. I hope there's a chance for the Original SAO Characters before Leafa and Sinon. (And a small consideration to keep them here for now) Earvinexes21 ( talk) 16:25, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Murderdolls which preserves the history in the event sourcing is IDed Star Mississippi 22:50, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Eric Griffin

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

Ineligible for WP:PROD. Redirection has been contested by an IP address. As far as I can tell no WP:CSD criteria apply. So, article has 1 reference which is primary by nature of it being an interview and the link is dead. Looking for sourcing for a WP:BEFORE is a nightmare due to the name being shared with Eric Griffin (boxer). Narrowing results nets me nothing. I've tried regular Google, Google news, news archive, and the Wikipedia Library - all without success. As such Eric Griffin inherently fails WP:GNG. — Sirdog ( talk) 06:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — Sirdog ( talk) 06:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:14, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Murderdolls, As per nom, finding sources for this individual is a nightmare, but I do believe there are some sources if we look deeper, I found this, this, and this, which appears to be nothing but passing mentions. It seems like the subject is not notable outside of their affiliation with their former band. dxneo ( talk) 12:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete for what? His page was fine before a certain person decided to keep editing it by adding irrelevant information as related to this artist’s personal life on behalf of an old girlfriend. This page is for a legitimate musician who has toured all over the world as part of several notable bands that have their own pages: Murderdolls, Wednesday 13, Genitorturers, Davey Suicide, Pretty Boy Floyd and he toured for 1.5 years with Faster Pussycat. He is an endorsed artist with Dean Guitars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ButchFinger ( talk • contribs) 09:42, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I do believe that they are somehow notable, but your word alone is just not enough, touring the world does not equate to notability as Slim Jxmmi (one half of Rae Sremmurd) has toured the world and even made it here in South Africa but he's still considered non-not able for some reason. Please provide sources. dxneo ( talk) 19:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Weak keep, i actually think this guy is somewhat notable -- FMSky ( talk) 22:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Hello FMSky, so you are basing your vote on "I think"? Would you please provide sources. dxneo ( talk) 19:04, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Hes probably notable per WP:BAND for having having been a "musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles" -- FMSky ( talk) 22:51, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
FMSky, which WP:MUSICBIO are you talking about cause it says "Note that regardless of what notability criterion is being claimed, the claim must be properly verified by reliable sources...", RS illustrating SIGCOV to satisfy GNG must still be provided regardless. dxneo ( talk) 00:05, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Murderdolls: BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. I see nothing properly sourced for a merge.  //  Timothy ::  talk  12:47, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Construction surveying. Star Mississippi 22:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Survey stakes

Survey stakes (  | talk | history | 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 above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (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. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 01:23, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Martin, Kansas

Martin, Kansas (  | talk | history | 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 short-lived not-a-town post office. Mangoe ( talk) 05:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I don't have a problem with redirecting to the township when it has the same name, but I don't see the point here. Mangoe ( talk) 13:22, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
references
  • Gannett, Henry (1898). A Gazetteer of Kansas. Bulletin. Vol. 154. United States Geological Survey. OL  20596112M.
  • Merge it or delete It's a post office, the local paper for this county goes back to around 1840 at least. There are no mentions of a settlement called Martin. There is a post office called martin along the Saline river. People used it as a stopover between destinations. Purportedly, postmaster Delay's wife was a good cook, and would serve a good meal to those laying over there. There isn't really any one article that tells the story though. You just kind of have read them all. Every mention of this place is of the post office, The most illustrative example being this one. https://www.newspapers.com/article/ellis-county-news-republican-drowned/139266707/. Sorry to bum you guys out. James.folsom ( talk) 22:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • No worries. At this point we have the Kansas Historical Society now, the contemporary Kansas State Board of Agriculture back in the 19th century, and your newspaper clippings, calling this a post office; and only Gannett in 1898 saying that it is a "hamlet", which isn't that great a claim in any event. And on the gripping hand, nothing much to say about it in either form. Especially if we subtract the generic all-Kansas-articles infobox and further reading, and unverifiable ghost town with zero population claim. Uncle G ( talk) 07:48, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I've copied over a couple sentences about the post office at Martin to the Buckeye Township article. People who are really interested in the history of this part of rural Kansas can find it there. No reason for this obscure rural post office to have its own article. Jbt89 ( talk) 06:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to 2022 Bratislava shooting. Editors are free to merge any appropriate content to the target article. Complex/ Rational 14:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Juraj Vankulič

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

While the crime was horrendous, I see no evidence Vankulic is notable for anything but their death. There doesn't appear to be anything to add, rendering Shooting of... not a viable solution. A redirect to 2022 Bratislava shooting would be a fine ATD but expect that this is contentious so wanted broader eyes, especially with folks who have access to non English sourcing. Star Mississippi 03:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Juraj was a very notable and important person in Slovak queer scene. This article is important to their friends and family for keeping their legacy alive. Creating this article was the sole reason why I began an editing account. I beg you, please, do not delete it. Animaeon ( talk) 03:45, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
That's a noble goal, but please read WP:NOTAMEMORIAL and WP:COI if you knew Vankulic or are otherwise connected with their friends and family. Star Mississippi 04:08, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Maybe if any reviews of his performances could be found? -- Ouro ( blah blah) 10:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Baton Rouge, Louisiana#Education. ✗ plicit 04:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Education in Baton Rouge, Louisiana

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

Nothing about Baton Rouge that necessitates a Education page under Notability procedure. 777burger user talk contribs 03:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was Userfy‎ per creator's request Star Mississippi 22:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

January Walker

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

Random congressional candidate who's never received any national news coverage whatsoever. Blatant violation of WP:GNG and WP:NPOL BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 03:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I believe that getting 6.6% as a third party candidate is notable, along with the fact that she has received a substantial amount of Utah-specific coverage and been invited to several debates she is considered notable. Microplastic Consumer ( talk) 13:08, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Getting 6% of the vote most definitely does *not* make you notable. Take a look through the list of notable third-party performances in US elections and see how many of the third-party candidates have Wikipedia pages. I would argue that, based on WP:1E, it's not possible for anyone to be notable solely based on their performance in one election. And no, getting some routine campaign coverage within the state of Utah doesn't make her notable either. As WP:NPOL says: "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability." BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 19:56, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Understandable, I support the deletion- please just allow me to move the page to my userspace Microplastic Consumer ( talk) 00:40, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Consensus was reached to keep the article per adequate sourcing. (non-admin closure) Captain Galaxy 15:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Squirtle

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

Just like what happen to Charmander, this article is also having a problem with notability. Of all the sources cited at this article, only the polygon source [25] is useful. At WP:BEFORE, these are possibly the only good sources [26] and maybe this? [27]. This source [28] is probably just about the gameplay; showing that the article isn't notable despite the popularity (which isn't an argument). GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 02:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Because those are still not enough to pass WP:GNG. GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 04:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Oh well, didn't saw that Vice source coming. But, leaving this afd still open for discussion if the character now barely passes gng. GreenishPickle! ( 🔔) 05:08, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect/Merge Greenish Pickle got it right the first time, there's no need for backpedaling. The Polygon article is the only true SIGCOV I can see here. The Squirtle Squad as a group is not to be confused with Squirtle the Pokemon species. If Squirtle Squad is notable, the article ought to be about them, or the episode they appear, but notability is not inherited from the Squirtle Squad. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 05:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I find it a pretty strange assessment that reception for individual Squirtles are irrelevant to the species as a whole. I do not believe that the average person would look at the Squirtle Squad and differentiate it as a separate concept from Squirtle. Virtually all of the reception for Pikachu, for example, is about Ash's Pikachu, should that mean we should redirect Pikachu to the list and make an article called Ash's Pikachu? - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 05:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Is that really strange? We have an article on Mordin Solus but not salarian; they are not obviously notable, or at least people have not found them notable before now. Saying that Squirtle Squad and the individual Squirtle from the anime makes the species notable is like claiming Mordin automatically makes salarians notable.
    Pikachu is somewhat different, because Pikachu and Ash's Pikachu are virtually synonymous. I'm not sure if some people even realize there is a species. I don't think this is the case for any other Pokemon, such is the amount of popularity that Pikachu has. (Addendum: Team Rocket's Meowth may be the only other one I can think of that people know on such a basis) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 05:59, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    There is what I would consider a massive difference between an individual Squirtle named Squirtle and an individual salarian named Mordin Solus. It's also not claiming that the Squirtle Squad (which includes the individual Squirtle) makes the species notable, it's saying that the notability of the Squirtle Squad is directly relevant to Squirtle itself. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 06:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Bulbapedia has a separate page for both Ash's Squirtle and the Squirtle Squad, yet you are arguing that they are the same thing as the species. I don't think that's borne out by anything online.
    I do think that, even if this page is merged, the Squirtle Squad is independently notable. I found a GamesRadar article, which can be combined with Vice and TheGamer. I wouldn't oppose its creation, I just think the species isn't as well-known. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 09:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Of course there is both "Ash's Squirtle" and "Squirtle Squad" pages on Bulbapedia. Bulbapedia would not cover Ash's Squirtle as part of the Squirtle Squad article, and they would not cover the Squirtle Squad as part of the Ash's Squirtle article, because the Squirtle Squad has individual characters that would not make sense to include as part of that article. I have no concept of what you think that separate pages for the Squirtle Squad and Ash's Squirtle on Bulbapedia indicates, because that's just how Bulbapedia works. The leader of the Squirtle Squad has his own article, just like the leader of Team Rocket has his own article, without the groups they lead needing to be a part of their article.
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:59, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I will point out a street in Las Vegas is named after the Pokemon, something that was argued as significant coverage in Snorlax's AfD. Now mind you I personally don't find it much, but consensus shows others including Zx above felt different on that matter, so I think it's fair to argue for some consistency.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 12:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I'm not sure if you're directing that at me, but I never argued that a street name made Snorlax notable. My argument was based on unrelated sources. I don't think the street names have any bearing on the notability of Snorlax, Squirtle, or any Pokemon. It's just too insubstantial to say it confers any notability to anything besides perhaps the cultural impact of Pokemon in general. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 13:38, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    My mistake there, I was certain you'd agreed on that as well. Your reference was the one citing Pokemon GO with the police in that AfD. Still I think an overarching argument in that AfD as a whole was "the character is recognizable enough in commentary to get reaction". There are mutliple articles noting it in light of Ed Sheeran, which while a bit of promotion, does have some discussion over the multiple articles. Then there's weird moments like this with the President Elect of Chile, where Nintendo gifted him a plush of it and he vocally reacted. These are small, but do show there's recognition in pop culture of the character to an extent. And I think after the Snorlax AfD it's worth to consider where that lies with a Pokemon in terms of "should this have an article"?
    In addition regarding the whole squirtle squad thing, I think you may be looking at the forest but missing the tree: the argument isn't being made that "the Squirtle Squad" itself is notable, but that the characterization it gave Squirtle in the anime is, and how long that has endured. It's not a case like with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles for example where as a whole they're notable, because only one Squirtle in this case gets any commentary: Ash's.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 14:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I also believe it's strange to say that discussion of individual Squirtles is not relevant to the species article, considering that the appearances section is halfway composed of discussion about individual Squirtles. The article is clearly meant to encompass Squirtle and every variant, and Bulbapedia doing it differently reflects a completely different philosophy than what Wikipedia uses. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 18:28, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Squirtle already demonstrates notability based on the commentary references that Cukie offered as well as at least some representation within outside media with the references that Kung Fu Man cited. Based on this established precedent as well as how Bulbapedia is ultimately standardized wildly differently from Wikipedia, I see no valid reason why this article should deleted given how its meant to be a discussion on the species at large and not simply say, an article exclusively about Ash's Squirtle. SuperSkaterDude45 ( talk) 00:56, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: I wasn't sure about this, but ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ's claim that "the Squirtle squad" is notable but that "Squirtle" as a species is not strikes me as over-convenient hairsplitting. I don't think that argument holds up. If this article is deleted, no one is planning to raise a "Squirtle squad" article on its ashes. Keep the article that we have. AfD is not cleanup. Toughpigs ( talk) 03:32, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per above sourcing. Jclemens ( talk) 05:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep per the above arguments. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) 14:23, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep and clean-up per above. Some of our Pokemon content is on the edge, but there is WP:SIGCOV about this character. The trivial mentions can be summarized in a more encyclopedic way, and the rest can be figured out through editing. Shooterwalker ( talk) 19:36, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: As Cukie Gherkin and Kung Fu Man have pointed out, there are a couple of articles on the internet discussing the notability of this particular Pokemon species. I strongly agree that in this case, the popularity of the Squirtle Squad has definitely made an impact on the perception of the species as a whole as evidenced in this article from Forbes about Squirtle which was first featured as a Pokemon Go Community Day promotional event. Squirtle has also been promoted as a Funko Pop Vinyl doll, one of several species featured as livery on a commercial airline, and even as a kids meal toy from McDonald's. I believe I could transplant some of the sources from the Meowth, Charizard, and Raichu articles and use it to salvage the article from deletion. I am willing to do the work, but I am currently working on salvaging another featured list from demotion.
-- Birdienest81 talk 08:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Which featured list, out of curiosity? @ Birdienest8: - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 16:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
List of Los Angeles Rams head coaches Birdienest81 talk 21:26, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:36, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Anar Baghirov

AfDs for this article:
Anar Baghirov (  | talk | history | 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 page was deleted in 2017 for failing to meet notability. It was recreated in 2018 and still does not meet notability requirements. It also appears to have been created by a COI account. The subject does not meet notability requirements for academics or officials. The subject is the head of Azerbaijan's Bar Association but that does not seem to give notability to the subject. Thenightaway ( talk) 12:27, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:00, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:45, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 02:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Resume BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. Even a brief look at the article content and sources show the refs do not meet WP:IS. BLPs require strong sourcing. Ping me if WP:THREE sources are found that meet WP:SIGCOV and are not routine mill news.  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: part of a COI/SPA campaign about Azerbaijan topics. This one fails NBIO. Owen× ☎ 21:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. WP:NPASR applies. ✗ plicit 04:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Billy Reil

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

No notable wrestler. Worked on independent level. sources only make passing mentions about him WP:ROUTINE results. No in-deep coverage about him. HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 09:54, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:43, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 02:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. Consensus here is slim, especially with the nom being discounted since having been blocked. However this is a BLP without good sourcing, and therefore edge to delete. Star Mississippi 22:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Jana Amin

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

Failure of WP:BLP and WP:N. Sources are not independent, half are related to her entrepreneur mother, whose biography itself is not notable.

Source evaluation:

  • el Kaliouby, Rana; Coleman, Carol (2000). Girl Decoded. Penguin Random House.
Book from her mother.
  • "Changing the narrative around Muslim Women and supporting girl's education with Jana Amin, Egyptian-American Advocate (#16)"
Podcast involving her.
  • Changing the narrative, one Muslim woman at a time | Jana Amin | TEDxYouth@BeaconStreet
TEDx involving her.
  • "Affectiva Co-Founder Rana el Kaliouby on How She Built a Tech Startup as a Single Mom 5,000 Miles From Home"
Interview of her mother.
  • "Rana el Kaliouby decodes her memoir "Girl Decoded""
Book about her mother.
  • "UNGA 2020: 'I began my activist journey by telling the story of Muslim women I knew'"
Interview with her about her TEDx.
  • Amin, Jana (17 December 2019), Changing the narrative, one Muslim woman at a time, retrieved 2021-03-25
Her TEDx talk.
It is very likely self-published ( https://egyptianstreets.com/submit-an-article/). Also, see an excerpt of the article:
Amin is not just an inspiring women’s rights activist of our time, but also a young woman of action whose life is centered on learning, commitment and determination, and passionately works to ensure that visions, policies and even academia are turned into real tangible solutions..
  • "Protecting progress for girls' education — Assembly | Malala Fund"
Blog post by her.
  • Hung, Madeleine A.; Kim, Joyce E. (September 15, 2023). "Harvard Students Launch Fundraisers for Morocco Earthquake Relief".
One namedrop of her. Local college newspaper.

Given this and the overall interconnection between promotional pages, I think a WP:TNT delete is needed. बिनोद थारू ( talk) 23:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Pretty sure I remember this article having an AfD filed against it before, but I can't seem to find it now. If I didn't dream it, it might be worth checking what arguments were in that. 92.19.111.41 ( talk) 00:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply
    A PROD has been filed before, and the revert reason were the National and Egyptian Streets sources. [32] I included both in my evaluation above. बिनोद थारू ( talk) 00:27, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I have looked at the sources, and I substantially agree with the assessment that बिनोद थारू has given. There are citations to pages that don't even mention Jana Amin, pages that barely mention her in passing, and pages that are either certainly or probably not independent of her. There is no evidence at all of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines. JBW ( talk) 17:02, 31 December 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep because The National (Abu Dhabi) is a reputable newspaper and being prominently interviewed in it should be enough to establish WP:N, especially when also backed by Egyptian Streets which is a large blog in Egypt, plus being allowed to write for the Malala Fund and speak at TEDx: OK so not every TEDx speaker automatically has WP:N but a TEDx speaker who's also been in some country's major daily newspaper and another country's major blog is more likely to be. I agree that the article should be improved (we could cite the Borgen Project magazine article instead of just the front of the Collateral Repair Project for a start, although we'd first need to check why Wikipedia is blacklisting Borgen Project URLs, I wonder if this is an error). But I don't see the need to WP:TNT this article. (Potential Wikipedia:CONFLICT disclosure: her mother and I were in the same lab as PhD students. I think the points I made are still valid; a second opinion to check this would be nice) Silas S. Brown ( email, talk) 22:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Add sources to further establish notability: NowThis News - How Nawal El Saadawi Shook Up the Patriarchy in Egypt featured Jana; also the Italian version of Elle (magazine) ran an article on her; also Marie Claire Arabia (which does not currently have a Wikipedia article, but has been cited several times by various Wikipedia articles so appears to be a recognised source) had an Arabic article featuring her. Silas S. Brown ( email, talk) 14:05, 3 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 22:19, 6 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 02:17, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: WP:BLP, Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. As others have said, the sources are about others and only mention the subject, no direct and indepth coverage, or are promo or listings. Ping me if WP:SIGCOV is found.  //  Timothy ::  talk  14:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎ with a side of nomination withdrawn, however consensus is also clear Star Mississippi 22:28, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Conflict of contract laws

Conflict of contract laws (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • Delete This article is a mess and contains huge swaths of unverified content. Seems to violate WP:NOTESSAY and I believe it would be best to WP:TNT. Tooncool64 ( talk) 01:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC) — Tooncool64 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. James500 ( talk) 22:05, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Outside of what? Contract laws??? Tooncool64 ( talk) 22:28, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Outside of the topic of "unreferenced wikipedia articles" (and, to a lesser extent, unreferenced content within largely or allegedly unreferenced articles). As I explained in my edit summary, the contributions of your account consist more or less entirely of a 'campaign' against uncited articles. Your account is also a WP:SLEEPER with no edits for roughly five years, then a massive spike of edits over the Christmas holidays (when most editors were away), that consists entirely of this 'campaign' of PRODs, AfDs, RfCs etc. on unreferenced articles. James500 ( talk) 23:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion. In fact, I find your insinuation that I am a bad faith actor insulting. Tooncool64 ( talk) 23:13, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The reason we have Template:Single-purpose account is because it is relevant to AfD discussions. Further, I have not insinuated anthing. James500 ( talk) 23:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The template usage page specifically states that it should be used in cases of suspected sockpuppetry. Also, if you look at my contributions, I have contributed much more than just nominating articles for deletion. Tooncool64 ( talk) 23:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    That is not exactly what the template says. It roughly loosely says that it should be used if there are sufficient grounds for concern, and in my provisional opinion, the fact that an WP:SPA is also a WP:SLEEPER constitutes sufficient grounds. Yes, I can see that you have been adding sources etc to unreferenced articles, but that is still editing within the single narrow topic of the "unreferenced articles backlog". If you don't like the template, the simplest thing to do would be for you to diversify your editing. There are lots of things that you can do on this project that don't relate to the "unreferenced articles backlog". James500 ( talk) 00:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 01:48, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: no evidence whatsoever of WP:BEFORE. Here is a paper from a law journal I found after literally five seconds of a Google search for the article's name. Here's a book: "Eugene F. Scoles and Peter Hay, Hornbook on Conflict of Laws, West Group (2004)". Is there a reason these aren't viable? jp× g 🗯️ 02:23, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The paper you have found does not seem to mention the concept of "Conflict of contract laws". While the concept of "Conflict of laws" has implications on "contracts" and "contract law" (this is why there is a section titled "Contracts" in our article "Conflict of laws"), I am not familiar with the concept "Conflict of contract laws" as such. It might be that the phrases "Conflict of laws" and "Conflict of contract laws" are quasi-synonymous. I have some sympathy for Tooncool64's proposal to WP:TNT the article, in the absence of any source. In my view, in this specific instance, a sensible way forward would be to improve and expand the section "Contracts" in our article "Conflict of laws", rather than trying to convert a rather long personal essay containing no reference into a proper Wikipedia article. Edcolins ( talk) 11:35, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Satisfies GNG. This concept satisfies GNG easily and by an exceptionally wide margin. It has received significant coverage in many books and periodicals, and there are many entire periodical articles and entire book chapters about it. The expression "conflict of contract laws" does actually appear in numerous books and periodical articles in Google Books and elsewhere, but the expression is entirely synonymous with the chapter on "contract" that appears in every book on conflict of laws (aka private international law), and with that branch of the law of conflict of laws. Any attempt to deny this would violate NOTDICTIONARY, because we don't treat a single topic as multiple topics just because the single topic has multiple names. It may be that the present page name is not the WP:COMMONNAME of this concept, and the page should be moved. This topic has numerous names, such as: conflict of contract laws; conflict of laws in contract; conflict of laws of contract; conflict of laws: contract; conflict of laws and contract; contract in conflict of laws; contract in the conflict of laws; contract and conflict of laws; contract and the conflict of laws; and so on ad nauseum. They are all the same thing. They are not separate topics. There is no indication that the article is a mess, and David91 was not, as far as I can remember, in the habit of writing essays, or huge swaths of unverifiable content. He did make a few mistakes (I should know, because I have corrected some of them over the years), but it was very obvious that he always got his information from law books, and that most of it was reasonably accurate. Further the article is not actually unreferenced or unverified at all. The article cites four sources including one Act of Parliament and three international treaties, all of which are reliable sources. WP:TNT is not applicable, and the deletion of the main article on any broad area of the law would completely disrupt that entire area of the project and would be disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive, disruptive. James500 ( talk) 21:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The article is now referenced to seven treatises and a periodical article. There are many other sources available. James500 ( talk) 00:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I withdraw my nomination per information above. I made a mistake in not doing enough research. Tooncool64 ( talk) 01:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Speedy Keep‎. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Let'srun ( talk) 03:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Australia's Most Wanted

Australia's Most Wanted (  | talk | history | 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:NTV, WP:NCRIME and WP:GNG, despite being a notable program that aired on the Seven Network from 1989 to 1999, before being cancelled, then the program switched to the Nine Network for 6 weeks, then it was axed. Only refs are from IMDb, tv.com and ovguide.com. Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 ( his talk page) 01:38, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 04:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Suzanne Langlois

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

Questionable notability that does not appear to be established with WP:RS Amigao ( talk) 01:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

She is an important figure in St. Louis, both as founder of Kaldi's and her work at Meds and Food for Kids. M'Laurine ( talk) 18:38, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Sources are needed for that claim. Xxanthippe ( talk) 21:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC). reply
Here are some sources, including podcast interviews and stories in several newspapers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoRqyIZH_4k (The Seed - the Start-up Journey Episode 20)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmM2qClxudU (The Influential Non-profit - Episode 37)
https://www.voxmagazine.com/news/kaldis-coffee-mu-education-expansion/article_cbcb86d4-062a-11ea-9609-ff8bddb79a81.html
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/local/kaldis-makes-four-coffee-shops-near-the-corner-of-ninth-and-cherry-streets/article_4122ea2d-28f9-5bd9-847c-fe469738e061.html
https://www.stltoday.com/life-entertainment/local/food-drink/dining/coffee-is-good-with---and-in---muffins-special-request-bakers-at/article_e83b2d46-f6a5-55e7-9a27-0f17f94e41f4.html
https://urnex.com/blog/kaldis-is-raising-the-coffee-game-in-americas-heartland
https://www.riverfronttimes.com/best-of/2000/food-and-drink/best-place-to-buy-coffee-2507925
https://ethicalstl.org/docs/EthicsInActionAward/ParticiaWolff.pdf
https://newterritorymag.com/about/board/ M'Laurine ( talk) 22:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Commercial adspam of only local interest. If this BIO has been edited by a paid editor the subject should ask for their money back. Xxanthippe ( talk) 23:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC). reply
    I think we must agree to disagree. In my opinion, being a businesswoman sought out by multiple newspapers and bloggers for interviews, and later becoming CEO of an organization that has treated 800,000 Haitian children for malnutrition, amounts to cultural significance. Xxanthippe clearly disagrees. I suggest we let others weigh in.
    I would also request that you refrain from ad hominem attacks. You may disagree with me for believing that various St. Louisians merit Wikipedia pages, but my motivation is informational, not financial. Attacking the poster serves just to maintain the status quo of articles mainly about entertainers, university professors and athletes. M'Laurine ( talk) 16:32, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - based on sources in the article, listed here, and my online search, there does not appear to be significant independent, reliable, and secondary coverage to support WP:BASIC/ WP:GNG notability. For example, the source used to support the article's claim that Langlois "has been credited for changing the coffee landscape in St. Louis" ( URNEX), according to its About Us page, is a company that sells coffee-related products and offers services to coffee shop owners; its blog post source about Kaldi's includes "Josh Ferguson views Urnex less as just a product manufacturer and more as a trusted advisor in all things coffee equipment" etc - this appears to be an advertisement that lacks independence. The 2019 Vox Magazine source focuses on Josh Ferguson, Tricia Zimmer Ferguson, and Kaldi's, and mentions "In 1994, Howard Lerner and Suzanne Langlois founded Kaldi’s in St. Louis" so this is not significant coverage. The 2008 Columbia Missourian source is three lines, announcing a new Kaldi's location, so is not significant or secondary coverage of Langlois. The 2009 St Louis Dispatch source is mostly based on quotes from Langlois, lists Kaldi's locations and includes a muffins recipe, which is not significant, independent, secondary coverage of Langlois. There is also an event announcement that is not significant coverage. There is a post from the Kaldi's website, which is not independent. There is also a high school student newspaper I am not able to access, but this type of source is not strong support for notability. There is a 1994 St. Louis Dispatch source noting a local journalism award for Langlois, which is not significant support for notability. There is also a 2017 Feast magazine recognition for Kaldi's, which is not significant support for notability. Another source is the New Territory Magazine About page, which has a brief profile of Langlois, which is not independent or secondary support for notability. This source review is not saying Langlois has not had a successful career or diminishing the importance of her nonprofit career; there are various reasons why the notability guidelines have us looking for certain types of coverage, and it does not appear that we have those types of sources at this time. Beccaynr ( talk) 22:28, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - She is a successful businessperson who has accomplished various things but does not meet the requirements of WP:N. Llajwa ( talk) 21:54, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 00:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

WQAW-LD

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 01:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 02:21, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft deletion due to prior bundled AfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 01:27, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete Per nom, fails GNG and NCORP. No WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. BEFORE found routine mill news, nothing that meets SIGCOV.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. ✗ plicit 04:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Samsung Galaxy Tab A8

Samsung Galaxy Tab A8 (  | talk | history | 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 has no references. But, this article was moved to mainspace because of old article per WP:DRAFTIFY. Hajoon0102 💬 01:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 00:06, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

KDEO-LD

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 01:09, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete as per nomination. Non-notable TV station. TH1980 ( talk) 03:38, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Per nom, fails GNG and NCORP. No WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:18, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 00:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

KHDT-LD

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 01:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was keep per WP:SNOW and also WP:HEY. ( non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte ( talk) 12:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Lizbeth Goodman

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

Not appearing to meet WP:NOTABILITY standards. Avishai11 ( talk) 00:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The result was delete‎. ✗ plicit 00:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

KADY-LP

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Texas. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Not sure why Let'srun deprodded this, as it's an obvious case. I can't find local coverage about it whatsoever. And I created the article many years ago, probably when LAT TV still existed. Sammi Brie (she/her •  t • c) 00:40, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I thought I had found something approaching SIGCOV (which is why I deprodded my own PROD, but it ended up being for a different station. Let'srun ( talk) 02:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Definitely another remnant article from the much looser "notability guidelines" of 2007. Looks like even then, we didn't have much more than a LAT TV press release, which probably isn't independent or significant coverage anyway. I'm a bit puzzled about the self-contesting of the PROD too (there was an IP edit in 2011 that included a web address that contained "prod", but it was just its entry in an FCC database and that edit, which was purely a content addition, had nothing to do with proposed deletion). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun ( talk) 04:34, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2024_January_21&oldid=1200443956"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE