It's self-evident that people who have a bunch of computers and want to assign them names according to some sort of system do so, and that the systems are completely arbitrary, and that they are often inconsistently followed, and that people who aren't into naming systems either don't give them names or pick an arbitrary name each time if they have to. It's just not a subject, period, much less encyclopedic. Mangoe ( talk) 23:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a writer and musician, not
properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for writers or musicians. This was previously deleted in 2019 per
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Ferrier and then got recreated in fall 2023 after his death, but this version is still referenced almost entirely to
primary sources that aren't support for notability at all -- even the one footnote that's technically citing a newspaper is still just his paid-inclusion death notice in the classifieds, not a journalist-written news story about his death, and virtually everything else is content
self-published by companies or organizations he was directly affiliated with, while the one potentially acceptable source (LitLive) is not enough to clinch passage of GNG all by itself.
And for notability claims, there are statements (a minor literary award, presidency of an organization) that might count for something if they were sourced properly, but there's still absolutely nothing that would be "inherently" notable enough to hand him an automatic notability freebie in the absence of proper
WP:GNG-worthy sourcing.
And the French interlang is based entirely on the same poor sourcing as this one, so it has no GNG-worthy footnotes that can be copied over to salvage this either.
Bearcat (
talk) 16:36, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find sufficient coverage of the subject, a French rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 19:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 19:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
No such war in literature, it was part of the Russo-Polish War (1654–1667). This article is OR Marcelus ( talk) 20:11, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:08, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed during NPP. This is basically a catalog of a particular company's products. AFD nomination per no GNG sourcing of the topic per se and numerous wp:not issues. North8000 ( talk) 22:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
a catalog of a particular company's productsand I have added more sources. Someonewhoisusinginternet ( talk) 08:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject of this article fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. She has not starred in a single notable film; a Google search of her doesn't show her being discussed in reliable secondary sources. Most of the sources cited in the article are primary sources that involve the subject granting interviews to several publications. The article was previously deleted via an afd discussion, which can be seen here. Versace1608 Wanna Talk? 22:32, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, all of the sources are primary sources, are nothing but announcements and does not assert notability. @ BrigadierG: per suggestion by admin. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 16:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:49, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't have enough coverage in WP:RS or WP:SIGCOV needed to meet notability guidelines. There's some brief coverage in books but nothing significant other than "it's an HTML editor you can use," and nothing else I could find that seemed reliable. Survived an AfD in 2005 solely on the basis of being "well-known." StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Because of prior deletion discussion, a Soft Deletion is not an option here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. The only source are simply announcment, just not worthy of an encyclopaedic value. Those arguing for a keep must be advised of WP:USEFUL. I also advise those to create a Fandom page for your favorite sport if you want to save it so much. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 23:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Another page littered with unreliable sources. Hari Ram Gupta doesn't even say he was defeated at all (which the page misleads you by citing it did), removed if you check now on my newest revision. Noorullah ( talk) 22:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Extremely unreliable sources including over-reliance on primary sources that still fall under WP:RAJ such as Panth Prakash, also extremely exaggerated in numbers (1 million?) Noorullah ( talk) 22:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:Notability Wikibear47 ( talk) 17:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Hassan started her dancing career as a stage performer in the United States.
How do we believe such statement with no reliable source.?-- Meligirl5 ( talk) 00:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm familiar with a "Soft Delete" but can anyone define a "Soft Keep" for me? Do you mean "Weak Keep"?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation page with a clear primary topic and one other recently created and comparatively niche topic. I propose to delete this page, redirect the title to European Federation, which covers this concept, and add a hatnote there. BD2412 T 23:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
fails WP:NPROF and WP:AUTHOR, appears to be a vanity page Psychastes ( talk) 22:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The sources on this page almost all deal with WP:RAJ, with many of the sources (including Singh), tracing back to the Panth Prakash, which fails WP:RAJ. Some of these sources don't even state that such a thing happened, and nor do any other major sources regarding this campaign such as Hari Ram Gupta. Noorullah ( talk) 22:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
It's rare a google search returns no results, but here we are. Given this, and the fact this is merely a geographic formation, this fails WP:NPLACE by a long shot. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 22:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
No indication this was ever notable and completely WP:UNSOURCED but given I don't know French, decided to AfD instead of PROD out of an abundance of caution. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 22:16, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Defunct small-town station with no secondary sources. Fails WP:GNG. Redirect is unnecessary as the disambiguator of (Shoshoni, Wyoming) makes it an implausibly specific search term. AusLondonder ( talk) 21:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Have moved all the important content to Chailey Heritage School and would WP:BLAR but I feel that would leave an overly broad redirect, so I'm proposing a delete here. Fails WP:GNG and we can cover anything that does on Chailey Heritage School in the Searchlight Workshops section. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 21:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Biography of a politician, not properly sourced as passing WP:NPOL. The attempted notability claim here is that he served on a county board of supervisors, which is not an "inherently" notable role -- it's a local office that has to satisfy NPOL #2, where the notability test is contingent on the amount of substance that can be written about his political impact, and the amount of sourcing that can be shown to support it. But this is literally just "he is a person who existed, the end", and is completely unsourced. Bearcat ( talk) 21:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Article has absolutely no references to support it, has been tagged for many years to that effect, has not had anything substantial added to it for several years, and is not particularly informative. TooManyFingers ( talk) 16:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 21:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a politician, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NPOL. The attempted notability claim here is that she was an alternate vice-presidential candidate in one state for a minor fringe party's presidential campaign, which is not an automatic notability freebie -- it could get her an article if she were shown to actually pass WP:GNG for it, but it is in no way "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from GNG. But there are just three improperly-formatted footnotes here, all of which are to primary or unreliable sources that are not support for notability at all, so she hasn't been shown to satisfy GNG. Bearcat ( talk) 21:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This programming language does not have enough WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS to meet WP:GNG. Just another .NET addon. Previously deleted in a 2009 AfD but resurrected by a WP:SPA in 2016. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already been AfD'd, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 19:54, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 21:17, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
A Iraqi TikTok personality who was recently shot. Seems to lack any notability or sources while alive, a violation of WP:VICTIM and WP:GNG. BlakeIsHereStudios ( talk | contributions) 21:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't usually think Internet "personalities" are worth the time of day. However, she seems noteworthy as it further highlights the ludicrous things that people will fall foul of the morality police in the middle east. Salty1984 ( talk) 23:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails to meet relevant WP:MUSICBIO as well general WP:GNG. I would suggest first delete and then redirect to Noori. This BLP was created by a user who might have a COI.— Saqib ( talk | contribs) 20:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 21:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Non notable topic, not an encyclopedia article but a hagiography. Nationalistic drivel; a national myth presented as if it is factual. There are and have been many people who are or were good with horses. Reading this article as someone who was not born in the USA is just weird. Polygnotus ( talk) 20:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
“ | I appreciate the fact, and am proud of it, that the attentions I am receiving are intended more for our country than for me personally. | ” |
— Ulysses S. Grant |
Fails WP:GNG. Flounder fillet ( talk) 20:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable song, fails WP:NSONG. No in-depth coverage in secondary sources. Binksternet ( talk) 20:05, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This article is largely primary sources and WP:SYNTH of these sources. The first half is mostly just explianing what hyperlinks and framing is (mostly unnecessary WP:HOWTO), and the 2nd half largely acknowledges there really aren't copyright issues in US/Germany and other contexts. Why does this even exist? ZimZalaBim talk 19:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Not many articles have been attempted to be
prodded three times; in that sense alone, this AfD is long overdue. The article itself is a remnant of the looser standards in this topic area in the 2000s, but according to
the talk page there was a failed prod that was followed by an
A7 speedy deletion in 2007. It was recreated in 2009; a 2010 prod tagging was contested because of the prior article. (The contesting rationale notes that at the time, licensed radio stations are generally held to be notable
, but with the caveat that
consensus can change. In this topic area, that happened with this
2021 RfC; we now require
significant coverage and cannot source solely to FCC records and other databases.) I just had to procedurally contest a third prod because of the prior prods. I had been considering a redirect to the
list of radio stations in Pennsylvania as an
alternative to deletion, and I still think that is the best course of action (I do not support retaining the article as it is), but the triple-prod means this is as much a procedural nomination as anything else.
WCQuidditch
☎
✎ 19:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
seems to be just a dictionary definition Chidgk1 ( talk) 19:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a sports figure, not
properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for sportspeople. To be fair, at the time this was first created, Wikipedia had a consensus that simple presence at the Olympics was an automatic inclusion lock regardless of medal placement or sourcing issues -- but that's long since been deprecated, and a non-medalist now has to be shown to pass
WP:GNG on their sourceability.
But a
WP:BEFORE search turned up very little that could be used to salvage the article: apart from Olympic results reporting itself, I largely just get glancing namechecks of his existence and local high-school-athlete coverage rather than coverage that's substantively about him in any notability-building sense. I've further been completely unable to verify this article's claim that he was born in
Sudbury — even the database entry present here as the article's sole source fails to claim that, and his local high-school-athlete coverage is found in
Ottawa, not Sudbury. (And yes, I get that it's possible for people to be born in one place and then move to another, but we still need to be able to
verify claims about a person's birthplace.)
Finishing ninth in an Olympic event just isn't "inherently" notable enough anymore to exempt him from ever having to have more reliable source coverage than I've been able to find.
Bearcat (
talk) 19:03, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Poorly sourced footballer BLP that fails WP:GNG. All that comes up are trivial mentions. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Ineligible for PROD. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:53, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The best sources I found were two sentences of coverage here and four-ish sentences of coverage here. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Poorly sourced rugby BLP; subject made one pro appearance. All I really found was this transactional announcement. Fails WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:36, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable cake that does not pass WP:GNG, references consist of recipes and trivial mentions. WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV. BaduFerreira ( talk) 04:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I thought all of our "cake articles" (and "salad articles") had already passed through AFD but here is another.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Previously subject of a contested PROD. No secondary sources. Zero useful content. Previous consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dominica at the 2010 Commonwealth Games was that these articles are not useful, particularly if they lack substantive content.
AusLondonder ( talk) 14:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirect or merge and which is the preferred target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 17:36, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:32, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, appears not notable. Bakhtar40 ( talk) 16:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Keep. As the creator of the article i would like to suggest keep, as it passes WP:MUSIC. The musical artist have received full fledged coverage from independent media sources for his work such as [16], [17], [18]. [19]. Further the artist also passes one of the criteria of winning or being nominated for a notable award, as he won the notable Filmfare R. D. Burman Award in the category of upcoming music talent. [20] [21]
Hineyo ( talk) 17:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
:Note - This account ( Hineyo) is blocked. Bakhtar40 ( talk) 15:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Keep - Pass WP:MUSIC, Also, there are significant reliable sources availabe which talks about the subject. Grabup ( talk) 04:26, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
As noted in WP:NPOL and WP:NSUBPOL, Wikipedia doesn't normally consider municipal councillors notable enough for a separate article, unless they've received significant press coverage in that role. The rest of his roles have been low-to-mid-level party leader jobs and a political appointment as chair of Skill Development Board, Government of Rajasthan. No significant coverage of him per WP:GNG or WP:BIO in reliable secondary sources; what I can find on him in a WP:BEFORE search in English and Hindi (रामगोपाल सुथार) is routine coverage of his recent appointment as chair, and some WP:PRIMARY source quotes from his speeches. Wikishovel ( talk) 17:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
At a glance, this looks like a well-written and -sourced article, but it's a total WP:COATRACK. Almost nothing in the article is about the "town" of Martin, because there isn't anything to say: It was a minor railroad maintenance point that later had a station for a nearby ski area. Of all the cited sources, only reference 14 comes close to substantial coverage; many sources don't mention Martin at all. I couldn't find any additional sources that aren't already cited, and none are more than trivial mentions (e.g. photos of trains taken at Martin). I suggest a delete; I could also live with a merge of relevant content to Stampede Pass, Northern Pacific Railroad, or Meany Lodge (from which much of this article's content seems to have been copied). WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk) 15:41, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't find sources to show notability - I am aware this isn't my area though or language. Boleyn ( talk) 09:12, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:05, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP. Weak independent significant coverage. The resort in question closed down due to COVID/bankruptcy. Uhooep ( talk) 08:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 08:28, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Unclear that notability has been established. Beland ( talk) 04:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an English rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. Draftification would be an option, but this is a re-creation of an existing draft. JTtheOG ( talk) 01:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 02:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:42, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This has been sitting here unsourced and stubbed for years and years. If there is anything notable about "software law", it could just be a section in information technology law or similar article. ZimZalaBim talk 03:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
'''[[
User:CanonNi]]'''
(
talk|
contribs) 03:35, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 17:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Procedural nomination for deletion under WP:BIODELETE per request on my talk. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 17:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
(Renomination: the discussion from 2010 closed as "no consensus.") I don't believe that Brenda Jean Patrick fulfills the notability requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. She is (was? I think I found an obituary) an educational consultant who touted the idea of "customer care" in school districts. Most of the information I can find about her consultant work is in the form of press releases in local papers when she held workshops for a district. I don't see independent coverage outside of her PR. Joyous! Noise! 17:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
No indication school passes WP:NSCHOOL and written entirely as a WP:PROMO for the school. Was previously redirected to Elwood Union Free School District but reverted more than once. Unless notability can be established, seeking consensus for restoration of the redirect. Bungle ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 17:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:BOOK, only 5 citations in google scholar, none of which are reviews and 3 of which are by the author himself. Appears to be a vanity page. Psychastes ( talk) 17:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Probable UPE advertisement for non notable individual. Just another working photographer. Refbombed to primary source showing he has done work but there is a lack of independent coverage about him. None of the claimed awards are major awards or are specifically for him. A search found nothing better. duffbeerforme ( talk) 03:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
an important figure...widely cited by peers or successors; (B)
originated a significant new concept, theory, or technique; (C)
created -or played a major role in co-creating- a significant or well-known work; (D)
[his] work has become a significant monument, been part of a significant exhibition, won significant critical attention, or been represented within permanent collections. I'm afraid our subject meets none of the four. -- The Gnome ( talk) 15:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎ 17:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The only reliable source for this fishing ship / unarmed military transport ship is a massive 10-book encyclopedia of all German warships no matter how small or insignificant. The other source, netmarine.net, is more of a large hobby site / semi wiki than anything else ("Si vous souhaitez compléter ces pages par des récits, illustrations ou autres documents, écrivez nous."). Fram ( talk) 07:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
fishing ship / unarmed transport ship, is technically correct but is a misleading strawman. I'm not arguing for or against deletion because I don't know if there is a separate method for assessing the notability of ships, but that statement just irked me. Curbon7 ( talk) 09:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎ 17:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Reliant entirely on primary sources. Another one of those articles with a name so vague it's basically impossible to search for. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:16, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This is a series of unsourced lists of no encyclopedic value and we're not the Radio Times. -- D'n'B- t -- 17:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related pages because they are part of the same list:
* the 2015 does have a single source, but I'm standing by the lack of encylopedic value. -- D'n'B- t -- 17:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. Previously deleted via AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beenish Chohan — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 17:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. Previously deleted via AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sukaina Khan — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. Furthermore, majority of cited sources fails WP:RS. No evidence indicating significant involvement in notable films, TV dramas, etc. being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. Previously deleted as per AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erum Akhtar — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Per attempted 2021 PROD by Bwoodcock
Upon reading the talk page, it appears that this was malware disguised as antivirus. Which is a thing. But that sockpuppetry back in the day kept the article itself from actually saying so. So I think the main problem with this article is that it's substantially misleading, but that there's no practical way to clean it up, because it was of such minor significance that it left no footprint in the media... just a few bloggers arguing about whether it was malware or just antivirus software so bad that it didn't do anything. In any event, now, with the benefit of hindsight, it probably should have been dealt with differently, and it seems utterly un-note-worthy.
Although they were later blocked for unrelated sockpuppetry, I see no reason to doubt their knowledge on this specific issue, which means we've been lying to our readers for 17 years. What a disgrace. Anyway, it's time for this article to go. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:41, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Neither cited source even mentioned the topic. Source searching is finding only software download websites. No evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 16:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Reliant entirely on primary sources. No evidence of notability. Previous AfD was kept due to people sharing their own testimonials of how it helped them, which is just not how notability works. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Sources are all just database entries. No evidence of notability. Not eligible for proposed deletion due to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dyfuca * Pppery * it has begun... 15:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; ineligible for PROD. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Press Releases and announcements. Most of the news is about his firm. The news are about the company. Or it will be better to Redirect this article on Housing.com. Bakhtar40 ( talk) 15:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO and WP:GNG. A Google search brings up more such paid PR publications. Bakhtar40 ( talk) 15:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill malware with no evidence of notability. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill malware with no evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 15:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Inherently against WP:NOTDIR/ WP:NOTDATABASE. Wikipedia is not a malware database. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill malware with no evidence of notability. PROD previously contested by the now-banned Neelix with "try Google News search" - I did, and I found either nothing or unrelated topics * Pppery * it has begun... 14:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The fact that BitDefender is sometimes impersonated by malware probably deserves a mention there, but I'm really not seeing how this software is notable. The references are just how-to-guides from malware-removal companies, which will presumably publish such guides for every bit of malware to come to their attention, but this seems very run-of-the-mill to me. Yes, this is an indictment of society, but it is what it is. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of an artist and writer, not
properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for artists or writers. As always, creative professionals are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because their work exists -- the notability test doesn't hinge on sourcing their work to itself as proof that it exists, it hinges on sourcing their work to external validatation of its significance, through independent third-party reliable source coverage and analysis about them and their work in media and/or books.
But this is referenced almost entirely to directly affiliated
primary sources -- the self-published websites of galleries that have exhibited her work, "staff" profiles on the self-published websites of organizations she's associated with, etc. -- and the only footnotes that represent any kind of third-party coverage are a Q&A interview in which she's talking about herself in the first person and a single article in the local newspaper of her own hometown, which doesn't represent enough coverage to get her over the bar all by itself.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to be referenced better than this.
Bearcat (
talk) 21:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎ 14:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 14:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Changeworld1984 ( talk) 14:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Before search revealed little results outside of sources already in article ( passing mention in variety), fr-wiki article has little else to offer too. Someone should search in dutch but subject might not have another name based off filmfonds.nl source in article. (pinging Mushy Yank de-prodded) Just i yaya 13:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
All in all (and maybe there's more), I'd rather keep this, but that's just me. There's no page about the artist so far. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The entire article is original research, specifically
WP:SYNTH. There are many instances of stating opinions as facts (
WP:VOICE), e.g., "The roots of current Russian youth culture can be traced back to ancient Russia, but more readily apparent signs of modern Russian youth culture are due to the reactionary influence because of both the Soviet Union's formation and its dissolution"
, and riddled with
weasel words, e.g., "Some observers noted what they described as a "generational struggle" among Russians"
. Generally, these are not the basis for an article to be deleted when the article can be fixed or tagged, but the idea of the article itself is based on collating different sources to present a personal reflection, i.e.,
Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought.
Pleas note that the sources cited mostly do not support claims being asserted, with the statement being more of a conjecture rather than an encyclopaedic one.
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 13:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORGCRIT as lacking "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" - four of five sources are their own website, the other a non-specific cite to an industry publication. AusLondonder ( talk) 12:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Disputed PROD for non-notable locomotive; fails WP:GNG as all but one available sources are user-generated or self-published. (The single published source is a 23-page photo book, and GNG requires multiple reliable source.) Also fails notability under WP:TWP/MOS; there is no evidence of this individual locomotive being superlative or recognized as historically significant. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 12:08, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to List of Jeopardy! contestants#David Madden, or Delete. Case of WP:BLP1E that was previously deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Madden (Jeopardy! contestant) (2nd nomination), but it was recreated. Referencing is very poor (there are no quality RS that cover the subject in any SIGOV outside of being in lists of famous winners). I tagged the article a year ago and suggested it should be redirected as IPs were constantly adding badly referenced WP:PROMO material about his other business interests, but when I WP:BOLDLY redirected it a few days ago, having not had any response to my notices, User:Robert McClenon felt it was better to send to AfD. Aszx5000 ( talk) 09:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Article recreated by WP:SPA following deletion a year and a half ago. I am bringing this to the community's attention. I am personally a weak delete: somewhat accomplished person, but I think it falls a little short of our notability criteria. Russ Woodroofe ( talk) 09:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP. Insufficient independent significant coverage. Uhooep ( talk) 09:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Keep Notable historic hotel in East Timor.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:08, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 11:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 08:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG; another diginet coatrack. Could merge with sister station WBNA. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 06:29, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 08:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Notability issue. It's not even runed for 6 months. Xegma (talk) 07:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
'''[[
User:CanonNi]]'''
(
talk|
contribs) 07:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 08:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Deprod by @ MSMST1543:. There are lots of press releases available, with announcements similar to what's already cited, but nothing in-depth about the company itself. I do not believe this article would be able to meet WP:NCORP. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 14:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:34, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Unreferenced article since 2011. Searching for refs is difficult as there is a more successful band called "The Wallflowers", but even after including band members names into the search it seems like they received no coverage. Nothing in the article writeup suggests Wikipedia notability. InDimensional ( talk) 11:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
I’m the original article author. Happy to have article deleted. Band came to an end in 1998 with little notable activity.
( talk) 13:20, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP. Insufficient independent significant coverage. Uhooep ( talk) 08:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP. Insufficient independent significant coverage. Uhooep ( talk) 08:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:29, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an Australian cricketer player, to meet WP:GNG. The closest to WP:SIGCOV that I found were 1 and 2, both from the same publication. JTtheOG ( talk) 04:07, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There is clearly no additional support for Deletion but no consensus yet as opinion is divided between Keeping, Drafting or Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:25, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 06:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Article unreferenced since 2009 and tagged as such since 2010. No good hits on GSearch, GNews and GNews Archives. Found several false positive as Talakayan ng Bayan means "People's Dialogue" and is used by several entities aside from DWBL. -- Lenticel ( talk) 05:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
North America
1000 06:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 02:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 03:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 07:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 07:17, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 02:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 03:50, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
North America
1000 06:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG & WP:NARTIST. Gedaali ( talk) 02:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
As per the notability guidelines for authors, an author is notable if: The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
None of the preceding apply in this case and almost all the sources in the article are not independent. There are almost no reviews of his work and the awards he has won are not notable. The only significant coverage is of his legal issues. Ynsfial ( talk) 15:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 18:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:32, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Although the title of the article is "Women's roles during the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre", it actually only lists the deeds of four women during the Tiananmen Incident, without summarizing the role of women as a whole in the Tiananmen Incident, this article is more like talking about the experiences of these four women during the Tiananmen Incident. 日期20220626 ( talk) 05:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
One sentence-stub that completely fails WP:GNG. Sole source is a government list of diplomatic missions in London. AusLondonder ( talk) 13:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on redirecting this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 06:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The article does not align with the English Wikipedia's criteria for both WP:SIGCOV and WP:NSOFT. The sources used in the article are mainly either primary sources or focus on the company rather than the software. An earlier attempt in 2011 to remove the article was made due to the lack of detailed and in-depth coverage from reliable sources. Currently, there is still a lack of widespread coverage in reliable sources for this article. Barseghian Lilia ( talk) 18:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Articles that have been proposed for deletion cannot be soft deleted.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 18:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 19:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Any suggestions in keeping this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 06:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This was an indirect election, fails WP:Notability. I suggest it be either merged or redirected to the page, 2013 Rajya Sabha elections. — Hemant Dabral ( 📞 • ✒) 01:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone 06:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Deleted at AfD many years ago, and nothing of substance seems to have changed: my WP:BEFORE search didn't find anything that would meet the GNG (just a handful of blogs, interviews, etc.), and none of the WP:NARTIST criteria appear to be met. Not notable. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The organization does not appear to pass WP:GNG The only references not published by the organization itself is a trivial mention in the NYT and a profile of the editor, Katie Cook, in bpfna.org, who was (at the time) an editor of bpfna.org as well. While there is a list of articles under the "Further Reading" section, one of the articles was written by a student newspaper, one from Baptists Today, and the others all seem to be limited to the Waco Tribune-Herald. They are mostly from the 1990s- and I have been able to find no significant coverage since.
This is the second deletion debate this article will go through- but editors should note that the only two "keep" votes came from new accounts that did not edit anything but their own user page and the deletion discussion. While that has no bearing on the organization's notability, new Wikipedia editors will want to read the policies on canvassing and recruiting people off-Wiki before they contribute. (Unless you want to provide more sources- please, if you have them, I would like them very much) GreenLipstickLesbian ( talk) 05:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Only a single source, not enough to demonstrate notability. Yoblyblob ( Talk) :) 16:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear more points of view on whether the proposed redirect and its target article are acceptable. I've never come across an election article being redirected to a candidate's page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, merge or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 05:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The current sources at reception were just listicles and rankings. I tried to find any sources about this character per WP:BEFORE, but I cannot find any sigcov. Relying mostly with this single journal here [42] wouldn't help notability. Greenish Pickle! ( 🔔) 22:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Source analysis by
Conyo14
| ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not that it matters to affecting your !vote, the Game Developer blog is one that was chosen as a featured blog by GD editorial staff, and the author is a published SME in gaming. As far as The Mary Sue goes, it is listed as a reliable source on WP:RSP. I also do not believe that the use of WP:ROUTINE is appropriate; none of the citations I listed are news sources, all of these sources were posted years after release, written (presumably) because the author wanted to write about it. The Destructoid source, for example, is written as part of a series of significant parts of video games for their staff, with the author saying things like "Shooting The Boss, while over in a blink of an eye, really is a pretty innovative and surprisingly memorable moment. While it could have easily been incorporated into the always impressive cutscenes, making one, small creative decision to have the player perform this final killing shot makes the scene infinitely more powerful" as well as discuss the relationship between the player, Snake, and The Boss, their musing over whether the player is required to kill her or just let her die, and speculation on what Kojima was intending to depict by making the player execute her. I would strongly dispute the notion that ROUTINE applies in any capacity here. WP:SUMMARY also applies to an extent, but not to the entirety. The source is being utilized not for the description of the plot of The Boss, but for the author's feelings on her and her death. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 07:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on the keep !votes?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 05:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Article was not at all ready for mainspace and it currently fails WP:LASTING. Practically the entire article is a direct copy and paste from the meteorological synopsis and damage summary for this tornado in Tornado outbreak of March 31 – April 1, 2023. This article was created by me, in draftspace, doing a direct copy/paste of the damage summary so I could locate LASTING impacts (14,000 bytes). In this edit an anonymous user copy/pasted the entire meteorological synopsis section from the outbreak article (11,000 bytes). To note, the article is only 26,000 bytes. The entire article is a CONTENTFORK copy/paste, which was not ready for mainspace at all and was being edited by SOCKS. Either delete or draftify back like it was, but it clearly should not be an article right now. As a second note, the draft was submitted to AFC by a user who had not edited the article at all. The Weather Event Writer ( Talk Page) 13:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For some laundry-free discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'm confused by the nominator's stance here. You state "Either delete or draftify back like it was" but in the discussion comments, it looks like you are arguing against a move to Draft space. Please be clearer because if draftifying (to any previous version) is acceptable, then we can close this AFD discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Any thoughts from more independent editors?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 05:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
No independent reliable sources about this niche software company in the article, and I am seeing nothing in a search that is not promotional. BD2412 T 00:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
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 04:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Lowest-level local government authority in England - there are more than 10,000 parish councils and they are rarely notable. Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. No secondary sources. AusLondonder ( talk) 01:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 04:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Contested PROD. No sources at all other than a listing of diplomatic missions in London. Fails WP:GNG. AusLondonder ( talk) 01:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on redirecting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 04:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Unable to locate significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. AusLondonder ( talk) 00:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 04:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a YouTuber, not
properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for YouTubers. As usual, YouTubers are not "inherently" notable enough for Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass
WP:GNG on third-party reliable source coverage about them and their work -- but three of the seven footnotes here are the subject's own
self-published content about themself on YouTube or their own website, and one more is a "staff" profile on the self-published website of an organization they've been directly affiliated with, all of which are
primary sources that are not support for notability at all.
Meanwhile, the other three footnotes are a Q&A interview in which they're talking about themself in the first person (which would be acceptable as verification of additional facts after GNG had already been covered off by stronger sourcing, but is not itself contributing to passage of GNG as it still represents the subject talking about themself); one brief glancing namecheck of their existence as a provider of soundbite in an article about something other than themself, which isn't support for notability; and just one source that's actually represents third-party analysis about Khadija Mbowe in any meaningful sense, but is too short to singlehandedly clinch passage of GNG all by itself if it's the only strong source in the mix.
Obviously this is without prejudice against recreation in the future if and when an article can be sourced better than this, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the sourcing from having to be better than this.
Bearcat (
talk) 03:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Another WP:DICTDEF. I couldn't even find any usage of this phrase outside dictionary definitions. Not sure if there is a reasonable redirect target; maybe it could be moved to Wiktionary. Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 02:55, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Article about a company, not properly sourced as passing WP:NCORP. As always, companies are not "inherently" entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they existed, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH -- but the only source cited here is a single book in which this company gets mentioned but is not the principal subject, which is not enough all by itself, and the article has existed in this state since 2013, and been tagged as single-sourced since 2018, without ever having a second source added. And on a WP:BEFORE search, I found a few brief glancing namechecks of its existence in The Globe, but nothing substantive or detailed enough to make up the difference: mostly what I found was coverage about sick or dead people who had been employees of the company, not coverage about the company. Bearcat ( talk) 02:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Comment Per the included source, the company seems to have been more commonly called Northern Trading Company. I got some more hits, especially newspaper hits, under this name. Ravendrop 05:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This was back-entered onto the maps from GNIS, which cites an 1876 atlas of the state. Baird's History of Clark County, Indiana on p. 100 has a very brief reference to it as a post office, and I found nothing else of relevance other than that there was a school there at some point. I just don't see that there was ever a settlement here. Mangoe ( talk) 02:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Reliant entirely on primary sources. No evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 01:55, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The only reference for this stub biography of a footballer is a database entry, so this stub no longer satisfies sports notability and does not satisfy general notability. Draftification will provide six months to find significant coverage.
Per WP:NOTDICT. Since this term seems to be used in several different contexts, it can redirect to Reproduction (disambiguation). Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 00:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails GNG and WP:WEBCRIT. A search for "AFL Tables" will show up thousands of webpages which reference statistics from this online database, but no references which actually give significant coverage about the database as a subject, which is the benchmark which must be met under WEBCRIT. Google searching "paul jeffs afl tables" is a better search term to look for SIGCOV about the database (since any genuine SIGCOV would include Jeffs' name as the site's creator), and the best that shows up a few appreciative one-liner posts in public forums and on other stats databases - nothing which meets GNG's requirements of significance and independence. I don't see any valid alternative to deletion; there's no merge or redirect target that makes sense, and issue of lack of references can't reasonably be solved by draftifying. Aspirex ( talk) 00:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
[...] there are also a few publicly curated databases, the best of which is the brilliant AFL Tables maintained by Paul Jeffs. Jeffs' database includes, among other information, results from every AFL/VFL match since 1897, detailed player statistics dating back to 1965, and round-by-round Brownlow voting records from 1984 onwards. "It's a nice dataset, I can say that," said Dr Lenten. "It gives me good bang for my buck because it's possible to look at a number of problems."
Unreferenced since its inception in 2010. No notable hits in GBooks, GNews Archives, and GNews. Be prepared for a lot of false positives in your search due to how common "News Bites" is as a phrase. Weak Redirect to List of programs broadcast by Studio 23 as plausible target per WP:ATD. Weak as there are a lot of similarly named programs/media entities found during my Google Search. -- Lenticel ( talk) 00:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Tagged as unreferenced since 2012. No notable hits in GBooks, GNews Archives, and GNews. Be prepared for a lot of false positives in your search due to how common "News 23" is as a phrase. Redirect to List of programs broadcast by Studio 23 as plausible target per WP:ATD. -- Lenticel ( talk) 00:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Most of it were just primary sources. Fails WP:GNG. AfD'ing it to end the edit war. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 22:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Unreferenced article. I couldn't find any significant coverage on the web; it's tough to search for them as their name is shared with a few other groups, but by including band members I found only a very brief Q&A on sfgate.com and an album review on aural-innovations.com, neither of these seem like WP:SIGCOV and nothing in the article suggests notability per WP:BAND InDimensional ( talk) 22:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NORG - I could not find significant coverage of this church in reliable sources independent of the subject. HenryMP02 ( talk) 19:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Long-time unreferenced article. I am not sure if there is an overall concept/topic of 'lion mask' or sources to show its notability. Boleyn ( talk) 16:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:07, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:03, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Almost all of the article is already shown in the 'parent' article 2023–24 A-League Women, aside from a separate map with the subset of the teams that made the finals, so there is scant additional relevant information in this Fork to warrant a stand-alone article. The level of detail is equivalent to that shown in articles of previous seasons of the A-League Women Matilda Maniac ( talk) 23:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
It's self-evident that people who have a bunch of computers and want to assign them names according to some sort of system do so, and that the systems are completely arbitrary, and that they are often inconsistently followed, and that people who aren't into naming systems either don't give them names or pick an arbitrary name each time if they have to. It's just not a subject, period, much less encyclopedic. Mangoe ( talk) 23:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a writer and musician, not
properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for writers or musicians. This was previously deleted in 2019 per
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Ferrier and then got recreated in fall 2023 after his death, but this version is still referenced almost entirely to
primary sources that aren't support for notability at all -- even the one footnote that's technically citing a newspaper is still just his paid-inclusion death notice in the classifieds, not a journalist-written news story about his death, and virtually everything else is content
self-published by companies or organizations he was directly affiliated with, while the one potentially acceptable source (LitLive) is not enough to clinch passage of GNG all by itself.
And for notability claims, there are statements (a minor literary award, presidency of an organization) that might count for something if they were sourced properly, but there's still absolutely nothing that would be "inherently" notable enough to hand him an automatic notability freebie in the absence of proper
WP:GNG-worthy sourcing.
And the French interlang is based entirely on the same poor sourcing as this one, so it has no GNG-worthy footnotes that can be copied over to salvage this either.
Bearcat (
talk) 16:36, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find sufficient coverage of the subject, a French rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG ( talk) 19:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 19:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
No such war in literature, it was part of the Russo-Polish War (1654–1667). This article is OR Marcelus ( talk) 20:11, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:08, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed during NPP. This is basically a catalog of a particular company's products. AFD nomination per no GNG sourcing of the topic per se and numerous wp:not issues. North8000 ( talk) 22:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
a catalog of a particular company's productsand I have added more sources. Someonewhoisusinginternet ( talk) 08:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject of this article fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. She has not starred in a single notable film; a Google search of her doesn't show her being discussed in reliable secondary sources. Most of the sources cited in the article are primary sources that involve the subject granting interviews to several publications. The article was previously deleted via an afd discussion, which can be seen here. Versace1608 Wanna Talk? 22:32, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, all of the sources are primary sources, are nothing but announcements and does not assert notability. @ BrigadierG: per suggestion by admin. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 16:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:49, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't have enough coverage in WP:RS or WP:SIGCOV needed to meet notability guidelines. There's some brief coverage in books but nothing significant other than "it's an HTML editor you can use," and nothing else I could find that seemed reliable. Survived an AfD in 2005 solely on the basis of being "well-known." StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Because of prior deletion discussion, a Soft Deletion is not an option here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. The only source are simply announcment, just not worthy of an encyclopaedic value. Those arguing for a keep must be advised of WP:USEFUL. I also advise those to create a Fandom page for your favorite sport if you want to save it so much. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 23:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Another page littered with unreliable sources. Hari Ram Gupta doesn't even say he was defeated at all (which the page misleads you by citing it did), removed if you check now on my newest revision. Noorullah ( talk) 22:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Extremely unreliable sources including over-reliance on primary sources that still fall under WP:RAJ such as Panth Prakash, also extremely exaggerated in numbers (1 million?) Noorullah ( talk) 22:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:Notability Wikibear47 ( talk) 17:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Hassan started her dancing career as a stage performer in the United States.
How do we believe such statement with no reliable source.?-- Meligirl5 ( talk) 00:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm familiar with a "Soft Delete" but can anyone define a "Soft Keep" for me? Do you mean "Weak Keep"?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation page with a clear primary topic and one other recently created and comparatively niche topic. I propose to delete this page, redirect the title to European Federation, which covers this concept, and add a hatnote there. BD2412 T 23:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
fails WP:NPROF and WP:AUTHOR, appears to be a vanity page Psychastes ( talk) 22:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The sources on this page almost all deal with WP:RAJ, with many of the sources (including Singh), tracing back to the Panth Prakash, which fails WP:RAJ. Some of these sources don't even state that such a thing happened, and nor do any other major sources regarding this campaign such as Hari Ram Gupta. Noorullah ( talk) 22:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
It's rare a google search returns no results, but here we are. Given this, and the fact this is merely a geographic formation, this fails WP:NPLACE by a long shot. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 22:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
No indication this was ever notable and completely WP:UNSOURCED but given I don't know French, decided to AfD instead of PROD out of an abundance of caution. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 22:16, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Defunct small-town station with no secondary sources. Fails WP:GNG. Redirect is unnecessary as the disambiguator of (Shoshoni, Wyoming) makes it an implausibly specific search term. AusLondonder ( talk) 21:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Have moved all the important content to Chailey Heritage School and would WP:BLAR but I feel that would leave an overly broad redirect, so I'm proposing a delete here. Fails WP:GNG and we can cover anything that does on Chailey Heritage School in the Searchlight Workshops section. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 21:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Biography of a politician, not properly sourced as passing WP:NPOL. The attempted notability claim here is that he served on a county board of supervisors, which is not an "inherently" notable role -- it's a local office that has to satisfy NPOL #2, where the notability test is contingent on the amount of substance that can be written about his political impact, and the amount of sourcing that can be shown to support it. But this is literally just "he is a person who existed, the end", and is completely unsourced. Bearcat ( talk) 21:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Article has absolutely no references to support it, has been tagged for many years to that effect, has not had anything substantial added to it for several years, and is not particularly informative. TooManyFingers ( talk) 16:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 21:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a politician, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NPOL. The attempted notability claim here is that she was an alternate vice-presidential candidate in one state for a minor fringe party's presidential campaign, which is not an automatic notability freebie -- it could get her an article if she were shown to actually pass WP:GNG for it, but it is in no way "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from GNG. But there are just three improperly-formatted footnotes here, all of which are to primary or unreliable sources that are not support for notability at all, so she hasn't been shown to satisfy GNG. Bearcat ( talk) 21:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This programming language does not have enough WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS to meet WP:GNG. Just another .NET addon. Previously deleted in a 2009 AfD but resurrected by a WP:SPA in 2016. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already been AfD'd, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 19:54, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 21:17, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
A Iraqi TikTok personality who was recently shot. Seems to lack any notability or sources while alive, a violation of WP:VICTIM and WP:GNG. BlakeIsHereStudios ( talk | contributions) 21:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't usually think Internet "personalities" are worth the time of day. However, she seems noteworthy as it further highlights the ludicrous things that people will fall foul of the morality police in the middle east. Salty1984 ( talk) 23:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails to meet relevant WP:MUSICBIO as well general WP:GNG. I would suggest first delete and then redirect to Noori. This BLP was created by a user who might have a COI.— Saqib ( talk | contribs) 20:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 21:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Non notable topic, not an encyclopedia article but a hagiography. Nationalistic drivel; a national myth presented as if it is factual. There are and have been many people who are or were good with horses. Reading this article as someone who was not born in the USA is just weird. Polygnotus ( talk) 20:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
“ | I appreciate the fact, and am proud of it, that the attentions I am receiving are intended more for our country than for me personally. | ” |
— Ulysses S. Grant |
Fails WP:GNG. Flounder fillet ( talk) 20:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable song, fails WP:NSONG. No in-depth coverage in secondary sources. Binksternet ( talk) 20:05, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This article is largely primary sources and WP:SYNTH of these sources. The first half is mostly just explianing what hyperlinks and framing is (mostly unnecessary WP:HOWTO), and the 2nd half largely acknowledges there really aren't copyright issues in US/Germany and other contexts. Why does this even exist? ZimZalaBim talk 19:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Not many articles have been attempted to be
prodded three times; in that sense alone, this AfD is long overdue. The article itself is a remnant of the looser standards in this topic area in the 2000s, but according to
the talk page there was a failed prod that was followed by an
A7 speedy deletion in 2007. It was recreated in 2009; a 2010 prod tagging was contested because of the prior article. (The contesting rationale notes that at the time, licensed radio stations are generally held to be notable
, but with the caveat that
consensus can change. In this topic area, that happened with this
2021 RfC; we now require
significant coverage and cannot source solely to FCC records and other databases.) I just had to procedurally contest a third prod because of the prior prods. I had been considering a redirect to the
list of radio stations in Pennsylvania as an
alternative to deletion, and I still think that is the best course of action (I do not support retaining the article as it is), but the triple-prod means this is as much a procedural nomination as anything else.
WCQuidditch
☎
✎ 19:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
seems to be just a dictionary definition Chidgk1 ( talk) 19:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a sports figure, not
properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for sportspeople. To be fair, at the time this was first created, Wikipedia had a consensus that simple presence at the Olympics was an automatic inclusion lock regardless of medal placement or sourcing issues -- but that's long since been deprecated, and a non-medalist now has to be shown to pass
WP:GNG on their sourceability.
But a
WP:BEFORE search turned up very little that could be used to salvage the article: apart from Olympic results reporting itself, I largely just get glancing namechecks of his existence and local high-school-athlete coverage rather than coverage that's substantively about him in any notability-building sense. I've further been completely unable to verify this article's claim that he was born in
Sudbury — even the database entry present here as the article's sole source fails to claim that, and his local high-school-athlete coverage is found in
Ottawa, not Sudbury. (And yes, I get that it's possible for people to be born in one place and then move to another, but we still need to be able to
verify claims about a person's birthplace.)
Finishing ninth in an Olympic event just isn't "inherently" notable enough anymore to exempt him from ever having to have more reliable source coverage than I've been able to find.
Bearcat (
talk) 19:03, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Poorly sourced footballer BLP that fails WP:GNG. All that comes up are trivial mentions. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Ineligible for PROD. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:53, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The best sources I found were two sentences of coverage here and four-ish sentences of coverage here. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Poorly sourced rugby BLP; subject made one pro appearance. All I really found was this transactional announcement. Fails WP:GNG. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:36, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable cake that does not pass WP:GNG, references consist of recipes and trivial mentions. WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV. BaduFerreira ( talk) 04:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I thought all of our "cake articles" (and "salad articles") had already passed through AFD but here is another.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Previously subject of a contested PROD. No secondary sources. Zero useful content. Previous consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dominica at the 2010 Commonwealth Games was that these articles are not useful, particularly if they lack substantive content.
AusLondonder ( talk) 14:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirect or merge and which is the preferred target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 17:36, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:32, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG ( talk) 18:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG, appears not notable. Bakhtar40 ( talk) 16:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Keep. As the creator of the article i would like to suggest keep, as it passes WP:MUSIC. The musical artist have received full fledged coverage from independent media sources for his work such as [16], [17], [18]. [19]. Further the artist also passes one of the criteria of winning or being nominated for a notable award, as he won the notable Filmfare R. D. Burman Award in the category of upcoming music talent. [20] [21]
Hineyo ( talk) 17:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
:Note - This account ( Hineyo) is blocked. Bakhtar40 ( talk) 15:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Keep - Pass WP:MUSIC, Also, there are significant reliable sources availabe which talks about the subject. Grabup ( talk) 04:26, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
As noted in WP:NPOL and WP:NSUBPOL, Wikipedia doesn't normally consider municipal councillors notable enough for a separate article, unless they've received significant press coverage in that role. The rest of his roles have been low-to-mid-level party leader jobs and a political appointment as chair of Skill Development Board, Government of Rajasthan. No significant coverage of him per WP:GNG or WP:BIO in reliable secondary sources; what I can find on him in a WP:BEFORE search in English and Hindi (रामगोपाल सुथार) is routine coverage of his recent appointment as chair, and some WP:PRIMARY source quotes from his speeches. Wikishovel ( talk) 17:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
At a glance, this looks like a well-written and -sourced article, but it's a total WP:COATRACK. Almost nothing in the article is about the "town" of Martin, because there isn't anything to say: It was a minor railroad maintenance point that later had a station for a nearby ski area. Of all the cited sources, only reference 14 comes close to substantial coverage; many sources don't mention Martin at all. I couldn't find any additional sources that aren't already cited, and none are more than trivial mentions (e.g. photos of trains taken at Martin). I suggest a delete; I could also live with a merge of relevant content to Stampede Pass, Northern Pacific Railroad, or Meany Lodge (from which much of this article's content seems to have been copied). WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk) 15:41, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't find sources to show notability - I am aware this isn't my area though or language. Boleyn ( talk) 09:12, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:05, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP. Weak independent significant coverage. The resort in question closed down due to COVID/bankruptcy. Uhooep ( talk) 08:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 08:28, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Unclear that notability has been established. Beland ( talk) 04:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an English rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. Draftification would be an option, but this is a re-creation of an existing draft. JTtheOG ( talk) 01:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 02:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:42, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 18:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This has been sitting here unsourced and stubbed for years and years. If there is anything notable about "software law", it could just be a section in information technology law or similar article. ZimZalaBim talk 03:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
'''[[
User:CanonNi]]'''
(
talk|
contribs) 03:35, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 17:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Procedural nomination for deletion under WP:BIODELETE per request on my talk. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 17:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
(Renomination: the discussion from 2010 closed as "no consensus.") I don't believe that Brenda Jean Patrick fulfills the notability requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. She is (was? I think I found an obituary) an educational consultant who touted the idea of "customer care" in school districts. Most of the information I can find about her consultant work is in the form of press releases in local papers when she held workshops for a district. I don't see independent coverage outside of her PR. Joyous! Noise! 17:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
No indication school passes WP:NSCHOOL and written entirely as a WP:PROMO for the school. Was previously redirected to Elwood Union Free School District but reverted more than once. Unless notability can be established, seeking consensus for restoration of the redirect. Bungle ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 17:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:BOOK, only 5 citations in google scholar, none of which are reviews and 3 of which are by the author himself. Appears to be a vanity page. Psychastes ( talk) 17:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Probable UPE advertisement for non notable individual. Just another working photographer. Refbombed to primary source showing he has done work but there is a lack of independent coverage about him. None of the claimed awards are major awards or are specifically for him. A search found nothing better. duffbeerforme ( talk) 03:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
an important figure...widely cited by peers or successors; (B)
originated a significant new concept, theory, or technique; (C)
created -or played a major role in co-creating- a significant or well-known work; (D)
[his] work has become a significant monument, been part of a significant exhibition, won significant critical attention, or been represented within permanent collections. I'm afraid our subject meets none of the four. -- The Gnome ( talk) 15:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎ 17:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The only reliable source for this fishing ship / unarmed military transport ship is a massive 10-book encyclopedia of all German warships no matter how small or insignificant. The other source, netmarine.net, is more of a large hobby site / semi wiki than anything else ("Si vous souhaitez compléter ces pages par des récits, illustrations ou autres documents, écrivez nous."). Fram ( talk) 07:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
fishing ship / unarmed transport ship, is technically correct but is a misleading strawman. I'm not arguing for or against deletion because I don't know if there is a separate method for assessing the notability of ships, but that statement just irked me. Curbon7 ( talk) 09:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎ 17:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Reliant entirely on primary sources. Another one of those articles with a name so vague it's basically impossible to search for. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:16, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This is a series of unsourced lists of no encyclopedic value and we're not the Radio Times. -- D'n'B- t -- 17:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related pages because they are part of the same list:
* the 2015 does have a single source, but I'm standing by the lack of encylopedic value. -- D'n'B- t -- 17:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. Previously deleted via AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beenish Chohan — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 17:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. Previously deleted via AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sukaina Khan — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. Furthermore, majority of cited sources fails WP:RS. No evidence indicating significant involvement in notable films, TV dramas, etc. being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. Previously deleted as per AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erum Akhtar — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 16:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Per attempted 2021 PROD by Bwoodcock
Upon reading the talk page, it appears that this was malware disguised as antivirus. Which is a thing. But that sockpuppetry back in the day kept the article itself from actually saying so. So I think the main problem with this article is that it's substantially misleading, but that there's no practical way to clean it up, because it was of such minor significance that it left no footprint in the media... just a few bloggers arguing about whether it was malware or just antivirus software so bad that it didn't do anything. In any event, now, with the benefit of hindsight, it probably should have been dealt with differently, and it seems utterly un-note-worthy.
Although they were later blocked for unrelated sockpuppetry, I see no reason to doubt their knowledge on this specific issue, which means we've been lying to our readers for 17 years. What a disgrace. Anyway, it's time for this article to go. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:41, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Neither cited source even mentioned the topic. Source searching is finding only software download websites. No evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 16:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Reliant entirely on primary sources. No evidence of notability. Previous AfD was kept due to people sharing their own testimonials of how it helped them, which is just not how notability works. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Sources are all just database entries. No evidence of notability. Not eligible for proposed deletion due to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dyfuca * Pppery * it has begun... 15:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NSKATE; ineligible for PROD. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Press Releases and announcements. Most of the news is about his firm. The news are about the company. Or it will be better to Redirect this article on Housing.com. Bakhtar40 ( talk) 15:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO and WP:GNG. A Google search brings up more such paid PR publications. Bakhtar40 ( talk) 15:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill malware with no evidence of notability. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill malware with no evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 15:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Inherently against WP:NOTDIR/ WP:NOTDATABASE. Wikipedia is not a malware database. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill malware with no evidence of notability. PROD previously contested by the now-banned Neelix with "try Google News search" - I did, and I found either nothing or unrelated topics * Pppery * it has begun... 14:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The fact that BitDefender is sometimes impersonated by malware probably deserves a mention there, but I'm really not seeing how this software is notable. The references are just how-to-guides from malware-removal companies, which will presumably publish such guides for every bit of malware to come to their attention, but this seems very run-of-the-mill to me. Yes, this is an indictment of society, but it is what it is. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of an artist and writer, not
properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for artists or writers. As always, creative professionals are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because their work exists -- the notability test doesn't hinge on sourcing their work to itself as proof that it exists, it hinges on sourcing their work to external validatation of its significance, through independent third-party reliable source coverage and analysis about them and their work in media and/or books.
But this is referenced almost entirely to directly affiliated
primary sources -- the self-published websites of galleries that have exhibited her work, "staff" profiles on the self-published websites of organizations she's associated with, etc. -- and the only footnotes that represent any kind of third-party coverage are a Q&A interview in which she's talking about herself in the first person and a single article in the local newspaper of her own hometown, which doesn't represent enough coverage to get her over the bar all by itself.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to be referenced better than this.
Bearcat (
talk) 21:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎ 14:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
fails WP:GNG Joeykai ( talk) 14:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Changeworld1984 ( talk) 14:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Before search revealed little results outside of sources already in article ( passing mention in variety), fr-wiki article has little else to offer too. Someone should search in dutch but subject might not have another name based off filmfonds.nl source in article. (pinging Mushy Yank de-prodded) Just i yaya 13:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
All in all (and maybe there's more), I'd rather keep this, but that's just me. There's no page about the artist so far. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The entire article is original research, specifically
WP:SYNTH. There are many instances of stating opinions as facts (
WP:VOICE), e.g., "The roots of current Russian youth culture can be traced back to ancient Russia, but more readily apparent signs of modern Russian youth culture are due to the reactionary influence because of both the Soviet Union's formation and its dissolution"
, and riddled with
weasel words, e.g., "Some observers noted what they described as a "generational struggle" among Russians"
. Generally, these are not the basis for an article to be deleted when the article can be fixed or tagged, but the idea of the article itself is based on collating different sources to present a personal reflection, i.e.,
Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought.
Pleas note that the sources cited mostly do not support claims being asserted, with the statement being more of a conjecture rather than an encyclopaedic one.
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 13:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:ORGCRIT as lacking "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" - four of five sources are their own website, the other a non-specific cite to an industry publication. AusLondonder ( talk) 12:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Disputed PROD for non-notable locomotive; fails WP:GNG as all but one available sources are user-generated or self-published. (The single published source is a 23-page photo book, and GNG requires multiple reliable source.) Also fails notability under WP:TWP/MOS; there is no evidence of this individual locomotive being superlative or recognized as historically significant. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 12:08, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to List of Jeopardy! contestants#David Madden, or Delete. Case of WP:BLP1E that was previously deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Madden (Jeopardy! contestant) (2nd nomination), but it was recreated. Referencing is very poor (there are no quality RS that cover the subject in any SIGOV outside of being in lists of famous winners). I tagged the article a year ago and suggested it should be redirected as IPs were constantly adding badly referenced WP:PROMO material about his other business interests, but when I WP:BOLDLY redirected it a few days ago, having not had any response to my notices, User:Robert McClenon felt it was better to send to AfD. Aszx5000 ( talk) 09:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Article recreated by WP:SPA following deletion a year and a half ago. I am bringing this to the community's attention. I am personally a weak delete: somewhat accomplished person, but I think it falls a little short of our notability criteria. Russ Woodroofe ( talk) 09:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP. Insufficient independent significant coverage. Uhooep ( talk) 09:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Keep Notable historic hotel in East Timor.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:08, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 11:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 08:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG; another diginet coatrack. Could merge with sister station WBNA. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 06:29, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 08:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Notability issue. It's not even runed for 6 months. Xegma (talk) 07:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
'''[[
User:CanonNi]]'''
(
talk|
contribs) 07:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 08:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Deprod by @ MSMST1543:. There are lots of press releases available, with announcements similar to what's already cited, but nothing in-depth about the company itself. I do not believe this article would be able to meet WP:NCORP. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 14:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:34, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Unreferenced article since 2011. Searching for refs is difficult as there is a more successful band called "The Wallflowers", but even after including band members names into the search it seems like they received no coverage. Nothing in the article writeup suggests Wikipedia notability. InDimensional ( talk) 11:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
I’m the original article author. Happy to have article deleted. Band came to an end in 1998 with little notable activity.
( talk) 13:20, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP. Insufficient independent significant coverage. Uhooep ( talk) 08:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:CORP. Insufficient independent significant coverage. Uhooep ( talk) 08:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:29, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an Australian cricketer player, to meet WP:GNG. The closest to WP:SIGCOV that I found were 1 and 2, both from the same publication. JTtheOG ( talk) 04:07, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There is clearly no additional support for Deletion but no consensus yet as opinion is divided between Keeping, Drafting or Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:25, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 06:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Article unreferenced since 2009 and tagged as such since 2010. No good hits on GSearch, GNews and GNews Archives. Found several false positive as Talakayan ng Bayan means "People's Dialogue" and is used by several entities aside from DWBL. -- Lenticel ( talk) 05:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
North America
1000 06:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 02:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 03:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 08:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 07:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 07:17, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 02:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 03:50, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
North America
1000 06:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:GNG & WP:NARTIST. Gedaali ( talk) 02:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
As per the notability guidelines for authors, an author is notable if: The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
None of the preceding apply in this case and almost all the sources in the article are not independent. There are almost no reviews of his work and the awards he has won are not notable. The only significant coverage is of his legal issues. Ynsfial ( talk) 15:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 18:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 05:32, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Although the title of the article is "Women's roles during the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre", it actually only lists the deeds of four women during the Tiananmen Incident, without summarizing the role of women as a whole in the Tiananmen Incident, this article is more like talking about the experiences of these four women during the Tiananmen Incident. 日期20220626 ( talk) 05:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
One sentence-stub that completely fails WP:GNG. Sole source is a government list of diplomatic missions in London. AusLondonder ( talk) 13:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on redirecting this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 06:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The article does not align with the English Wikipedia's criteria for both WP:SIGCOV and WP:NSOFT. The sources used in the article are mainly either primary sources or focus on the company rather than the software. An earlier attempt in 2011 to remove the article was made due to the lack of detailed and in-depth coverage from reliable sources. Currently, there is still a lack of widespread coverage in reliable sources for this article. Barseghian Lilia ( talk) 18:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Articles that have been proposed for deletion cannot be soft deleted.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 18:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 19:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Any suggestions in keeping this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 06:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This was an indirect election, fails WP:Notability. I suggest it be either merged or redirected to the page, 2013 Rajya Sabha elections. — Hemant Dabral ( 📞 • ✒) 01:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 06:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cavarrone 06:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Deleted at AfD many years ago, and nothing of substance seems to have changed: my WP:BEFORE search didn't find anything that would meet the GNG (just a handful of blogs, interviews, etc.), and none of the WP:NARTIST criteria appear to be met. Not notable. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The organization does not appear to pass WP:GNG The only references not published by the organization itself is a trivial mention in the NYT and a profile of the editor, Katie Cook, in bpfna.org, who was (at the time) an editor of bpfna.org as well. While there is a list of articles under the "Further Reading" section, one of the articles was written by a student newspaper, one from Baptists Today, and the others all seem to be limited to the Waco Tribune-Herald. They are mostly from the 1990s- and I have been able to find no significant coverage since.
This is the second deletion debate this article will go through- but editors should note that the only two "keep" votes came from new accounts that did not edit anything but their own user page and the deletion discussion. While that has no bearing on the organization's notability, new Wikipedia editors will want to read the policies on canvassing and recruiting people off-Wiki before they contribute. (Unless you want to provide more sources- please, if you have them, I would like them very much) GreenLipstickLesbian ( talk) 05:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Only a single source, not enough to demonstrate notability. Yoblyblob ( Talk) :) 16:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear more points of view on whether the proposed redirect and its target article are acceptable. I've never come across an election article being redirected to a candidate's page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, merge or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 05:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The current sources at reception were just listicles and rankings. I tried to find any sources about this character per WP:BEFORE, but I cannot find any sigcov. Relying mostly with this single journal here [42] wouldn't help notability. Greenish Pickle! ( 🔔) 22:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Source analysis by
Conyo14
| ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not that it matters to affecting your !vote, the Game Developer blog is one that was chosen as a featured blog by GD editorial staff, and the author is a published SME in gaming. As far as The Mary Sue goes, it is listed as a reliable source on WP:RSP. I also do not believe that the use of WP:ROUTINE is appropriate; none of the citations I listed are news sources, all of these sources were posted years after release, written (presumably) because the author wanted to write about it. The Destructoid source, for example, is written as part of a series of significant parts of video games for their staff, with the author saying things like "Shooting The Boss, while over in a blink of an eye, really is a pretty innovative and surprisingly memorable moment. While it could have easily been incorporated into the always impressive cutscenes, making one, small creative decision to have the player perform this final killing shot makes the scene infinitely more powerful" as well as discuss the relationship between the player, Snake, and The Boss, their musing over whether the player is required to kill her or just let her die, and speculation on what Kojima was intending to depict by making the player execute her. I would strongly dispute the notion that ROUTINE applies in any capacity here. WP:SUMMARY also applies to an extent, but not to the entirety. The source is being utilized not for the description of the plot of The Boss, but for the author's feelings on her and her death. - Cukie Gherkin ( talk) 07:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on the keep !votes?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 05:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Article was not at all ready for mainspace and it currently fails WP:LASTING. Practically the entire article is a direct copy and paste from the meteorological synopsis and damage summary for this tornado in Tornado outbreak of March 31 – April 1, 2023. This article was created by me, in draftspace, doing a direct copy/paste of the damage summary so I could locate LASTING impacts (14,000 bytes). In this edit an anonymous user copy/pasted the entire meteorological synopsis section from the outbreak article (11,000 bytes). To note, the article is only 26,000 bytes. The entire article is a CONTENTFORK copy/paste, which was not ready for mainspace at all and was being edited by SOCKS. Either delete or draftify back like it was, but it clearly should not be an article right now. As a second note, the draft was submitted to AFC by a user who had not edited the article at all. The Weather Event Writer ( Talk Page) 13:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For some laundry-free discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Star
Mississippi 14:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'm confused by the nominator's stance here. You state "Either delete or draftify back like it was" but in the discussion comments, it looks like you are arguing against a move to Draft space. Please be clearer because if draftifying (to any previous version) is acceptable, then we can close this AFD discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Any thoughts from more independent editors?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Toadette
Edit! 05:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
No independent reliable sources about this niche software company in the article, and I am seeing nothing in a search that is not promotional. BD2412 T 00:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
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 04:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Lowest-level local government authority in England - there are more than 10,000 parish councils and they are rarely notable. Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. No secondary sources. AusLondonder ( talk) 01:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 04:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Contested PROD. No sources at all other than a listing of diplomatic missions in London. Fails WP:GNG. AusLondonder ( talk) 01:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on redirecting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 04:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Unable to locate significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. AusLondonder ( talk) 00:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 04:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a YouTuber, not
properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for YouTubers. As usual, YouTubers are not "inherently" notable enough for Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass
WP:GNG on third-party reliable source coverage about them and their work -- but three of the seven footnotes here are the subject's own
self-published content about themself on YouTube or their own website, and one more is a "staff" profile on the self-published website of an organization they've been directly affiliated with, all of which are
primary sources that are not support for notability at all.
Meanwhile, the other three footnotes are a Q&A interview in which they're talking about themself in the first person (which would be acceptable as verification of additional facts after GNG had already been covered off by stronger sourcing, but is not itself contributing to passage of GNG as it still represents the subject talking about themself); one brief glancing namecheck of their existence as a provider of soundbite in an article about something other than themself, which isn't support for notability; and just one source that's actually represents third-party analysis about Khadija Mbowe in any meaningful sense, but is too short to singlehandedly clinch passage of GNG all by itself if it's the only strong source in the mix.
Obviously this is without prejudice against recreation in the future if and when an article can be sourced better than this, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the sourcing from having to be better than this.
Bearcat (
talk) 03:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Another WP:DICTDEF. I couldn't even find any usage of this phrase outside dictionary definitions. Not sure if there is a reasonable redirect target; maybe it could be moved to Wiktionary. Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 02:55, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Article about a company, not properly sourced as passing WP:NCORP. As always, companies are not "inherently" entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they existed, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH -- but the only source cited here is a single book in which this company gets mentioned but is not the principal subject, which is not enough all by itself, and the article has existed in this state since 2013, and been tagged as single-sourced since 2018, without ever having a second source added. And on a WP:BEFORE search, I found a few brief glancing namechecks of its existence in The Globe, but nothing substantive or detailed enough to make up the difference: mostly what I found was coverage about sick or dead people who had been employees of the company, not coverage about the company. Bearcat ( talk) 02:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Comment Per the included source, the company seems to have been more commonly called Northern Trading Company. I got some more hits, especially newspaper hits, under this name. Ravendrop 05:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This was back-entered onto the maps from GNIS, which cites an 1876 atlas of the state. Baird's History of Clark County, Indiana on p. 100 has a very brief reference to it as a post office, and I found nothing else of relevance other than that there was a school there at some point. I just don't see that there was ever a settlement here. Mangoe ( talk) 02:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Reliant entirely on primary sources. No evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 01:55, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
The only reference for this stub biography of a footballer is a database entry, so this stub no longer satisfies sports notability and does not satisfy general notability. Draftification will provide six months to find significant coverage.
Per WP:NOTDICT. Since this term seems to be used in several different contexts, it can redirect to Reproduction (disambiguation). Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 00:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails GNG and WP:WEBCRIT. A search for "AFL Tables" will show up thousands of webpages which reference statistics from this online database, but no references which actually give significant coverage about the database as a subject, which is the benchmark which must be met under WEBCRIT. Google searching "paul jeffs afl tables" is a better search term to look for SIGCOV about the database (since any genuine SIGCOV would include Jeffs' name as the site's creator), and the best that shows up a few appreciative one-liner posts in public forums and on other stats databases - nothing which meets GNG's requirements of significance and independence. I don't see any valid alternative to deletion; there's no merge or redirect target that makes sense, and issue of lack of references can't reasonably be solved by draftifying. Aspirex ( talk) 00:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
[...] there are also a few publicly curated databases, the best of which is the brilliant AFL Tables maintained by Paul Jeffs. Jeffs' database includes, among other information, results from every AFL/VFL match since 1897, detailed player statistics dating back to 1965, and round-by-round Brownlow voting records from 1984 onwards. "It's a nice dataset, I can say that," said Dr Lenten. "It gives me good bang for my buck because it's possible to look at a number of problems."
Unreferenced since its inception in 2010. No notable hits in GBooks, GNews Archives, and GNews. Be prepared for a lot of false positives in your search due to how common "News Bites" is as a phrase. Weak Redirect to List of programs broadcast by Studio 23 as plausible target per WP:ATD. Weak as there are a lot of similarly named programs/media entities found during my Google Search. -- Lenticel ( talk) 00:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Tagged as unreferenced since 2012. No notable hits in GBooks, GNews Archives, and GNews. Be prepared for a lot of false positives in your search due to how common "News 23" is as a phrase. Redirect to List of programs broadcast by Studio 23 as plausible target per WP:ATD. -- Lenticel ( talk) 00:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Most of it were just primary sources. Fails WP:GNG. AfD'ing it to end the edit war. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 22:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Unreferenced article. I couldn't find any significant coverage on the web; it's tough to search for them as their name is shared with a few other groups, but by including band members I found only a very brief Q&A on sfgate.com and an album review on aural-innovations.com, neither of these seem like WP:SIGCOV and nothing in the article suggests notability per WP:BAND InDimensional ( talk) 22:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NORG - I could not find significant coverage of this church in reliable sources independent of the subject. HenryMP02 ( talk) 19:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Long-time unreferenced article. I am not sure if there is an overall concept/topic of 'lion mask' or sources to show its notability. Boleyn ( talk) 16:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:07, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:03, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Almost all of the article is already shown in the 'parent' article 2023–24 A-League Women, aside from a separate map with the subset of the teams that made the finals, so there is scant additional relevant information in this Fork to warrant a stand-alone article. The level of detail is equivalent to that shown in articles of previous seasons of the A-League Women Matilda Maniac ( talk) 23:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)