Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 22 January 24 >

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. ✗ plicit 01:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

El mejor verano de mi vida

El mejor verano de mi vida (  | 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’m not seeing in depth coverage in reliable independent sources to indicate this band is notable. Mccapra ( talk) 21:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not soft-deleting here as article was only recently created.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:34, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - Doesn't meet notability for a band. Sources listed all are either someone's blog or do not demonstrate significant coverage. Worth noting that this page was a redirect to a movie named that in Spanish before being rewritten by two IP editors (probably members of the band because the IPs are from Peru). -- StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk) 01:19, 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. Owen× ☎ 23:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DXET-TV

DXET-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)

There does not seem to be significant coverage in reliable sources. Given the age of the article, there are a lot of Wikipedia mirror results. Previous AFD did not seem to discuss any WP:SIGCOV. MarioGom ( talk) 23:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. MarioGom ( talk) 23:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep - if this had the first tv broadcast in the history of Mindanao, that sounds historically notable. But it is unsourced. Llajwa ( talk) 19:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Fails GNG and NCORP. Two refs in article are mill news, neither meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth, BEFORE found nothing other than promo and listings.  //  Timothy ::  talk  11:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Timothy's rationale. Chaosbrigader64 ( talk) 23:25, 30 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 23:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Consulate General of Germany, İzmir

Consulate General of Germany, İzmir (  | 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 clear that a consulate general is notable. Most embassies aren’t and there is nothing special about this as an institution or as a building. Mccapra ( talk) 23:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Yes, there are many such consulates that are located only in offices. However, the German Consulate in Izmir is not like that. It has both a solid history and a separate diplomatic complex.
The consulate has been operating continuously since 1924. The consulate has a separate diplomatic complex, the land area is more than 5000 m2. Ayratayrat ( talk) 20:26, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
But how does having a separate complex make it notable? Llajwa ( talk) 20:01, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I don't see the notability. Llajwa ( talk) 20:01, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Fails GNG. 2 of the 3 sources are primary. LibStar ( talk) 08:00, 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 23:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Dr. Johnny Wildside

Dr. Johnny Wildside (  | 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 independent significant coverage of this pro wrestler - Altenmann >talk 21:17, 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 no consensus‎. Nomination was a vague wave. The other delete argument stated the used sources did not meet GNG, but notability is based upon available sources. Several of the keep arguments stated that GNG was met, but gave no further evidence, so they are also weak. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 02:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Party "Together with the Vytis"

Party "Together with the Vytis" (  | 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)

Minor party, without any real political success or significance Marcelus ( talk) 14:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep, significant coverage about non-trivial history. Not a WP:MILL party at all. Geschichte ( talk) 08:03, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:32, 16 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) 21:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep - took part in several elections - Altenmann >talk 21:24, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Sourcing used is either primary, or trivial mentions. I don't see much we could use to build an article. Oaktree b ( talk) 02:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. If kept should be renamed Together with the Vytis. No need to disambiguate. gidonb ( talk) 07:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, meets WP:GNG. Serious consideration should then be given to gidonb's naming proposal. Jacona ( talk) 12:13, 30 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. If anyone would like a temporary copy of this to use for creation of a gallery on Commons, let me know and I will be happy to facilitate that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:16, 1 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Gallery of distinctive unit insignias

Gallery of distinctive unit insignias (  | 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)

WP:NOTGALLERY. A very long, almost completely unsourced (one insignia has a source) gallery, basically a repeat of Commons:Category:Distinctive Unit Insignia (DUI) of the United States Army. Fram ( talk) 16:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • No opinion I wasn't aware of NOTGALLERY; I saw Gallery of sovereign state flags and figured Galleries were a thing. My bad. I moved all of these images out of Distinctive unit insignia because it was making that article so large that it was struggling to load, and getting in the way of reading the actual prose. I don't particularly care what happens to Gallery of distinctive unit insignias, as long as the great wall of images doesn't just get moved back to Distinctive unit insignia. The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 23:05, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The Squirrel Conspiracy, I'm one of the groups of military veteran editors that built that page, from the beginning it was designed and made as it was. It was meant to be a short description and display of the unit insignia. please return it back to how it was as you destroyed years of work on it with your edits. Rukia8492 ( talk) 18:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The content isn't bad for Wikipedia, it's just not the way to display it. All of these DUI can be displayed in the relevant unit articles. They can also remain on Commons and a link to the commons category can be placed in the DUI article. Jahaza ( talk) 21:18, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep Useful visual list, clearly defined subject (has parent article " Distinctive unit insignia"). If someone is worried with the word "gallery", the article just as well may be renamed to List of distinctive unit insignias - Altenmann >talk 21:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • a "Visual list" is a gallery, and renaming it doesn't change the content. An article is text-based and source-based, summarizing secondary sources about a subject. None of this is present here. Fram ( talk) 08:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      • List pages do not "summarize" anything, they.. er.. list things. - Altenmann >talk
        • But (on enwiki) not images, that's what Commons does, and that's why we have "notgallery". Otherwise every gallery would be kept because "it is a list". A list which isn't used for navigation and otherwise doesn't provide information about the listed items is not what enwiki is intended for. Fram ( talk) 17:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
          • Nor each category is a list for wikipedia purposes. The discussed list does provide information about its items. - Altenmann >talk 23:11, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Transwiki to Commons as per User:MKFI above. Is there any argument to make against that solution? Llajwa ( talk) 20:05, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete or transwiki per NOTGALLERY. Sandstein 08:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete If wp:gallerycruft exists. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 11:42, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 19:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete WP:NOTGALLERY Lightburst ( talk) 20:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Transwiki to Commons. This sort of page is perfect for Commons, and we should place it there. Destroying the work by just deleting it now makes little sense; first we should have the page imported there, and only after that should it be deleted. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 21:12, 31 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 00:46, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Barmer–Bandra Terminus Humsafar Express

Barmer–Bandra Terminus Humsafar Express (  | 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)
Bandra Terminus–Barmer Humsafar Express (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable train lines to be opened this week, no non-trivial coverage. Support possibility of recreating the articles if the lines receives coverage after opening. ChaotıċEnby( t · c) 13:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 13:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:17, 16 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) 21:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delele without prejudice to recreation once it satisfies WP:GNG. Now it is unreferenced. - Altenmann >talk 21:26, 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 delete‎. Owen× ☎ 00:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Herminigildo Ranera

AfDs for this article:
Herminigildo Ranera (  | 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 she meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. I am aware I may be missing something in Tagalog sources. Last AfD had very low participation, so no consensus. As this has been waiting in CAT:NN for 14 years, I really hope we can now get a discussion going. Boleyn ( talk) 18:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Tito Pao, Probably lack of quorum. Rfd's can be closed comfortably with at least two votes but Afd is supposed to have a wider audience. -- Lenticel ( talk) 22:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I tried to look at the News archives for articles but most of the info that I found are shows for orchestras that he was conducting for rather than about him as a person/musician. Maestro just means he's a conductor. -- Lenticel ( talk) 01:06, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete I can't find any significant coverage. Other editors have had 14 years to do so. At this point, absent any evidence to the contrary, it seems fair to assume there aren't any. Jfire ( talk) 03:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep Being conductor of the Philippine Philharmonic Orchestra, along with other high profile accomplishments, sounds notable. Agree that lack of RS is a problem. Llajwa ( talk) 20:09, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Source in article is a name mention in a list, and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. Ping me if sources are found.  //  Timothy ::  talk  18:08, 30 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 withdrawn by nominator‎. (non-admin closure) InfiniteNexus ( talk) 03:59, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Family Plan (1997 film)

AfDs for this article:
Family Plan (1997 film) (  | 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)

Article fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. All the references in the article are mere mentions about this film. I did a WP:BEFORE and found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I also found nothing suitable, reliable and in-depth enough to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and WP:NEXIST. The Film Creator ( talk) 20:56, 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 University of Plymouth#Student accommodation. ✗ plicit 23:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Francis Drake Hall of Residence

Francis Drake Hall of Residence (  | 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)

Unable to find substantial independent coverage about these halls of residence - the only coverage I can find about the buildings are in regards to an arson attack and not the buildings themseves being notable. Would recommend a redirect to University_of_Plymouth#Student_accommodation. pinktoebeans (talk) 20:55, 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 keep‎. Discussion over the best transliterated spelling can continue on the article's Talk page. Owen× ☎ 00:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ravipalli

Ravipalli (  | 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 sources cited. Multiple attempts at finding sources (other than a map) have failed. Avishai11 ( talk) 20:47, 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 delete‎. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 20:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Modti inc.

Modti inc. (  | 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)

Company is now nonexistent, the domain has expired in mid-2018. The only significant contributors seem to be closely connected to the subject. No search results were found outside the Wayback Machine.  🇮🇱🇺🇸JayCubby probby haz NPOV on the Isr.-Pal. Conflict🇮🇱🇺🇸  talk 20:05, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

OSQA

OSQA (  | 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:NSOFT. No sources covering the subject. Deltaspace42 ( talk • contribs) 15:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • delete, no independent coverage. - Altenmann >talk 21:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I agree it should be deleted due to lack of notability

-- Policy1257 ( talk) 15:57, 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 23:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ferrán Marín Ramos

Ferrán Marín Ramos (  | 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 he meets WP:AUTHOR or WP:GNG, though it was hard to assess not being familiar with these sources and organisations. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 16:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:37, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete the person and does not pass General Notability nor reliable sources are found to underline the notability of Ferran Ramos -- 88.214.186.108 ( talk) 12:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no claim to notability. Llajwa ( talk) 20:20, 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 23:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

James McFadden (dancer)

James McFadden (dancer) (  | 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 he meets WP:N. It is from a period of time where it is harder to find online sources, unfortunately. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 16:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:37, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Weak delete - this is someone's OR project based on newspaper articles. Subject is not obviously notable nor are there sufficient sources provided. But if the original author had gone further and found good secondary sources, it might have met requirement. Maybe one day someone will. Llajwa ( talk) 20:23, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Samidin Xhezairi

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

Does not appear independently notable. Can find little literature that mentions him (by real name or nickname), and these mentions are very brief. The source used for the article names him as one of 100 ex-guerrillas being questioned at the Hague, and relies itself partially on the man's brother on Facebook. While it is clear that this man did participate in the Yugoslav Wars, I can't see the sources proving notability. Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk) 17:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - insufficient RS, no real claim to notability. Llajwa ( talk) 20:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: per nom BLP, not sure this even makes a valid claim to notability. 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. Open to a consensus redirect suggestion, but I really don't see an appropriate one.  //  Timothy ::  talk  18:33, 30 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 La Trobe University#Research. Owen× ☎ 00:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Research Centre for Linguistic Typology

Research Centre for Linguistic Typology (  | 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 it meets WP:ORG or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Possible WP:ATD could be redirect to its current university, but it has been part of 2, so that could cause confusion. Boleyn ( talk) 17:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:35, 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 delete‎. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 20:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Lech Stanisław Laszkiewicz

Lech Stanisław Laszkiewicz (  | 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 is made up of a variety of unreliable sources such as blogs, forums, and a directory, and passing mentions in wider war histories. It provides the biography of a seemingly non-notable WW2 pilot, who is mentioned because he served and lived long enough to talk to the Imperial War Museum about the war, but unfortunately does not appear to pass any level of notability; he was not, for example, an ace. Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk) 17:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:34, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete. Sadly, I have to concur with the nom. Non-notalbe pilot (never shot down an enemy plane, not listed at Bajan's list), not subject any any coverage outside having been interviewed for the IWM, which did not lead to any media or academic coverage - just blog/catalogue inclusion. No pl interwiki. No major awards (or minor even?). I am afraid he belongs on Wikidata but not Wikipedia. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123250223 will be enough (it can be expanded, and the creator of this article, SPA otherwise, plausibly a relative or such, is encouraged to do so - this can always be userspaced as a draft). Bottom line, not every soldier is notable. In the meantime, we need to delete photos as they are copyvio (WW2 photos described by the uploader as "own work", sigh). -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Piotrus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 18:35, 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 23:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Stanley Modrzyk

Stanley Modrzyk (  | 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 he meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 18:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Looking through The Wild Hunt, the main Pagan news site, there seem to be a couple of mentions that Modrzyk passed away but little beyond that to really sustain notability for Wikipedia's purposes. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 12:41, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:33, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete. Nothing in EBSCOhost. ProQuest has a few news articles in which he is briefly quoted, e.g. ProQuest  309969259, ProQuest  420258868. Similar articles in newspapers.com. I don't see any significant coverage. No reviews of his books. Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Jfire ( talk) 03:30, 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 23:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ronald Rieder

Ronald Rieder (  | 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 he meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 18:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:33, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: all I can is an obituary [2], could even be a different person. There isn't much in the article now for GNG. Oaktree b ( talk) 02:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. The obit is a paid memorial notice so not independent. here is the NYT source ( ProQuest  110065074). The article is about Freshman orientation programs; he has a brief quote. Not SIGCOV. The Psychiatric News article has longer quotes from him, but again, he's not the subject. Jfire ( talk) 03:13, 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 23:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Enrique Mederos

Enrique Mederos (  | 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 he meets WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 19:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Weak delete Sad he died so young. I would love to know more about the career of a professional Mexican film dubber. It would be nice for him to continue to float in the WP ether for a while longer. But I assume his filmography and photo are on IMDB too. Llajwa ( talk) 20:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article, and BEFORE found listings, nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimothyBlue ( talk • contribs) 19:15, 30 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. Withdrawn as Keep - OK I hold my hands up to that one, you learn something every day. Could be improved a lot, though. Black Kite (talk) 16:40, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Abel Peter Diah

Abel Peter Diah (  | 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)

Member of a lower regional house (i.e. not national), does not appear to pass NPOL. Indeed there is only an article on Taraba State House of Assembly because the same editor created it. Created by a now indefintely-blocked paid editor. Black Kite (talk) 19:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep — The page subject is a former Assembly Speaker, who used to hold (and arguably retains) substantial influence in Taraba state politics; members of subnational legislatures often have pages, especially if they have held a leadership position in the chamber. It is a poorly-written page but that does not warrant the subject non-notable. Watercheetah99 ( talk) 21:38, 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 speedy keep‎. Per WP:SPEEDYKEEP#1. The nominator has withdrawn their nomination and there are no other arguments for deletion. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 14:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Everyone Loves Mel

Everyone Loves Mel (  | 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:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I did a WP:BEFORE and found one review from The Dove Foundation. Needs one more suitable and reliable review to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and WP:NEXIST. The Film Creator ( talk) 19:14, 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 speedy keep‎. Per WP:SPEEDYKEEP#1. The nominator has withdrawn their nomination and there are no other arguments for deletion. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 14:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Yellow (2006 feature film)

Yellow (2006 feature film) (  | 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:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I did a WP:BEFORE and found nothing suitable or reliable enough to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and WP:NEXIST. The Film Creator ( talk) 18:58, 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 speedy keep‎. Per WP:SPEEDYKEEP#1. The nominator has withdrawn their nomination and there are no other arguments for deletion. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 14:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Undercover Angel (film)

Undercover Angel (film) (  | 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)

Article fails WP:GNG, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. Rotten Tomatoes states there are two reviews but neither of them are shown. I did a WP:BEFORE and found a review from The Dove Foundation. Needs one more review in order to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and NEXIST. I found only newspaper listings on Newspapers.com. The review from Common Sense Media doesn’t count because it’s a review for the 2017 film of the same title. The Film Creator ( talk) 18:46, 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 keep‎. WP:SNOW keep, withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 17:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

A Bastard's Tale

A Bastard's Tale (  | 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 was able to find two reviews: [3] and [4]. However, that is the extent of reliable or situational sources I could find covering the game in any significant detail, with even passing coverage being rare. Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 18:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 18:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I also only found the same two sources, and there aren't any suitable redirect or merger targets.-- Alexandra IDV 18:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Changing to a very weak Keep thanks to the source found by ZXCVBNM-- Alexandra IDV 12:03, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep another review at Gaming Age here and other reviews linked at Metacritic here, imv Atlantic306 ( talk) 20:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • I considered Gaming Age, but all discussions on their potential reliability suggest that content published after 2002 may not be reliable. As far as other Metacritic sources go, none of those are listed as reliable sources for use on Wikipedia. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 23:46, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • @ Atlantic306: ( edit conflict) Looking at WP:VG/RS classification and the past discussions linked there, Gaming Age isn't usable aside from possibly old material from before it split off from IGN in the early 00s. The other reviews listed on Metacritic (aside from the two Cukie mentioned) are either classed as unreliable (God is a Geek, Worth Playing, GameGrin) or haven't been classed at all (PlayStation Country, GameSpew). If this is going to have a chance, I think we would have to discuss PlayStation Country and GameSpew at WT:VG/RS, although the lack of an "about" page or similar on PlayStation Country, and GameSpew's self-description as a passion-project blog site, makes me doubtful that they could be considered reliable sources.-- Alexandra IDV 23:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep A review from Softpedia should get it across the finish line in terms of notability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 08:19, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Keep We very narrowly got there in the end with WP:THREE. Don't forget to make sure to add them in the article or used the sources found template! ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 08:25, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • @ Alexandra IDV: What do you think now that there's a third RS review? I feel it may just barely squeak by, but since you !voted delete, I'd like your input before I withdraw. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 00:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • @ Cukie Gherkin: I think this article subject only just meets GNG with the absolute bare minimum of coverage, but yeah, struck my "delete".-- Alexandra IDV 12:05, 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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Class of '09 (video game)

Class of '09 (video game) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced page and no reliable sources come up in a WP:BEFORE search. This game is an absolute WP:N failure in every regard. Additionally, it was moved to draftspace due to the zero sources present, but was moved back into mainspace by the creator anyways. λ Negative MP1 18:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - No reliable sources exist, like at all. The best I could find was one review on some random person's blog (the one singular review on Metacritic I might add). The lack of inline citations or really any citations at all makes this an original research nightmare. -- StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk) 20:32, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Not sure if this is what you were refering to, but the review on Metacritic does not appear to be a personal blog. Regardless this article will probably need a complete rewrite at least (and there are few sources, even thought it has blown up recently) but I think this should be noted. Totalibe ( talk) 17:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete No substance to suggest general notability at all. One of the most impressively excessive cases of WP:GAMECRUFT I've seen in a while. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 08:37, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Seems to fail WP:GNG. Even if a review from a reliable source randomly came up, that still wouldn't be enough, it's simply far too minor for Wikipedia. Wikipedia isn't an advertising tool. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 08:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Only RS mention I could find was one brief post from Pocket Gamer. It seems like the game actually did fairly well, but visual novels tend to not get much RS coverage, so I'm not particularly surprised by the lack of sources. CurlyWi ( talk) 22:24, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above. Even if it passes WP:GNG I will just recommend completely WP:TNT-ing it. OceanHok ( talk) 15:57, 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 redirect‎ to 2024 Portland, Oregon municipal elections#City auditor. Relevant sourced content can be merged from the history. Sandstein 08:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

2024 Portland, Oregon Auditor election

2024 Portland, Oregon Auditor election (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable election. This differs from the mayoral election which is obviously notable. After a search I believe it violates WP:SIGCOV and WP:NOTNEWS. Grahaml35 ( talk) 18:25, 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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:23, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

2023 Tucker municipal elections

2023 Tucker municipal elections (  | 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 election of a small town in Georgia. After a search I believe it violates WP:SIGCOV, WP:NOTNEWS, no WP:DEPTH. Grahaml35 ( talk) 18:21, 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 draftify‎ to Draft:Luke Brennan (soccer). Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 20:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Luke Brennan (soccer)

AfDs for this article:
Luke Brennan (soccer) (  | 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 has changed since the prior AfD, the article was even created by the same editor. Still doesn't meet WP:GNG, possibly-independent coverage is limited to one unbylined article signed, Rosguill talk 18:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • WP:FPL is depreciated as a way of determining notability, WP:GNG is the only acceptable way to demonstrate this. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 10:42, 30 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. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 00:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Comedian Marcus

Comedian Marcus (  | 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, sources include (1) death certificate search that returns 500 error, (2) a review of the subject's work and discussion, (3) passing mention subject and review of song, (4) coverage of a play (that mentions cast only by first name so I have to assume this is about the subject), and then (5) one mentioned as attribution to a work. 1 out of 5 on a source review.
Cumulatively, these don't meet WP:SIGCOV or WP:SUSTAINED withdrawn microbiologyMarcus ( petri dish· growths) 17:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

--> keep. WP:HEY and arguments and sources presented by The Discoverer below. Thanks.- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Not a shred of Notability. Maliner ( talk) 15:42, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect as per User:Mushy Yank (adding Marcus's name to the list of past tiatrists). This page is obviously a labor of love for User:Rejoy2003. Comedian Marcus was clearly an accomplished person and I would love to have seen him perform. I hope you will find other spaces to memorialize him and his achievements. Llajwa ( talk) 20:51, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Per User:The Discoverer below, I withdraw my redirect and switch to Keep. Llajwa ( talk) 17:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The article has many more references now in comparison to the time when it was nominated. Admittedly, several of these references have only passing mentions of the subject, but this is a complete article in a mainstream newspaper focussed on the subject. These four: [5], [6], [7], [8], are records of recognition accorded to him, while another newspaper article praises his performance in a play. I think that these are sufficient to establish the notability for an artist who performs in a language that has very little presence in the online and offline publishing world. The Discoverer ( talk) 16:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, withdrawn above, the article has received significant improvement. I'm bookmarking this to point to in the future in case people are curious as to the good that can come from AfD! microbiologyMarcus ( petri dish· growths) 14:38, 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 23:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

At-location mapping

At-location mapping (  | 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)

Tagged uncited in 2009 this must have been an idea which was superceeded Chidgk1 ( talk) 17:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Good point, Delete as neologism. PaulT2022 ( talk) 14:57, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • delete I saw the same thing as Unc G: it's a name for how on-line mapping is used in the age of smart phones that someone tried to turn into terminology but which didn't stick because it was too obvious, from the earliest days of the tricorder. Mangoe ( talk) 13:29, 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 23:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Md Sameen Rahman

Md Sameen Rahman (  | 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 world record does not make a person notable, and nothing else in the article does either. Note, this has been G11d many times in draftspace - Rich T| C| E-Mail 16:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • KeepThe article seems fine to me as he is an entrepreneur and his news articles are quite heavy, and I think he is notable as I can see his company getting featured in some of the biggest journals, and they are pointing him out as an entrepreneur. And speaking of world record it was edited and fixed.
Thank you Caspter ( talk) 20:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Appears to be entirely promotional, and there is an evident lack of reliable sourcing to back it up. I honestly would've tagged it as WP:G11 if it hadn't been nominated here. CycloneYoris talk! 01:49, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Crampcomes ( talk) 21:42, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • KeepI don't think the articles appears to be a promotional. I have gone through all the news articles of this individual, and it seems fine to me as all the news is from the respected news desk, so keeping the article would be a wise decision. Forhad alavi ( talk) 11:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
My nom is to delete... so how can you !vote "Keep per nom" - Rich T| C| E-Mail 18:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
More interested to know how an account with seven contributions that hasn't edited in a half-dozen years showed up on an AfD. Also perhaps why @ Caspter: above has tried multiple times to create an article for @ Forhad alavi:. I guess we could do an SPI, or we could probably just DUCK discount their contributions as an obvious WP:DUCK. Seems someone here may have a farm or a friend.
GMG talk 15:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - The subject's "projects" appear to be simply unfishished websites. The Grow More site has exactly one "course" which appears to be a YouTube video, and a couple dozen courses "coming soon". UPGRADE is basically empty aside from the landing page and a bunch of "under construction". These don't seem to be bona fide projects, but rather attempts to pad their resume for anyone who doesn't look too closely. The world record for [insert thing nobody cares about] is neither here nor there. The article here is likely just another attempt at paper-thin self promotion. GMG talk 12:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom and per User:GreenMeansGo. Also clearly COI. -- আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk) 20:43, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - the Windsor tie world record is pretty cool, but there's no claim to notability in this article. Llajwa ( talk) 21:01, 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 speedy delete‎ per WP:CSD#G5. Kinu  t/ c 01:32, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ortner Airport

Ortner Airport (  | 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)

Completely non-notable small airstrip. In cases such as this I generally look for a plausible merge or redirect target, but I do not think that 1967 Lake Erie skydiving disaster, the reason for it's cla9imed 'fame', would be of any use. TheLongTone ( talk) 15:22, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

It is indeed somewhat well-known for that incident, and is a fairly popular airstrip. I was working on the page last night and fell asleep before I could expand it and add more citations. Windowcleaner4 ( talk) 17:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The topic is notable enough just because of the Ortner Air Service- which may deserve an article of its own. Windowcleaner4 ( talk) 17:15, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Checkuser note The article creator has been blocked as a  Confirmed sock and the article has been deleted per WP:CSD#G5.-- Ponyo bons mots 21:02, 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. Owen× ☎ 00:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Living in Tehran

Living in Tehran (  | 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 indication of meeting WP:NCORP, most cited sources do not even mention the subject. I wasn't able to find any additional coverage searching in English and Persian. signed, Rosguill talk 15:19, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

There were several references to it in English and Persian https://financialtribune.com/articles/travel/80774/guide-to-living-in-tehran 148.252.24.130 ( talk) 15:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The Guardian piece does not mention Living in Tehran, other than to say that a Persian lion from Bristol zoo had been sent to live in Tehran zoo. The Financial Tribune piece is unbylined and reads like an ad. We're nowhere near meeting WP:NCORP here. signed, Rosguill talk 15:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
IP, please stop wasting our time by re-linking sources already cited in the article which don't even begin to address notability concerns. The latest addition is a reprint of an article, not independent coverage. signed, Rosguill talk 15:31, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - does not seem to meet WP:N. Llajwa ( talk) 21:03, 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 merge‎ to Paratha. Owen× ☎ 00:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Dulhan paratha

Dulhan paratha (  | 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's normal to have many local variations of a recipe in India and Pakistan. I don't see notability here, as this is about a paratha sold by a local restaurant and prepared by mixing some extra items in it. Additionally, the sources used promote this cafe as they list locations, rates, products, time etc. – DreamRimmer ( talk) 15:16, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ali Jihami (marketer)

Ali Jihami (marketer) (  | 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 sources don't seem solid enough to meet WP:GNG, and it doesn't seem like the award he won is notable. There might be better sources but I didn't find them on a WP:BEFORE. BuySomeApples ( talk) 15:11, 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 List of television and radio stations owned by TV5 Network. ✗ plicit 23:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DYTE-TV

DYTE-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)

Tagged as unsourced since 2016. Given the age of the article, there are a lot of Wikipedia mirrors, but no significant coverage in reliable sources. MarioGom ( talk) 15:05, 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 List of television and radio stations owned by TV5 Network. ✗ plicit 23:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DWTE-TV

DWTE-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)

Tagged as unsourced since 2016. Given the age of the article, there are a few thousands Wikipedia mirrors, but no significant coverage in reliable sources. MarioGom ( talk) 15:03, 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 keep‎. Not closing as withdrawn due to standing !deletes, but there is now a consensus here to keep per new sourcing. (non-admin closure) Schminnte [ talk to me 19:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

K.F.C. Moerbeke

K.F.C. Moerbeke (  | 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 football team in the 8th division of the Belgian league pyramid. There is zero coverage about it online (apart from the usual stats websites). It was tagged in 2012 and it still fails notability guidelines. Recently PRODed then DEPRODed so nominating it here. Sgubaldo ( talk) 15:09, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Withdrawn by nominator - Gidonb found coverage in multiple reliable sources and article has been improved. Sgubaldo ( talk) 14:57, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
This and all similar arguments below fail the golden WP:NEXIST rule: Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article, hence should be discounted to the fullest extent. gidonb ( talk) 17:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:41, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:44, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • @ GiantSnowman: - another editor has presented some sources below. I haven't looked at them, so have no opinion at this point, but as you asked to be pinged I have pinged you :-) -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 13:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      • Keep per sources below which show notability. Giant Snowman 18:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Agree with nomination, unless someone can prove otherwise. Govvy ( talk) 20:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I am still a little on the fence, but I will strike my delete per the updates to the article. Govvy ( talk) 10:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - As the person who originally PROD this, I agree here. HawkAussie ( talk) 09:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Since you raised the PROD yourself: why did you prod this if there is not even the beginning of a case for deletion? Which part of "must" in the following WP policy is unclear?

PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected. gidonb ( talk) 14:24, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

    • Especially with sources now being put in and the article being expanded, I do feel like it's now a Keep. HawkAussie ( talk) 21:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per the above; unable to find any meaningful independent coverage of this club. Left guide ( talk) 23:03, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per all above. No evidence of notability. REDMAN 2019 ( talk) 14:34, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Constant coverage in HN, HLN, and GVA. [10] A few coverage examples: [11] [12] [13] [14] Note that Belgium doesn't have an equally accessible newspaper archive as Delpher in the Netherlands. So these examples are recent. The club has been around since 1927. gidonb ( talk) 07:25, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Significant coverage in two reliable sources identified by Gidonb. This discussion seems to be the worst kind of WP:SNOW with only Left guide having claimed to have done any searching. ~ Kvng ( talk) 13:00, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss sources just flagged by gidonb
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:04, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious ( talk) 14:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. There are good sources, so there are good reasons to keep the article despite the low league tier. -- Ouro ( blah blah) 15:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - @ Svartner:, @ HawkAussie:, @ Govvy:, Per above. Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk) 20:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment Keep per me? I posted delete above, but then nobody pinged me about changes to the article! So I might just strike my delete. Govvy ( talk) 10:49, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. Not sure why this is still open. The deletes carry no weight. gidonb ( talk) 05:46, 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 no consensus‎. Both those supporting deletion and keeping make reasonable arguments that are plausibly based in policy (implicitly WP:DEL-REASON#8 for the deletion supporters, and WP:ANYBIO#1 for those supporting keep). Consensus is ascertained in light of the quality of the arguments presented in this discussion as viewed through the lens of Wikipedia policy. And, as the arguments were of relatively similar strength, there is no consensus in this discussion. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 03:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

George Tripp

George Tripp (  | 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)

Nicely researched genealogical piece, but not notable. Ingratis ( talk) 08:23, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:42, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:42, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete – Fails WP:NBIO and WP:GNG; search in Google News and Google Books found a few obituaries and news articles of different people of the same name. Toadette ( Merry Christmas, and a happy new year) 10:46, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Recipient of the CB, which we have always held to easily meet the criteria of WP:ANYBIO #1 (which is a CBE or above). Chief administrative officer of one of the most significant police forces in the world. Only someone with absolutely zero knowledge of the subject would think this was merely a "genealogical piece". Very clearly notable. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 14:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Comment: a clear case of asserted inherent notability. a) The only source that refers to Tripp's job, which is the only reason for his posited notability, is the book by Fairfax, which the article's creator himself describes as unpublished - don't think that counts. All the other sources are entirely genealogical - census returns (unreferenced), a parish register entry, civil registration indexes and a probate entry - and equally available for anyone in the country: they are bog standard pieces of genealogical information and certainly don't go to notability. b) Police civil officials are not inherently notable; come up with proper sources for this man. c) "we have always held [CBs] to easily meet the criteria of WP:ANYBIO #1": I have no idea who "we" are; again, actually provide some proper sources. ANYBIO specifically says: "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included'." (bolding mine). If no adequate sources are forthcoming, the rest is just handwaving and the article should go. Ingratis ( talk) 14:38, 5 January 2024 (UTC) reply

[continued below the relisting line]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC) reply

      • "We" would be the Wikipedia community, as illustrated here. It's called consensus. If he was considered notable enough to receive a high honour by the British government, then he is clearly notable enough for Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 16:18, 8 January 2024 (UTC) reply
        • You should not need reminding that notability rests on sources - but since apparently you do, see WP:N. Where are the sources? Ingratis ( talk) 03:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
          • No, I don't, but thank you for the patronising comment. You should also not need reminding that Wikipedia works on consensus, which I have illustrated. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 10:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
            • As to "patronising", people in glass houses... As to the rest, you're apparently arguing that because this man had a CB (as per WP:ANYBIO#1, if that were to cover CBs) the article is exempt from the sourcing requirements of WP:BASIC. I've already pointed out that this article presently contains only a single secondary source, which is invalid, because it is unpublished; all the rest are primary sources/original records, which without the secondary source do not add up to SIGCOV. Even if this were a clear instance of "automatic" notability - such as those covered by NPOL - it would not stand without the appropriate sourcing, which this does not have. (Your lists, in my view, are missing the point: articles have to be considered individually, as they will not always be decided solely on the ANYBIO issue, as you seem to suggest). Ingratis ( talk) 13:55, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
              • One of the reasons we have ANYBIO is that it would be laughable if Wikipedia considered people who had been granted high honours in the real world to be non-notable. Clearly notable in the real world, but not in the rarefied atmosphere of wikiworld, where the only people considered notable are those who have sustained coverage on the internet! It really does just make us look like we live on another planet. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 15:04, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply
                To be frank, show us sourced about a monkey that took a selfie [15] and it get's an article here. Wining the award is fine, but we need things that talk it about it at length. We don't have much that talks about the person here that isn't related to him or the award presenter. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep WP:ANYBIO #1 - agree with Necrothesp here. Lightburst ( talk) 15:11, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 14:36, 16 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, NotAGenious ( talk) 14:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Chief financial officer of the police is fine, but not terribly notable. I don't see extensive coverage (or much of anything) on this person. Civil servant that won an award. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: There are only a few hundred of the higher members of the order, almost 2000 of the lower level (as this person was), so it's a rather long list. We'd need a ton of sourcing to create an article on a Companion-level individual. They give out so many of these, it seems most names are only mentioned, then onto the next name. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:46, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Won an award. It's being appointed to a high honour, not winning an award. They give out so many of these. They really don't. A couple of dozen at the most every year. Not many in a country of 60-70 million people. There are only a few hundred of the higher members of the order, almost 2000 of the lower level (as this person was)... The statutes provide for a maximum of 1,925 Companions at any one time. That doesn't mean there are 1,925 Companions at any one time (or even close to it)! But even if there were, it's a drop in the ocean considering the population of the country (or, in those days, the entire British Empire). And the "lower level" of the Order of the Bath is a very high level indeed. It outranks pretty much anyone else who doesn't have a knighthood. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 16:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      Then provide us with extensive sources with which to build the article. For all of the 10 lines of text, that's not extensive coverage at all. That's my issue, the lack of sourcing first and foremost. Oaktree b ( talk) 17:55, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 14:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Vishwapriya Nagar

Vishwapriya Nagar (  | 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 neighborhood. No sources in the article and no reliable sources could be found. Broc ( talk) 11:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and India. Broc ( talk) 11:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. One (unreliable) source from youtube but that too shows that the content is unavailable. Absence of sources makes this article fail wp:n. RangersRus ( talk) 13:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete fails to meet WP:NGEO - MPGuy2824 ( talk) 06:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Changing my mind. This doesn't meet NGEO, but as an AtD, it can be Redirected to Bangalore. - MPGuy2824 ( talk) 02:27, 19 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      • ...where Vishwapriya Nagar is not mentioned. Geschichte ( talk) 09:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on redirecting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious ( talk) 14:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment: I don't think it should be redirected, there is no mention of this neighborhood anywhere. I know redirects are cheap, but they should be meaningful too. -- Broc ( talk) 19:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • delete Neighborhoods and the like should not be redirected to enclosing geography unless there is meaningful discussion of them, and in this case the target article doesn't mention neighborhoods at all. Mangoe ( talk) 20:51, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no need to redirect - this is OR, and will live on in its Kannada incarnation. Llajwa ( talk) 21:06, 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 redirect‎ to 2024 Florida House of Representatives election. ✗ plicit 23:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Anne Gerwig

Anne Gerwig (  | 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 sure this meets WP:NPOL, because simply running for the Florida house doesn't demonstrate notability, and being mayor of a village doesn't either necessarily. BuySomeApples ( talk) 14:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep the "village" has 60 000 people apparently, that's not a small hamlet. It might be called a village, but certainly has the population of a town. We've had mayors of towns this size with articles here. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to 2024 Florida House of Representatives election. The subject does not pass WP:NPOL as the only metric for a clear pass of the SNG is holding a national or statewide elected position. However, the appropriate standard is WP:GNG. What is generally expected of a local official is whether the coverage of the subject's service as an elected official illustrates the lasting impact of their actions and votes taken (not statements), and what is generally expected for candidates is whether the coverage is well beyond that of the average candidate, such as internationalized coverage. As it is, I do not see any coverage beyond her local area, nor do I see an independent write up comprehensively documenting her service as mayor. Also, size of population does not determine whether or not a stand-alone article is created. Redirect to the main election page as a usual and appropriate outcome where information about the election and the candidates can be added. -- Enos733 ( talk) 17:23, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect per Enos733, we can restore the page if she is elected, but not notable now. SportingFlyer T· C 17:46, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: Fine with any !redirect if it goes that way. Oaktree b ( talk) 22:11, 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 keep‎. Owen× ☎ 00:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

2028 ICC Men's T20 World Cup

2028 ICC Men's T20 World Cup (  | 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)

WP:TOOSOON. 8 years away that is not a mega event like the Olympics Grahaml35 ( talk) 13:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment. 2028 is just four years away despite what the nominator may think. Lean keep even I, from Poland, have heard of the Twenty20, so perhaps not at all too soon, as there is room for expansion as qualifications are probably starting next year, right? -- Ouro ( blah blah) 15:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Haha yes, my bad 4 years away not 8. Not sure why my brain thought we are still in 2020. Grahaml35 ( talk) 16:02, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    True it is just 4 years away, but considering there is going to be another T20 World cup in 2026 there wont be any announcements about qualification anytime soon Cric editor ( talk) 06:39, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
My bad. 4 years away not 8. Grahaml35 ( talk) 16:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Only 4 years away and certain to happen. StickyWicket aka AA ( talk) 23:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • There's little point deleting this - it will only be re-created, probably within days. If there's a real desire for it to not exist for now, a redirection is the better option (as has been done for the 2030 version of this) but then someone will need to pay whack-a-mole with it. I would never like to guarantee that anything in cricket will definitely happen, given the history of tournaments in the game, but this seems reasonable to keep around for now. Redirect is the worst that should happen. Blue Square Thing ( talk) 11:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Four years is not too soon. If it was 2032, that would be. Batagur baska ( talk) 02:02, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 14:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Mohamed Yusoff

Mohamed Yusoff (  | 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'm not sure this meets WP:GNG, he's mentioned in a few articles but there's nothing substantially about him in reliable sources. References to his own websites don't count which eliminates about half of the refs. BuySomeApples ( talk) 11:23, 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 delete‎. Owen× ☎ 01:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Yehezkel Mizrahi

Yehezkel Mizrahi (  | 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)

Currently fails WP:BIO. Arrested for having an apparently minor role in a militant movement. The article has been plagiarized from the sources. Schierbecker ( talk) 09:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Don't Delete. There is absolutely no reason to delete this article. Sources were provided and the life of that particular person was documented. It's like any other biography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OctoGreeko ( talk • contribs) 13:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    that's the problem, it's routine stuff, like any other biography. We need to see why he's deserving of an article here. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. Not individually notable but ideally he would be added to the prison photo caption in Kingdom of Israel (group) and redirected. gidonb ( talk) 01:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: The article isn't really clear as to why he's notable. He was born. Ok. Served in the military, got arrested, got married and had a kid. End of the article. All I find is one mention in a court record, that wouldn't seem to pass CRIME notability. I'm not even sure what this person did to deserve an article... Oaktree b ( talk) 15:55, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    He served in the British army, Lehi and the IDF while lying about his age and having serious health problems. He was involved in the Assasination of Folke Bernadotte and the israeli civil/independence war. He also was involved in several other activities which I mentioned in the article.
    So yes, he is notable. OctoGreeko ( talk) 07:50, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Service in the British Army or the IDF, even in wartime, does not make you noteworthy. You need what we call a credible claim of significance. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Read my comment again. That's not the only thing I said OctoGreeko ( talk) 13:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete If you are going to write a biographical article, start by telling us in the first sentence why this person deserves to have an article. A lead that tells you that he was born does not does not make the grade. Following up by telling us a series of equally mundane details does not help. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:58, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    It's all in the article. People just have to read it. OctoGreeko ( talk) 07:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    It says in the infobox that he was involved in the assassination of Folke Bernadotte, and if so this should be in the lead sentence as his primary claim to significance. However, there is no mention of this assertion in the article, the cited sources, or the article on the assassination, and therefore the claim is likely to be removed from the infobox by a passing gnome as unsourced. That would get you over the first hurdle, but note WP:CRIME: A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. If you can't say anything except "he was born, became a soldier, married, and then died", then the article is not needed. Artem.G ( talk) 21:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    And the same argument again. How about reading the entire article instead of just typing the same text as others? OctoGreeko ( talk) 15:31, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    To save yourself from this hassle (or a speedy deletion by the New Page Patrol) in the future, a claim to significance should appear in the first sentence. (See MOS:LEADSENTENCE) Don't expect the NPP to read the entire article, or check the sources, especially when they are in a foreign language. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    the whole article is "he was born, studied, joined the army, was arrested, got married". As noted by others, if you can't say about a person something other than "he was born" in the first sentence, you have a problem. The article is also a really close retelling of the second source, from the Lehi website. Artem.G ( talk) 10:42, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I rewrote the first part of my page. I hope that helps OctoGreeko ( talk) 01:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    well, no, you didn't, it's still copyvio. compare it:
    second para: article: "He studied in a kuttab, a rigorous cheder, and Sephardic Talmud Torah while simultaneously studying general subjects." - source: "Yehezkel studied in a kuttab, a rigorous cheder, and Sephardic Talmud Torah. Simultaneously, he studied general subjects."
    "At age thirteen, he joined Beitar, and he soon went to work to support his family." - "At age thirteen, he joined Beitar, and he soon went to work to support his family."
    "A few years later, at age sixteen, he joined the British armed forces to fight the Nazis while lying about his age. He served in the Royal Navy from 1941 to 1946." - "At age sixteen, he joined the British armed forces to fight the Germans, lying about his age. He served in the Royal Navy from 1941 to 1946."
    last sentence: "He died on July 29, 1989, leaving his wife Zipporah, a daughter and two sons." - "He fell ill and died on July 29,1989, leaving his wife Zipporah, a daughter and two sons."
    etc etc etc. please read Wikipedia:Copyright violations. Artem.G ( talk) 10:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Well, these parts of his life are important and should be covered in this article. OctoGreeko ( talk) 14:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    they are, but you shouldn't copy-paste text from copyrighted sources. Artem.G ( talk) 14:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Would a "reconstruction" help in this situation? OctoGreeko ( talk) 19:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep - setting aside the plagiarism accusation, which should be adjudicated separately, he seems notable, he participated in important historical events. Sources are insufficient and/or OR, but it seems likely that he is discussed in the abundant historical literature on this period of Israel/Palestine history. Llajwa ( talk) 21:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
it seems likely that he is discussed in the abundant historical literature (emphasis my own). It seems like it, but you haven't actually gone looking? Schierbecker ( talk) 02:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Further to my earlier comment. I haven't gotten to writing the caption. This is not something the merge team should be burdened with. Redirect after some work was my optimum. This can also be done later. Delete is my default. gidonb ( talk) 01:32, 30 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 Myanmar Royal Dragon Army. Discussion about which of the two titles the merged article should have can continue in the Talk page. Owen× ☎ 01:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Burma National Revolutionary Army

Burma National Revolutionary Army (  | 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)

Direct duplication of content from Myanmar Royal Dragon Army, currently a content fork of Myanmar Royal Dragon Army. If this rename becomes the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, can move the other page title accordingly- no RS showing any significant differences. EmeraldRange ( talk/ contribs) 12:21, 9 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! 08:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Pinging @ Espresso Addict as someone involved in prior WP:PROD for thoughts. Additional comment: it is a direct fork (i.e. someone created this article by copying content from the other) so content should already be in the other article. EmeraldRange ( talk/ contribs) 15:58, 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 Asian Para Games. Owen× ☎ 01:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Judo at the 2022 Asian Para Games

Judo at the 2022 Asian Para Games (  | 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 indication of meeting WP:GNG, all cited sources are primary. Other than brief press releases of Iran's wins in this category ( [16], [17]), I was unable to find independent coverage. N.b. that this article was primarily edited by Xihuaa, a blocked sockpuppet with a long term pattern of fait accompli article creations for non-notable subevents of this tournament. I think that restoring the redirect to 2022 Asian Para Games is the most appropriate course of action here, but my attempt to WP:BLAR was contested. signed, Rosguill talk 14:18, 9 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! 08:07, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment It's true that this article's sources are just results published by the event itself, but from what I see that's true of many (if not all) of the individual sports articles from this event. Consistency would dictate that either all of the sports should have articles or none should. This type of coverage is typical of WP coverage of many multi-sport gatherings and I'm not sure where the line should be (or has been) drawn between which events should have such coverage and which shouldn't. I'd say this coverage doesn't pass WP notability criteria, but I see that many attempts to redirect this type of article have been reversed. If there's been a precedent or relevant policy, please let me know. If forced to choose, I'd go for a redirect. Papaursa ( talk) 21:19, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 07:26, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Zora (platform)

Zora (platform) (  | 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)

Apart from being slightly WP:PROMO, sources consist of press releases, WP:ROUTINE, or short mentions as a kind of middleman. Others included questionably- WP:RELIABLE sources / cryptocurrency publications like https://decrypt.co TLA (talk) 08:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, and Companies. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak delete. The various crypto publications might be OK for providing some verifiability but I'm not seeing a level of coverage that suggests that this is sufficiently notable. The connections to celebrities seem minor and notability is not inherited anyway. As always with crypto stuff, any mentions of dollar values should be taken with a substantial pinch of salt unless verified by truly Reliable Sources. Ironically, it might be more notable if it was a shadier operation, getting coverage for its shadiness, but I don't see any evidence of that. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 00:30, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Yahoo News reposted a Coindesk article, which is a non-RS. Funding announcements don't contribute to notability and the list of "notable events" is longer than the rest of the article. PROMO Oaktree b ( talk) 16:00, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 07:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Semi Jaupaj

AfDs for this article:
Semi Jaupaj (  | 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)

More than half of these references are WP:YOUTUBE. Other sources range from press releases (lack of a byline) / WP:ROUTINE to highly likely non- WP:RELIABLE. Aside from that, there's a lot of WP:ORIGINAL. TLA (talk) 08:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Television, and Albania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete with fire, at that. Got soft deleted last time due to minimal RfD participation and here it is with precisely the same problems as my last nomination for deletion in 2022: "Albanian singer of little notability. Been watching this for a while to see if any sign of improvement or abiding importance emerges. It hasn't. Hasn't won any music competition, no evidence of any music charting, no evidence of any enduring influence or impact. Coverage is skimpy social pages stuff, no in-depth coverage. Borderline, yes, but ultimately not a WP:GNG pass and not WP:MUSICBIO either." Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 07:46, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: I tried limiting Gsearch to Albanian websites with .al, they all are celebrity gossip items [18] and all in English. Most of the article now has no citations so could be OR or simply a hoax for all we know. I'm not seeing notability. Could be too early, TOOSOON. Oaktree b ( talk) 16:05, 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 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 00:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Khaled Abouemara

Khaled Abouemara (  | 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 (I'm not very familiar with WP:SCHOLAR, though doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria.) WP:SELFPUB sources, sources that don't even mention this person, etc. TLA (talk) 08:58, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:02, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - No indication of notability. Llajwa ( talk) 21:20, 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 speedy keep‎. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) (non-admin closure) Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 10:16, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Nachhatar Pal

Nachhatar Pal (  | 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:NPOL and WP:GNG. Existing sources are mostly trivial mentions. Does not seem to have significant coverage from independent sources. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 09:25, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 10:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Could be the move

Could be the move (  | 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 find much coverage for this podcast. The best source seems to be the Penn State student blog already referenced, it's the closest thing to WP:SIGCOV. BuySomeApples ( talk) 06:03, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - Like the nom., I could not find any SIGCOV. Looking at the sources placed on the page, the fourth is about the company that owns this and not the subject itself and the third is just instagram with a follower count (primary source). Looking at the other two that address the subject, Pieczynsk (2024) is independent and addresses the subject with significant coverage, but the article is on the Penn State student blog. This is not a reliable secondary source. James (2022) has the same issue. It's a blog and thus self published. So we are left with nothing at all. It is clear that this is a podcast that some people like. At this point it lacks sigcov in reliable independent secondary sources. It could be WP:TOOSOON but it is not notable as it stands. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 07:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Entertainment, Internet, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Recently created so don't want to close as soft-delete. Relisting to establish a stronger consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 09:12, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - this podcast sounds kind of funny and cool but there's no claim to notability. Llajwa ( talk) 21:23, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 10:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Look Afraid

Look Afraid (  | 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 barely been visited, it is not notable. I am at a loss as for why this article would need to remain. If there is no feedback regarding this matter, I will be bold and delete it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleter ( talk • contribs) 15:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply

This request is malformed and should most likely be deleted, and resubmitted following the instructions available at WP:AFDHOWTO; probably easiest to use WP:TWINKLE. Also see Wikipedia:Deletion policy about why view counts are not a valid metric for why something should be deleted, Wikipedia:NOTABILITY is, and why you are not able to unilaterally delete this article without following a proper Wikipedia:Deletion process. -- Cerebral726 ( talk) 19:41, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I've fixed the formatting. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 09:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I am writing to request the deletion of the article on Look Afraid. Upon review, it has become evident that the subject matter does not meet the notability criteria outlined in Wikipedia's guidelines for music-related articles. While the band may have achieved some local recognition and won an international competition, there is a lack of substantial coverage from reliable sources to establish enduring notability.
The references provided in the article primarily consist of self-published sources such as MySpace profiles and dead links, which do not meet Wikipedia's standards for reliable sourcing. Additionally, the band's discography and history appear to be limited in scope and relevance to a broader audience.
Given these reasons, I believe that the article does not meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion and should be considered for deletion. I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to your prompt response. Cleter ( talk) 15:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
You have already started a deletion discussion that Pppery fixed for you. People have responded, I'm not sure who this letter-like comment is intended for. Cerebral726 (talk) 15:32, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
"Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 09:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)" Cleter ( talk) 16:13, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete No indication of notability. Llajwa ( talk) 21:25, 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 merge‎ to List of defunct Drum Corps International member corps. Star Mississippi 11:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Legends Drum and Bugle Corps

AfDs for this article:
Legends Drum and Bugle Corps (  | 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 drum corps went inactive in 2022, and as of now, seems to be dead. It does not seem to meet the notability requirements to be a standalone page, and I am against a merge to List of defunct Drum Corps International member corps per my comments on the talk page. Why? I Ask ( talk) 07:38, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Not eligible for Soft Deletion due to the previous AFD. That closed as Redirect, is that an option here?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Sadly, it can't be redirected to the old target because it no longer qualifies. They are no longer a Drum Corps International member corps. Why? I Ask ( talk) 15:00, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:48, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 10:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Josh Brown (figure skater)

Josh Brown (figure skater) (  | 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:NSKATE; no medal placements at any senior-level skating competitions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:33, 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! 07:38, 9 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! 07:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:47, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - does not meet criteria for notability. Llajwa ( talk) 21:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: NSKATE requires winning a medal at an international senior-level event or at a World Junior Figure Skating Championship. Securing the 23rd spot in 2016 isn't even a marginal case. The appearance on Ice Stars doesn't add notability. Owen× ☎ 19:13, 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 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 10:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Adamu Ibrahim Lamuwa

Adamu Ibrahim Lamuwa (  | 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)

Article created by a now indef-blocked paid editor, but I'm not convinced that a Permanent Secretary is notable anyway; this is not a ministerial position but a routine civil service position. His name obviously pops up occasionally but even the Voice of Nigeria ref from which most of the article is written is a Government publication. Black Kite (talk) 08:28, 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 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships 1978#4 × 10 km relay. Despite substantial discussion, nobody proposes anything but redirection or deletion. Sandstein 08:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Esko Lähtevänoja

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

BLP, 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. Ping me if sources are added to article that meet WP:SIGCOV and are not routine mill news or stats.  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Finland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to FIS Nordic World Ski Championships 1978 pending sources. The Finnish Wikipedia have none either. I failed to find some here as well, although I'm not sure if I used it correctly. Geschichte ( talk) 10:11, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - The National Library of Finland newspaper archive has about 1800 hits for "Esko Lähtevänoja" if one has a researcher account that allows access to more recent newspapers, but these are largely your run-of-the-mill sports coverage about how he fared in some competition or another. Some of the more promising stories include the following:
    • A two-thirds page article in Ilta-Sanomat (25 Feb 1978, page 33), but it's a combined interview of four young Finnish athletes who are hoping to take part in the 1980 Winter Olympics and contains pretty much zero independent content.
    • A two-thirds page in Kaleva (3 March 2017, page 26), which reminisces about how he participated in the 1978 Finnish championship biathlon relay. The actual contents are pretty much just "here's how he did in 1978, and here's a few quotes from today". I'm unclear why this is a news story.
    • A story in Helsingin Sanomat (24 February 1978, page 26) but the amount of encyclopedically useful information is, again, highly limited: we learn pretty much only how he fared in the 1978 Finnish championship, that he has previously won (unnamed) local competitions and that his father is his coach.
    • A segment in Etelä-Suomen Sanomat (7 November 1981, page 21) about how he is "in the shape of his lifetime" and preparing for the "Oslo world championship", whatever that is. This one is perhaps the best in terms of making claims of notability, calling him the "most successful Finnish young (lit. "boy") skier of all time" and noting how he "won the boys and young men's national championship four times in a row". But beyond those claims, the actual contents are then just more of the standard "he's in really good shape and ran a fast lap just recently".
I don't think these quite reach GNG. There's also a bunch of Swedish language stuff I don't have the time to translate (my Swedish is abysmal, and reading it takes a lot of effort), but based on quick glimpses it looked to be more of the same.
Overall, I'm getting a sense of a promising young athlete who never truly broke through. There might be something in more specialized sources (e.g. books on Finnish skiing), but hypothetical sourcing doesn't count. While I didn't go through all the old newspapers, what I saw makes me think this is borderline at best, and unlikely to ever go beyond a stub. While I'm not quite ready to !vote yet, I'm leaning towards something else than a keep. - Ljleppan ( talk) 10:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I can help out with Swedish sources Geschichte ( talk) 12:05, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Thanks, I appreciate the offer but I can't really share the texts :/ Ljleppan ( talk) 15:21, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I unfortunately lack the time to dig deeper into this, and what I've found so far indeed looks to fall short of what I'd consider a notability pass. As such, I'll note myself down as a Redirect to FIS Nordic World Ski Championships 1978 per Geschichte above. Please ping me if more sourcing is identified, and I'll happily reconsider. Ljleppan ( talk) 22:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I don't want to prioritize it either. By the way, the Oslo world championship would be the 1982 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships. I don't think he participated there, as he would have been mentioned in Norway. He is mentioned, though, as coming in 9th in the 1978 Holmenkollen ski festival 50 kilometres, one of the most historic races in the world. So there's potential. If this is redirected, admin, please mark it with {{ R with possibilities}}. Geschichte ( talk) 09:02, 30 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 casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Sandstein 08:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Katarzyna Doraczyńska

Katarzyna Doraczyńska (  | 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 evidence of this meeting WP:NBIO. Minor politician/bureaucrat (for some reason described on en wiki as an activist) who died in a high-profile crash. Pl Wikipedia article is a bit longer but also has nothing suggesting notability (just an obituary). A posthumous award of Order of Polonia Restituta, likely mass-awarded to everyone who died in said tragic event (~90 people) is not enough. WP:ATD-R would be to redirect this to List of casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment. PR person, clerical worker at the offices of the president of Poland, had functions in the Polish scouting movement and member of local city district councils. -- Ouro ( blah blah) 18:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Very much non-notable then. Oaktree b ( talk) 21:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: It's like the 9/11 articles that come up, not everyone that passed away is notable. They'll likely all have coverage at some point, but NOTMEMORIAL applies. Oaktree b ( talk) 21:28, 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 List of Ultima characters#The Avatar. ✗ plicit 05:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Avatar (Ultima)

AfDs for this article:
Avatar (Ultima) (  | 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 there is some reception for the origin of the term avatar as a concept in gaming, I'm going to argue that reception pertains more to the Ultima series and gaming tropes it established rather than to this character itself. As a character, the Avatar is barely one, and the reception reflects that. There's just no meat on this bone. Kung Fu Man ( talk) 05:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Kung Fu Man ( talk) 05:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge/Redirect to List of Ultima characters#The Avatar. As stated by the nom, the importance of the avatar in a gameplay context is more about the game than the character itself, who does not pass GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 05:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to List of Ultima characters#The Avatar where this is already covered. There isn't WP:SIGCOV for this topic outside of the game itself, and it makes more sense to cover this in a wider context. Shooterwalker ( talk) 17:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect I noticed you raised the previous deletion discussion in 2009. How time flies! I think the crux of it is that the Avatar is not a notable character in itself, the character is largely faceless and anonymous, what is being construed as 'The Avatar' is the embodiment of the virtues that form part of the narrative and gameplay. This is reflected by the sources really coming to struggle to say anything about the character without leaning on the broader concepts of the game and the player's input. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 08:01, 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 05:09, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Rose Lefebvre

Rose Lefebvre (  | 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)

An orphan article. I tried looking in google books, but comes up with hits of namesakes. Fails WP:ARTIST. LibStar ( talk) 04:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete: Per the one source in the article, she is mentioned on page 8 of Émile Delignières Catalogue raisonné de l’œuvre gravé de Jacques Aliamet, d’Abbeville, Paris, 1896, digital scan available here (in French). Evidently the same information given by the source used in the article, and hardly conveying any amount of notability: it's a single, one-sentence aside in a footnote. Otherwise, the closest thing to a source I could find is that Google Books hints there may be a mention on page 109 of Achille Le Sueur Le clergé Picard et la révolution - Volumes 1-2, Yvert et Tellier, 1904 (but snippet view isn't showing it to me and I haven't found the work digitalized anywhere I can access it). AddWitty NameHere 09:19, 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 List of casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Owen× ☎ 01:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Artur Francuz

Artur Francuz (  | 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 evidence of this meeting WP:NBIO. Non-notable minor security functionary who died in a high-profile crash. Pl Wikipedia article is a bit longer but also has nothing suggesting notability (just several obituaries). A posthumous award of Order of Polonia Restituta, likely mass-awarded to everyone who died in said tragic event (~90 people) is not enough. WP:ATD-R would be to redirect this to List of casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Side-note: he was not an officer - he was an NCO, promotion to the officer rank was posthomous as well. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:49, 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 List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:35, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

K33LN-D

K33LN-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 GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 04:48, 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 List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

KMBD-LD

KMBD-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) 04:31, 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 List of Daystar Television Network stations. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

WDMI-LD

WDMI-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. Redirect or merge to List of Daystar Television Network stations. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 04:30, 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 Griffithstown. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

St Hilda's Church, Griffithstown

St Hilda's Church, Griffithstown (  | 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)

Only sources I could find were sources promoting the church. Additionally, it fails WP:GNG as it seems to just be a random church. It can easily be merged with List of Church in Wales churches or Griffithstown. ''Flux55'' ( talk) 03:22, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 January 23. — cyberbot I Talk to my owner:Online 03:47, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge and Redirect to Griffithstown. The Coflein entry and the source it cites is adequate to cover it there. I couldn't find any other significant coverage. Jfire ( talk) 05:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge/Redirect: have not found anything to indicate that it is notable enough for a separate article. EdwardUK ( talk) 05:36, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Christianity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • A quick perusal of what sources there are indicates that if our Incorporated Church Building Society article actually dealt with that subject and didn't just ignore the entire 19th century, it might be better dealt with there. Uncle G ( talk) 07:57, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge to Griffithstown per Jfire. It gets mentioned up front in [19] but only as the location of a funeral. A couple of other such mentions in books. Newspapers find quite a few items, but they are the usual primary sources, mainly weddings and funerals. The church does not appear to be a listed building, but contains a memorial to Henry Griffiths for whom the town is named. I cannot find any reason to keep as an article in its own right, but it is part of Griffithstown and there should be some mergeable content here that would be well placed in that article. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 13:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • delete There is no serious claim to notability for this late Victorian building, and while I can appreciate the urge to merge, I've not seen lists of churches in town articles— for surely this is not the only church in town. Mangoe ( talk) 15:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Churches can be found in town articles, e.g South Croydon#Churches or Aberystwyth#Churches. St Hilda's is already mentioned at Griffithstown. If you think that mention is sufficient I would suggest redirect is a better WP:ATD. Findachurch suggests there are 3 churches in Griffithstown. Google maps adds another 2 and a kingdom hall in close proximity. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 16:12, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions: Other stuff does not exist Djflem ( talk) 16:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge to Griffithstown, where St Hilda's is already mentioned as a landmark. Djflem ( talk) 18:18, 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 redirect‎ to Eugene Group. The Wordsmith Talk to me 19:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Eugene Concrete

Eugene Concrete (  | 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)

Doesn't pass WP:ORGCRIT. I can only find mentions in passing in Korean of this company (e.g. [20]). The parent company Eugene Group is notable though. toobigtokale ( talk) 03:19, 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 keep‎. Withdrawn, did not see AfD in Nov 2023. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 02:34, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Diamondbacks–Dodgers rivalry

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

Not a "true" rivalry. The teams play each other often because they are in the same division. And there was some short-lived beef in the 2010s but nothing to the level of a big rivalry like Yankees-Red Sox . Natg 19 ( talk) 02:25, 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 keep‎. ✗ plicit 02:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

China Navigation Company

China Navigation Company (  | 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)

About 90% of the text has been RD1 redacted that there isn't much of an article left. Draftifying seems the best next step. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, China, and Singapore. UtherSRG (talk) 12:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    My name is Robert Jennings. I am the Head of Group Archives for John Swire & Sons Ltd. (JS&S)
    I do not believe that there have been any breaches of copyright in the content of the page for the China Navigation Company. If any allegations of copyright infringement by a puported copyright holder have been made then I would dispute such allegations. I believe that the page can and should be returned to its previous condition. It certainly shouldn't be deleted. CNCo celebrated its 150th anniversary in 2022 - an extraordinary achievement for a shipping company, made even more extraordinary by the fact that it is still in the hands of its original owners.
    I can confirm that Swire Shipping and Swire Bulk are wholly owned operating subsidiaries of the China Navigation Company Ltd. (CNCo). CNCo is a holding company and is a wholly owned subsidiary of JS&S. I can confirm that any written history of CNCo that is the copyright of JSS, CNCo or either Swire Shipping or Swire Bulk can be used freely and without specific permission from JSS.
    The history text (flagged for copyright violation) contained within the description of the CNCo physical archives (owned by JSS and held in the archive collection of the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS)) and shared on ‘Archives Hub’ https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/ea5125cd-1825-31be-b41a-142a903c5ede?component=e8bf8d21-b4a5-3546-ac96-9bc57cfc7319 has been reproduced (with minor edits to bring it up to date) from the introduction to the JSS collection at SOAS written by Elizabeth Hook and published originally in 1977. The copyright to this text is owned by SOAS but permission to use the text feely for non-commercial purposes is explicitly given. The link to the digitised version of the Elizabeth Hook 1977 catalogue of the JSS collection and to the permission are included below.
    https://digital.soas.ac.uk/AA00001363/00001/1x?search=hook
    https://digital.soas.ac.uk//permissions/
    I do hope the above is sufficiently satisfactory to remove any issue. Please do contact me if there are any further questions. Tie Coup ( talk) 15:21, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Tie Coup/Robert Jennings,
    The license which Wikipedia ascribes the text and contributions by editors to is Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0, as stated in the footer of the site. This license allows the commercial usage of the material, which evidently is incongruent with the permission to use the archive materials freely for non-commercial purposes. Do see Donating copyrighted materials for more information.
    – robertsky ( talk) 20:30, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. It was I who removed the copyvio content, and left the page in its present state; unfortunately no rewrite was proposed in the four weeks the page was listed at WP:CP. I fully agree with UtherSRG that that's far from ideal, but don't think that we can justify deletion: the company has well over a century of significant history and is indisputably notable. Other options – redirect, merge or rewrite/expansion – are all preferable to deletion. If the page is kept it should be moved to Swire Shipping. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 10:40, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 02:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Hyde, Francis E.; Harris, J. R. (1957) [1956]. Blue Funnel: A History of Alfred Holt and Company of Liverpool from 1865 to to 1914. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. p. 34. OCLC  1148033078. Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Internet Archive.

      The book notes: "As early as 1867 he had realised the importance of sending small steamers up the Yangtse River, but it was not until 1872 that he was able to form the China Navigation Company with a capital of £360,000. He had initially tried to persuade Alfred and Philip Holt to subscribe capital to this project, but without success. But as the venture became relatively more important to the maintenance of Holt’s main line cargoes they were induced in 1883 to loan £10,000 to Swire’s company, secured by a debenture repayable at the end of 1885. The business of the China Navigation Company eventually became so large that shipping operations finally became Butterfield & Swire’s paramount concern; after 1902 they discontinued their trading activities altogether."

    2. Liu, Kwang-Ching (August 1959). "Steamship Enterprise In Nineteenth-Century China". The Journal of Asian Studies. 18 (4). doi: 10.2307/2941139.

      The article notes on page 439: "In the early 1870's the China Navigation Company was organized by John Samuel Swire, head of John Swire & Co. in London, and of Butterfield & Swire in Shanghai. In 1872 Swire was able to persuade his friends and relatives in England to join him in raising £360,000 (the equivalent of Tls. 970,000) for his new company. Although one or two British merchants in the treaty ports were said to have taken shares, the shareholders' meetings were held in England, and the annual reports were never published in China."

      The article notes on page 440: "Although the China Navigation Company owned only five ships in 1877, its managing firm, Butterfield & Swire, served also as agents for five other steamships which operated mainly on South China routes. These five ships were later incorporated into the China Navigation Company's fleet in 1883."

      The article notes on page 445: "In this period, of the two major British companies, the China Navigation Company (Butterfield & Swire, agents) was the more prosperous."

      The article notes on page 448: "This was the pattern of development also followed by the China Navigation Company (under the agency of Butterfield & Swire), except that the latter was more prosperous and grew faster. Even during the frenzied competition of the 1870's, the China Navigation Company could finance expansion from current earnings. In the twenty years between 1874 and 1894, the China Navigation Company's fleet increased from six ships with a total of 10,618 tons, to twenty-nine ships totaling 34,543 tons—this despite the fact that between 1873 and 1893 the company lost a total of nine ships in accidents."

    3. Johnman, Lewis; Murphy, Hugh (2017). Scott Lithgow: Dejá Vu All Over Again! The Rise and Fall of a Shipbuilding Company. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. p. 5. ISBN  0-9738934-0-0. ISSN  1188-3928. Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Google Books.

      The book notes: "By 1872 Swire had established his China Navigation Company, registered in London, with James Henry Scott's father among its shareholders. The younger James Henry Scott became a partner in 1874 and with Swire visited Greenock to purchase two steamers, later named Fuchow and Swatow, from John Scott IV, who in turn took a half share in each. The two vessels steamed for China and formed the basis of another new company, the Coast Boats Ownery, in which John Scott was again a substantial investor. Up to 1879 Scotts supplied six steamers to the company and by 1882 had delivered another ten. The following year Coast Boats and China Navigation merged in response to competition, with the new company retaining the China Navigation name. From modest beginnings the relationship of mutual trust and friendship between Scotts, Holt and Swire, initially through builder-client relationships and then through interlocking shareholdings, resulted in Ocean registering as a private company in 1902. In so doing, Ocean also purchased a controlling interest in the China Navigation Company. But by this time John Samuel Swire had died and James Henry Scott had become the senior partner.15 In 1917, Ocean purchased one-third of Scotts' ordinary shares at a cost of £366,640.16."

    4. Jones, Geoffrey (2000). Merchants to Multinationals: British Trading Companies in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp.  37, 71– 72. ISBN  0-19-829450-6. Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Internet Archive.

      The book notes on page 37: "A major development came in 1872 when Swire’s entered the China coastal and river shipping business in direct competition to the established shipping operations of Jardine Matheson and the American firm of Russell and Co. In that year the China Navigation Company was formed to provide steamer services on the Lower Yangtze, and to supply cargoes for Holt’s ships. This was a Londonregistered limited liability company, though its shares were principally held by the Swires, the Holts, and other Liverpool families."

      The book notes on pages 71– 72: "Swire’s China Navigation Company grew in the late nineteenth century as one of the leading shipping companies in the Far East. In China the firm expanded from its initial business of running steamers up the Yangtze river to the coastal trade, which by the 1890s had become the main source of revenue. The growth of the China Navigation Company was achieved by breaking into the rates agreements of the pre-existing companies, and then organizing stronger cartel arrangements with Swire’s inside them. By the late 1890s China Navigation had a fleet of forty-seven ships, considerably larger than Jardines' Indo-China, and was declaring dividends of 20 per cent per annum, although in the 1900s Japanese and other competition ended the period of great prosperity. In this decade further shipping-related investments were made, notably the building of a large dockyard and a firm to provide lighter services for China Navigation.'

    5. Cowan, Charles Donald (1964). The Economic Development Of China And Japan: Studies In Economic History And Political Economy. London: George Allen & Unwin. pp.  51, 58. OCLC  350522. Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Internet Archive.

      The book notes on page 51: "The heaviest blow to Russell and Company’s position was dealt by a concern organized in Britain. This was the China Navigation Company Limited, whose initial capital of £360,000 was organized by John Samuel Swire in London in the spring of 1872. With this capital, the company purchased the two ships and the shore properties of the Union S.N. Company, the small British firm in the Yangtze trade, and, in addition, three new ships (to be built on American models) were ordered from A. and J. Inglis, shipbuilders at Glasgow."

      The book notes on page 58: "In the first half of 1874, for example, the profits of the China Navigation Company before deducting depreciation were only £8,500 — a fact which brought 'glum looks from shareholders'. In the second half of 1874, the company yielded larger earnings only because the Glengyle, one of its steamers, was removed from the Yangtze river for service on the China coast. In order to satisfy the shareholders, the China Navigation Company declared an annual dividend of 5 per cent in early 1875. But that the company’s profits continued to be unsatisfactory is indicated by the fact that during 1875, John Swire had to arrange a loan of £57,000 from Alfred and Philip Holt for the China Navigation Company, at 5 per cent per annum."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow China Navigation Company to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard ( talk) 09:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per excellent sources found by Cunard. Thanks 1.46.159.106 ( talk) 05:22, 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 speedy keep‎. Per WP:SPEEDYKEEP#1. The nominator has withdrawn their nomination and there are no other arguments for deletion. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 14:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

International Wood Products Journal

International Wood Products Journal (  | 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 it meets WP:N. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 17:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 02:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. I think there's both a long-enough history, and enough secondary-source coverage. — David Eppstein ( talk) 06:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Indexed in Scopus, easy pass of WP:NJournals. -- Randykitty ( talk) 09:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Withdraw nomination per excellent ponits above. Boleyn ( talk) 13:19, 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. Despite Jfire's laudable attempts at finding something, "likely" sources are not a sufficient basis to retain an aricle in the light of WP:V. All Wikipedia content must be verifiable, i.e. based on actually existing and identifiable sources. Sandstein 08:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Cafer Bater

Cafer Bater (  | 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 he meets WP:ARTIST or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 18:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • I think these are all exhibition catalogues or pamphlets: [21], [22], [23].
  • The last of the above corresponds to a memorial exhibition that occurred after his death. Milliyet has a brief article about the exhibition opening [24], which calls Bater one of Turkey's most important watercolor painters, and another about it being extended due to its popularity [25].
  • There is a 1987 column in Milliyet archives which I can't access: [26]. And I'm guessing the third result there, dated 03.04.1994, mentions his death.
  • There are two catalogs that I can't access: [27] [28].
Together, these lead me to believe that he was a notable pre-internet Turkish watercolor artist, for which GNG-establishing sources will likely only be found in Turkish, and offline. Jfire ( talk) 04:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 02:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO, nothing showing this meets WP:ARTIST. Sources in article (single ref and ELs) and BEFORE show nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. Ping me if WP:IS sources are added to article that meet WP:SIGCOV and are not OBITs.  //  Timothy ::  talk  19:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I am not finding significant reliable sources for this artist. Not finding him listed as part of any notable collections. -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk) 01:27, 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 Paku Karen Baptist Association where a sentence has been added, rendering this a viable ATD whereas the merger would have been an issue with the lack of sourcing. History retained should sourcing prove accessible. Star Mississippi 11:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Paku Divinity School

Paku Divinity School (  | 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 it meets WP:N; it should be but I couldn't prove it. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 19:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 02:00, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete or merge - Agreed with Peterkingiron that there's likely few online sources. While it's likely a real organisation, I don't think it meets WP:GNG right now. In fact, if it weren't an education institution it would meet WP:A7 criteria for speedy deletion.
I'm not sure if we should merge unsourced content elsewhere, so the best might be to delete it and recreate it when an editor can find an appropriate source. I've added a sentence about this school based on this article's lead in Paku Karen Baptist Association for now. EmeraldRange ( talk/ contribs) 16:08, 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 List of stations owned by Innovate Corp. as a viable ATD with a slightly stronger consensus than WQCW. This can be changed, however, as a matter of editorial discretion Star Mississippi 14:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

WOCW-LD

WOCW-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 WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV from secondary sources. Article was part of a bulk AfD last year that closed as no consensus but there isn't much to show this meets the notability guidelines on its own. Let'srun ( talk) 02:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and West Virginia. Let'srun ( talk) 02:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Established broadcast channel. Standards for source frequency on articles about media outlets should be much looser since media doesn’t tend to cover media. WilsonP NYC ( talk) 03:01, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete or possibly redirect to WQCW. The argument above has fallen way out of favor, including at an RfC. WHCP had issues getting its signal into Charleston, yet there is no coverage even mentioning this translator for some reason in Charleston newspapers. Sammi Brie (she/her •  t • c) 04:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.: its pre-2015 history as a WQCW relay is a bit more than your average DTV America/HC2/Innovate station, but not much (since that incarnation would not have been independently notable), and of course the supposedly-limited operations since then are the usual national networks, no local content, and no significant coverage — but it's barely enough for me to at least consider retaining the page history behind a redirect. It's another technical survivor of a bulk nomination from last year. As for the notion of media outlets having looser standards: we tried that, and the eventual result was a 2021 RfC that pretty much confirmed that the GNG is the notability barometer, not NMEDIA. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Pretty sure that discusion ended without a clear consensus. WilsonP NYC ( talk) 11:39, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 02:00, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp. Its notability as a WQCW translator is easily noted in that article, but as Gray sold it for a pittance knowing that DTVA wouldn't come close to being a competitor, and the station's low sale price is truly the only thing of note. Gray likely knew that the station's viability once it moved the WQCW transmitter to WSAZ's stick would be nil to none (this was before they started programming subchannel networks of their own), and DTVA wouldn't be competitive at all since it can only serve Charleston proper due to the area's geography. Nate • ( chatter) 00:25, 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. The arguments by the people who have addressed the quality of the article's references in detail have remained unaddressed and unrebutted. Sandstein 08:34, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ukraine Solidarity Campaign

Ukraine Solidarity Campaign (  | 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 secondary sources, besides sparse one liners in Morning Star which is already not very reliable ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him •  talk) 21:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I've expanded the page to include more information and draw on more secondary sources, including from the mainstream press. This organisation is clearly notable given its significant support from trade unions representing tens of thousands of workers, as well as elected politicians. It also provides crucial information about how different political tendencies have responded to the war in Ukraine. For these reasons, I say we keep the page. — Zcbeaton ( talk) 13:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Here is my summary of each the non-primary sources in article and why they do not show WP:Secondary WP:SIGCOV..

  1. Interview with founder of USC Chris Ford [1]
  2. Article BY Chris Ford, founder of USC [2]
  3. A brief passing mention that they admire USC; [3]
  4. Brief mention of USC and USC Scotland. [4]
  5. Passing mention of USC [5]
  6. Morning Star (British newspaper) mentions that USC organised a demo, no more info [6]
  7. MP statement who co-founded USC [7]
  8. Trade unionist supports USC; no elaboration on it [8]
  9. No mention of USC, except one of the signatories [9]

In short...I am not convinced that WP:42 has been achieved. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him •  talk) 23:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply

References

  1. ^ "International solidarity. How foreign leftists are helping Ukraine in the war". Commons. Retrieved 2024-01-15.
  2. ^ Moloney, Christopher Ford, Mick Antoniw, John (2022-04-08). "The labour movement must stand by Ukraine: join our historic demonstration". LabourList. Retrieved 2024-01-15.{{ cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( link)
  3. ^ Łobodziński, Wojciech Albert (2022-10-28). "Ukrainian workers fight on the front - and suffer from lack of political power". Cross-border Talks. Retrieved 2024-01-15.
  4. ^ "Ukraine's Popular Resistance – Scottish Left Review". Retrieved 2024-01-15.
  5. ^ Jones, Alan (2023-04-30). "Train drivers' union boss hits out over criticism of strike on eve of Eurovision". Evening Standard. Retrieved 2024-01-15.
  6. ^ Friday; April 8; 2022 (2022-04-07). "Trade unions will stage a protest march and rally in Whitehall in solidarity with Ukraine". Morning Star. Retrieved 2024-01-15. {{ cite web}}: |last3= has numeric name ( help)CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list ( link)
  7. ^ Editors, Labour Hub (2023-02-21). "The Ukrainian Question for Socialists". Labour Hub. Retrieved 2024-01-15. {{ cite web}}: |last= has generic name ( help)
  8. ^ Antoniw, Mick. "Welsh unions are supporting Ukrainian workers. We need more of this solidarity". openDemocracy.
  9. ^ "Letter calling for arms to Ukraine is dangerous, say peace campaigners". Morning Star. 2023-02-16. Retrieved 2024-01-15.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, please do not put your comments in the midst of the nomination statement.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:33, 8 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! 22:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep I think with the sourced expansion it is notable. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 16:39, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Which one? I methodically went through the nine sources and why they’re insufficient for establishing notability ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him •  talk) 09:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The additional sources have established notability. TH1980 ( talk) 02:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Could the Keep arguments please specify which sources are sufficient, or explain why Shushugah's analysis of them is incorrect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering ( talk) 01:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Fails GNG and NORG. Source eval:
Comments Source
Primary, fails WP:IS 1. "Labour Movement Aid Delivered to Ukrainian Resistance". 22 December 2022. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
Primary, fails WP:IS 2. ^ "Support Ukrainian workers at the front!". Ukraine Solidarity Campaign. 7 March 2023. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
Interview with Chris Ford, fails WP:IS 3. ^ "International solidarity. How foreign leftists are helping Ukraine in the war". Commons. 4 October 2022. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
Article author is Christopher Ford, fails WP:IS 4. ^ "The labour movement must stand by Ukraine: join our historic demonstration". LabourList. 8 April 2022. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
One sentence mention, "In this area, I really admire the work of the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign in the UK, which has pushed many British trade unions from pacifist or pro-Russian to pro-Ukrainian positions", fails WP:SIGCOV 5. ^ "Ukrainian workers fight on the front – and suffer from lack of political power". Cross-Border Talks. 28 October 2022. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
One sentence mention, " The Ukraine Solidarity Campaign, and its sister organisation in Scotland, were set up to make the links between their struggles and ours and to win them practical support for their fight for survival. " fails SIGCOV 6. ^ Colin Turbett (September 2023). "Ukraine's popular resistance". Scottish Left Review. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
Name mention, "Mr Harper hasn’t – and we are members of the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign. Mr Harper isn’t.", fails SIGCOV 7. ^ "Train drivers' union boss hits out over criticism of strike on eve of Eurovision". Evening Standard. 30 April 2023. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
Primary, fails WP:IS 8. ^ Jump up to:a b "About". Ukraine Solidarity Campaign. 9 September 2014. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
Article about an event they had a leading role in "Saturday’s demo, organised by the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign and endorsed by five Ukrainian union federations, will see several British unions", nothing about the event because it hadn't happened yet, nothing about the org other than it was part of the event. Fails WP:SIGCOV, does not address the subject (Ukraine Solidarity Campaign) directly and indepth. 9. ^ "Trade unions will stage a protest march and rally in Whitehall in solidarity with Ukraine". Morning Star. 8 April 2022. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
Primary, "At this stage a number of us founded the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign and then over the years worked together on trade union campaigns through the Confederation of the Free Trade Unions of Ukraine.", the source also fails WP:SIGCOV, it does not address the subject (Ukraine Solidarity Campaign) directly and indepth 10. ^ "The Ukrainian Question for Socialists". 21 February 2023. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
One sentence mention "The Ukraine Solidarity Campaign has been instrumental in working with trade unions in the UK to develop closer links and to provide direct support to their brothers and sisters in Ukrainian unions.", fails WP:SIGCOV 11. ^ "Welsh unions are supporting Ukrainian workers. We need more of this solidarity". openDemocracy. 31 July 2023. Retrieved 2 January 2024.
Names two individuals representing Ukraine Solidarity Campaign in letter signature, fails WP:SIGCOV 12. ^ "Letter calling for arms to Ukraine is dangerous, say peace campaigners". Morning Star. 16 February 2023. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
Nothing above meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth, @ TH1980: or @ Shushugah: could you clarify which sources you believe are independent and address the subject directly and indepth?  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
@ TimothyBlue I do not believe SIGCOV is satisfied and have similarly examined each of the present sources. But perhaps @ Alextejthompson or @ Zcbeaton could expand? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him •  talk) 17:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Thanks, I confused your signature in the comment with another when copying it, thanks for the proper pings.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:41, 30 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 00:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Cream City Collectives

Cream City Collectives (  | 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)

Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. ( ?) It had no meaningful hits in searches of EBSCOhost (federated), Google Books, and newspaper archives beyond passing mentions. Altogether there is not enough reliably sourced content with which to write an article worthy of the subject. There are no worthwhile redirect targets, as the infoshop list only includes independently notable infoshops. czar 01:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Wisconsin. czar 01:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I was looking at the cited sources and found that only one of them even mentioned the "Cream City Collectives", but it only verifies there being a gallery in it, nothing else. I couldn't verify the detail about the Mathilde Anneke infoshop, as the cited biographical source never mentions the infoshop or the Cream City Collectives. If there's not significant coverage of this that we're missing, this is definitely a non-controversial candidate for deletion. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 14:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Couldn't find any sources that could prove the subject's notability. Davest3r08 >:) ( talk) 13:12, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 00:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Embassy of Indonesia, Wellington

Embassy of Indonesia, Wellington (  | 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)

Based on the sole primary source. Lacking coverage to meet WP:ORG. LibStar ( talk) 01:32, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 00:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Abel Tesfamariam

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

Fails WP:GNG, no information about the athlete except his participation in the 2012 YOG and dual nationality. His FIS profile says he was last active in 2012. Could be redirected to the Philippines at the 2012 Winter Youth Olympics at best. Hariboneagle927 ( talk) 01:24, 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 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. Star Mississippi 14:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

List of institutions with Sanskrit mottos

List of institutions with Sanskrit mottos (  | 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)

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of educational institutions with Sanskrit mottos * Pppery * it has begun... 01:49, 9 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! 02:26, 16 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! 01:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete, I don't particularly see why the intersection between motto and Sanskrit would meet LISTN. Geschichte ( talk) 08:54, 30 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 01:40, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Stanislas Branicki

Stanislas Branicki (  | 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 am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject – a French men's field hockey player – to meet WP:GNG. I found a few quotes here from Le Parisien and not much else. JTtheOG ( talk) 00:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment in French the article has already existed for a year+, however it is also a stub. It is possible this article does not meet WP:GNG. However, I think it best wait for a comment by the creator of the article, perhaps if more sources are brought than GNG can be met. Homerethegreat ( talk) 15:10, 16 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! 01:01, 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 Joe Biden judicial appointment controversies. as a viable ATD with the history preserved should her status change. Star Mississippi 14:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Marian Gaston

Marian Gaston (  | 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 or WP:JUDGE. Failed judicial nominees aren't inherently notable, WP:BIO1E applies. Let'srun ( talk) 00:09, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Law, and California. Let'srun ( talk) 00:09, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Draftify until renomination. I don't understand what makes her a "failed" nominee all of a sudden. So she hasn't been renominated within the first five days of her nomination being sent back, and....? Snickers2686 ( talk) 03:39, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Draftify per the above. BD2412 T 04:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Weak Keep in keeping with the spirit of Wikipedia:WOMRED, let's see if her nomination regains traction. Wl219 ( talk) 01:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Appears that her nomination has been withdrawn at her request. I'd be fine with redirecting this to Joe Biden judicial appointment controversies as a WP:ATD. Let'srun ( talk) 04:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Redirect the page "Marian Gatson" to Joe Biden judicial appointment controversies, as her litigation record and opposition to her nomination are substantive, while the fact she withdrew herself means she's no longer a nominee and not notable enough to merit her own article. JohnAdams1800 ( talk) 04:39, 11 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! 00:18, 16 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! 00:56, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 04:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Aeroeste

Aeroeste (  | 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:NCORP and GNG. A BEFORE search didn't yield any SIGCOV ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him •  talk) 00:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete or Draftify - Clearly an established if small commercial carrier but no apparent independent media coverage prevents a vote to keep. WilsonP NYC ( talk) 02:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - No claim to notability. Llajwa ( talk) 03:02, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 01:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Sole Satisfier

Sole Satisfier (  | 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)

Background concerns: A rather tricky page for an encyclopaedia, Sole Satisfier concerns the Christian theological notion that God is the only source of complete fulfilment. The page was heavily purged of uncited material in a series of edits last year by Horse Eye's Back, and now consists only of two quotations from saints. For a Christian theological notion, it noticeably draws from Catholic sources ( WP:CONTENTFORK?), and reads as an essay or collection of related saintly writings rather than an encyclopaedic entry. About a dozen pages linked to it in "See also" until I removed these links last week; they were almost universally articles of saints with no clear connection to "Sole satisfier". The only mainspace page that now links here is Spiritual communion, which exhibits the same problems regarding essay-style writing and sayings-collection.

Motivation: I am concerned that the article might never be able to meet an encyclopaedic standard. A Google search returns very few results; "sole satisfier" is not even mentioned in the Catechism of the Catholic Church quoted in the article. I am happy to be corrected by someone better acquainted with theology, but I do not think the term "sole satisfier" is something that has any academic foundation, and is therefore in the "language" of theology. The article reads like an attempt to define, coin, and discuss a specific theological notion that is not supported in reliable, independent sources; therefore, the article will violate WP:OR for as long as sources do not use this particular term. Nevertheless, the notion could be incorporated into existing articles; Desire#Religion might serve particularly well for a redirect as an alternative to deletion, and there is some relevance for Argument from desire.

(This is my first AfD nomination, so I am sorry if I am doing anything wrong!) IgnatiusofLondon ( talk) 19:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete. After looking a bit, I agree with the nominator; this simply isn't discussed as a concept in any sources. Original research. — Moriwen ( talk) 23:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete. The term "Sole Satisfier" seems more like an urban terminology from the last few decades of modern music - such as Sister Souljah. Made-up term, even. I have never, ever heard this term, or one even similar, tied to any Christian faith. — Maile ( talk) 01:00, 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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2024_January_23&oldid=1201458057"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 22 January 24 >

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. ✗ plicit 01:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

El mejor verano de mi vida

El mejor verano de mi vida (  | 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’m not seeing in depth coverage in reliable independent sources to indicate this band is notable. Mccapra ( talk) 21:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not soft-deleting here as article was only recently created.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:34, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - Doesn't meet notability for a band. Sources listed all are either someone's blog or do not demonstrate significant coverage. Worth noting that this page was a redirect to a movie named that in Spanish before being rewritten by two IP editors (probably members of the band because the IPs are from Peru). -- StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk) 01:19, 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. Owen× ☎ 23:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DXET-TV

DXET-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)

There does not seem to be significant coverage in reliable sources. Given the age of the article, there are a lot of Wikipedia mirror results. Previous AFD did not seem to discuss any WP:SIGCOV. MarioGom ( talk) 23:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. MarioGom ( talk) 23:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep - if this had the first tv broadcast in the history of Mindanao, that sounds historically notable. But it is unsourced. Llajwa ( talk) 19:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Fails GNG and NCORP. Two refs in article are mill news, neither meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth, BEFORE found nothing other than promo and listings.  //  Timothy ::  talk  11:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Timothy's rationale. Chaosbrigader64 ( talk) 23:25, 30 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 23:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Consulate General of Germany, İzmir

Consulate General of Germany, İzmir (  | 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 clear that a consulate general is notable. Most embassies aren’t and there is nothing special about this as an institution or as a building. Mccapra ( talk) 23:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Yes, there are many such consulates that are located only in offices. However, the German Consulate in Izmir is not like that. It has both a solid history and a separate diplomatic complex.
The consulate has been operating continuously since 1924. The consulate has a separate diplomatic complex, the land area is more than 5000 m2. Ayratayrat ( talk) 20:26, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
But how does having a separate complex make it notable? Llajwa ( talk) 20:01, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I don't see the notability. Llajwa ( talk) 20:01, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Fails GNG. 2 of the 3 sources are primary. LibStar ( talk) 08:00, 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 23:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Dr. Johnny Wildside

Dr. Johnny Wildside (  | 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 independent significant coverage of this pro wrestler - Altenmann >talk 21:17, 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 no consensus‎. Nomination was a vague wave. The other delete argument stated the used sources did not meet GNG, but notability is based upon available sources. Several of the keep arguments stated that GNG was met, but gave no further evidence, so they are also weak. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 02:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Party "Together with the Vytis"

Party "Together with the Vytis" (  | 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)

Minor party, without any real political success or significance Marcelus ( talk) 14:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep, significant coverage about non-trivial history. Not a WP:MILL party at all. Geschichte ( talk) 08:03, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:32, 16 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) 21:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep - took part in several elections - Altenmann >talk 21:24, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Sourcing used is either primary, or trivial mentions. I don't see much we could use to build an article. Oaktree b ( talk) 02:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. If kept should be renamed Together with the Vytis. No need to disambiguate. gidonb ( talk) 07:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, meets WP:GNG. Serious consideration should then be given to gidonb's naming proposal. Jacona ( talk) 12:13, 30 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. If anyone would like a temporary copy of this to use for creation of a gallery on Commons, let me know and I will be happy to facilitate that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:16, 1 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Gallery of distinctive unit insignias

Gallery of distinctive unit insignias (  | 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)

WP:NOTGALLERY. A very long, almost completely unsourced (one insignia has a source) gallery, basically a repeat of Commons:Category:Distinctive Unit Insignia (DUI) of the United States Army. Fram ( talk) 16:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • No opinion I wasn't aware of NOTGALLERY; I saw Gallery of sovereign state flags and figured Galleries were a thing. My bad. I moved all of these images out of Distinctive unit insignia because it was making that article so large that it was struggling to load, and getting in the way of reading the actual prose. I don't particularly care what happens to Gallery of distinctive unit insignias, as long as the great wall of images doesn't just get moved back to Distinctive unit insignia. The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 23:05, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The Squirrel Conspiracy, I'm one of the groups of military veteran editors that built that page, from the beginning it was designed and made as it was. It was meant to be a short description and display of the unit insignia. please return it back to how it was as you destroyed years of work on it with your edits. Rukia8492 ( talk) 18:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    The content isn't bad for Wikipedia, it's just not the way to display it. All of these DUI can be displayed in the relevant unit articles. They can also remain on Commons and a link to the commons category can be placed in the DUI article. Jahaza ( talk) 21:18, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep Useful visual list, clearly defined subject (has parent article " Distinctive unit insignia"). If someone is worried with the word "gallery", the article just as well may be renamed to List of distinctive unit insignias - Altenmann >talk 21:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • a "Visual list" is a gallery, and renaming it doesn't change the content. An article is text-based and source-based, summarizing secondary sources about a subject. None of this is present here. Fram ( talk) 08:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      • List pages do not "summarize" anything, they.. er.. list things. - Altenmann >talk
        • But (on enwiki) not images, that's what Commons does, and that's why we have "notgallery". Otherwise every gallery would be kept because "it is a list". A list which isn't used for navigation and otherwise doesn't provide information about the listed items is not what enwiki is intended for. Fram ( talk) 17:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
          • Nor each category is a list for wikipedia purposes. The discussed list does provide information about its items. - Altenmann >talk 23:11, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Transwiki to Commons as per User:MKFI above. Is there any argument to make against that solution? Llajwa ( talk) 20:05, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete or transwiki per NOTGALLERY. Sandstein 08:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete If wp:gallerycruft exists. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 11:42, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 19:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete WP:NOTGALLERY Lightburst ( talk) 20:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Transwiki to Commons. This sort of page is perfect for Commons, and we should place it there. Destroying the work by just deleting it now makes little sense; first we should have the page imported there, and only after that should it be deleted. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 21:12, 31 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 00:46, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Barmer–Bandra Terminus Humsafar Express

Barmer–Bandra Terminus Humsafar Express (  | 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)
Bandra Terminus–Barmer Humsafar Express (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable train lines to be opened this week, no non-trivial coverage. Support possibility of recreating the articles if the lines receives coverage after opening. ChaotıċEnby( t · c) 13:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 13:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:17, 16 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) 21:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delele without prejudice to recreation once it satisfies WP:GNG. Now it is unreferenced. - Altenmann >talk 21:26, 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 delete‎. Owen× ☎ 00:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Herminigildo Ranera

AfDs for this article:
Herminigildo Ranera (  | 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 she meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. I am aware I may be missing something in Tagalog sources. Last AfD had very low participation, so no consensus. As this has been waiting in CAT:NN for 14 years, I really hope we can now get a discussion going. Boleyn ( talk) 18:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Tito Pao, Probably lack of quorum. Rfd's can be closed comfortably with at least two votes but Afd is supposed to have a wider audience. -- Lenticel ( talk) 22:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I tried to look at the News archives for articles but most of the info that I found are shows for orchestras that he was conducting for rather than about him as a person/musician. Maestro just means he's a conductor. -- Lenticel ( talk) 01:06, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 21:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete I can't find any significant coverage. Other editors have had 14 years to do so. At this point, absent any evidence to the contrary, it seems fair to assume there aren't any. Jfire ( talk) 03:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep Being conductor of the Philippine Philharmonic Orchestra, along with other high profile accomplishments, sounds notable. Agree that lack of RS is a problem. Llajwa ( talk) 20:09, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Source in article is a name mention in a list, and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. Ping me if sources are found.  //  Timothy ::  talk  18:08, 30 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 withdrawn by nominator‎. (non-admin closure) InfiniteNexus ( talk) 03:59, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Family Plan (1997 film)

AfDs for this article:
Family Plan (1997 film) (  | 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)

Article fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. All the references in the article are mere mentions about this film. I did a WP:BEFORE and found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I also found nothing suitable, reliable and in-depth enough to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and WP:NEXIST. The Film Creator ( talk) 20:56, 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 University of Plymouth#Student accommodation. ✗ plicit 23:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Francis Drake Hall of Residence

Francis Drake Hall of Residence (  | 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)

Unable to find substantial independent coverage about these halls of residence - the only coverage I can find about the buildings are in regards to an arson attack and not the buildings themseves being notable. Would recommend a redirect to University_of_Plymouth#Student_accommodation. pinktoebeans (talk) 20:55, 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 keep‎. Discussion over the best transliterated spelling can continue on the article's Talk page. Owen× ☎ 00:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ravipalli

Ravipalli (  | 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 sources cited. Multiple attempts at finding sources (other than a map) have failed. Avishai11 ( talk) 20:47, 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 delete‎. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 20:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Modti inc.

Modti inc. (  | 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)

Company is now nonexistent, the domain has expired in mid-2018. The only significant contributors seem to be closely connected to the subject. No search results were found outside the Wayback Machine.  🇮🇱🇺🇸JayCubby probby haz NPOV on the Isr.-Pal. Conflict🇮🇱🇺🇸  talk 20:05, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

OSQA

OSQA (  | 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:NSOFT. No sources covering the subject. Deltaspace42 ( talk • contribs) 15:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • delete, no independent coverage. - Altenmann >talk 21:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I agree it should be deleted due to lack of notability

-- Policy1257 ( talk) 15:57, 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 23:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ferrán Marín Ramos

Ferrán Marín Ramos (  | 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 he meets WP:AUTHOR or WP:GNG, though it was hard to assess not being familiar with these sources and organisations. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 16:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:37, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete the person and does not pass General Notability nor reliable sources are found to underline the notability of Ferran Ramos -- 88.214.186.108 ( talk) 12:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no claim to notability. Llajwa ( talk) 20:20, 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 23:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

James McFadden (dancer)

James McFadden (dancer) (  | 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 he meets WP:N. It is from a period of time where it is harder to find online sources, unfortunately. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 16:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:37, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Weak delete - this is someone's OR project based on newspaper articles. Subject is not obviously notable nor are there sufficient sources provided. But if the original author had gone further and found good secondary sources, it might have met requirement. Maybe one day someone will. Llajwa ( talk) 20:23, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Samidin Xhezairi

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

Does not appear independently notable. Can find little literature that mentions him (by real name or nickname), and these mentions are very brief. The source used for the article names him as one of 100 ex-guerrillas being questioned at the Hague, and relies itself partially on the man's brother on Facebook. While it is clear that this man did participate in the Yugoslav Wars, I can't see the sources proving notability. Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk) 17:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - insufficient RS, no real claim to notability. Llajwa ( talk) 20:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: per nom BLP, not sure this even makes a valid claim to notability. 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. Open to a consensus redirect suggestion, but I really don't see an appropriate one.  //  Timothy ::  talk  18:33, 30 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 La Trobe University#Research. Owen× ☎ 00:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Research Centre for Linguistic Typology

Research Centre for Linguistic Typology (  | 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 it meets WP:ORG or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Possible WP:ATD could be redirect to its current university, but it has been part of 2, so that could cause confusion. Boleyn ( talk) 17:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:35, 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 delete‎. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 20:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Lech Stanisław Laszkiewicz

Lech Stanisław Laszkiewicz (  | 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 is made up of a variety of unreliable sources such as blogs, forums, and a directory, and passing mentions in wider war histories. It provides the biography of a seemingly non-notable WW2 pilot, who is mentioned because he served and lived long enough to talk to the Imperial War Museum about the war, but unfortunately does not appear to pass any level of notability; he was not, for example, an ace. Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk) 17:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:34, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete. Sadly, I have to concur with the nom. Non-notalbe pilot (never shot down an enemy plane, not listed at Bajan's list), not subject any any coverage outside having been interviewed for the IWM, which did not lead to any media or academic coverage - just blog/catalogue inclusion. No pl interwiki. No major awards (or minor even?). I am afraid he belongs on Wikidata but not Wikipedia. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123250223 will be enough (it can be expanded, and the creator of this article, SPA otherwise, plausibly a relative or such, is encouraged to do so - this can always be userspaced as a draft). Bottom line, not every soldier is notable. In the meantime, we need to delete photos as they are copyvio (WW2 photos described by the uploader as "own work", sigh). -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Piotrus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 18:35, 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 23:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Stanley Modrzyk

Stanley Modrzyk (  | 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 he meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 18:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Looking through The Wild Hunt, the main Pagan news site, there seem to be a couple of mentions that Modrzyk passed away but little beyond that to really sustain notability for Wikipedia's purposes. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 12:41, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:33, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete. Nothing in EBSCOhost. ProQuest has a few news articles in which he is briefly quoted, e.g. ProQuest  309969259, ProQuest  420258868. Similar articles in newspapers.com. I don't see any significant coverage. No reviews of his books. Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Jfire ( talk) 03:30, 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 23:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ronald Rieder

Ronald Rieder (  | 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 he meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 18:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:33, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: all I can is an obituary [2], could even be a different person. There isn't much in the article now for GNG. Oaktree b ( talk) 02:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. The obit is a paid memorial notice so not independent. here is the NYT source ( ProQuest  110065074). The article is about Freshman orientation programs; he has a brief quote. Not SIGCOV. The Psychiatric News article has longer quotes from him, but again, he's not the subject. Jfire ( talk) 03:13, 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 23:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Enrique Mederos

Enrique Mederos (  | 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 he meets WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 19:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Weak delete Sad he died so young. I would love to know more about the career of a professional Mexican film dubber. It would be nice for him to continue to float in the WP ether for a while longer. But I assume his filmography and photo are on IMDB too. Llajwa ( talk) 20:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article, and BEFORE found listings, nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimothyBlue ( talk • contribs) 19:15, 30 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. Withdrawn as Keep - OK I hold my hands up to that one, you learn something every day. Could be improved a lot, though. Black Kite (talk) 16:40, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Abel Peter Diah

Abel Peter Diah (  | 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)

Member of a lower regional house (i.e. not national), does not appear to pass NPOL. Indeed there is only an article on Taraba State House of Assembly because the same editor created it. Created by a now indefintely-blocked paid editor. Black Kite (talk) 19:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep — The page subject is a former Assembly Speaker, who used to hold (and arguably retains) substantial influence in Taraba state politics; members of subnational legislatures often have pages, especially if they have held a leadership position in the chamber. It is a poorly-written page but that does not warrant the subject non-notable. Watercheetah99 ( talk) 21:38, 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 speedy keep‎. Per WP:SPEEDYKEEP#1. The nominator has withdrawn their nomination and there are no other arguments for deletion. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 14:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Everyone Loves Mel

Everyone Loves Mel (  | 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:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:SIGCOV. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I did a WP:BEFORE and found one review from The Dove Foundation. Needs one more suitable and reliable review to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and WP:NEXIST. The Film Creator ( talk) 19:14, 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 speedy keep‎. Per WP:SPEEDYKEEP#1. The nominator has withdrawn their nomination and there are no other arguments for deletion. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 14:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Yellow (2006 feature film)

Yellow (2006 feature film) (  | 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:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I did a WP:BEFORE and found nothing suitable or reliable enough to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and WP:NEXIST. The Film Creator ( talk) 18:58, 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 speedy keep‎. Per WP:SPEEDYKEEP#1. The nominator has withdrawn their nomination and there are no other arguments for deletion. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 14:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Undercover Angel (film)

Undercover Angel (film) (  | 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)

Article fails WP:GNG, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. Rotten Tomatoes states there are two reviews but neither of them are shown. I did a WP:BEFORE and found a review from The Dove Foundation. Needs one more review in order to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and NEXIST. I found only newspaper listings on Newspapers.com. The review from Common Sense Media doesn’t count because it’s a review for the 2017 film of the same title. The Film Creator ( talk) 18:46, 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 keep‎. WP:SNOW keep, withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 17:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

A Bastard's Tale

A Bastard's Tale (  | 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 was able to find two reviews: [3] and [4]. However, that is the extent of reliable or situational sources I could find covering the game in any significant detail, with even passing coverage being rare. Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 18:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 18:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I also only found the same two sources, and there aren't any suitable redirect or merger targets.-- Alexandra IDV 18:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Changing to a very weak Keep thanks to the source found by ZXCVBNM-- Alexandra IDV 12:03, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep another review at Gaming Age here and other reviews linked at Metacritic here, imv Atlantic306 ( talk) 20:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • I considered Gaming Age, but all discussions on their potential reliability suggest that content published after 2002 may not be reliable. As far as other Metacritic sources go, none of those are listed as reliable sources for use on Wikipedia. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 23:46, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • @ Atlantic306: ( edit conflict) Looking at WP:VG/RS classification and the past discussions linked there, Gaming Age isn't usable aside from possibly old material from before it split off from IGN in the early 00s. The other reviews listed on Metacritic (aside from the two Cukie mentioned) are either classed as unreliable (God is a Geek, Worth Playing, GameGrin) or haven't been classed at all (PlayStation Country, GameSpew). If this is going to have a chance, I think we would have to discuss PlayStation Country and GameSpew at WT:VG/RS, although the lack of an "about" page or similar on PlayStation Country, and GameSpew's self-description as a passion-project blog site, makes me doubtful that they could be considered reliable sources.-- Alexandra IDV 23:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep A review from Softpedia should get it across the finish line in terms of notability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 08:19, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Keep We very narrowly got there in the end with WP:THREE. Don't forget to make sure to add them in the article or used the sources found template! ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 08:25, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • @ Alexandra IDV: What do you think now that there's a third RS review? I feel it may just barely squeak by, but since you !voted delete, I'd like your input before I withdraw. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 00:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • @ Cukie Gherkin: I think this article subject only just meets GNG with the absolute bare minimum of coverage, but yeah, struck my "delete".-- Alexandra IDV 12:05, 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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Class of '09 (video game)

Class of '09 (video game) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced page and no reliable sources come up in a WP:BEFORE search. This game is an absolute WP:N failure in every regard. Additionally, it was moved to draftspace due to the zero sources present, but was moved back into mainspace by the creator anyways. λ Negative MP1 18:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - No reliable sources exist, like at all. The best I could find was one review on some random person's blog (the one singular review on Metacritic I might add). The lack of inline citations or really any citations at all makes this an original research nightmare. -- StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk) 20:32, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Not sure if this is what you were refering to, but the review on Metacritic does not appear to be a personal blog. Regardless this article will probably need a complete rewrite at least (and there are few sources, even thought it has blown up recently) but I think this should be noted. Totalibe ( talk) 17:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete No substance to suggest general notability at all. One of the most impressively excessive cases of WP:GAMECRUFT I've seen in a while. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 08:37, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Seems to fail WP:GNG. Even if a review from a reliable source randomly came up, that still wouldn't be enough, it's simply far too minor for Wikipedia. Wikipedia isn't an advertising tool. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 08:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Only RS mention I could find was one brief post from Pocket Gamer. It seems like the game actually did fairly well, but visual novels tend to not get much RS coverage, so I'm not particularly surprised by the lack of sources. CurlyWi ( talk) 22:24, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above. Even if it passes WP:GNG I will just recommend completely WP:TNT-ing it. OceanHok ( talk) 15:57, 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 redirect‎ to 2024 Portland, Oregon municipal elections#City auditor. Relevant sourced content can be merged from the history. Sandstein 08:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

2024 Portland, Oregon Auditor election

2024 Portland, Oregon Auditor election (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable election. This differs from the mayoral election which is obviously notable. After a search I believe it violates WP:SIGCOV and WP:NOTNEWS. Grahaml35 ( talk) 18:25, 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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit 23:23, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

2023 Tucker municipal elections

2023 Tucker municipal elections (  | 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 election of a small town in Georgia. After a search I believe it violates WP:SIGCOV, WP:NOTNEWS, no WP:DEPTH. Grahaml35 ( talk) 18:21, 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 draftify‎ to Draft:Luke Brennan (soccer). Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 20:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Luke Brennan (soccer)

AfDs for this article:
Luke Brennan (soccer) (  | 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 has changed since the prior AfD, the article was even created by the same editor. Still doesn't meet WP:GNG, possibly-independent coverage is limited to one unbylined article signed, Rosguill talk 18:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • WP:FPL is depreciated as a way of determining notability, WP:GNG is the only acceptable way to demonstrate this. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 10:42, 30 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. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 00:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Comedian Marcus

Comedian Marcus (  | 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, sources include (1) death certificate search that returns 500 error, (2) a review of the subject's work and discussion, (3) passing mention subject and review of song, (4) coverage of a play (that mentions cast only by first name so I have to assume this is about the subject), and then (5) one mentioned as attribution to a work. 1 out of 5 on a source review.
Cumulatively, these don't meet WP:SIGCOV or WP:SUSTAINED withdrawn microbiologyMarcus ( petri dish· growths) 17:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

--> keep. WP:HEY and arguments and sources presented by The Discoverer below. Thanks.- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Not a shred of Notability. Maliner ( talk) 15:42, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect as per User:Mushy Yank (adding Marcus's name to the list of past tiatrists). This page is obviously a labor of love for User:Rejoy2003. Comedian Marcus was clearly an accomplished person and I would love to have seen him perform. I hope you will find other spaces to memorialize him and his achievements. Llajwa ( talk) 20:51, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Per User:The Discoverer below, I withdraw my redirect and switch to Keep. Llajwa ( talk) 17:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The article has many more references now in comparison to the time when it was nominated. Admittedly, several of these references have only passing mentions of the subject, but this is a complete article in a mainstream newspaper focussed on the subject. These four: [5], [6], [7], [8], are records of recognition accorded to him, while another newspaper article praises his performance in a play. I think that these are sufficient to establish the notability for an artist who performs in a language that has very little presence in the online and offline publishing world. The Discoverer ( talk) 16:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, withdrawn above, the article has received significant improvement. I'm bookmarking this to point to in the future in case people are curious as to the good that can come from AfD! microbiologyMarcus ( petri dish· growths) 14:38, 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 23:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

At-location mapping

At-location mapping (  | 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)

Tagged uncited in 2009 this must have been an idea which was superceeded Chidgk1 ( talk) 17:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Good point, Delete as neologism. PaulT2022 ( talk) 14:57, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • delete I saw the same thing as Unc G: it's a name for how on-line mapping is used in the age of smart phones that someone tried to turn into terminology but which didn't stick because it was too obvious, from the earliest days of the tricorder. Mangoe ( talk) 13:29, 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 23:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Md Sameen Rahman

Md Sameen Rahman (  | 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 world record does not make a person notable, and nothing else in the article does either. Note, this has been G11d many times in draftspace - Rich T| C| E-Mail 16:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • KeepThe article seems fine to me as he is an entrepreneur and his news articles are quite heavy, and I think he is notable as I can see his company getting featured in some of the biggest journals, and they are pointing him out as an entrepreneur. And speaking of world record it was edited and fixed.
Thank you Caspter ( talk) 20:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Appears to be entirely promotional, and there is an evident lack of reliable sourcing to back it up. I honestly would've tagged it as WP:G11 if it hadn't been nominated here. CycloneYoris talk! 01:49, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Crampcomes ( talk) 21:42, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • KeepI don't think the articles appears to be a promotional. I have gone through all the news articles of this individual, and it seems fine to me as all the news is from the respected news desk, so keeping the article would be a wise decision. Forhad alavi ( talk) 11:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
My nom is to delete... so how can you !vote "Keep per nom" - Rich T| C| E-Mail 18:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
More interested to know how an account with seven contributions that hasn't edited in a half-dozen years showed up on an AfD. Also perhaps why @ Caspter: above has tried multiple times to create an article for @ Forhad alavi:. I guess we could do an SPI, or we could probably just DUCK discount their contributions as an obvious WP:DUCK. Seems someone here may have a farm or a friend.
GMG talk 15:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - The subject's "projects" appear to be simply unfishished websites. The Grow More site has exactly one "course" which appears to be a YouTube video, and a couple dozen courses "coming soon". UPGRADE is basically empty aside from the landing page and a bunch of "under construction". These don't seem to be bona fide projects, but rather attempts to pad their resume for anyone who doesn't look too closely. The world record for [insert thing nobody cares about] is neither here nor there. The article here is likely just another attempt at paper-thin self promotion. GMG talk 12:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom and per User:GreenMeansGo. Also clearly COI. -- আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk) 20:43, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - the Windsor tie world record is pretty cool, but there's no claim to notability in this article. Llajwa ( talk) 21:01, 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 speedy delete‎ per WP:CSD#G5. Kinu  t/ c 01:32, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ortner Airport

Ortner Airport (  | 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)

Completely non-notable small airstrip. In cases such as this I generally look for a plausible merge or redirect target, but I do not think that 1967 Lake Erie skydiving disaster, the reason for it's cla9imed 'fame', would be of any use. TheLongTone ( talk) 15:22, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

It is indeed somewhat well-known for that incident, and is a fairly popular airstrip. I was working on the page last night and fell asleep before I could expand it and add more citations. Windowcleaner4 ( talk) 17:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The topic is notable enough just because of the Ortner Air Service- which may deserve an article of its own. Windowcleaner4 ( talk) 17:15, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Checkuser note The article creator has been blocked as a  Confirmed sock and the article has been deleted per WP:CSD#G5.-- Ponyo bons mots 21:02, 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. Owen× ☎ 00:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Living in Tehran

Living in Tehran (  | 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 indication of meeting WP:NCORP, most cited sources do not even mention the subject. I wasn't able to find any additional coverage searching in English and Persian. signed, Rosguill talk 15:19, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

There were several references to it in English and Persian https://financialtribune.com/articles/travel/80774/guide-to-living-in-tehran 148.252.24.130 ( talk) 15:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The Guardian piece does not mention Living in Tehran, other than to say that a Persian lion from Bristol zoo had been sent to live in Tehran zoo. The Financial Tribune piece is unbylined and reads like an ad. We're nowhere near meeting WP:NCORP here. signed, Rosguill talk 15:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
IP, please stop wasting our time by re-linking sources already cited in the article which don't even begin to address notability concerns. The latest addition is a reprint of an article, not independent coverage. signed, Rosguill talk 15:31, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - does not seem to meet WP:N. Llajwa ( talk) 21:03, 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 merge‎ to Paratha. Owen× ☎ 00:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Dulhan paratha

Dulhan paratha (  | 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's normal to have many local variations of a recipe in India and Pakistan. I don't see notability here, as this is about a paratha sold by a local restaurant and prepared by mixing some extra items in it. Additionally, the sources used promote this cafe as they list locations, rates, products, time etc. – DreamRimmer ( talk) 15:16, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 23:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ali Jihami (marketer)

Ali Jihami (marketer) (  | 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 sources don't seem solid enough to meet WP:GNG, and it doesn't seem like the award he won is notable. There might be better sources but I didn't find them on a WP:BEFORE. BuySomeApples ( talk) 15:11, 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 List of television and radio stations owned by TV5 Network. ✗ plicit 23:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DYTE-TV

DYTE-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)

Tagged as unsourced since 2016. Given the age of the article, there are a lot of Wikipedia mirrors, but no significant coverage in reliable sources. MarioGom ( talk) 15:05, 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 List of television and radio stations owned by TV5 Network. ✗ plicit 23:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

DWTE-TV

DWTE-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)

Tagged as unsourced since 2016. Given the age of the article, there are a few thousands Wikipedia mirrors, but no significant coverage in reliable sources. MarioGom ( talk) 15:03, 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 keep‎. Not closing as withdrawn due to standing !deletes, but there is now a consensus here to keep per new sourcing. (non-admin closure) Schminnte [ talk to me 19:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

K.F.C. Moerbeke

K.F.C. Moerbeke (  | 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 football team in the 8th division of the Belgian league pyramid. There is zero coverage about it online (apart from the usual stats websites). It was tagged in 2012 and it still fails notability guidelines. Recently PRODed then DEPRODed so nominating it here. Sgubaldo ( talk) 15:09, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Withdrawn by nominator - Gidonb found coverage in multiple reliable sources and article has been improved. Sgubaldo ( talk) 14:57, 22 January 2024 (UTC) reply
This and all similar arguments below fail the golden WP:NEXIST rule: Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article, hence should be discounted to the fullest extent. gidonb ( talk) 17:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:41, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:44, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • @ GiantSnowman: - another editor has presented some sources below. I haven't looked at them, so have no opinion at this point, but as you asked to be pinged I have pinged you :-) -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 13:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      • Keep per sources below which show notability. Giant Snowman 18:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Agree with nomination, unless someone can prove otherwise. Govvy ( talk) 20:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I am still a little on the fence, but I will strike my delete per the updates to the article. Govvy ( talk) 10:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - As the person who originally PROD this, I agree here. HawkAussie ( talk) 09:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Since you raised the PROD yourself: why did you prod this if there is not even the beginning of a case for deletion? Which part of "must" in the following WP policy is unclear?

PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected. gidonb ( talk) 14:24, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

    • Especially with sources now being put in and the article being expanded, I do feel like it's now a Keep. HawkAussie ( talk) 21:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per the above; unable to find any meaningful independent coverage of this club. Left guide ( talk) 23:03, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per all above. No evidence of notability. REDMAN 2019 ( talk) 14:34, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Constant coverage in HN, HLN, and GVA. [10] A few coverage examples: [11] [12] [13] [14] Note that Belgium doesn't have an equally accessible newspaper archive as Delpher in the Netherlands. So these examples are recent. The club has been around since 1927. gidonb ( talk) 07:25, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Significant coverage in two reliable sources identified by Gidonb. This discussion seems to be the worst kind of WP:SNOW with only Left guide having claimed to have done any searching. ~ Kvng ( talk) 13:00, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss sources just flagged by gidonb
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:04, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious ( talk) 14:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. There are good sources, so there are good reasons to keep the article despite the low league tier. -- Ouro ( blah blah) 15:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - @ Svartner:, @ HawkAussie:, @ Govvy:, Per above. Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk) 20:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment Keep per me? I posted delete above, but then nobody pinged me about changes to the article! So I might just strike my delete. Govvy ( talk) 10:49, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. Not sure why this is still open. The deletes carry no weight. gidonb ( talk) 05:46, 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 no consensus‎. Both those supporting deletion and keeping make reasonable arguments that are plausibly based in policy (implicitly WP:DEL-REASON#8 for the deletion supporters, and WP:ANYBIO#1 for those supporting keep). Consensus is ascertained in light of the quality of the arguments presented in this discussion as viewed through the lens of Wikipedia policy. And, as the arguments were of relatively similar strength, there is no consensus in this discussion. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 03:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

George Tripp

George Tripp (  | 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)

Nicely researched genealogical piece, but not notable. Ingratis ( talk) 08:23, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:42, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:42, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete – Fails WP:NBIO and WP:GNG; search in Google News and Google Books found a few obituaries and news articles of different people of the same name. Toadette ( Merry Christmas, and a happy new year) 10:46, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Recipient of the CB, which we have always held to easily meet the criteria of WP:ANYBIO #1 (which is a CBE or above). Chief administrative officer of one of the most significant police forces in the world. Only someone with absolutely zero knowledge of the subject would think this was merely a "genealogical piece". Very clearly notable. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 14:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Comment: a clear case of asserted inherent notability. a) The only source that refers to Tripp's job, which is the only reason for his posited notability, is the book by Fairfax, which the article's creator himself describes as unpublished - don't think that counts. All the other sources are entirely genealogical - census returns (unreferenced), a parish register entry, civil registration indexes and a probate entry - and equally available for anyone in the country: they are bog standard pieces of genealogical information and certainly don't go to notability. b) Police civil officials are not inherently notable; come up with proper sources for this man. c) "we have always held [CBs] to easily meet the criteria of WP:ANYBIO #1": I have no idea who "we" are; again, actually provide some proper sources. ANYBIO specifically says: "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included'." (bolding mine). If no adequate sources are forthcoming, the rest is just handwaving and the article should go. Ingratis ( talk) 14:38, 5 January 2024 (UTC) reply

[continued below the relisting line]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC) reply

      • "We" would be the Wikipedia community, as illustrated here. It's called consensus. If he was considered notable enough to receive a high honour by the British government, then he is clearly notable enough for Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 16:18, 8 January 2024 (UTC) reply
        • You should not need reminding that notability rests on sources - but since apparently you do, see WP:N. Where are the sources? Ingratis ( talk) 03:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
          • No, I don't, but thank you for the patronising comment. You should also not need reminding that Wikipedia works on consensus, which I have illustrated. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 10:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
            • As to "patronising", people in glass houses... As to the rest, you're apparently arguing that because this man had a CB (as per WP:ANYBIO#1, if that were to cover CBs) the article is exempt from the sourcing requirements of WP:BASIC. I've already pointed out that this article presently contains only a single secondary source, which is invalid, because it is unpublished; all the rest are primary sources/original records, which without the secondary source do not add up to SIGCOV. Even if this were a clear instance of "automatic" notability - such as those covered by NPOL - it would not stand without the appropriate sourcing, which this does not have. (Your lists, in my view, are missing the point: articles have to be considered individually, as they will not always be decided solely on the ANYBIO issue, as you seem to suggest). Ingratis ( talk) 13:55, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
              • One of the reasons we have ANYBIO is that it would be laughable if Wikipedia considered people who had been granted high honours in the real world to be non-notable. Clearly notable in the real world, but not in the rarefied atmosphere of wikiworld, where the only people considered notable are those who have sustained coverage on the internet! It really does just make us look like we live on another planet. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 15:04, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply
                To be frank, show us sourced about a monkey that took a selfie [15] and it get's an article here. Wining the award is fine, but we need things that talk it about it at length. We don't have much that talks about the person here that isn't related to him or the award presenter. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep WP:ANYBIO #1 - agree with Necrothesp here. Lightburst ( talk) 15:11, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 14:36, 16 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, NotAGenious ( talk) 14:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Chief financial officer of the police is fine, but not terribly notable. I don't see extensive coverage (or much of anything) on this person. Civil servant that won an award. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: There are only a few hundred of the higher members of the order, almost 2000 of the lower level (as this person was), so it's a rather long list. We'd need a ton of sourcing to create an article on a Companion-level individual. They give out so many of these, it seems most names are only mentioned, then onto the next name. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:46, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Won an award. It's being appointed to a high honour, not winning an award. They give out so many of these. They really don't. A couple of dozen at the most every year. Not many in a country of 60-70 million people. There are only a few hundred of the higher members of the order, almost 2000 of the lower level (as this person was)... The statutes provide for a maximum of 1,925 Companions at any one time. That doesn't mean there are 1,925 Companions at any one time (or even close to it)! But even if there were, it's a drop in the ocean considering the population of the country (or, in those days, the entire British Empire). And the "lower level" of the Order of the Bath is a very high level indeed. It outranks pretty much anyone else who doesn't have a knighthood. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 16:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      Then provide us with extensive sources with which to build the article. For all of the 10 lines of text, that's not extensive coverage at all. That's my issue, the lack of sourcing first and foremost. Oaktree b ( talk) 17:55, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 14:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Vishwapriya Nagar

Vishwapriya Nagar (  | 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 neighborhood. No sources in the article and no reliable sources could be found. Broc ( talk) 11:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and India. Broc ( talk) 11:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. One (unreliable) source from youtube but that too shows that the content is unavailable. Absence of sources makes this article fail wp:n. RangersRus ( talk) 13:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete fails to meet WP:NGEO - MPGuy2824 ( talk) 06:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Changing my mind. This doesn't meet NGEO, but as an AtD, it can be Redirected to Bangalore. - MPGuy2824 ( talk) 02:27, 19 January 2024 (UTC) reply
      • ...where Vishwapriya Nagar is not mentioned. Geschichte ( talk) 09:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on redirecting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious ( talk) 14:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment: I don't think it should be redirected, there is no mention of this neighborhood anywhere. I know redirects are cheap, but they should be meaningful too. -- Broc ( talk) 19:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • delete Neighborhoods and the like should not be redirected to enclosing geography unless there is meaningful discussion of them, and in this case the target article doesn't mention neighborhoods at all. Mangoe ( talk) 20:51, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no need to redirect - this is OR, and will live on in its Kannada incarnation. Llajwa ( talk) 21:06, 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 redirect‎ to 2024 Florida House of Representatives election. ✗ plicit 23:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Anne Gerwig

Anne Gerwig (  | 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 sure this meets WP:NPOL, because simply running for the Florida house doesn't demonstrate notability, and being mayor of a village doesn't either necessarily. BuySomeApples ( talk) 14:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep the "village" has 60 000 people apparently, that's not a small hamlet. It might be called a village, but certainly has the population of a town. We've had mayors of towns this size with articles here. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to 2024 Florida House of Representatives election. The subject does not pass WP:NPOL as the only metric for a clear pass of the SNG is holding a national or statewide elected position. However, the appropriate standard is WP:GNG. What is generally expected of a local official is whether the coverage of the subject's service as an elected official illustrates the lasting impact of their actions and votes taken (not statements), and what is generally expected for candidates is whether the coverage is well beyond that of the average candidate, such as internationalized coverage. As it is, I do not see any coverage beyond her local area, nor do I see an independent write up comprehensively documenting her service as mayor. Also, size of population does not determine whether or not a stand-alone article is created. Redirect to the main election page as a usual and appropriate outcome where information about the election and the candidates can be added. -- Enos733 ( talk) 17:23, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect per Enos733, we can restore the page if she is elected, but not notable now. SportingFlyer T· C 17:46, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: Fine with any !redirect if it goes that way. Oaktree b ( talk) 22:11, 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 keep‎. Owen× ☎ 00:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

2028 ICC Men's T20 World Cup

2028 ICC Men's T20 World Cup (  | 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)

WP:TOOSOON. 8 years away that is not a mega event like the Olympics Grahaml35 ( talk) 13:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment. 2028 is just four years away despite what the nominator may think. Lean keep even I, from Poland, have heard of the Twenty20, so perhaps not at all too soon, as there is room for expansion as qualifications are probably starting next year, right? -- Ouro ( blah blah) 15:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Haha yes, my bad 4 years away not 8. Not sure why my brain thought we are still in 2020. Grahaml35 ( talk) 16:02, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    True it is just 4 years away, but considering there is going to be another T20 World cup in 2026 there wont be any announcements about qualification anytime soon Cric editor ( talk) 06:39, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
My bad. 4 years away not 8. Grahaml35 ( talk) 16:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Only 4 years away and certain to happen. StickyWicket aka AA ( talk) 23:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • There's little point deleting this - it will only be re-created, probably within days. If there's a real desire for it to not exist for now, a redirection is the better option (as has been done for the 2030 version of this) but then someone will need to pay whack-a-mole with it. I would never like to guarantee that anything in cricket will definitely happen, given the history of tournaments in the game, but this seems reasonable to keep around for now. Redirect is the worst that should happen. Blue Square Thing ( talk) 11:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Four years is not too soon. If it was 2032, that would be. Batagur baska ( talk) 02:02, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 14:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Mohamed Yusoff

Mohamed Yusoff (  | 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'm not sure this meets WP:GNG, he's mentioned in a few articles but there's nothing substantially about him in reliable sources. References to his own websites don't count which eliminates about half of the refs. BuySomeApples ( talk) 11:23, 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 delete‎. Owen× ☎ 01:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Yehezkel Mizrahi

Yehezkel Mizrahi (  | 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)

Currently fails WP:BIO. Arrested for having an apparently minor role in a militant movement. The article has been plagiarized from the sources. Schierbecker ( talk) 09:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Don't Delete. There is absolutely no reason to delete this article. Sources were provided and the life of that particular person was documented. It's like any other biography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OctoGreeko ( talk • contribs) 13:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    that's the problem, it's routine stuff, like any other biography. We need to see why he's deserving of an article here. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. Not individually notable but ideally he would be added to the prison photo caption in Kingdom of Israel (group) and redirected. gidonb ( talk) 01:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: The article isn't really clear as to why he's notable. He was born. Ok. Served in the military, got arrested, got married and had a kid. End of the article. All I find is one mention in a court record, that wouldn't seem to pass CRIME notability. I'm not even sure what this person did to deserve an article... Oaktree b ( talk) 15:55, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    He served in the British army, Lehi and the IDF while lying about his age and having serious health problems. He was involved in the Assasination of Folke Bernadotte and the israeli civil/independence war. He also was involved in several other activities which I mentioned in the article.
    So yes, he is notable. OctoGreeko ( talk) 07:50, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Service in the British Army or the IDF, even in wartime, does not make you noteworthy. You need what we call a credible claim of significance. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Read my comment again. That's not the only thing I said OctoGreeko ( talk) 13:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete If you are going to write a biographical article, start by telling us in the first sentence why this person deserves to have an article. A lead that tells you that he was born does not does not make the grade. Following up by telling us a series of equally mundane details does not help. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:58, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    It's all in the article. People just have to read it. OctoGreeko ( talk) 07:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    It says in the infobox that he was involved in the assassination of Folke Bernadotte, and if so this should be in the lead sentence as his primary claim to significance. However, there is no mention of this assertion in the article, the cited sources, or the article on the assassination, and therefore the claim is likely to be removed from the infobox by a passing gnome as unsourced. That would get you over the first hurdle, but note WP:CRIME: A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. If you can't say anything except "he was born, became a soldier, married, and then died", then the article is not needed. Artem.G ( talk) 21:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    And the same argument again. How about reading the entire article instead of just typing the same text as others? OctoGreeko ( talk) 15:31, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    To save yourself from this hassle (or a speedy deletion by the New Page Patrol) in the future, a claim to significance should appear in the first sentence. (See MOS:LEADSENTENCE) Don't expect the NPP to read the entire article, or check the sources, especially when they are in a foreign language. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    the whole article is "he was born, studied, joined the army, was arrested, got married". As noted by others, if you can't say about a person something other than "he was born" in the first sentence, you have a problem. The article is also a really close retelling of the second source, from the Lehi website. Artem.G ( talk) 10:42, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    I rewrote the first part of my page. I hope that helps OctoGreeko ( talk) 01:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    well, no, you didn't, it's still copyvio. compare it:
    second para: article: "He studied in a kuttab, a rigorous cheder, and Sephardic Talmud Torah while simultaneously studying general subjects." - source: "Yehezkel studied in a kuttab, a rigorous cheder, and Sephardic Talmud Torah. Simultaneously, he studied general subjects."
    "At age thirteen, he joined Beitar, and he soon went to work to support his family." - "At age thirteen, he joined Beitar, and he soon went to work to support his family."
    "A few years later, at age sixteen, he joined the British armed forces to fight the Nazis while lying about his age. He served in the Royal Navy from 1941 to 1946." - "At age sixteen, he joined the British armed forces to fight the Germans, lying about his age. He served in the Royal Navy from 1941 to 1946."
    last sentence: "He died on July 29, 1989, leaving his wife Zipporah, a daughter and two sons." - "He fell ill and died on July 29,1989, leaving his wife Zipporah, a daughter and two sons."
    etc etc etc. please read Wikipedia:Copyright violations. Artem.G ( talk) 10:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Well, these parts of his life are important and should be covered in this article. OctoGreeko ( talk) 14:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    they are, but you shouldn't copy-paste text from copyrighted sources. Artem.G ( talk) 14:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Would a "reconstruction" help in this situation? OctoGreeko ( talk) 19:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep - setting aside the plagiarism accusation, which should be adjudicated separately, he seems notable, he participated in important historical events. Sources are insufficient and/or OR, but it seems likely that he is discussed in the abundant historical literature on this period of Israel/Palestine history. Llajwa ( talk) 21:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
it seems likely that he is discussed in the abundant historical literature (emphasis my own). It seems like it, but you haven't actually gone looking? Schierbecker ( talk) 02:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Further to my earlier comment. I haven't gotten to writing the caption. This is not something the merge team should be burdened with. Redirect after some work was my optimum. This can also be done later. Delete is my default. gidonb ( talk) 01:32, 30 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 Myanmar Royal Dragon Army. Discussion about which of the two titles the merged article should have can continue in the Talk page. Owen× ☎ 01:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Burma National Revolutionary Army

Burma National Revolutionary Army (  | 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)

Direct duplication of content from Myanmar Royal Dragon Army, currently a content fork of Myanmar Royal Dragon Army. If this rename becomes the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, can move the other page title accordingly- no RS showing any significant differences. EmeraldRange ( talk/ contribs) 12:21, 9 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! 08:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Pinging @ Espresso Addict as someone involved in prior WP:PROD for thoughts. Additional comment: it is a direct fork (i.e. someone created this article by copying content from the other) so content should already be in the other article. EmeraldRange ( talk/ contribs) 15:58, 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 Asian Para Games. Owen× ☎ 01:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Judo at the 2022 Asian Para Games

Judo at the 2022 Asian Para Games (  | 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 indication of meeting WP:GNG, all cited sources are primary. Other than brief press releases of Iran's wins in this category ( [16], [17]), I was unable to find independent coverage. N.b. that this article was primarily edited by Xihuaa, a blocked sockpuppet with a long term pattern of fait accompli article creations for non-notable subevents of this tournament. I think that restoring the redirect to 2022 Asian Para Games is the most appropriate course of action here, but my attempt to WP:BLAR was contested. signed, Rosguill talk 14:18, 9 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! 08:07, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment It's true that this article's sources are just results published by the event itself, but from what I see that's true of many (if not all) of the individual sports articles from this event. Consistency would dictate that either all of the sports should have articles or none should. This type of coverage is typical of WP coverage of many multi-sport gatherings and I'm not sure where the line should be (or has been) drawn between which events should have such coverage and which shouldn't. I'd say this coverage doesn't pass WP notability criteria, but I see that many attempts to redirect this type of article have been reversed. If there's been a precedent or relevant policy, please let me know. If forced to choose, I'd go for a redirect. Papaursa ( talk) 21:19, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 07:26, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Zora (platform)

Zora (platform) (  | 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)

Apart from being slightly WP:PROMO, sources consist of press releases, WP:ROUTINE, or short mentions as a kind of middleman. Others included questionably- WP:RELIABLE sources / cryptocurrency publications like https://decrypt.co TLA (talk) 08:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, and Companies. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak delete. The various crypto publications might be OK for providing some verifiability but I'm not seeing a level of coverage that suggests that this is sufficiently notable. The connections to celebrities seem minor and notability is not inherited anyway. As always with crypto stuff, any mentions of dollar values should be taken with a substantial pinch of salt unless verified by truly Reliable Sources. Ironically, it might be more notable if it was a shadier operation, getting coverage for its shadiness, but I don't see any evidence of that. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 00:30, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Yahoo News reposted a Coindesk article, which is a non-RS. Funding announcements don't contribute to notability and the list of "notable events" is longer than the rest of the article. PROMO Oaktree b ( talk) 16:00, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 07:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Semi Jaupaj

AfDs for this article:
Semi Jaupaj (  | 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)

More than half of these references are WP:YOUTUBE. Other sources range from press releases (lack of a byline) / WP:ROUTINE to highly likely non- WP:RELIABLE. Aside from that, there's a lot of WP:ORIGINAL. TLA (talk) 08:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Television, and Albania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete with fire, at that. Got soft deleted last time due to minimal RfD participation and here it is with precisely the same problems as my last nomination for deletion in 2022: "Albanian singer of little notability. Been watching this for a while to see if any sign of improvement or abiding importance emerges. It hasn't. Hasn't won any music competition, no evidence of any music charting, no evidence of any enduring influence or impact. Coverage is skimpy social pages stuff, no in-depth coverage. Borderline, yes, but ultimately not a WP:GNG pass and not WP:MUSICBIO either." Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 07:46, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: I tried limiting Gsearch to Albanian websites with .al, they all are celebrity gossip items [18] and all in English. Most of the article now has no citations so could be OR or simply a hoax for all we know. I'm not seeing notability. Could be too early, TOOSOON. Oaktree b ( talk) 16:05, 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 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 00:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Khaled Abouemara

Khaled Abouemara (  | 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 (I'm not very familiar with WP:SCHOLAR, though doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria.) WP:SELFPUB sources, sources that don't even mention this person, etc. TLA (talk) 08:58, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:02, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - No indication of notability. Llajwa ( talk) 21:20, 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 speedy keep‎. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) (non-admin closure) Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 10:16, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Nachhatar Pal

Nachhatar Pal (  | 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:NPOL and WP:GNG. Existing sources are mostly trivial mentions. Does not seem to have significant coverage from independent sources. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 09:25, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 10:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Could be the move

Could be the move (  | 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 find much coverage for this podcast. The best source seems to be the Penn State student blog already referenced, it's the closest thing to WP:SIGCOV. BuySomeApples ( talk) 06:03, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - Like the nom., I could not find any SIGCOV. Looking at the sources placed on the page, the fourth is about the company that owns this and not the subject itself and the third is just instagram with a follower count (primary source). Looking at the other two that address the subject, Pieczynsk (2024) is independent and addresses the subject with significant coverage, but the article is on the Penn State student blog. This is not a reliable secondary source. James (2022) has the same issue. It's a blog and thus self published. So we are left with nothing at all. It is clear that this is a podcast that some people like. At this point it lacks sigcov in reliable independent secondary sources. It could be WP:TOOSOON but it is not notable as it stands. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 07:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Entertainment, Internet, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Recently created so don't want to close as soft-delete. Relisting to establish a stronger consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 09:12, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - this podcast sounds kind of funny and cool but there's no claim to notability. Llajwa ( talk) 21:23, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 10:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Look Afraid

Look Afraid (  | 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 barely been visited, it is not notable. I am at a loss as for why this article would need to remain. If there is no feedback regarding this matter, I will be bold and delete it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleter ( talk • contribs) 15:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply

This request is malformed and should most likely be deleted, and resubmitted following the instructions available at WP:AFDHOWTO; probably easiest to use WP:TWINKLE. Also see Wikipedia:Deletion policy about why view counts are not a valid metric for why something should be deleted, Wikipedia:NOTABILITY is, and why you are not able to unilaterally delete this article without following a proper Wikipedia:Deletion process. -- Cerebral726 ( talk) 19:41, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I've fixed the formatting. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 09:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I am writing to request the deletion of the article on Look Afraid. Upon review, it has become evident that the subject matter does not meet the notability criteria outlined in Wikipedia's guidelines for music-related articles. While the band may have achieved some local recognition and won an international competition, there is a lack of substantial coverage from reliable sources to establish enduring notability.
The references provided in the article primarily consist of self-published sources such as MySpace profiles and dead links, which do not meet Wikipedia's standards for reliable sourcing. Additionally, the band's discography and history appear to be limited in scope and relevance to a broader audience.
Given these reasons, I believe that the article does not meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion and should be considered for deletion. I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to your prompt response. Cleter ( talk) 15:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
You have already started a deletion discussion that Pppery fixed for you. People have responded, I'm not sure who this letter-like comment is intended for. Cerebral726 (talk) 15:32, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
"Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 09:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)" Cleter ( talk) 16:13, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete No indication of notability. Llajwa ( talk) 21:25, 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 merge‎ to List of defunct Drum Corps International member corps. Star Mississippi 11:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Legends Drum and Bugle Corps

AfDs for this article:
Legends Drum and Bugle Corps (  | 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 drum corps went inactive in 2022, and as of now, seems to be dead. It does not seem to meet the notability requirements to be a standalone page, and I am against a merge to List of defunct Drum Corps International member corps per my comments on the talk page. Why? I Ask ( talk) 07:38, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Not eligible for Soft Deletion due to the previous AFD. That closed as Redirect, is that an option here?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Sadly, it can't be redirected to the old target because it no longer qualifies. They are no longer a Drum Corps International member corps. Why? I Ask ( talk) 15:00, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:48, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 10:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Josh Brown (figure skater)

Josh Brown (figure skater) (  | 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:NSKATE; no medal placements at any senior-level skating competitions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:33, 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! 07:38, 9 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! 07:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:47, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - does not meet criteria for notability. Llajwa ( talk) 21:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: NSKATE requires winning a medal at an international senior-level event or at a World Junior Figure Skating Championship. Securing the 23rd spot in 2016 isn't even a marginal case. The appearance on Ice Stars doesn't add notability. Owen× ☎ 19:13, 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 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 10:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Adamu Ibrahim Lamuwa

Adamu Ibrahim Lamuwa (  | 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)

Article created by a now indef-blocked paid editor, but I'm not convinced that a Permanent Secretary is notable anyway; this is not a ministerial position but a routine civil service position. His name obviously pops up occasionally but even the Voice of Nigeria ref from which most of the article is written is a Government publication. Black Kite (talk) 08:28, 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 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships 1978#4 × 10 km relay. Despite substantial discussion, nobody proposes anything but redirection or deletion. Sandstein 08:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Esko Lähtevänoja

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

BLP, 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. Ping me if sources are added to article that meet WP:SIGCOV and are not routine mill news or stats.  //  Timothy ::  talk  06:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Finland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to FIS Nordic World Ski Championships 1978 pending sources. The Finnish Wikipedia have none either. I failed to find some here as well, although I'm not sure if I used it correctly. Geschichte ( talk) 10:11, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - The National Library of Finland newspaper archive has about 1800 hits for "Esko Lähtevänoja" if one has a researcher account that allows access to more recent newspapers, but these are largely your run-of-the-mill sports coverage about how he fared in some competition or another. Some of the more promising stories include the following:
    • A two-thirds page article in Ilta-Sanomat (25 Feb 1978, page 33), but it's a combined interview of four young Finnish athletes who are hoping to take part in the 1980 Winter Olympics and contains pretty much zero independent content.
    • A two-thirds page in Kaleva (3 March 2017, page 26), which reminisces about how he participated in the 1978 Finnish championship biathlon relay. The actual contents are pretty much just "here's how he did in 1978, and here's a few quotes from today". I'm unclear why this is a news story.
    • A story in Helsingin Sanomat (24 February 1978, page 26) but the amount of encyclopedically useful information is, again, highly limited: we learn pretty much only how he fared in the 1978 Finnish championship, that he has previously won (unnamed) local competitions and that his father is his coach.
    • A segment in Etelä-Suomen Sanomat (7 November 1981, page 21) about how he is "in the shape of his lifetime" and preparing for the "Oslo world championship", whatever that is. This one is perhaps the best in terms of making claims of notability, calling him the "most successful Finnish young (lit. "boy") skier of all time" and noting how he "won the boys and young men's national championship four times in a row". But beyond those claims, the actual contents are then just more of the standard "he's in really good shape and ran a fast lap just recently".
I don't think these quite reach GNG. There's also a bunch of Swedish language stuff I don't have the time to translate (my Swedish is abysmal, and reading it takes a lot of effort), but based on quick glimpses it looked to be more of the same.
Overall, I'm getting a sense of a promising young athlete who never truly broke through. There might be something in more specialized sources (e.g. books on Finnish skiing), but hypothetical sourcing doesn't count. While I didn't go through all the old newspapers, what I saw makes me think this is borderline at best, and unlikely to ever go beyond a stub. While I'm not quite ready to !vote yet, I'm leaning towards something else than a keep. - Ljleppan ( talk) 10:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I can help out with Swedish sources Geschichte ( talk) 12:05, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Thanks, I appreciate the offer but I can't really share the texts :/ Ljleppan ( talk) 15:21, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I unfortunately lack the time to dig deeper into this, and what I've found so far indeed looks to fall short of what I'd consider a notability pass. As such, I'll note myself down as a Redirect to FIS Nordic World Ski Championships 1978 per Geschichte above. Please ping me if more sourcing is identified, and I'll happily reconsider. Ljleppan ( talk) 22:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I don't want to prioritize it either. By the way, the Oslo world championship would be the 1982 FIS Nordic World Ski Championships. I don't think he participated there, as he would have been mentioned in Norway. He is mentioned, though, as coming in 9th in the 1978 Holmenkollen ski festival 50 kilometres, one of the most historic races in the world. So there's potential. If this is redirected, admin, please mark it with {{ R with possibilities}}. Geschichte ( talk) 09:02, 30 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 casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Sandstein 08:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Katarzyna Doraczyńska

Katarzyna Doraczyńska (  | 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 evidence of this meeting WP:NBIO. Minor politician/bureaucrat (for some reason described on en wiki as an activist) who died in a high-profile crash. Pl Wikipedia article is a bit longer but also has nothing suggesting notability (just an obituary). A posthumous award of Order of Polonia Restituta, likely mass-awarded to everyone who died in said tragic event (~90 people) is not enough. WP:ATD-R would be to redirect this to List of casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment. PR person, clerical worker at the offices of the president of Poland, had functions in the Polish scouting movement and member of local city district councils. -- Ouro ( blah blah) 18:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Very much non-notable then. Oaktree b ( talk) 21:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: It's like the 9/11 articles that come up, not everyone that passed away is notable. They'll likely all have coverage at some point, but NOTMEMORIAL applies. Oaktree b ( talk) 21:28, 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 List of Ultima characters#The Avatar. ✗ plicit 05:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Avatar (Ultima)

AfDs for this article:
Avatar (Ultima) (  | 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 there is some reception for the origin of the term avatar as a concept in gaming, I'm going to argue that reception pertains more to the Ultima series and gaming tropes it established rather than to this character itself. As a character, the Avatar is barely one, and the reception reflects that. There's just no meat on this bone. Kung Fu Man ( talk) 05:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Kung Fu Man ( talk) 05:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge/Redirect to List of Ultima characters#The Avatar. As stated by the nom, the importance of the avatar in a gameplay context is more about the game than the character itself, who does not pass GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 05:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to List of Ultima characters#The Avatar where this is already covered. There isn't WP:SIGCOV for this topic outside of the game itself, and it makes more sense to cover this in a wider context. Shooterwalker ( talk) 17:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect I noticed you raised the previous deletion discussion in 2009. How time flies! I think the crux of it is that the Avatar is not a notable character in itself, the character is largely faceless and anonymous, what is being construed as 'The Avatar' is the embodiment of the virtues that form part of the narrative and gameplay. This is reflected by the sources really coming to struggle to say anything about the character without leaning on the broader concepts of the game and the player's input. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 08:01, 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 05:09, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Rose Lefebvre

Rose Lefebvre (  | 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)

An orphan article. I tried looking in google books, but comes up with hits of namesakes. Fails WP:ARTIST. LibStar ( talk) 04:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete: Per the one source in the article, she is mentioned on page 8 of Émile Delignières Catalogue raisonné de l’œuvre gravé de Jacques Aliamet, d’Abbeville, Paris, 1896, digital scan available here (in French). Evidently the same information given by the source used in the article, and hardly conveying any amount of notability: it's a single, one-sentence aside in a footnote. Otherwise, the closest thing to a source I could find is that Google Books hints there may be a mention on page 109 of Achille Le Sueur Le clergé Picard et la révolution - Volumes 1-2, Yvert et Tellier, 1904 (but snippet view isn't showing it to me and I haven't found the work digitalized anywhere I can access it). AddWitty NameHere 09:19, 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 List of casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Owen× ☎ 01:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Artur Francuz

Artur Francuz (  | 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 evidence of this meeting WP:NBIO. Non-notable minor security functionary who died in a high-profile crash. Pl Wikipedia article is a bit longer but also has nothing suggesting notability (just several obituaries). A posthumous award of Order of Polonia Restituta, likely mass-awarded to everyone who died in said tragic event (~90 people) is not enough. WP:ATD-R would be to redirect this to List of casualties of the Smolensk air disaster. Side-note: he was not an officer - he was an NCO, promotion to the officer rank was posthomous as well. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:49, 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 List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:35, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

K33LN-D

K33LN-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 GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 04:48, 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 List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

KMBD-LD

KMBD-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) 04:31, 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 List of Daystar Television Network stations. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

WDMI-LD

WDMI-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. Redirect or merge to List of Daystar Television Network stations. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 04:30, 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 Griffithstown. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

St Hilda's Church, Griffithstown

St Hilda's Church, Griffithstown (  | 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)

Only sources I could find were sources promoting the church. Additionally, it fails WP:GNG as it seems to just be a random church. It can easily be merged with List of Church in Wales churches or Griffithstown. ''Flux55'' ( talk) 03:22, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 January 23. — cyberbot I Talk to my owner:Online 03:47, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge and Redirect to Griffithstown. The Coflein entry and the source it cites is adequate to cover it there. I couldn't find any other significant coverage. Jfire ( talk) 05:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge/Redirect: have not found anything to indicate that it is notable enough for a separate article. EdwardUK ( talk) 05:36, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Christianity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • A quick perusal of what sources there are indicates that if our Incorporated Church Building Society article actually dealt with that subject and didn't just ignore the entire 19th century, it might be better dealt with there. Uncle G ( talk) 07:57, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge to Griffithstown per Jfire. It gets mentioned up front in [19] but only as the location of a funeral. A couple of other such mentions in books. Newspapers find quite a few items, but they are the usual primary sources, mainly weddings and funerals. The church does not appear to be a listed building, but contains a memorial to Henry Griffiths for whom the town is named. I cannot find any reason to keep as an article in its own right, but it is part of Griffithstown and there should be some mergeable content here that would be well placed in that article. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 13:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • delete There is no serious claim to notability for this late Victorian building, and while I can appreciate the urge to merge, I've not seen lists of churches in town articles— for surely this is not the only church in town. Mangoe ( talk) 15:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Churches can be found in town articles, e.g South Croydon#Churches or Aberystwyth#Churches. St Hilda's is already mentioned at Griffithstown. If you think that mention is sufficient I would suggest redirect is a better WP:ATD. Findachurch suggests there are 3 churches in Griffithstown. Google maps adds another 2 and a kingdom hall in close proximity. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 16:12, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions: Other stuff does not exist Djflem ( talk) 16:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge to Griffithstown, where St Hilda's is already mentioned as a landmark. Djflem ( talk) 18:18, 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 redirect‎ to Eugene Group. The Wordsmith Talk to me 19:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Eugene Concrete

Eugene Concrete (  | 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)

Doesn't pass WP:ORGCRIT. I can only find mentions in passing in Korean of this company (e.g. [20]). The parent company Eugene Group is notable though. toobigtokale ( talk) 03:19, 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 keep‎. Withdrawn, did not see AfD in Nov 2023. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 02:34, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Diamondbacks–Dodgers rivalry

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

Not a "true" rivalry. The teams play each other often because they are in the same division. And there was some short-lived beef in the 2010s but nothing to the level of a big rivalry like Yankees-Red Sox . Natg 19 ( talk) 02:25, 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 keep‎. ✗ plicit 02:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

China Navigation Company

China Navigation Company (  | 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)

About 90% of the text has been RD1 redacted that there isn't much of an article left. Draftifying seems the best next step. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, China, and Singapore. UtherSRG (talk) 12:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    My name is Robert Jennings. I am the Head of Group Archives for John Swire & Sons Ltd. (JS&S)
    I do not believe that there have been any breaches of copyright in the content of the page for the China Navigation Company. If any allegations of copyright infringement by a puported copyright holder have been made then I would dispute such allegations. I believe that the page can and should be returned to its previous condition. It certainly shouldn't be deleted. CNCo celebrated its 150th anniversary in 2022 - an extraordinary achievement for a shipping company, made even more extraordinary by the fact that it is still in the hands of its original owners.
    I can confirm that Swire Shipping and Swire Bulk are wholly owned operating subsidiaries of the China Navigation Company Ltd. (CNCo). CNCo is a holding company and is a wholly owned subsidiary of JS&S. I can confirm that any written history of CNCo that is the copyright of JSS, CNCo or either Swire Shipping or Swire Bulk can be used freely and without specific permission from JSS.
    The history text (flagged for copyright violation) contained within the description of the CNCo physical archives (owned by JSS and held in the archive collection of the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS)) and shared on ‘Archives Hub’ https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/ea5125cd-1825-31be-b41a-142a903c5ede?component=e8bf8d21-b4a5-3546-ac96-9bc57cfc7319 has been reproduced (with minor edits to bring it up to date) from the introduction to the JSS collection at SOAS written by Elizabeth Hook and published originally in 1977. The copyright to this text is owned by SOAS but permission to use the text feely for non-commercial purposes is explicitly given. The link to the digitised version of the Elizabeth Hook 1977 catalogue of the JSS collection and to the permission are included below.
    https://digital.soas.ac.uk/AA00001363/00001/1x?search=hook
    https://digital.soas.ac.uk//permissions/
    I do hope the above is sufficiently satisfactory to remove any issue. Please do contact me if there are any further questions. Tie Coup ( talk) 15:21, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Tie Coup/Robert Jennings,
    The license which Wikipedia ascribes the text and contributions by editors to is Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0, as stated in the footer of the site. This license allows the commercial usage of the material, which evidently is incongruent with the permission to use the archive materials freely for non-commercial purposes. Do see Donating copyrighted materials for more information.
    – robertsky ( talk) 20:30, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. It was I who removed the copyvio content, and left the page in its present state; unfortunately no rewrite was proposed in the four weeks the page was listed at WP:CP. I fully agree with UtherSRG that that's far from ideal, but don't think that we can justify deletion: the company has well over a century of significant history and is indisputably notable. Other options – redirect, merge or rewrite/expansion – are all preferable to deletion. If the page is kept it should be moved to Swire Shipping. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 10:40, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 02:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Hyde, Francis E.; Harris, J. R. (1957) [1956]. Blue Funnel: A History of Alfred Holt and Company of Liverpool from 1865 to to 1914. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. p. 34. OCLC  1148033078. Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Internet Archive.

      The book notes: "As early as 1867 he had realised the importance of sending small steamers up the Yangtse River, but it was not until 1872 that he was able to form the China Navigation Company with a capital of £360,000. He had initially tried to persuade Alfred and Philip Holt to subscribe capital to this project, but without success. But as the venture became relatively more important to the maintenance of Holt’s main line cargoes they were induced in 1883 to loan £10,000 to Swire’s company, secured by a debenture repayable at the end of 1885. The business of the China Navigation Company eventually became so large that shipping operations finally became Butterfield & Swire’s paramount concern; after 1902 they discontinued their trading activities altogether."

    2. Liu, Kwang-Ching (August 1959). "Steamship Enterprise In Nineteenth-Century China". The Journal of Asian Studies. 18 (4). doi: 10.2307/2941139.

      The article notes on page 439: "In the early 1870's the China Navigation Company was organized by John Samuel Swire, head of John Swire & Co. in London, and of Butterfield & Swire in Shanghai. In 1872 Swire was able to persuade his friends and relatives in England to join him in raising £360,000 (the equivalent of Tls. 970,000) for his new company. Although one or two British merchants in the treaty ports were said to have taken shares, the shareholders' meetings were held in England, and the annual reports were never published in China."

      The article notes on page 440: "Although the China Navigation Company owned only five ships in 1877, its managing firm, Butterfield & Swire, served also as agents for five other steamships which operated mainly on South China routes. These five ships were later incorporated into the China Navigation Company's fleet in 1883."

      The article notes on page 445: "In this period, of the two major British companies, the China Navigation Company (Butterfield & Swire, agents) was the more prosperous."

      The article notes on page 448: "This was the pattern of development also followed by the China Navigation Company (under the agency of Butterfield & Swire), except that the latter was more prosperous and grew faster. Even during the frenzied competition of the 1870's, the China Navigation Company could finance expansion from current earnings. In the twenty years between 1874 and 1894, the China Navigation Company's fleet increased from six ships with a total of 10,618 tons, to twenty-nine ships totaling 34,543 tons—this despite the fact that between 1873 and 1893 the company lost a total of nine ships in accidents."

    3. Johnman, Lewis; Murphy, Hugh (2017). Scott Lithgow: Dejá Vu All Over Again! The Rise and Fall of a Shipbuilding Company. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. p. 5. ISBN  0-9738934-0-0. ISSN  1188-3928. Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Google Books.

      The book notes: "By 1872 Swire had established his China Navigation Company, registered in London, with James Henry Scott's father among its shareholders. The younger James Henry Scott became a partner in 1874 and with Swire visited Greenock to purchase two steamers, later named Fuchow and Swatow, from John Scott IV, who in turn took a half share in each. The two vessels steamed for China and formed the basis of another new company, the Coast Boats Ownery, in which John Scott was again a substantial investor. Up to 1879 Scotts supplied six steamers to the company and by 1882 had delivered another ten. The following year Coast Boats and China Navigation merged in response to competition, with the new company retaining the China Navigation name. From modest beginnings the relationship of mutual trust and friendship between Scotts, Holt and Swire, initially through builder-client relationships and then through interlocking shareholdings, resulted in Ocean registering as a private company in 1902. In so doing, Ocean also purchased a controlling interest in the China Navigation Company. But by this time John Samuel Swire had died and James Henry Scott had become the senior partner.15 In 1917, Ocean purchased one-third of Scotts' ordinary shares at a cost of £366,640.16."

    4. Jones, Geoffrey (2000). Merchants to Multinationals: British Trading Companies in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp.  37, 71– 72. ISBN  0-19-829450-6. Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Internet Archive.

      The book notes on page 37: "A major development came in 1872 when Swire’s entered the China coastal and river shipping business in direct competition to the established shipping operations of Jardine Matheson and the American firm of Russell and Co. In that year the China Navigation Company was formed to provide steamer services on the Lower Yangtze, and to supply cargoes for Holt’s ships. This was a Londonregistered limited liability company, though its shares were principally held by the Swires, the Holts, and other Liverpool families."

      The book notes on pages 71– 72: "Swire’s China Navigation Company grew in the late nineteenth century as one of the leading shipping companies in the Far East. In China the firm expanded from its initial business of running steamers up the Yangtze river to the coastal trade, which by the 1890s had become the main source of revenue. The growth of the China Navigation Company was achieved by breaking into the rates agreements of the pre-existing companies, and then organizing stronger cartel arrangements with Swire’s inside them. By the late 1890s China Navigation had a fleet of forty-seven ships, considerably larger than Jardines' Indo-China, and was declaring dividends of 20 per cent per annum, although in the 1900s Japanese and other competition ended the period of great prosperity. In this decade further shipping-related investments were made, notably the building of a large dockyard and a firm to provide lighter services for China Navigation.'

    5. Cowan, Charles Donald (1964). The Economic Development Of China And Japan: Studies In Economic History And Political Economy. London: George Allen & Unwin. pp.  51, 58. OCLC  350522. Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Internet Archive.

      The book notes on page 51: "The heaviest blow to Russell and Company’s position was dealt by a concern organized in Britain. This was the China Navigation Company Limited, whose initial capital of £360,000 was organized by John Samuel Swire in London in the spring of 1872. With this capital, the company purchased the two ships and the shore properties of the Union S.N. Company, the small British firm in the Yangtze trade, and, in addition, three new ships (to be built on American models) were ordered from A. and J. Inglis, shipbuilders at Glasgow."

      The book notes on page 58: "In the first half of 1874, for example, the profits of the China Navigation Company before deducting depreciation were only £8,500 — a fact which brought 'glum looks from shareholders'. In the second half of 1874, the company yielded larger earnings only because the Glengyle, one of its steamers, was removed from the Yangtze river for service on the China coast. In order to satisfy the shareholders, the China Navigation Company declared an annual dividend of 5 per cent in early 1875. But that the company’s profits continued to be unsatisfactory is indicated by the fact that during 1875, John Swire had to arrange a loan of £57,000 from Alfred and Philip Holt for the China Navigation Company, at 5 per cent per annum."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow China Navigation Company to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard ( talk) 09:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep per excellent sources found by Cunard. Thanks 1.46.159.106 ( talk) 05:22, 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 speedy keep‎. Per WP:SPEEDYKEEP#1. The nominator has withdrawn their nomination and there are no other arguments for deletion. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 14:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

International Wood Products Journal

International Wood Products Journal (  | 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 it meets WP:N. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 17:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 02:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. I think there's both a long-enough history, and enough secondary-source coverage. — David Eppstein ( talk) 06:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Indexed in Scopus, easy pass of WP:NJournals. -- Randykitty ( talk) 09:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Withdraw nomination per excellent ponits above. Boleyn ( talk) 13:19, 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. Despite Jfire's laudable attempts at finding something, "likely" sources are not a sufficient basis to retain an aricle in the light of WP:V. All Wikipedia content must be verifiable, i.e. based on actually existing and identifiable sources. Sandstein 08:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Cafer Bater

Cafer Bater (  | 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 he meets WP:ARTIST or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 18:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • I think these are all exhibition catalogues or pamphlets: [21], [22], [23].
  • The last of the above corresponds to a memorial exhibition that occurred after his death. Milliyet has a brief article about the exhibition opening [24], which calls Bater one of Turkey's most important watercolor painters, and another about it being extended due to its popularity [25].
  • There is a 1987 column in Milliyet archives which I can't access: [26]. And I'm guessing the third result there, dated 03.04.1994, mentions his death.
  • There are two catalogs that I can't access: [27] [28].
Together, these lead me to believe that he was a notable pre-internet Turkish watercolor artist, for which GNG-establishing sources will likely only be found in Turkish, and offline. Jfire ( talk) 04:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 02:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO, nothing showing this meets WP:ARTIST. Sources in article (single ref and ELs) and BEFORE show nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. Ping me if WP:IS sources are added to article that meet WP:SIGCOV and are not OBITs.  //  Timothy ::  talk  19:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I am not finding significant reliable sources for this artist. Not finding him listed as part of any notable collections. -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk) 01:27, 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 Paku Karen Baptist Association where a sentence has been added, rendering this a viable ATD whereas the merger would have been an issue with the lack of sourcing. History retained should sourcing prove accessible. Star Mississippi 11:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Paku Divinity School

Paku Divinity School (  | 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 it meets WP:N; it should be but I couldn't prove it. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn ( talk) 19:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 02:00, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete or merge - Agreed with Peterkingiron that there's likely few online sources. While it's likely a real organisation, I don't think it meets WP:GNG right now. In fact, if it weren't an education institution it would meet WP:A7 criteria for speedy deletion.
I'm not sure if we should merge unsourced content elsewhere, so the best might be to delete it and recreate it when an editor can find an appropriate source. I've added a sentence about this school based on this article's lead in Paku Karen Baptist Association for now. EmeraldRange ( talk/ contribs) 16:08, 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 List of stations owned by Innovate Corp. as a viable ATD with a slightly stronger consensus than WQCW. This can be changed, however, as a matter of editorial discretion Star Mississippi 14:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

WOCW-LD

WOCW-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 WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV from secondary sources. Article was part of a bulk AfD last year that closed as no consensus but there isn't much to show this meets the notability guidelines on its own. Let'srun ( talk) 02:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and West Virginia. Let'srun ( talk) 02:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - Established broadcast channel. Standards for source frequency on articles about media outlets should be much looser since media doesn’t tend to cover media. WilsonP NYC ( talk) 03:01, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete or possibly redirect to WQCW. The argument above has fallen way out of favor, including at an RfC. WHCP had issues getting its signal into Charleston, yet there is no coverage even mentioning this translator for some reason in Charleston newspapers. Sammi Brie (she/her •  t • c) 04:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.: its pre-2015 history as a WQCW relay is a bit more than your average DTV America/HC2/Innovate station, but not much (since that incarnation would not have been independently notable), and of course the supposedly-limited operations since then are the usual national networks, no local content, and no significant coverage — but it's barely enough for me to at least consider retaining the page history behind a redirect. It's another technical survivor of a bulk nomination from last year. As for the notion of media outlets having looser standards: we tried that, and the eventual result was a 2021 RfC that pretty much confirmed that the GNG is the notability barometer, not NMEDIA. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Pretty sure that discusion ended without a clear consensus. WilsonP NYC ( talk) 11:39, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 02:00, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp. Its notability as a WQCW translator is easily noted in that article, but as Gray sold it for a pittance knowing that DTVA wouldn't come close to being a competitor, and the station's low sale price is truly the only thing of note. Gray likely knew that the station's viability once it moved the WQCW transmitter to WSAZ's stick would be nil to none (this was before they started programming subchannel networks of their own), and DTVA wouldn't be competitive at all since it can only serve Charleston proper due to the area's geography. Nate • ( chatter) 00:25, 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. The arguments by the people who have addressed the quality of the article's references in detail have remained unaddressed and unrebutted. Sandstein 08:34, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ukraine Solidarity Campaign

Ukraine Solidarity Campaign (  | 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 secondary sources, besides sparse one liners in Morning Star which is already not very reliable ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him •  talk) 21:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC) reply

I've expanded the page to include more information and draw on more secondary sources, including from the mainstream press. This organisation is clearly notable given its significant support from trade unions representing tens of thousands of workers, as well as elected politicians. It also provides crucial information about how different political tendencies have responded to the war in Ukraine. For these reasons, I say we keep the page. — Zcbeaton ( talk) 13:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Here is my summary of each the non-primary sources in article and why they do not show WP:Secondary WP:SIGCOV..

  1. Interview with founder of USC Chris Ford [1]
  2. Article BY Chris Ford, founder of USC [2]
  3. A brief passing mention that they admire USC; [3]
  4. Brief mention of USC and USC Scotland. [4]
  5. Passing mention of USC [5]
  6. Morning Star (British newspaper) mentions that USC organised a demo, no more info [6]
  7. MP statement who co-founded USC [7]
  8. Trade unionist supports USC; no elaboration on it [8]
  9. No mention of USC, except one of the signatories [9]

In short...I am not convinced that WP:42 has been achieved. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him •  talk) 23:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply

References

  1. ^ "International solidarity. How foreign leftists are helping Ukraine in the war". Commons. Retrieved 2024-01-15.
  2. ^ Moloney, Christopher Ford, Mick Antoniw, John (2022-04-08). "The labour movement must stand by Ukraine: join our historic demonstration". LabourList. Retrieved 2024-01-15.{{ cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( link)
  3. ^ Łobodziński, Wojciech Albert (2022-10-28). "Ukrainian workers fight on the front - and suffer from lack of political power". Cross-border Talks. Retrieved 2024-01-15.
  4. ^ "Ukraine's Popular Resistance – Scottish Left Review". Retrieved 2024-01-15.
  5. ^ Jones, Alan (2023-04-30). "Train drivers' union boss hits out over criticism of strike on eve of Eurovision". Evening Standard. Retrieved 2024-01-15.
  6. ^ Friday; April 8; 2022 (2022-04-07). "Trade unions will stage a protest march and rally in Whitehall in solidarity with Ukraine". Morning Star. Retrieved 2024-01-15. {{ cite web}}: |last3= has numeric name ( help)CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list ( link)
  7. ^ Editors, Labour Hub (2023-02-21). "The Ukrainian Question for Socialists". Labour Hub. Retrieved 2024-01-15. {{ cite web}}: |last= has generic name ( help)
  8. ^ Antoniw, Mick. "Welsh unions are supporting Ukrainian workers. We need more of this solidarity". openDemocracy.
  9. ^ "Letter calling for arms to Ukraine is dangerous, say peace campaigners". Morning Star. 2023-02-16. Retrieved 2024-01-15.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, please do not put your comments in the midst of the nomination statement.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:33, 8 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! 22:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep I think with the sourced expansion it is notable. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 16:39, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Which one? I methodically went through the nine sources and why they’re insufficient for establishing notability ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him •  talk) 09:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The additional sources have established notability. TH1980 ( talk) 02:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Could the Keep arguments please specify which sources are sufficient, or explain why Shushugah's analysis of them is incorrect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering ( talk) 01:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Fails GNG and NORG. Source eval:
Comments Source
Primary, fails WP:IS 1. "Labour Movement Aid Delivered to Ukrainian Resistance". 22 December 2022. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
Primary, fails WP:IS 2. ^ "Support Ukrainian workers at the front!". Ukraine Solidarity Campaign. 7 March 2023. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
Interview with Chris Ford, fails WP:IS 3. ^ "International solidarity. How foreign leftists are helping Ukraine in the war". Commons. 4 October 2022. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
Article author is Christopher Ford, fails WP:IS 4. ^ "The labour movement must stand by Ukraine: join our historic demonstration". LabourList. 8 April 2022. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
One sentence mention, "In this area, I really admire the work of the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign in the UK, which has pushed many British trade unions from pacifist or pro-Russian to pro-Ukrainian positions", fails WP:SIGCOV 5. ^ "Ukrainian workers fight on the front – and suffer from lack of political power". Cross-Border Talks. 28 October 2022. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
One sentence mention, " The Ukraine Solidarity Campaign, and its sister organisation in Scotland, were set up to make the links between their struggles and ours and to win them practical support for their fight for survival. " fails SIGCOV 6. ^ Colin Turbett (September 2023). "Ukraine's popular resistance". Scottish Left Review. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
Name mention, "Mr Harper hasn’t – and we are members of the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign. Mr Harper isn’t.", fails SIGCOV 7. ^ "Train drivers' union boss hits out over criticism of strike on eve of Eurovision". Evening Standard. 30 April 2023. Retrieved 3 January 2024.
Primary, fails WP:IS 8. ^ Jump up to:a b "About". Ukraine Solidarity Campaign. 9 September 2014. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
Article about an event they had a leading role in "Saturday’s demo, organised by the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign and endorsed by five Ukrainian union federations, will see several British unions", nothing about the event because it hadn't happened yet, nothing about the org other than it was part of the event. Fails WP:SIGCOV, does not address the subject (Ukraine Solidarity Campaign) directly and indepth. 9. ^ "Trade unions will stage a protest march and rally in Whitehall in solidarity with Ukraine". Morning Star. 8 April 2022. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
Primary, "At this stage a number of us founded the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign and then over the years worked together on trade union campaigns through the Confederation of the Free Trade Unions of Ukraine.", the source also fails WP:SIGCOV, it does not address the subject (Ukraine Solidarity Campaign) directly and indepth 10. ^ "The Ukrainian Question for Socialists". 21 February 2023. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
One sentence mention "The Ukraine Solidarity Campaign has been instrumental in working with trade unions in the UK to develop closer links and to provide direct support to their brothers and sisters in Ukrainian unions.", fails WP:SIGCOV 11. ^ "Welsh unions are supporting Ukrainian workers. We need more of this solidarity". openDemocracy. 31 July 2023. Retrieved 2 January 2024.
Names two individuals representing Ukraine Solidarity Campaign in letter signature, fails WP:SIGCOV 12. ^ "Letter calling for arms to Ukraine is dangerous, say peace campaigners". Morning Star. 16 February 2023. Retrieved 19 June 2023.
Nothing above meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth, @ TH1980: or @ Shushugah: could you clarify which sources you believe are independent and address the subject directly and indepth?  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
@ TimothyBlue I do not believe SIGCOV is satisfied and have similarly examined each of the present sources. But perhaps @ Alextejthompson or @ Zcbeaton could expand? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him •  talk) 17:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Thanks, I confused your signature in the comment with another when copying it, thanks for the proper pings.  //  Timothy ::  talk  17:41, 30 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 00:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Cream City Collectives

Cream City Collectives (  | 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)

Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. ( ?) It had no meaningful hits in searches of EBSCOhost (federated), Google Books, and newspaper archives beyond passing mentions. Altogether there is not enough reliably sourced content with which to write an article worthy of the subject. There are no worthwhile redirect targets, as the infoshop list only includes independently notable infoshops. czar 01:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Wisconsin. czar 01:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I was looking at the cited sources and found that only one of them even mentioned the "Cream City Collectives", but it only verifies there being a gallery in it, nothing else. I couldn't verify the detail about the Mathilde Anneke infoshop, as the cited biographical source never mentions the infoshop or the Cream City Collectives. If there's not significant coverage of this that we're missing, this is definitely a non-controversial candidate for deletion. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 14:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Couldn't find any sources that could prove the subject's notability. Davest3r08 >:) ( talk) 13:12, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 00:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Embassy of Indonesia, Wellington

Embassy of Indonesia, Wellington (  | 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)

Based on the sole primary source. Lacking coverage to meet WP:ORG. LibStar ( talk) 01:32, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 00:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Abel Tesfamariam

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

Fails WP:GNG, no information about the athlete except his participation in the 2012 YOG and dual nationality. His FIS profile says he was last active in 2012. Could be redirected to the Philippines at the 2012 Winter Youth Olympics at best. Hariboneagle927 ( talk) 01:24, 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 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. Star Mississippi 14:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

List of institutions with Sanskrit mottos

List of institutions with Sanskrit mottos (  | 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)

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of educational institutions with Sanskrit mottos * Pppery * it has begun... 01:49, 9 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! 02:26, 16 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! 01:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete, I don't particularly see why the intersection between motto and Sanskrit would meet LISTN. Geschichte ( talk) 08:54, 30 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 01:40, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Stanislas Branicki

Stanislas Branicki (  | 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 am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject – a French men's field hockey player – to meet WP:GNG. I found a few quotes here from Le Parisien and not much else. JTtheOG ( talk) 00:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment in French the article has already existed for a year+, however it is also a stub. It is possible this article does not meet WP:GNG. However, I think it best wait for a comment by the creator of the article, perhaps if more sources are brought than GNG can be met. Homerethegreat ( talk) 15:10, 16 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! 01:01, 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 Joe Biden judicial appointment controversies. as a viable ATD with the history preserved should her status change. Star Mississippi 14:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Marian Gaston

Marian Gaston (  | 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 or WP:JUDGE. Failed judicial nominees aren't inherently notable, WP:BIO1E applies. Let'srun ( talk) 00:09, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Law, and California. Let'srun ( talk) 00:09, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Draftify until renomination. I don't understand what makes her a "failed" nominee all of a sudden. So she hasn't been renominated within the first five days of her nomination being sent back, and....? Snickers2686 ( talk) 03:39, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Draftify per the above. BD2412 T 04:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Weak Keep in keeping with the spirit of Wikipedia:WOMRED, let's see if her nomination regains traction. Wl219 ( talk) 01:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Appears that her nomination has been withdrawn at her request. I'd be fine with redirecting this to Joe Biden judicial appointment controversies as a WP:ATD. Let'srun ( talk) 04:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Redirect the page "Marian Gatson" to Joe Biden judicial appointment controversies, as her litigation record and opposition to her nomination are substantive, while the fact she withdrew herself means she's no longer a nominee and not notable enough to merit her own article. JohnAdams1800 ( talk) 04:39, 11 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! 00:18, 16 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! 00:56, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 04:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Aeroeste

Aeroeste (  | 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:NCORP and GNG. A BEFORE search didn't yield any SIGCOV ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him •  talk) 00:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete or Draftify - Clearly an established if small commercial carrier but no apparent independent media coverage prevents a vote to keep. WilsonP NYC ( talk) 02:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - No claim to notability. Llajwa ( talk) 03:02, 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 delete‎. ✗ plicit 01:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Sole Satisfier

Sole Satisfier (  | 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)

Background concerns: A rather tricky page for an encyclopaedia, Sole Satisfier concerns the Christian theological notion that God is the only source of complete fulfilment. The page was heavily purged of uncited material in a series of edits last year by Horse Eye's Back, and now consists only of two quotations from saints. For a Christian theological notion, it noticeably draws from Catholic sources ( WP:CONTENTFORK?), and reads as an essay or collection of related saintly writings rather than an encyclopaedic entry. About a dozen pages linked to it in "See also" until I removed these links last week; they were almost universally articles of saints with no clear connection to "Sole satisfier". The only mainspace page that now links here is Spiritual communion, which exhibits the same problems regarding essay-style writing and sayings-collection.

Motivation: I am concerned that the article might never be able to meet an encyclopaedic standard. A Google search returns very few results; "sole satisfier" is not even mentioned in the Catechism of the Catholic Church quoted in the article. I am happy to be corrected by someone better acquainted with theology, but I do not think the term "sole satisfier" is something that has any academic foundation, and is therefore in the "language" of theology. The article reads like an attempt to define, coin, and discuss a specific theological notion that is not supported in reliable, independent sources; therefore, the article will violate WP:OR for as long as sources do not use this particular term. Nevertheless, the notion could be incorporated into existing articles; Desire#Religion might serve particularly well for a redirect as an alternative to deletion, and there is some relevance for Argument from desire.

(This is my first AfD nomination, so I am sorry if I am doing anything wrong!) IgnatiusofLondon ( talk) 19:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete. After looking a bit, I agree with the nominator; this simply isn't discussed as a concept in any sources. Original research. — Moriwen ( talk) 23:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete. The term "Sole Satisfier" seems more like an urban terminology from the last few decades of modern music - such as Sister Souljah. Made-up term, even. I have never, ever heard this term, or one even similar, tied to any Christian faith. — Maile ( talk) 01:00, 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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2024_January_23&oldid=1201458057"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE