Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

16 September 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< September 15	September 17 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Benjamin Faraas

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No WP:SIGCOV (just match results and stats pages) and thus no pass of WP:GNG, WP:NSPORT. Given his career stage, open to draftify as an AtD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Norway. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Villaflores College

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I cannot find any WP:SIGCOV of this college to meet WP:GNG (much less WP:NORG. The sources in the article are affiliated sources, directories, blogs, etc., and a WP:BEFORE search turned up nothing qualifying. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Philippines. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Felix Goddard

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG, no significant coverage, just stats/routine news. Giant Snowman 19:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s got significant coverage from what I can see. Stop pointlessly tagging pages for deletion - becoming quite pathetic now. 2A06:5902:180C:5800:59C9:B142:4513:9C80 (talk) 19:59, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melony Munro

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no available WP:SIGCOV of this beauty pageant contestant. Munro's name appears in WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of the winner of the competitions, but without SIGCOV there's a failure on WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. (Miss International Queen USA itself appears non-notable and as such winning it does not constitute a WP:ANYBIO #3 pass.) I don't see a plausible redirect since Munro has been a third-place contestant in different contests, but open to a suggestion should anyone have one. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Beauty pageants, and Florida. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2018

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Based on same reasoning in the AfD for the 2023 ceremony. Main page Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards exists which is also likely not notable so not seeing how this would meet notability guidelines. Cannot find enough coverage to establish it for this specific year. Attempted (twice) to redirect as an WP:ATD but IPs who are likely UPE have removed every time so would be opposed to any redirect at this point. CNMall41 (talk) 19:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 19:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also pinging the three other participants from the 2023 discussion - @TimothyBlue:, @RangersRus:, @Improvised but so real unicorn: in case you have other thoughts on this year from 2023.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2019

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Based on same reasoning in the AfD for the 2023 ceremony. Main page Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards exists which is also likely not notable so not seeing how this would meet notability guidelines. Cannot find enough coverage to establish it for this specific year. Attempted (twice) to redirect as an WP:ATD but IPs who are likely UPE have removed every time so would be opposed to any redirect at this point. CNMall41 (talk) 19:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also pinging the three other participants from the 2023 discussion - @TimothyBlue:, @RangersRus:, @Improvised but so real unicorn: in case you have other thoughts on this year from 2023.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2020–21

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Based on same reasoning in the AfD for the 2023 ceremony. Main page Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards exists which is also likely not notable so not seeing how this would meet notability guidelines. Cannot find enough coverage to establish it for this specific year. Attempted (twice) to redirect as an WP:ATD but IPs who are likely UPE have removed every time so would be opposed to any redirect at this point. CNMall41 (talk) 19:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also pinging the three other participants from the 2023 discussion - @TimothyBlue:, @RangersRus:, @Improvised but so real unicorn: in case you have other thoughts on this year from 2023.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2022

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Based on same reasoning in the AfD for the 2023 ceremony. Main page Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards exists which is also likely not notable so not seeing how this would meet notability guidelines. Cannot find enough coverage to establish it for this specific year. Attempted (twice) to redirect as an WP:ATD but IPs who are likely UPE have removed every time so would be opposed to any redirect at this point. CNMall41 (talk) 19:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also pinging the three other participants from the 2023 discussion - @TimothyBlue:, @RangersRus:, @Improvised but so real unicorn: in case you have other thoughts on this year from 2023.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Lawrence Schieffelin

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is virtually no independent secondary coverage of this individual. The sources in the article (and in the WP:BEFORE search) are primarily primary-source documents, except for a book by one of the subject's family members (who is also the self-declared COI creator of this article and a whole WP:WALLEDGARDEN of articles about his family members). The other book source is published by an imprint of unreliable WP:ARCADIA Press. Without [WP:SIGCOV]] independent, secondary sources, this subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Law, and New York. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tiziana Scandaletti

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unreferenced BLP. Not clear it passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 19:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A. Lorne Weil

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. References are passing mentions, paid for profiles and interviews. Fails WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 19:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:ANYBIO. My first thought was, "...and???". He's rich, he has a family, he got an education. He rose up the corporate ladder. Having the right connections can accomplish that much. But what did he actually do? — Maile (talk) 20:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO for lack of WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bafakhy Yatheemkhana

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I cannot find WP:SIGCOV of this charitable organization in WP:SIRS for a pass of WP:GNG or WP:NORG. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and India. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amarilli Nizza

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2015. Sources are all self published blogs or dead links to self published theatre websites. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 18:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Italy. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Irzen Hawer

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 18:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Macrì

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2017. Uses unreliable sources like instagram. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 18:13, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Italy. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siue Moffat

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a cookbook author and filmmaker, not reliably sourced as having a strong claim to passing notability criteria for either occupation. As always, people are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show evidence of WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them in media independent of themselves -- but the only notability claim on offer here is that her work exists, and the article is referenced to one (deadlinked but recoverable) short blurb that isn't enough to get her over GNG all by itself if it's all she's got for GNG-worthy coverage, and one primary source that isn't support for notability at all.
The article, further, has been tagged for needing more sources since 2011 without ever having better sources added, and a WP:BEFORE search came up dry as all I found in ProQuest was the blurb and a small handful of glancing namechecks of her existence in coverage of events.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have more and better referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Food and drink, Music, and Entertainment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Monika Gonzalez

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2008. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 17:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Italy. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bruno Bertez

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of significance. Reference are routine coverage of business operations. No secondary sources. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 17:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Journalism, Finance, Economics, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hairshirt environmentalism

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Dicdef expanded into an essay, poorly sourced; fails WP:N — The Anome (talk) 17:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete - Appears to be copied from the Virgin Design Page source, with no other verification. The USA Today page is no longer accessible. Not listed at all in Wiktionary. The creating editor only made one other edit, and it was not related to this subject. — Maile (talk) 19:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perry Sook

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. A before found nothing. Coverage seems all about contract. scope_creep^Talk 17:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Television, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amla Sadarpur Secondary School

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Well-established but ultimately non-notable school. None of the sources cited contribute anything towards notability, and a BEFORE search finds nothing more than the usual social media accounts, directory listings, etc. (If someone can find non-English sources that satisfy the WP:GNG standard, please do.) Declined at AfC but published by the author regardless, so here we are. Clearly fails WP:ORG. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attempt to Add Citations - Hmm, I will try to see if there is anything that can be done. I will try to look for citations that makes proof that the school is notable. Many more might participate, if this page is seen by more, If there are not any citations or proof of notability, there is possibly a reason for deletion. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If any citations that give clear proof that school has notability, English or Non-English. Keep might be a option. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, BangladeshiEditorInSylhet, did you find any citations? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 16:59, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

British army in the Eureka Rebellion

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unnecessary content fork. Content could easily be merged into Eureka Rebellion and List of Eureka Stockade defenders. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 16:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep not at all a WP:CFORK. I see almost no overlaps. And we don't merge large articles into huger ones. --Altenmann >talk 17:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Just wanted to note that 860 words of readable prose is hardly a large article. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unnecessary WP:CFORK and one of many excessive bloated pages about this minor event. Mztourist (talk) 04:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 16:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Wayshak

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article and a WP:BEFORE search turns up no WP:SIGCOV in independent, secondary, reliable sources for this comic artist -- just WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS and WP:PRIMARYSOURCES. Thus the subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO; the subject also meets no criterion of WP:NARTIST. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:41, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Comics and animation. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:41, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsing vandalism from blocked user Kellpb93ke (talk) 16:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per the deletion of Daniel Morcombe which did get undeleted. Kellpb93ke (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC) — Kellpb93ke (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

What has this got to do with Morcombe? Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kellpb93ke What does Daniel Morcombe have to do with Jonathan Wayshak? Did you mean to comment on a different discussion? Unless this comment was posted mistakenly, there is no actual rationale offered to keep the article. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:59, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete Poorly referenced. --Altenmann >talk 17:16, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Jonathan Wayshak is a primary subject in the MTV News, Juxtapoz, and Fangoria, and more cited in the article. He has illustrated posters for Beetlejuice, and comics for DC, Halo, etc. Hexatekin (talk) 04:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are we looking at the same sources?
- The MTV source is a WP:INTERVIEW and as a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE cannot contribute to notability.
- The Juxtapoz source has a single WP:TRIVIALMENTION of Wayshak's name.
- Fangoria has a single paragraph discussing a poster Wayshak illustrated, most of it consisting of a quote from Wayshak.
None of these are WP:SIGCOV to qualify toward notability. And it's a complete red herring to say "he has illustrated posters...and comics." That doesn't establish notability at all. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per source analysis below. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:00, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230317204837/https://www.mtv.com/news/ae6ax8/sam-kieth-and-jonathan-wayshak-make-the-chickens-revolt-interview	Promotional site for MTV		interview	✘ No
https://gizmodo.com/indie-artist-interviews-new-york-comic-con-artist-alley-1849640204/4			interview	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240822030049/https://www.circusposterus.com/blog/juxtapoz-teases-us-with-their-annual-halloween-issue/			blog posting about Halloween issue of Juxtapoz. No mention of other publications	✘ No
https://www.thewrap.com/godzilla-x-kong-mondo-toys-poster-reveal/			passing metion of poster	✘ No
https://www.fangoria.com/mondo-beetlejuice-wayshak/			site selling poster	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20220527121739/https://hifructose.com/2015/08/24/inside-the-sketchbook-of-comic-artist-jonathan-wayshak/	?	?	multple images	? Unknown
https://web.archive.org/web/20240416070823/https://www.dc.com/comics/the-ferryman-2008/the-ferryman-1			promo listing for Ferryman #1	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240416081838/https://www.dc.com/comics/the-ferryman-2008/the-ferryman-2			promo listing for Ferryman #2	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20210224042407/https://www.darkhorse.com/Blog/2353/dark-horse-comics-deploys-justin-jordan-call-duty			promo listing for Call of Duty: Zombies #1	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240809132706/https://hifructose.com/2010/09/07/hi-fructose-collected-edition-vol-2/	?	?	Promo for Hi-Fructose Collected Edition Vol. 2	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240817205952/https://www.harvard.com/book/zerofriends_a_collection_of_art_passion_and_madness/			listing for Zerofriends at Harvard Booksotore	✘ No
https://www.thewrap.com/godzilla-x-kong-mondo-toys-poster-reveal/			A single WP:TRIVIALMENTION: "We are also super thrilled to debut a new timed edition poster by artist and illustrator Jonathan Wayshak, also for “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire.” The 24” by 36” screen-printed poster is a striking black-and-white tableau featuring Godzilla and Kong battling the movie’s villain the Skar King, a ferocious ape from deep within Hollow Earth. The poster will go for $80. See it below."	✘ No
https://www.shelfabuse.com/comic-book-reviews/toner-5-comic-book-review/		ShelfAbuse is self-published by Carl Doherty (see WP:SPS). (https://www.shelfabuse.com/about/)		✘ No
https://www.popculturemaven.com/comics/new-comic-book-reviews-week-of-12016/			Review of Devolution issue 1; not WP:SIGCOV of subject	✘ No
https://theslingsandarrows.com/call-of-duty-zombies/			Review of Call of Duty: Zombies; not SIGCOV of subject. Review does not mention Wayshak's work.	✘ No
https://theslingsandarrows.com/devolution/			Review of Devolution issue 1; not WP:SIGCOV of subject	✘ No
https://www.youdontreadcomics.com/comics/2021/7/28/the-scumbag-9-review			Review of The Scumbag issue 9; not WP:SIGCOV of subject	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

KEEP: Wayshak is well-known in the comic book/graphic novel world. I have added reviews from a number of sources within that world, which I would suggest indicates some notability. Guinness323 (talk) 06:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added the sources to the assessment table above. They don't show WP:SIGCOV, except for sources that fail the test of independence or reliability. The closest they get is a claim of notability under WP:NARTIST, but that's only if you interpret a single comic book issue with two reviews as "a significant or well-known work or collective body of work." While the guideline does not describe comic books, it does generally exclude notability for individual works that are serial installments of a longer series (e.g. a TV show episode) and applying that principle to comic books would exclude this principle here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on sources added by Guinness323. BOZ (talk) 11:57, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the save goes to Guinness323. Not a field I excel in but if the artist is well-known within it then notability becomes evident. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:19, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the article has improved with the new sources; was there really a WP:BEFORE? Tduk (talk) 16:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tduk, indeed there was. Read the source table. The sources added to the article do not support notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - based on the source analysis above and a BEFORE search. It is WP:TOOSOON for this artist, perhaps in a few more years there will be enough significant coverage in reliable sources that are fully independent of the subject to support an encyclopedia article. Being "well known" or having career success or "fame" is not the same as encyclopedic notability; this is not a reflection on the artist or their work, but simply a reality of WP's guidelines that have been crafted through consensus over a period of years. The article fails WP:NARTIST and WP:GNG at this time. Netherzone (talk) 02:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Source analysis appears to favor delete. The keep !voters need to remember that it is not a vote and would be advised to respond objectively and factually to source analysis.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 16:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per the source analysis, there aren't any reliable, independent sources with enough WP:SIGCOV to favour an article at the moment. I agree it may be a case of WP:TOOSOON, but for the time being, the article fails WP:ARTIST and WP:GNG. DesiMoore (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diablo (upcoming film)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreleased film, not expected to release until 2025. Does not meet WP:NFF or WP:SIGCOV, and won't until release. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It should be created on release day. AutorisedUser673 (talk) 17:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Super Mario War

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

poorly sourced fail WP:GNG Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of unofficial Mario media. Failed to get much significant coverage besides maybe this review, though it's enough to merit a mention. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Serena Daolio

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tagged for BLP sources since 2011. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. 4meter4 (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Italy. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Black Economic Alliance

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This group received some coverage when it first launched in 2018, but that's mainly a function of having a good publicist. Since 2018, they've received very little in-depth coverage. There's some in-depth coverage of its leadership, but most articles I could find only mention BEA in passing. An editor removed my PROD on this article because they found a "recent NYT article that refers to organization's recent activity," which they said "addresses the issue" I had. There's only one problem: the NYT article in question is about Wes Moore, and there is exactly 1 sentence about BEA. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 16:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Economics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails the WP:N test of WP:SUSTAINED with a few stories upon launch and no WP:SIGCOV since. Subsequent coverage is limited to WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. It should go without saying that this organization cannot inherit notability from its members. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nipun Roy Chowdhury

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No inherent notability. Subject fails WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. BEFORE wasn't helpful. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 15:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nino Fresh

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:MUSICBIO, WP:SIGCOV. References are annoucements,profiles and interviews. scope_creep^Talk 15:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Music, and California. – The Grid (talk) 15:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gustave Ducousso

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another football biography fails WP:GNG, WP:NSPORT with no WP:SIGCOV in independent, secondary reliable sources. The only sources are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS or database directories like Olympedia. He fails WP:NOLYMPIC as a substitute for a team that did not apparently medal. I propose either to delete or to redirect to Football at the 1948 Summer Olympics – Men's team squads as was done earlier this year before being reverted. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Olympics, and France. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mariam Battistelli

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cited exclusively to either unreliable sources like sound cloud, or to websites of companies which have employed the subject and are self published in addition to lacking independence. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 15:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: All I get hits on are review of this performance [1], which aren't enough for notability here. What's now used for sourcing in the article is primary or simple confirmation of performances given. Oaktree b (talk) 15:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Ethiopia. – The Grid (talk) 15:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Bottini

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Football biography fails WP:GNG, WP:NSPORT with no WP:SIGCOV in independent, secondary reliable sources. The only sources are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS or database directories like this one. He fails WP:NOLYMPIC as a substitute for a team that did not apparently medal. I propose either to delete or to redirect to Football at the 1948 Summer Olympics – Men's team squads as was done earlier this year before being reverted. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Football, Olympics, and France. – The Grid (talk) 15:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Han Jiet

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This biography of a Malaysian YouTuber fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. The sources in the article are tabloid coverage of his engagement (excluded for notability per WP:SBST) and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. I couldn't find any other qualifying WP:SIGCOV in my WP:BEFORE search, but given the language barrier happy to revise my opinion if SIGCOV is found. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Malaysia. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Debangshu Bhattacharya

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No inherent notability here. Subject fails WP:NPOL, and I've checked the cited sources, none could satisfy WP:GNG criteria. The regular WP:ROTM sources we get during election periods. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Davood Noroozi

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No inherent notability, fails WP:GNG, WP:NPOL or WP:ANYBIO. BEFORE was not productive. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Journalism, and Iran. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ronald K. Hoeflin

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable pseudoscientist, does not meet WP:GNG. No WP:SUSTAINED WP:INDEPTH WP:DIVERSE coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject Polygnotus (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, Philosophy, and Georgia (U.S. state). Hey man im josh (talk) 15:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Polygnotus (talk)
Source	Comments
Morris, Scot. "The one-in-a-million I.Q. test". Omni magazine, April 1985, pp 128-132.	Not about Hoeflin. Also clearly not WP:INDEPENDENT because it says This test is "the result of almost two years of collaboration between Hoeflin and Omni.
Republic Magazine, November 1985, "Beyond Mensa," by Catherine Seipp	An inflight magazine
Carlson, Roger D. (1991). "The Mega Test". In Keyser, Daniel; Sweetland, Richard (eds.). Test Critiques. Vol. VIII. Kansas City (MO): Test Corporation of America. pp. 431–435. ISBN 0-89079-254-2. ISSN 1553-9121. Although the approach that Hoeflin takes is interesting, inventive, intellectually stimulating, and internally consistent, it violates many good psychometric principles by overinterpreting the weak data of a self-selected sample.
"Mind Games: the hardest IQ test you'll ever love suffering through", Omni magazine, pp 90 ff, April 1990
Prizes and Awards (American Philosophical Association	https://www.apaonline.org/page/jvi awarded for the best unpublished, article-length work in philosophy by a non-academically affiliated philosopher.
Proceedings, "News from the National Office". Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, Vol. 62, No. 4. (Mar., 1989), pp. 691.
"Ronald K. Hoeflin". geni_family_tree. 2023-03-27. Retrieved 2024-08-14.	WP:USERGENERATED
Hoeflin, Ronald. "About the Author." Noesis, Issue #176 February 2005.	This is a "magazine"/newsletter published by megasociety so not WP:INDEPENDENT
"Encyclopedia of Categories [Volume 1-13]". USIA: United Sigma Intelligence Association. 2020-11-17. Retrieved 2021-05-09.	Written and published by Hoeflin
Aviv, Rachel (2006-08-02). "The Intelligencer". Village Voice. Archived from the original on 2007-02-11. Retrieved 2006-08-02. This article is primarily a biography of and interview with Dr Hoeflin
Knight, Sam (2009-04-10). "Is a high IQ a burden as much as a blessing?". Financial Times (London). Retrieved 2006-04-20. This article has a section which contains a biography of and interview with Dr Hoeflin	Made me feel sorry for him. But it certainly does not make him notable.
Perleth, Christoph; Schatz, Tanja; Mönks, Franz J. (2000). "Early Identification of High Ability". In Heller, Kurt A.; Mönks, Franz J.; Sternberg, Robert J.; et al. (eds.). International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (2nd ed.). Amsterdam: Pergamon. p. 301. ISBN 978-0-08-043796-5. norm tables that provide you with such extreme values are constructed on the basis of random extrapolation and smoothing but not on the basis of empirical data of representative samples.	Does not mention Hoeflin
Hoeflin, Ronald (July 1987). "About the Editor" (PDF). Noesis, the Journal of the Noetic Society. 16: 11. I have been a member of all six high-IQ societies listed in the Encyclopedia of Associations: Mensa, Intertel, the International Society for Philosophical Enquiry, the Triple Nine Society, the Prometheus Society, and the Mega Society — but I currently belong to only three of these: Mensa, Triple Nine, and Prometheus. I am the founder of Prometheus and of the Noetic Society (formerly called the Titan Society). I consider myself the founder of the Mega Society, although some argue that Chris Harding has at least equal claim to that status. I am also a co-founder of the Triple Nine Society. Thus, I have been at least partly responsible for the establishment of four of the seven currently active high-IQ societies.	This is a "magazine"/newsletter published by megasociety so not WP:INDEPENDENT
Sager, Mike (November 1999). "The Smartest Man in America". Esquire. Retrieved 2011-01-07.	[2] Human-interest story. I feel sorry for him after reading this. But it does not make him notable.
Membership Committee (1999). "1998/99 Membership Committee Report". Prometheus Society. Archived from the original on 2006-07-17. Retrieved 2006-07-26. `{{cite journal}}`: Cite journal requires `\|journal=` (help)	Founded by Hoeflin
A Short (and Bloody) History of the High I.Q. Societies Archived 2013-09-22 at the Wayback Machine	Not about Hoeflin specifically but about the Societies. Not an RS.

Benedikte Pryneid Hansen

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No inherent notability, fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Nothing useful came from WP:BEFORE. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Norway. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Internal party apparatchiks are rarely notable enough to meet WP:NPOL. From a brief perusal of the Red Party (Norway) article, the Secretary General of the party is not the front-facing leader, nor does it look like an internally elected position (though I may be wrong on the latter point). Bkissin (talk) 15:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ghosts of India

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NBOOK tagged for notability since Januray of last year. One unreliable review Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 14:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Literature, and India. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 14:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nom, I noticed the same thing, was gonna AfD myself. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

North Malabar Institute of Technology

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This exists, but even the very stubby article doesn't prove it. Its own website server fails to respond. Not inherently notable. Fails WP:NCORP 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Kerala. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Back in 2015 the creating editor twice removed a {{merge to}} template, refusing to discuss it. I am not averse to a merge if deemed appropriate 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools, Engineering, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kannur University. LibStar (talk) 00:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 13:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and increase to a stub article. Win-win ending. Kellpb93ke (talk) 16:52, 9 September 2024 (UTC) — Kellpb93ke (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
What does "win win ending" mean here? LibStar (talk) 23:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was a vandalism-only account so their comment should be disregarded. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The Institute have no individual sources fails WP:NCORP. Xegma(talk) 17:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:09, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Smyrna, Decatur County, Indiana

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A 4tgh class post office, not a town. There's almost nothing there, and what little there is was mostly built in the 1950s. Mangoe (talk) 13:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there something wrong with being built in the 1950's? Of the "almost nothing", does that indicate there is actually something there? — Maile (talk) 14:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New FM

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced since 2010 Golikom (talk) 11:59, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 12:19, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV. Xegma(talk) 12:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Broadcast Operations Group per ATD. Nate • (chatter) 16:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources I added.

Sources:

Connell, Tim (30 August 2012). "today's topics - Rock classic makes its sound mark". Newcastle Herald. Newcastle: Fairfax Media. p. 13. Retrieved 15 September 2024 – via NewsBank.
Sadlier, Kevin (7 May 1989). "Radio". Television. The Sun-Herald. Sydney: John Fairfax Holdings. p. 116. Retrieved 16 April 2010 – via NewsBank.
Sadlier, Kevin (26 November 1989). "FM Stations Eat Away at Ratings". News and Features. The Sun-Herald. Sydney: John Fairfax Holdings. p. 134. Retrieved 17 April 2010 – via NewsBank.
Joyce, James (14 May 1999). "Birthday blowout for NEW-FM". News. Newcastle Herald. Newcastle: Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited. p. 63. Retrieved 15 September 2024 – via NewsBank.
Joyce, James (22 March 1999). "NSW Labor signs off with 2HD". News. Newcastle Herald. Newcastle: Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited. p. 12. Retrieved 15 September 2024 – via NewsBank.
Day, Mark (10 February 2000). "Mystery mogul of radio". News. The Australian. Sydney: News Limited. p. M12. Retrieved 15 September 2024 – via NewsBank.

There is sufficient coverage in multiple reliable sources to allow the subject to pass the general notability guideline, requiring "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". --Yours sincerely, Bas (or TechGeek105) (talk to me) 01:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. I would likely have said much the same thing as an extensive user of NewsBank. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:12, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tobiáš Diviš

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I cannot find any evidence of notability for this Slovak men's footballer to meet WP:GNG. He only played 48 matches in lower leagues. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nyrika Holkar

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A promotional biography of a businesswoman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:ADMASQ, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. TCBT1CSI (talk) 12:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. TCBT1CSI (talk) 12:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinhook, Decatur County, Indiana

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A "nothing there" spot about which I can only find the barest passing reference in one of those old county histories. Mangoe (talk) 11:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Shellwood (talk) 12:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Monument Mythos

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail notability guidelines. Most of the article’s sources are student newspapers by the author’s own description. Could not find reliable significant coverage in my search. Has been previously deleted. StewdioMACK (talk) 09:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Has been previously deleted.... when? Has been previously kept....Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Draft:The_Monument_Mythos... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was kept as a draft. It was nominated for deletion as a draft by a non-good-faith actor. But that is not evidence that there was a consensus that the subject is notable after someone challenged its notability. Drafts are not deleted for lack of notability so a draft being kept does not mean that editors thought that the subject is notable. —Alalch E. 15:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, maybe, but the page was discussed and the then-draft found promising by some users, whereas deletion was NOT discussed, so that stating ’has been previously deleted’ here (an AfD venue, where consensus is what matters) is misleading imv. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that's is misleading. The decision to keep the draft does not matter at all in either direction. —Alalch E. 22:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. StewdioMACK (talk) 09:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:59, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Babysharkboss2!! ^{(Nomad Vagabond)} 14:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful if, as one of the contributors to the page, you could find time to explain why you think deletion is not necessary. Thank you in advance. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Babysharkboss2 (pinging you to increase chances you read this). Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:16, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yeah. Anyway, this has etiquette enough sources and there are still sources to be added. It survived MfD (Even after one very...passionate user wanted it gone). So i'd like to keep it. Babysharkboss2!! ^{(Nomad Vagabond)} 12:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This is about all there is [3] for sourcing and it's not enough. Rest of what's used is marginally reliable sources per Source Highlighter, so not much of anything we can use for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I am satisfied with the existing coverage, see GNews please. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: significant coverage in reliable sources includes Collider (twice) but also The Gamer among other things and I would consider https://fnewsmagazine.com/2022/01/ghosts-in-the-machine-the-star-spangled-monsters-of-mister-manticores-the-monument-mythos/ and the article in the The Signal perfectly acceptable sources too.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I find F Newsmagazine to be a very good, professional-level, outlet in the areas of culture and critique of visual media. —Alalch E. 14:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't find any substantial, reliable sources for this. Most of what is here are student publications, including F Newsmagazine, which is a student publication of the Arts Institute of Chicago. The coverage in Collider and The Gamer is limited to a few paragraphs in a page with many other entries, and formulaic in style. AKA: promotional. Searching turns up lots of TikTok and other bits, none which have any content about the "show". Lamona (talk) 03:49, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sudent or college newspapers, but high-quality (and award-winning, for one of them) reliable ones. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:20, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Uttar Pradesh train derailment

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS, title is ambiguous as there are other (albeit non notable) derailment incidents in the state, including a recent one just hours ago. ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify it for now, need to add more sources. Xegma(talk) 16:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CalDigit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for companies. StewdioMACK (talk) 09:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Technology. StewdioMACK (talk) 09:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Checking in Google News, there are hundreds (20 pages of links) of independent appearances in media. Still, it's true they are mostly reviews of their products, not talking about the company itself. The company consumer products have been pretty popular, but maybe that fame is not enough. Tbh I'm not sure. Janeender (talk) 09:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I find sales sites for their products (Amazon, etc.) and one product review of one product, but nothing about the company itself. Lamona (talk) 03:57, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Act to confronting the hostile actions of the Zionist regime against peace and security

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article could simply fit into a section at Iran-Israel relations. Several primary sources, including Parliament and at least two others, are no longer functioning. Only sources focusing on Iran are available. The article mainly consists of quotes from the law. EpicAdventurer (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Iran, and Israel. EpicAdventurer (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matilda Whitney Nakayima

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I cannot find sufficient reliable news coverage independent of the topic here, per WP:BIO or General Notability Moarnighar (talk) 11:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Moarnighar (talk) 11:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Uganda. Shellwood (talk) 11:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails all notability guidelines. Ednabrenze (talk) 11:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nelly Agbogu

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Disputed AfC submission. This subject fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO by all means. The milestone "Tony Elumelu Entrepreneur" does not inherently confer notability as over a hundred could be in a year. The source analysis below will give you further insight. I also suspect WP:UPE and WP:COI going on.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table: prepared by User:Vanderwaalforces
https://pmnewsnigeria.com/2024/04/25/lagos-partners-naija-brand-chick-for-hospitality-trade-fair/	We can't be sure of WP:INDEPENDENT when there's no byline in the first place.	While publication is reliable per WP:NGRS, the piece is unreliable because we can't rely on a piece without a byline.	Utterly no, this is more or less a routine coverage.	✘ No
https://guardian.ng/guardian-woman/metrowoman-entrepreneur-of-the-week-nelly-agbogu/	This is an interview.	Ditto.		✘ No
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq89nLdKp4U	Fails WP:INDEPENDENT.	Whether some will say TED, the publisher of this video, is reliable or YouTube is an unreliable source, this is unreliable still because it involves the appearance of the subject.	Ditto.	✘ No
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/05/africa/nelly-agbogu-naijbrandchick-intl-cmd/index.html	Reading this piece makes it clear that it is not entirely independent of the subject. The phrase "Courtesy Nelly Agbogu" at the end suggests that she is the source of this information, implying that either she provided it directly or the information is being shared with her permission or acknowledgment.	While the publication is reliable, we can't rely on a piece that fails WP:INDEPENDENCE.	Does not provide the WP:SIGCOV on the subject that we need on Wikipedia.	✘ No
https://thesun.ng/naijabrandchick-offers-game-changing-program-to-help-online-business-owners-dominate-sales-and-influence/	Reading this makes it clear that it fails WP:INDEPENDENT. The piece lacks a byline.	Reliable publication per WP:NGRS but the piece lacks a byline and we can't rely on such, especially when it fails WP:INDEPENDENT.	This isn't about the subject.	✘ No
https://guardian.ng/saturday-magazine/over-200-exhibitors-expected-at-tourism-fair/	Unassessed because it does not even apply to the subject at all.	Ditto, and lacks a proper byline while looking like a WP:ROTM.	Ditto, and there is no WP:SIGCOV on the subject either.	✘ No
https://www.tonyelumelufoundation.org/marketing-materials/meet-the-selected-1000-tony-elumelu-entrepreneurs-for-2017	This is not a source or piece used to establish notability in the first place.	Ditto.	Ditto.	? Unknown
https://twmagazine.net/tw-tv/tw-everyday/women-love-nelly-agbogu/	Piece is an interview, thus failing WP:INDEPENDENT.	Ditto.		✘ No
https://www.globalbrandsmagazine.com/how-nelly-agbogu-is-transforming-nigerian-entrepreneurship/	Piece lacks a byline and reading it makes it clear that it is not entirely independent of the subject.	We can't rely on a piece that lacks a byline, plus the publication itself is not reliable because it looks like a part of a news PR system.	Piece does not provide the WP:SIGCOV we need.	✘ No
https://archive.businessday.ng/enterpreneur/article/nelly-agbogus-biggest-challenge-birthed-business-journey/	Piece is an interview, thus failing WP:INDEPENDENT.	Ditto.		✘ No
https://www.cnbcafrica.com/2017/business-of-healthy-living-in-nigeria/	Fails WP:INDEPENDENT as an interview.	Ditto, even though the publication is a reliable one.	Ditto.	✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/06/lagos-govt-naija-brand-chick-continue-to-build-economy-through-tourism/amp/	If this is entirely legitimate, I wonder why it would lack a byline.	No byline, marginally reliable per WP:NGRS.	WP:ROTM or routine coverage.	✘ No
Citation 13: https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2024/06/07/naijabrandchicks-dsi-programme-empowering-women-to-transform-industries/ , Citation 15: https://dailytimesng.com/four-reasons-to-attend-lagos-tourism-nbc-tradefair-nelly/ , Citation 16: https://lagosstate.gov.ng/lasg-reiterates-continuous-support-for-smes-as-lagos-tourism-nbc-3-day-trade-fair-ends/ , Citation 18: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/07/wema-bank-nbc-smedan-to-hold-inter-continental-trade-empower-women/amp/ , Citation 20: https://msmeafricaonline.com/wema-bank-and-smedan-collaborate-to-empower-women-led-msmes-through-naija-brand-chick-trade-fair/ , Citations 21 all through 24.	All these sources are unassessed because they cannot be used to establish a proton of notability on the subject.	Ditto.	Ditto.	? Unknown
Citation 14: https://businessday.ng/sponsored/article/naijabrandchicks-dsi-program-transforms-women-entrepreneurs-into-industry-leaders/ , Citation 19: https://businessday.ng/sponsored/article/fez-delivery-is-the-official-delivery-partner-at-nbc-african-fair-london-2024/	Sponsored pieces.	Ditto.	Ditto.	✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/06/participants-laud-6th-naija-brand-chick-trade-fair/amp/	Lacks byline as usual, ditto.	Ditto.	Fails WP:SIGCOV.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:09, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Women, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:09, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The assessment table created by the nom seems to disregard every source. My use of sources is based onWP:NGRS ensuring that the subject passes WP:GNG. I am even more surprised to see the assessment of CNN and TedX. Marking all the notable newspapers Vanguard, Punch, The Sun etc as unreliable makes me wonder what Nigerian Editors can then use for referencing. Also, kindly look at his talk page to see how our conversations based on his accusation prior to this went (I can’t seem to link to it). I will not vote a keep but would prefer other neutral editors to look into this objectively and vote accordingly. Mevoelo (talk) Mevoelo
Delete: I have confirmed the source analysis table independently and before reading it. I suggest the be a soft delete - without prejudice to future re-creation - because I sense that Nelly Agbogu approaches WP:BIO despite not quite being there, certainly as referenced. A major rewrite and re-referencing at this stage will change my mind, provided the WP:HEY is done sufficiently well. This means that unreferenced so called facts must be removed, and faux references must go, along with the facts they purport to verify. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:12, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Thanks for the thorough source analysis, which I concur with, and according to which notability is indeed not established. I get the impression of someone who is 'famous for being famous', which probably at least in part explains the WP:REFBOMBING with flaky sources. Fails WP:GNG. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: The referencing is also rather lacking: I checked out a few of the sources, and the first one (#1) did not verify the DOB against which it is cited; the second (#7) is cited at the end of the 'Biography' and verifies only the very last, and arguably the least significant, statement in that section, with the educational history completely unsupported; and the third (#8) does verify that she worked for Schlumberger, but not what role she held. Which begs the question, if all those details didn't come from the sources cited against them, where did they come from? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The source from which got the DOB is here, although it appears I ended up not adding it to the reference list. For the role she held, I cannot specifically state which of the sources but it was part of the info I got while researching. If I’m not mistaken, it was stated on her TedEx Talk. Mevoelo (talk) 13:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The subject fails to meet notability guidelines. Lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources.Mysecretgarden (talk) 16:13, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cliff Schwarz

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this previously unreferenced article about a composer, and added one reference. It is a passing mention, however, and I cannot find other coverage. I don't think he meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:NCOMPOSER. Tacyarg (talk) 10:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Music, Television, and United States of America. Tacyarg (talk) 10:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not notable. Before search returned nothing. Fails WP:GNG or WP:Nmusic. Ednabrenze (talk) 11:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asian Breakbeat

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No WP:SIGCOV, does not satisgy WP:GNG. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:12, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of intercity bus stops in Arkansas

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:LISTN WP:NOTTRAVEL. For the same reasons as per South Dakota, this is a list of unremarkable, non notable bus stops in a particular state. Ajf773 (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because similarly as the reasons above:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists, Transportation, Arkansas, Kansas, Nebraska, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Wyoming. Ajf773 (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lucas Sant

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent, secondary sources. (I would draftify, but a draft already exists - which can be incubated until the subject is ready for mainspace). Paul W (talk) 09:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Send to draft space, possibly notable in the future, but not seeing it at the moment. Govvy (talk) 10:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A draft already exists, Govvy - hence the AfD here. Paul W (talk) 11:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This version is better, histmerge this one to draft and SALT until it's in good state. Govvy (talk) 12:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per above. Svartner (talk) 16:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. NB that article creator has a long history of creating articles in mainspace that are already in draft... Giant Snowman 19:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SI-UK

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This company page fails to meet WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Trivial coverage WP:ORGTRIV, promotional WP:PROMO. TCBT1CSI (talk) 09:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Kingdom. TCBT1CSI (talk) 09:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Japan, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Entertainers Cricket League T10

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not enough coverage on independent reliable sources; fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 09:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Cricket. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 09:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The creator of these articles, who have had 94% per cent of their articles deleted, really need their WP:COMPETENCE questioned. AA (talk) 10:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Pan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There doesn't seem to be significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. toweli (talk) 08:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games, Law, and Argentina. toweli (talk) 08:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Vischjager

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There doesn't seem to be significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. toweli (talk) 08:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Games, and Netherlands. toweli (talk) 08:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jessica Serfaty

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable as an actress or a living person. The editing spirit (talk) 08:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Arkansas. Shellwood (talk) 10:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: a lot (I do mean a lot) of coverage mostly on her private life in more or less reliable sources (from Globo and People to, say, Page Six and Pure People or US Weekly) but not on a short period of time (2014-now, at least). Some people receive significant coverage because they create a vaccine, some for their private life. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Killing of Michael Mohn

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This feels like a violation of WP:NOTNEWS Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 07:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Pennsylvania. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 07:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, does not appear to be a notable crime. Coverage appears to be generally local and mostly primary sources. Esolo5002 (talk) 14:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Art of Sound (exhibition)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 15:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Music. Netherzone (talk) 16:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: further expansion of the article and context was needed. AlphaLemur (talk) 01:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lister Storm GTM002

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable vehicle chassi, information is out of scope of Wikipedia. However, having a hard time figuring out where would be an appropriate rederict/merge -- the race team? Sadads (talk) 12:41, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Motorsport and Transportation. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Baffling to find an article about such a specific, unspecial chassis - not even a model! Don't see any encyclopaedic value in it. No mainspace links to it exist ([4]). Think a suitable redirect target would be Lister Storm or Lister Storm#GT, but we've got to consider deleting it altogether. MSport1005 (talk) 17:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot Flight 31

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: A search reveals that there exists no (significant) news coverage of the event, no secondary sources, no in-depth coverage, no continued coverage, no demonstrated lasting effects and no long-term impact on a significant region of the world that would make this event notable enough for a stand-alone article. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Russia. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:N. There are no independent, reliable sources of information about this incident. The ASN source cites airdisaster.ru as its source of information, airdisaster.ru does not cite any sources itself and has been the topic of a past discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_446#airdisaster.ru. Most of the currently uncited material in the article is a close paraphrase of the limited information that appears on airdisaster.ru, and the baaa-acro.com source is a WP:SPS. I've spent some time trying to find even a brief mention of this accident in reliable sources, and have failed. While Wikipedia's notability guideline is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the current state of sourcing in an article, the policy does state that information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; if no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article. RecycledPixels (talk) 18:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sadush Danaj

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Sources are profile and no significant coverages. Xegma(talk) 07:18, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Albania. Shellwood (talk) 08:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I honestly have no idea what the coverage is like in Albania and for the clubs he played for, there are two in the list that are a fair size and get good support. If someone does build a decent article with sources ping me please. Govvy (talk) 21:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miranda (engine)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article on a rocket engine under development which has no proven notability as it does not yet exist. Clear case of WP:TOOSOON. As part of WP:NPP it was draftified for improvement, for instance waiting until it has proven to be viable. Novice editor removed tags, moved back to main and made comments that violate politeness code. This article and approach is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Since the editor has rejected draftification, deletion now is the approach. If the motor ever works and becomes useful, then and only then would it be appropriate for Wikipedia. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:51, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Spaceflight. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:51, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

N.B., this page used to be a redirect to a short description in the Firefly Aerospace page. Within that page it can be OK; however creating a new article by replacing a redirect must pass the same bar as the creation of any new page. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:57, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lean keep Unlike a lot of these fledgling companies, that end up promising a lot of vaporware, this case is likely different. This engine has the backing of Northrop Grumman, which needs it to power its Antares rocket, which it needs to lift the Cygnus spacecraft into space to resupply the International Space Station per the terms of its Commercial Resupply Services contract witch NASA. So there’s a lot riding on this program, which all adds to its notability. Furthermore, if this engine program fails, that itself may be notable if it ends the entire Antares rocket program. RickyCourtney (talk) 05:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While you make interesting points, I think keeping the article would also contradict Wikipedia:NOTACRYSTALBALL (I.e. Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not) since the engine is still a prototype. Let's see other opinions. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:55, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and try this at BE-4 or Raptor pages first as a precedent... KroOoOze (talk) 18:34, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That’s a poor comparison as the BE-4 and Raptor have both flown and this engine has not. RickyCourtney (talk) 05:10, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On test\certification flights. Raptor 3 have not flown at all. In either case we rely on official informations from the companies, and things like Isp is fundamentally impossible to independently verify, and we cannot be sure with what specs they will ultimately end up with (and that is ok). Invoking CRYSTALBALL is frivolous and agaist the spirit\intention of the guideline. KroOoOze (talk) 18:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS: but fine. What about New Glenn or Artemis II articles? By this twisted logic, should they be deleted? KroOoOze (talk) 18:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern, however I’ll point out that this engine has completed several hot fire tests, that were shared by Northrop Grumman. So in my opinion, it’s not entirely correct to point to WP:CRYSTALBALL. This isn’t just a product announcement or rumors when they actually have a working product and a deadline to deliver that’s just months away at this point. RickyCourtney (talk) 05:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has many problems, but reference information being readily available ain't one of them. With consideration to how this frivolous demand was brought up, I suggest to summarily dismiss this and not waste any more of anyone's time. Whether this is inlined and put under another pointless redirection is a distinction without difference to normal people. So if anyone wants to waste his time doing this, whatever. But don't deny access to the users in the process by (soft or hard) deleting it.

|

The engine was test-fired, so it has more than sufficient physicality. People expect to find all this basic information here. I don't think there is precedent, and purging all development engines from Wikipedia is, on the face of it, bizzare idea. The template itself has a state available for whether the engine is in development or in any other stage; i.e. it is normal and expected there would be articles about engines in development.

|

The petitioner out of the blue tried to draftify the article, with complete disregard for any links to it. He tried do draftify it despite it existing more than 90 days (years in fact). Now it is clear the motivation was as a prelude to deletion. In this discussion several frivolous reasons for deletion are thrown around simply trying to see what sticks, while concern over what actually most benefits the users is not considered. Any large rocket engine is very much "notable" to people in the field as well as fans, regardless whether currently in development or not. One could claim Too_soon with maybe some concept that will be renamed two more times and doesn't have anything but the name in the first place, but hardly this engine at this stage. KroOoOze (talk) 18:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not provide incorrect information. As I clarified, the earlier page was a {{redirect}}. If it was a real page then it was not eligible for draftification. However, it was a new page and as such goes through the standard Wikipedia:New pages patrol process.

Please note the Wikipedia:Five pillars "Wikipedia's editors should treat each other with respect and civility" Ldm1954 (talk) 20:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

that is to say keep. It is self-evidently WP:N to anyone even vaguely interested in this area. And to others, reporting on it do exist confirming notability per WP:NPOSSIBLE. Deletion cannot be considered a serious suggestion; as it would leave Wikipedia in worse state than before. It is a WP:RECKLESS suggestion. As for merging, rocket engines of this class are typically (and should be) in standalone article, and do not require context of another article. KroOoOze (talk) 18:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Firefly Aerospace per WP:NSUSTAINED, WP:FUTURE, WP:PAGEDECIDE, WP:NOTPROMO, etc etc. While a few reliable sources have briefly covered the testing of this engine, it fails WP:GNG - there is not yet enough detailed coverage to warrant a standalone article. I think this is a clear case of WP:TOOSOON. This engine may well become independently notable in the future, but currently, there simply is not enough coverage to provide all but the most basic information on it. Until further SIGCOV appears, this seems better handled as a subsection of the Firefly Aerospace article. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 03:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We have arguments to Delete, Merge and one editor Leaning Keep so there is no consensus here yet. We determine notability on Wikipedia not based on editors' opinions but by coverage by reliable, secondary independent sources. Could anyone provide a further source assessment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source analysis: There are 5 sources. 1, 2, 5 are all web articles by the manufacturer, so are not independent and (IMO) weak. Both sources 3 & 4 are from specialized science web news sites, and mainly repeat statements by the two companies, so are also weak on independence; there are no comments from independent experts. They are not from, for instance, a major national or international newspaper, and there is no comment from NASA, JPL etc experts. I do not consider that the current article has any reliable, secondary and independent sources. Ldm1954 (talk) 03:59, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Besides the source listed in the article currently, I found the following:

Two press releases[5][6]
A paywalled article in Aviation Week [7], a reputable publication
A few short articles on niche aerospace news websites[8][9][10] of unclear reliability/independence, and one particularly shameful article[11] that just reads like an ad

Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 06:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While SpaceNews isn’t a household name, Jeff Faust has become quite respected among the small cadre of full-time space journalists. He’s also probably the only one with a PhD from MIT. I’d argue he’s a reliable source.

While I don’t recognize the name of the journalist from Space.com, the site does have the green check of approval as a reliable source for Wikipedia.

-- RickyCourtney (talk) 06:31, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think this discussion boils down to the issue of how current Wikipedia should be. The issue is whether an engine being developed should be a redirect to a section in the page of the relevant company, as it was prior to July 22, 2024, or a page in its own right (post July 22, 2024). If an engine for space, land or anything else has really unique features such that even testing it is a breakthrough (verified by multiple sources) then it merits a page where these are detailed. Without this I don't see why an exception should be made. In particular I will ask What Is The Rush? If the engine becomes a roaring success then change the redirect to a page, otherwise let's be patient and wait. Ldm1954 (talk) 07:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Ukraine, Dublin

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Based on primary sources. Fails GNG and WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 23:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Ireland, and Ukraine. LibStar (talk) 23:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move and improve. Rather than delete. While it is likely true that the embassy (the office/building/institution/whatever) doesn't have independent notability, there is plenty of coverage of Ireland-Ukraine relations generally. So, personally, I'd suggest that the article be increased in scope slightly. And moved to Ukraine–Ireland relations. Similar to Ireland–Russia relations. Or Spain–Ukraine relations. Or others. With a redirect left behind. If that's "too much", the title should (at the very least) be retargeted to List of diplomatic missions of Ukraine. Personally don't think that outright deletion is the best approach here. Guliolopez (talk) 17:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If Ireland-Ukraine relations are a notable topic, which is quite possibly true, then an article on that subject can easily be created. AusLondonder (talk) 10:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your note. There is already, on a second review, a title on the subject. At Ireland–Ukraine relations. So we wouldn't need to create an (additional) article on that subject. We'd just need to merge/redirect the content (on the embassy - which effectively covers foreign relations as a whole anyway) to the existing title. Personally I think that's the best course of action. Rather than deleting (and then effectively recreating) the content/topic/title. Guliolopez (talk) 09:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep but concurring with the "move and improve" of User:Guliolopez - consider creating Ukraine-Ireland relations and move this into there with more on the relations rather than the embassy. I did find this from the Kyiv Post - it's part 2 so presumably part 1 also has useful info. And I assume that Dublin newspapers will also cover the topic. That seems much more important than the embassy. Lamona (talk) 04:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and merge if salvageable Andre🚐 18:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus. There is a redirect at Ireland-Ukraine relations so there would have to be a different target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but move as suggested and fix the links and redirects. The relations between the two countries became important only in 2022, after Russia invaded Ukraine. Bearian (talk) 01:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sonali Phogat

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBLP. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 15:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Politicians, Women, Television, and Haryana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Significant coverage in reliable sources, including BBC and The Hindu, and bylined articles in other media, indicating her notability as social media personality, politician, or related to her death. She meets the requirements, in my opinion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Goa. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi M S Hassan. Thanks for reviewing this article. However Wikipedia platform is created with principles and articles of public interest which has notability and I feel this article has. Request you to withdraw this notice.Thanks.Gardenkur (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank.Thanks Mushy Yank for his opinion.Gardenkur (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – news coverage appears to be only connected to her death. As tragic as that event was, WP:BLPCRIME as well as WP:BLP1E applies. --bonadea contributions talk 11:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm finding the same as bonadea. Here is something more recent that mentions her, but again in the context of her death and without significant biographical coverage. -- asilvering (talk) 20:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I should add that there is limited coverage of her in the context of her striking another politician with a shoe (example), which is also not very useful for WP:GNG, and some routine election coverage (example). So while I think it's plausible that there is solid biographical coverage out there, I don't think we've found it yet. If anyone can turn up an obituary (rather than an article about the circumstances of her death) that might give us something to go on. -- asilvering (talk) 20:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PGC 2387685

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant or non-trivial coverage in media or studies, not in a catalogue of note, not visible to the naked eye, and not discovered before 1850. SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: the interacting companion galaxy, SDSS J161330.18+510335.5, has at least one paper published.[12] Praemonitus (talk) 01:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tanha Dar Mazrae

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No reliable sources (a.k.a. no wiki links) and no reliable reviews. This may fail Wikipedia:Notability (films). This article about a short film is short because no other sources exist.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sayeye Penhan. I am also nominating the following related page because it is also is sourced by a similar website (akhbarrasmi, is it notable?):

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, no participation so far.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this movie in Iranian cinema.

Khosli is attractive and spectacular and this movie has found many fans.

In our opinion, Iranians, this is the best movie in the Middle East, and if there is a little source now, it is because this movie has just been waiting and the article will gradually mature and grow, and I ask you not to show too much sensitivity on this issue and let it remain an article to avoid wiki law. 5.233.227.181 (talk) 17:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinch to Punch

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This lacks WP:SIGCOV even the article knows it limited information has surfaced online. Oricon yield no result, Natalie yield no result, even the Japanese article has one source, the only thing I could find that is RS is from the Media Arts Database Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 06:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Anime and manga and Japan. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 06:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominating this related articles with the same reason as above

Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 06:15, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Keep) and improve with sources from the Japanese WP, that has a lot considering it's a 1969-1970 series! -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Education, and Transportation. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(My initial !vote above is about Zen-chan Tsū-chan). I hadn't seen this was a bundled nom when I !voted through the assisted script. Procedural keep. These series have very little in common. And it's hard to discuss and improve the 3 at the same time without long tedious explanations and comments about what precisely is relevant to each case. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC) (The nominator indicates they nominated the pages "with the same reason" but the 2nd article has >10 references to reliable newspapers on JaWP, for example.)[reply]
I'll just seperate the 2nd one. Thanks for pointing out Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 13:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, my mention of ’the 2nd article’ is unclear: for the record, I mean Zen-chan Tsū-chan. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirects to the respective networks should also be considered.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:57, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~I would like to see some way to keep the content, and suggest a merge to Fuji Television.~~ For the ones which are made by Fuji, which doesn't include Zen-chan (please, please, don't do combined nominations of disparate articles!). Not sure about Zen-chan, as like @Mushy Yank this came up as a single article for me and I hadn't given it any thought before starting this comment
On Pinch to Punch it's unfortunate that there is so little secondary material out there although it seems even the primary material has been lost. This attests to its importance in the context of the development of Anime. This article could be perfectly happy as a stub, verified by what little information is out there~~, but it's hard to make a case for IAR on this.~~
Keep based on the anime encyclopedia entry and the existence of multiple shorter sources in the en. article and in the jp. article. Although the encyclopedia is the only lengthy treatment found, the article subject is clearly a launching point in the history of Japanese anime. The article is verifiable and the project benefits (and has little to lose) from these stub articles. Since this is basically an IAR argument, I've struck my inconsistent comment above. I still wouldn't object to a merge as a backup. Oblivy (talk) 07:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue with developing these articles would be our inability to access archives which would have information about an anime series from 50 years ago. Hard to imagine that Pinch and Punch, a series with 156 episodes airing on a national TV channel, wouldn't be notable with access to the correct archives. If someone is interested, perhaps Fuji or the National Film Archive of Japan can help? I would personally either keep or merge the articles at a minimum. DCsansei (talk) 07:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is no consensus here. But I don't see any support for Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yes lack of WP:SIGCOV.

Note - maximum sources are databases. and it's an enough reason to delete. Xegma(talk) 13:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. That is not true. References to Japanese newspapers of the time on the JA WP page. See my comments above, thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 01:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's multi-paragraph coverage in this book at 634, less extensive at 132, 146, and 268. Oblivy (talk) 02:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Corporation Limited

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Single ref is effectively WP:OR. No indication of significance. scope_creep^Talk 06:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Andhra Pradesh. Shellwood (talk) 08:52, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Significant organization, state-owned power distributor having vast network and consumer base, has more than one reliable citations now. Thewikizoomer (talk) 18:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We will go through your new references to check them. scope_creep^Talk 19:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, presumably into a "regional operations" section. Dan • ✉ 15:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with a totally unrelated company? Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited is a power generation company owned by Andhra Pradesh state government, the Andhra Pradesh state government owns lots of companies.

The Power Generation Corporation generates and supplies power to not only this distribution company but it supplies power to whole Power Grid of India. So according to me it doesn't make sense to merge two separate companies just because they sound same or owned by same owner. They are literally DIFFERENT COMPANIES. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It states here: [13]] that the electricity generators were deregulated in 1999. The main monolithic supplier APSEB was split into a grid supplier and the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited. The regional generator were split off from this organisation into regional supplier. They are all owned by Andhra Pradesh government. Even though they are seperate companies, they can be one article, because all companies are owned by one entity. scope_creep^Talk 16:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
10s of companies are owned by Andhra Pradesh state government, it is still unfair and doesn't make sense to merge, just because they are owned by the same party. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:23, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same comment as the Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. No indication of significance. scope_creep^Talk 06:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Andhra Pradesh. Shellwood (talk) 08:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Significant organization, state-owned power distributor having vast network and consumer base. Google search reflects a lot of sources showing the kind of significance the org. holds. Thewikizoomer (talk) 18:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, presumably into a "regional operations" section. Dan • ✉ 15:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with a totally unrelated company? Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited is a power generation company owned by Andhra Pradesh state government, the Andhra Pradesh state government owns lots of companies.

The Power Generation Corporation generates and supplies power to not only this distribution company but it supplies power to whole Power Grid of India. So according to me it doesn't make sense to merge two separate companies just because they sound same or owned by same owner. They are literally DIFFERENT COMPANIES. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Thewikizoomer: If you don't stop WP:BLUDGEONing every comment that made has been made on this, I will take you to WP:ANI. scope_creep^Talk 16:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This appears like a personal attack, accusing other users of doing something that they are not and within accordance with Wikipedia policies is personal attack. I can take you to WP:ANI and instead of threatening, you can directly take it there. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:20, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It states here: [14] that the electricity generators were deregulated in 1999. The main monolithic supplier APSEB was split into a grid supplier and the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited. The regional generator were split off from this organisation into regional supplier. They are all owned by Andhra Pradesh government. Even though they are seperate companies, they can be one article, because all companies are owned by one entity. scope_creep^Talk 16:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
10s of companies are owned by Andhra Pradesh state government, it is still unfair and doesn't make sense to merge, just because they are owned by the same party. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same comment as the Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Single ref is effectively WP:OR. scope_creep^Talk 06:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Andhra Pradesh. Shellwood (talk) 08:52, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Significant organization, state-owned power distributor having vast network and consumer base, has more than one reliable citations now. Thewikizoomer (talk) 18:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, presumably into a "regional operations" section. Dan • ✉ 15:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with a totally unrelated company? Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited is a power generation company owned by Andhra Pradesh state government, the Andhra Pradesh state government owns lots of companies.

The Power Generation Corporation generates and supplies power to not only this distribution company but it supplies power to whole Power Grid of India. So according to me it doesn't make sense to merge two separate companies just because they sound same or owned by same owner. They are literally DIFFERENT COMPANIES. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:12, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It states here: [15]] that the electricity generators were deregulated in 1999. The main monolithic supplier APSEB was split into a grid supplier and the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited. The regional generator were split off from this organisation into regional supplier. They are all owned by Andhra Pradesh government. Even though they are seperate companies, they can be one article, because all companies are owned by one entity. scope_creep^Talk 16:34, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
10s of companies are owned by Andhra Pradesh state government, it is still unfair and doesn't make sense to merge, just because they are owned by the same party. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:23, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here, we need more editors with knowledge of electric grids in India.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gotham TV Award for Outstanding Performance in a Drama Series

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It's hard to decide if I will draftify this article but this feels like it's too soon to have the a standalone article. The award and the 1st edition of the award itself is notable but this specific category as of now, seems no notable. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 05:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominating this article for the same reason:

Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 05:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: as a WP:SPLITLIST or redirect to the main page. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:50, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Gotham Awards#Gotham TV Awards for now; assuming that the next ceremony includes these categories, these lists would no longer copy information from a single article and could be recreated then. I would also support redirecting Gotham TV Award for Outstanding Performance in a Comedy Series for the same reasons. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 05:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep has source but need more sources. Xegma(talk) 13:33, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

James L. Enos

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No clear indication of notability. Being the first president of the National Teachers Association isn't enough. No significant coverage in cited sources. Before search found nothing significant. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 05:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Iowa. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 05:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Journalism, Iowa, New York, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Has anyone looked in the possible book sources? Bearian (talk) 02:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I expanded it from another source. The nominator's comment "Being the first president of the National Teachers Association isn't enough" seems to suggest that WP:GNG-based notability is based on significance of accomplishments. It is not. It is based on depth of reliable sourcing. I think the multi-page profile I added and the paragraph about him in the SUNY 1895 source are enough, for someone from that time. And as for accomplishments: president of what is now the National Education Association is significant, but far from his only accomplishment. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rules lawyer

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Simple failure of WP:NOTDICTIONARY as the article only consists of a definition. A potential WP:ATD is merge to Letter and spirit of the law, but that one is more in a legal context than a gaming one, and not exactly well-sourced or stable in itself. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Games, and Psychology. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. come on, this is the stuff we come to Wikipedia for. Suppose it could be merged somewhere; would support that if appropriate placement is identified. Hyperbolick (talk) 06:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:ILIKEIT. While you may enjoy the article, personal preference doesn't factor into AfDs, only evidence that a full article can be created based on the idea of "rules lawyering". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m satisfied what’s there shows it can. Tell me where you would merge it. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Role-playing game terms seems like a better place to merge it than letter and spirit of the law given its predominant use in RPGs. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article as it is now, although short, already has some content which would not fit into a dictionary. And a WP:BEFORE search shows that various sources dealing with table-top roleplaying games have more to say: On A Roll p. 45, The Civilized Guide to Tabletop Gaming p. 66 and The Postmodern Joy of Role-Playing Games all have about a page of content, including commentary. And the journal Analog Game Studies Vol. IV has a full essay on the topic. How can 6+ pages contain "only a definition"? So it seems to me the nomination is mostly talking about the current status of the article, which is not decisive when deciding about deletion. All that said, the first and primary paragraph could be merged in to Role-playing game terms, and later be spun out again as soon as someone uses the listed sources further. But aside from that fact that I see no advantage in that, it would already be akward to fit in the other contexts where same term may pop up, but more rarely so if the Google Books search is any indication. Daranios (talk) 15:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on sources found by Daranios. BOZ (talk) 16:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gamesmanship

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTDICTIONARY, with the article besides the pure definition of gamesmanship (which, in itself, is partly WP:OR) being an example farm of different sports. Beyond that, it mostly cites the book written by the person who popularized (and possibly invented) the term, a primary source that doesn't contribute to notability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Psychology, and Sports. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Competition. Hyperbolick (talk) 06:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rama rama

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The only other sources I could find is a trivial mention that contradicts our article: [16] and this one: [17] which calls it a misidentification? Traumnovelle (talk) 05:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There seems to be some uncertainty about current placement, but that does not mean that the species does not exist or does not represent a valid classification. It appears in one recent checklist as a cyprinid [18] but in another, as well as in Fishbase and CoL (and our article) as Bagridae [19][20][21], and is present in a number of other checklists and publications [22][23]. CoL states "Considered in some literature as synonym of Chandramara chandramara (Hamilton)" (also a bagrid). So, the taxonomic status is murky, but that is something to sort out out and summarize in the article. No grounds for deletion. (The "misidentification" mentioned above refers to particular specimens from a particular collection, and has no bearing on taxonomic status as a whole.) --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There doesn't appear to be any in depth secondary coverage which is the grounds for deletion. I can't access the last link but all the others are quite trivial in coverage. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We do not require "in-depth coverage" for species in excess of the original description and inclusion in multiple reliable databases. I am aware that discussions are ongoing re WP:NSPECIES (see Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(species)), but what you are assuming here sounds like one of the far-end positions in that discourse that was never going to gain majority traction, and certainly does not seem likely to end up as the conclusion. If that is your deletion rationale, then this is an assured non-starter. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We do require that. WP:WHYN. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...welcome to AfD, where we get this exact issue twice a month, which is why we are currently trying to formalize it into a special notability guideline. I'll sum this up as "Keep per WP:NSPECIES" and leave it to others to reiterate the argument. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmedabad Rockets

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not enough coverage; Fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 05:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's also the following articles,

Chandigarh Lions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Chennai Superstars (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Dhaka Warriors (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Delhi Giants (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hyderabad Heroes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Royal Bengal Tigers (sports team) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Lahore Badshahs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Mumbai Champs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 05:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Cricket. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 05:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Might be perfect candidates for collection in a List of Indian Cricket League teams. This would mean a merge all to such a list. Geschichte (talk) 09:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Wikibear47 (talk) 06:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aware Girls

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability issue. WP:GNG Wikibear47 (talk) 04:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can you elaborate on the notability concerns? On a quick glance, there are a lot of cites from major publications. The founder has her own article, no doubt at least partly on the strength of having founded this organization. If there's a notability issue I'm not seeing it but perhaps you had something specific in mind. Oblivy (talk) 05:13, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I suppose @Wikibear47: should edit all of their AFDs and provide more detailed explanations so that we can better analyze them. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 05:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  The only reason for AFD is because this one looks like WP:PROMOTION to me. Does it really deserve its own article? Just my thought. Wikibear47 (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Notability issue. WP:GNG" is not a sufficient reason to offer for an article's deletion. It also doesn't demonstrate that you followed procedures and did a WP:BEFORE before deciding to nominate this article. You have to show your work. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep If the language is promotional, it can be fixed but WP:NOTCLEANUP says that such issues shouldn't be raised here.
Since nobody has voted to delete, you can still withdraw the nomination. Once you're up to speed on how these things work, and if at that point you genuinely believe there's a notability issue, you could bring the AfD again. Oblivy (talk) 06:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And what is worse is that you cut and pasted this same deletion rationale for all of your deletion nominations! This is not acceptable. I'm going to consider doing a procedural close on these AFDs because it's apparent you didn't put much thought into these nominations, Wikibear47. I would encourage you to withdrawn these nominations. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Pakistan. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Wikibear47 (talk) 07:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

St. Vincent's Home for the Aged

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability issue. WP:GNG Wikibear47 (talk) 04:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Wikibear47 (talk) 07:03, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

South City Hospital

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability issue. WP:GNG Wikibear47 (talk) 04:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Wikibear47 (talk) 07:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sada-e-Umeed

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability issue. WP:GNG Wikibear47 (talk) 04:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disability, Organizations, and Christianity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Wikibear47 (talk) 07:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Family Educational Services Foundation

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability issue. WP:GNG Wikibear47 (talk) 04:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Education. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Wikibear47 "Notability issue" is a generic reason for starting an AfD; can you expand on a specific rationale relating to this organisation and its work? AllyD (talk) 05:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well I recommended this one because it looks more like news to me. WP:NOTNEWS. Also it fails to satisfy why it deserves an article based of its work. WP:INHERITORG Wikibear47 (talk) 05:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Wikibear47 (talk) 07:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alamgir Welfare Trust

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability issue. WP:GNG Wikibear47 (talk) 04:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Wikibear47 (talk) 06:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Progressive Education Network Pakistan

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability issue. WP:GNG Wikibear47 (talk) 04:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Education. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Wikibear47 (talk) 06:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strengthening Participatory Organization

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability issue. WP:GNG Wikibear47 (talk) 04:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Wikibear47 (talk) 06:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Todd's Welfare Society

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability issue. WP:GNG Wikibear47 (talk) 04:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Organizations. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Wikibear47 (talk) 06:59, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan Islamic Medical Association

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability issue. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 04:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Islam, and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ryan Wesley Routh

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP1E. Only notable for the shooting, and unlike Thomas Matthew Crooks, who actually injured Trump during the attempt, Routh did not even shoot close to Trump (sources have said he was 300-500 yards away). Even though the FBI has said this is an assassination attempt, very little is known about the suspect at this time. MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 03:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per WP:RAPID. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait: He doesn't have to have injured Trump to be notable; that's not a requirement. Honestly, some of the good arguments used to support keeping the article of Thomas Matthew Crooks could apply to Ryan Wesley Routh. I'm just less convinced of his notability so I won't !vote to keep this time. I think we should wait for more details to appear before we try to determine whether or not he's notable; it's still too early. Nythar (💬-🍀) 04:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, Waiting is the best option for the next 24 hours. Leaning towards Draftify/Redirect if nothing else is dug up but his previous activism may be promising. Page metadata needs to be changed, it already claims this guy is an assassin (the point is somewhat moot but I think it’s premature). 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 05:09, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think waiting feels a little CRYSTALLBALLish. Presumed future notability really oughtn't matter when deciding whether an article is notable enough right now, which is all we're here to do. So there's probably an argument for the article being WP:TOOSOON. Still, I agree with you that many of the arguments used in favour of keeping Thomas Matthew Crooks could apply here (while also sharing your doubts about notability), so I'll hold off from a !vote for now. GhostOfNoMeme 12:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just when does an attempted Presidential assassin become notable? When he succeeds in getting a shot off?Amyzex (talk) 19:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, Politics, Florida, Hawaii, and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now as it was reported that Routh had previous charges involving weapons of mass destruction, so this is not WP:BLP1E. 2601:603:300:AFF0:C55A:28C9:721:C5ED (talk) 04:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete / merge back into the main article. As Trump was not injured and no shots were fired at him, I suspect Routh's notability to fade, like many of the other people who are listed at Security incidents involving Donald Trump. This is less of an assassination attempt as it is a security incident or foiled plan. (Luckily) the Secret Service did its job. Natg 19 (talk) 04:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We don't create articles and then wait around to see if they become notable. That's not how this works. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree but I'm not sure if it's a good thing to delete the article now that it's been created. Ideally it wouldn't have been created until we were sure that the subject is notable. Nythar (💬-🍀) 05:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to Trump International Golf Club shooting and draftify -- 64.229.88.34 (talk) 04:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep laughable to even consider deletion - how much clear political bias does wiki need to unendingly display?! Arguments: obviously WP:RAPID since we have no idea how deep down the rabbit hole this one goes and obviously not WP:BLP1E since he was previously arrested with a fully automatic machine gun = weapon of mass destruction!2600:8800:FF0E:300:7C5A:797:4AF2:99DF (talk) 04:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automatic firearm is not a weapon of mass destruction, despite how the media spins it. It was not what Bush was searching for in Iraq, since there are literal tonnes of AKs there. Thus the WMD issue is a non-starter, so not relevant to notablity -- 64.229.88.34 (talk) 05:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He was charged with "carrying a concealed weapon and possession of a weapon of mass destruction" [24]. David O. Johnson (talk) 05:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He had a machine gun, which he did not actually use, not a nuclear bomb or similar which is what most people think of as a WMD.--A bit iffy (talk) 06:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He was convicted of that same charge.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/5-things-apparent-assassination-attempt-trump-golf-courses-113712979 David O. Johnson (talk) 06:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Owning an AK-47 does not in any way lend itself to establishing notability. This is Florida. If I had a nickel for everyone down here who owns a military style assault rifle, I could stop buying lottery tickets. -Ad Orientem (talk) 06:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per BLP1E. Routh simply won't be significant enough in the future to justify it's own article. It should be merged into a section in Trump International Golf Club shooting. Feeglgeef (talk) 05:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are articles for other individuals of a similar level of notability for him who attempted to assassinate presidents without injuring same, including Cipriano Ferrandini, Richard Lawrence (failed assassin) and Raymond Lee Harvey.XavierGreen (talk) 19:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
merge per above. Bedivere (talk) 05:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per BLP1E. No indication Routh is of lasting significance. Incorporate content in other articles where relevant.--A bit iffy (talk) 06:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to Trump International Golf Club shooting per BLP1E and WP:DELAY. One tends to get tired of people wielding WP:RAPID as a sort of get out of jail free card for the abuse of DELAY and the pervasive rush to create articles that do not meet our guidelines and are unlikely to in the future. -Ad Orientem (talk) 06:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep We don't get very many presidential assassins here on wikipedia and presidential assassins are inherently notable and this event has lots of sources already. The FBI has announced this was an attempted assassination and that makes the subject of this article notable. He has been arrested and charged and will be prosecuted. At present, the FBI has not obtained an indictment which should come very soon, after which this Afd can be updated. Too soon to delete this article. 24.21.161.89 (talk) 06:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you point me to the guideline that says failed presidential assassins are inherently notable? I've been around a while but must have missed that one. -Ad Orientem (talk) 06:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can point you to numerous articles on presidential assassins which each have their own article. If you try to assassinate a president or former president of the United States, you will most certainly make it into the history books. I don't think I need to state the obvious. The "Guideline" is what gets reduced to practice on WP, and all these former assassins have an article which is reducing it to practice. 24.21.161.89 (talk) 07:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The 2016 assassination attempt on Trump in Las Vegas does not get an article for its perpetrator. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Trump International Golf Club shooting per WP:BLP1E. No need for a biography and there is no reason it can't be covered sufficiently there. Esolo5002 (talk) 06:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He already had a fair bit of media coverage before his attempted assassination of Trump, due to his activities in Ukraine. And of course now with his attempted shooting and subsequent arrest and trial, there will be a whole lot more coverage. There doesn't really seem to be any reason to doubt his notability at this point -2003:CA:8718:B90B:3530:38D0:867B:345C (talk) 06:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Trump International Golf Club shooting per WP:BLP1E and multiple editors above. He wouldn’t be notable without the golf club incident. Bondegezou (talk) 06:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The man didn't even get close, and he's about to go to prison for a very long time where I doubt he's going to have any more notable events that would qualify him for a wiki page. I say this as someone who voted keep on Thomas Matthew Crooks, this guy is not gonna remain notable enough to get his own page a week from now. --Aabicus (talk) 06:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - clearly passing WP:GNG right now. Would be presidential assassin. Which is rare. The sourcing is third party and good at the moment. Keep it.BabbaQ (talk) 07:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or keep; leaning on merge Certainly not a full delete, in case more info comes out and he warrants a page again, I'd like for the edit history to be easily seen for a potential reconstruction. But at the moment, there's not enough info about him to warrant him a page. Unnamed anon (talk) 07:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete but only for now. Routh may become more significant as time passes but as of right now we have little to no information about him aside from his past endeavors. I say wait until the FBI interrogates him and we get a more fleshed out story as he is still alive.TJD2 (talk) 08:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject is notable at the moment as more details about him is being unraveled. Suspect was caught alive by FBI according to sources and not dead. The Afd nomination is too quick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by War Term (talk • contribs) 08:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now. This discussion should have started on the talk page per WP:ATD. Anyway... my keep opinion is based on WP:RAPID, another option is to have a redirect to the article where his name is mentioned. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 09:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: According to nomination. --- Bhairava7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє) 10:03, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify/Temporarily Delete while he definitely has the potential for notability, it is important to remember that WP:BLPCRIME still applies even if he's been convicted of a previous offense. It is rather easy to have false/uncertain information circulate especially in the very early stages of a highly publicized event. The FBI/Secret Service has had less than a day to investigate this, and perceived notions around this case can change rapidly. And even then, they are not a jury which can give a conviction.

For this reason I believe it is best to temporarily delete (or to draftify incase of reinstation) as this accusation is the only reason he is notable enough to be considered for his own article, and even then the notability is being debated above.

WP:BLPCRIME shouldn't be ignored just because this is a high profile case, and I am frankly a bit concerned that not a single person has even mentioned this guideline in the entire discussion . Floine (talk) 10:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now, for the simple reason that there are independent global and third-party sources about him that tell and delve into his life and story. It is not the first time that is under the media spotlight [25] for is controversial supporting on Ukrainian-Russia war. For now he has considerable notability as a criminal. 109.114.14.46 (talk) 10:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep since this individual has had a bit of a past, and one does not have to fire a bullet at a person in order to attempt an assassination on them. YodaYogaYogurt154 (talk) 11:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now. I see it doing no harm to keep it. SlaterRaptor1976 (talk) 12:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: I suggest we keep the content but merge it with Trump International Golf Club shooting SlaterRaptor1976 (talk) 12:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or Keep per others. - Sebbog13 (talk) 12:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- WP:BLP1E on an event that itself is facing an argument on whether it deserves a stand-alone article. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 12:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep if Thomas Crooks has one I don't see a problem.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloxzge 025 (talk • contribs) .

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is a bad argument to use on its own. GhostOfNoMeme 12:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- WP:BLP1E on an event that itself is facing an argument on whether it deserves a stand-alone article. I second deletion. Let us stop making an article for every idiot who trespasses with intentions to commit a felony. We are not a Tabloid! Delete immediately or lose the credibility as an Encyclopaedia. Also, giving visibility to such people reinforces their desire to kill.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.87.68.175 (talk • contribs)

Also, giving visibility to such people reinforces their desire to kill. Maybe so, but Wikipedia is not censored. What's important is the verifiability and notability of an article's subject. GhostOfNoMeme 12:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes GNG per his criminal history and past interviews with news media in combination with his most recent arrest. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to the event page per BLP. Di (they-them) (talk) 13:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: WP:BLP1E. Nothing really happened here. The event itself might not even warrant its own article. C F A 💬 13:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Not nearly as notable as Crooks, and he is also a living person so BLP1E is involved here. We can recreate the article later if we need to. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect This is getting absurd. This man has little to no notability and the contents of the article could easily be merged into the actual shooting. The event itself has a merge request and may fail notability (we'll see how that turns out), I don't see how the suspect can also have an article. See Salvador Ramos. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 13:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: per WP:RAPID also we have Squeaky Fromme, who also failed at an assassination where no one was hurt. LuxembourgLover (talk) 13:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LuxembourgLover: We also don't have Michael Steven Sandford who failed at an assassination of Trump where nobody was hurt. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like a person grabbing a cops gun is not the same as police opening fire a a guy aiming at trump. LuxembourgLover (talk) 13:59, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, see Salvador Ramos, a man who killed 21 people in ~90 minutes, also someone who doesn't have an article because the section on them is perfectly fine. The only notability by Routh so far is his involvement in an incident not even primarily regarding him (WP:CRIME). While he does meet Perp criteria 1, they still don't even know if this is the right guy. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 14:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now per above fails WP:N until the shooter is confirmed articles should not be created. SKAG123 (talk) 13:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/merge No need for a separate page here. The previous criminal history is not relevant to notability. Reywas92^Talk 14:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I was able to find more articles that date back before his attempted assassination, including his marriage and his life with his wife. Plus, it is the second attempted assassination of Donald Trump during the 2024 Election. Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 14:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Can't see any reason to delete this. I also expect a lot more coverage as he goes to trial and more details are revealed.KatoKungLee (talk) 15:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Previous attempted assassin of Trump's page was also kept. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 15:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per others

Waleed (talk) 15:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; does not satisfy the deletion requirements re: WP:BLP1E. To wit, requirement 3 (The event was not significant and/or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well-documented) is not met:

The event is significant; it is an assassination attempt of a former President of the United States. The example that BLP1E gives for notability is literally the Reagan assassination attempt.
The role of Ryan Wesley Routh is substantial; he is the primary suspect.
While the role of Ryan Wesley Routh is not well documented, this is covered by WP:RAPID as multiple people have noted, as the situation has not yet had enough time to develop and be written about.

𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The event was not "significant". The example given is the Reagan assassination attempt, where Reagan was severely wounded and nearly died. All that happened yesterday was that someone was found with a gun in a bush at Trump's golf course. No injuries at all – Routh didn't even let off any shots. All three criteria of BLP1E are met here (1: Covered in the context of a single event; 2: Obviously a low-profile individual; 3: the event was not "significant" enough to warrant a separate biography). C F A 💬 20:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, but regarding Routh didn't even let off any shots I don't think it's known either way, yet. CBC and NPR are both reporting that it's "unclear" whether he let off any shots before the USSS agent(s?) opened fire. The New York Times similarly says it's unclear whether he took any shots "before fleeing" (presumably meaning the time between being engaged by the agents and his fleeing).

Personally, I don't think this will amount to anything like the Crooks event. I don't see it being significant now or in the future. GhostOfNoMeme 20:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: significant media coverage, very similar to Thomas Matthew Crooks. Senior Captain Thrawn (talk) 15:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Gregory Lee Leingang also tried to kill President Trump in 2017, but he did not get his own Wikipedia page. Neither men made a shot or any contact with him. Catboy69 (talk) 16:13, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: significant media coverage. Don't see an issue since Thomas Crooks has one. Magical Golden Whip (talk) 16:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - It is true that Thomas Matthew Crooks underwent the same treatment in its early stages, with attempted redirects along the way. I'm against using that as keep justification though, considering that he has been confirmed as the attempted assassin of his case, whereas Routh is unconfirmed-- not to mention that there were no shots fired nor injuries sustained. Reasoning for weak keep is that there is significant media coverage, paired with the identification of being a suspect. RadiantTea (talk) 16:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:RAPID.Jsgoodrich (talk) 16:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Participant in a major news story. Another example of deletionism gone wild. Moncrief (talk) 17:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC) 17:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per earlier precedent such as Crooks. We are seeing the beginnings where political violence is being normalized once again in the US since the 1960s (Ronald Reagan's assassin wasn't really politically-motivated ..more of a celebrity fetish/crush thing ). Such novel developments should be represented via individuals such as these. I also disagree with editors saying "He barely did anything" , this also doesn't fit precedents in other cases (1) . Routh is notable enough , whenever he pulled the trigger or not. The fact he was the second person who attempted to assassinate Trump and has a clear political history compared to the late aloof and equivocal Crooks (Who literally was a kid), makes him in some way more interesting for readers.

TheCuratingEditor (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BLP1E and WP:LASTING. Not notable for just this one incident at this time, and appears unlikely to be notable in the future (with the event itself currently bordering on being notable enough to sustain an article). —Locke Cole • t • c 18:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:RAPID. Neighborhood Review (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Trump International Golf Club shooting _pbp 19:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep he satisfies the notability requirements, the shooting and his Russo-Ukrainian War related activities combined together satisfy the guidelines.XavierGreen (talk) 19:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now. Given all the speculation, thorough coverage of Routh would unbalance the main article, but a brief summary is likely to produce an unbalanced account of Routh's politics and motivations. Nuance matters in a politically charged issue like this one, and the best way to maintain nuance is to maintain an article, at least for now. Guettarda (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unpunked Sound

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails the notability guideline for musicians. Working as best as I can through machine translation, the sources in the article appear to be either self-published or lack significant coverage of the subject, or both. A quick check for more sources turned up nothing useful. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Brazil. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping for AfC reviewer Kvng. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Armenis Kukaj

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

23 games in Albania’s highest league, brief career in the semi-pro second tier. I am unable to find significant coverage of the player, which would be needed to satisfy WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I only found this as well as this, where the news outlet bears the Wordpress logo, i.e. looks like a blog. Geschichte (talk) 03:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Albania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis Scholl

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The claim to notability, playing 66 minutes in the second league of Portugal, is extremely weak. There are some sources, but they seem like WP:ROUTINE transactional news: [26] [27] [28]. These two might be more substantial, but are paywalled: [29] [30]. Perhaps someone can access them? Either way, his achievements were so minor that I don't think it meets the policies. Geschichte (talk) 03:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Belgium, and Portugal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Qingdao No. 1 International School of Shandong Province

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSCHOOL, only 1 source provided which confirms its address. Previous AfD was keep based on high schools being inherently notable, which is no longer true. LibStar (talk) 03:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and China. LibStar (talk) 03:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Park Sung-hoon

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:PRIMARYRED, unnecessary disambiguation page as only one other article currently exists for this name, Park Sung-hoon (actor). Other person named Park Sunghoon is located at Sunghoon per his WP:COMMONNAME.

Disambiguation page should be deleted and Park Sung-hoon (actor) should be moved into its place at Park Sung-hoon. RachelTensions (talk) 03:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. RachelTensions (talk) 03:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that a hatnote already exists at Park Sung-hoon (actor) directing people looking for the singer of the same name to Sunghoon. RachelTensions (talk) 03:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Disambiguations, and South Korea. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prometheus Society

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG. No WP:SUSTAINED WP:INDEPTH WP:DIVERSE coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject Polygnotus (talk) 03:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Psychology. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Laboratory for Energy-Related Health Research Superfund Site

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails to establish notability. None of the article's sources appear independent of the subject, and are thus not reliable enough to support a claim of notability. A quick check before the nomination did not turn up any other sources with significant coverage which would help. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment and California. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping for AfC reviewer Garsh2. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2028 Northern Territory general election

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete per WP:TOOSOON. Article only has one source, and it does not say anything about the election in 2028. CycloneYoris ^talk! 03:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Australia. CycloneYoris ^talk! 03:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TOOSOON. Thought about a redirect but I really couldn't find a suitable target. Esolo5002 (talk) 04:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
redirect to Northern Territory Legislative Assembly maybe? otherwise yeah delete Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 22:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Next Northern Territory general election. No point in deleting the page when it will only need to be remade again. Viatori (talk) 08:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting an article does not prevent it from being recreated when more sources emerge. Having to be remade again is a given and is not a reason against deletion. Esolo5002 (talk) 06:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Next Northern Territory general election or keep, for the same reasons as Viatori. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:49, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet. Just a point of information, an AFD closer can not close a discussion with a decision to "Move" an article because that is an editing decision. So, if you want to Move this article, "vote" Keep and then have a Move discussion afterwards on the article talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legends League Cricket

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Recreation of a deleted article following this AfD. Apparently because the wording and WP:REFBOMBS are different, it cannot be a G4 speedy... Non-notable, just as it was a month and a bit ago, with WP:REFBOMBS and no establishment of WP:GNG. Just because retired players are taking part, doesn't mean notability is inherited. Coverage within the refbombs is routine. AA (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Cricket. AA (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As I previously commented that the page should not be deleted because this is known cricket league. And In this all are international cricket players. And this is the main page of league not season page and also old league. I think it should be not be deleted because a lot of news references are available.
PQR01 (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't actually contribute at the last AFD (at least not as this logged in user). But WP:NOTINHERITED applies- just because notable people compete, that doesn't make this event notable. If you didn't like that it was deleted, WP:Deletion review would have been the proper process, not re-creating the article and thus forcing another AFD. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the previous comment PQR01 is referring to is on the talk page of the article. -- asilvering (talk) 20:23, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Oman, Qatar, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt as per my rationale at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legends League Cricket. Nothing has changed in the 1 month since the last AFD, and re-creating an article after a clear AFD consensus like this is just disruptive. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a sockpuppet investigation here, as I am sure many, if not all, of these accounts are linked. AA (talk) 20:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As per above rationale. Simione001 (talk) 00:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think the league is quite notable as it's the most watched league in India after IPL as per BARC with reference to the news. Also the league was started back in 2022 and from then, a total of 4 seasons have happened and the 5th season is about to start from 20th September. The league is approved by Oman & Qatar cricket associations & several state associations in India. Taplow45 (talk) 08:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So that's a lot of personal opinion... where's the WP:GNG, WP:OFFCRIC, WP:EVENT pass? AA (talk) 10:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Among other things, let's see how that sock investigation goes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: Seems noteworthy [31] [32], covered in other news sources as well. Although, article should be improved to include a bit more info such as champions, scorecards, stats etc. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 17:17, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: Move to mainspace once the article is complete and ready. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 09:34, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Big Legends play and it has continuously grown in stature. Lot of media attention shows that fans want to know about the league thus i think it should be on Wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by LegendaryFan88 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thats a good point. Move the page to main space 103.70.152.141 (talk) 11:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The above and below keeps should be discarded as they are likely sockpuppets. I have added LegendaryFan88 to an ongoing sockpuppet investigation... curious isn't it, that LegendaryFan88 has made a handful of edits yet stumbles across this AfD. AA (talk) 12:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It seems like someone has an agenda against the league for not having got a chance to work with them. One of the comments shows that an agency is supporting the author. This league is creating jobs for retired cricketers and other staff. And it is visible on top sports networks across the world. Thus i feel it should have a Wiki page for dissemination of information — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.70.152.141 (talk) 09:23, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: SPI is hopelessly backlogged,but I've protected this discussion for some laundry free discussion as there's no consensus among established editors
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Hundred

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

One source (a historical marker database); contested merge. The location (a 1626 parish or planation) doesn't reach WP:GNG. See also discussion at User talk:Jacobsatterfield#I have sent you a note about a page you started. Klbrain (talk) 21:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:Hi, please note I was in the middle of updating the article when it was nominated for deletion. It is a significantly more fully developed piece than when nominated.jacobsatterfield (talk) 22:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article has developed further (great!), but the references and discussion relate to a much broader topic. None of the new references have Stanley Hundred as their primary subject. Mulberry Island might be reasonable focus for an article with the existing content. So, I therefore that a merge to a broader topic, like Mulberry Island, would be better. Klbrain (talk) 22:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd indeed support a subsection in Mulberry Island article if the consensus is that Stanley Hundred doesn't stand by itself. It would be much more precise/applicable than the previous attempted Warwick Shire merge. For geographic reference, Stanley Hundred would be about 1300 acres out of around 8000 that comprise the entirety of Mulberry Island. For temporal reference, it's about 150 years out of 400 years of recorded history in that area. The Mulberry Island article itself could be significantly expanded with content by a willing editor, there's much more colonial history that isn't given much attention currently, not to mention the overlap with the modern usage as Fort_Eustis aka Joint Base Langley-Eustis. Contra-wise, a large and sprawling Mulberry Island article could get difficult to follow. Might suggest looking for other examples of historical places of similar size to see what works well.

Do note that the cited Richie/Colonial Williamsburg source has over ten pages dedicated specifically to Stanley Hundred, and the place has it's own historical marker separate from Mulberry Island. But I'm ultimately ambivalent to how the taxonomy of WP pages should be structured, I leave that to the editing pros.::Jacobsatterfield (talk) 23:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Geography. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:Also as a point of reference for other reviewers/commentors, see the Flowerdew Hundred Plantation article, which is Yeardley's other plantation contemporary to this one. As that other historical location is not currently on an active military base, it is a bit more visited and well known/documented than this one. As such, another viable option would be to merge all of this under their founder George Yeardley, but again it boils down to personal preferences for one huge article or several smaller ones, perhaps the Article size guidance is helpful here? Guidance/priority/experience/wise words from a senior editor on WP preference to organizing articles by geography, time-period, or biographical association would be useful, as there's no clear taxonomic preference to the overall corpus.

Jacobsatterfield (talk) 15:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The current version of the page easily demonstrates notability. Whether the article topic is the primary subject of its sources are irrelevant: what matters is that they discuss the topic (other than passing references, like phone-book entries) and that the sources be reliable secondary sources. All but one is secondary (the exceptions being the Virginia Company records), and all of them are reliable. In this kind of context, such sources typically discuss early settlements in detail; I strongly doubt that they merely give passing references. Nyttend (talk) 21:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There's been some effort here to improve quality and better document notability. It is now least as good as many other historic articles of similar age/scope, and the articles that link to it. Appreciate Klbrain for originally taking interest in the article and encouraging the cleanup. I'll try to visit some of the related articles such as Mulberry Island and do some better organizing soon, which this discussion has highlighted is needed. Jacobsatterfield (talk) 12:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cambridge High School, New Zealand

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unable to find any sigcov. Can be redirect to Cambridge, New Zealand#Education Traumnovelle (talk) 01:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and New Zealand. Traumnovelle (talk) 01:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - If you click on any of the links on this nomination template: "Find sources: "Cambridge High School, New Zealand" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR", a whole lot of sourcing comes up to help verify Cambridge High School, New Zealand. — Maile (talk) 02:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And which of those sources are reliable, secondary, and in depth? Traumnovelle (talk) 04:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, an unnotable school lacking in sigcov. Esolo5002 (talk) 04:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, of the sources recently added by Schwede66, only [33] is anything close to significant coverage. The others are routine reporting about the school opening. I would need to see more sources to change my vote. Esolo5002 (talk) 18:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  I wasn't attempting to just add sources that show significant coverage. I've added a few sources to show that some of them show significant coverage. The school closed for a few years and that will have been discussed at length. Sources exist; you just need to look for them. Schwede 66 19:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  I searched and didn't find any. You claim there are sources, I don't. The sources you provided are not enough. Esolo5002 (talk) 20:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Well, you don't appear to live in New Zealand. Hence, you wouldn't know about PapersPast. And beyond that, you'll find heaps of stuff via ProQuest, which you have access to via the Wikipedia Library. It takes a while to get your head around how it works but once you've figured it out, it's an absolute treasure trove. Schwede 66 08:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV. Xegma(talk) 05:33, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's ridiculous to nominate a high school for deletion that's been around for 140 years. Of course it's notable; you just have to look for sources. Schwede 66 03:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many schools in New Zealand have been around for over a century and lack any SIGCOV, I couldn't even find any coverage for several recently. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree with Schwede66 and Maile. Definitely notable. TheSwamphen (talk) 03:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - while I don't have time to edit this at the moment, Papers Past has over 1000 articles referencing Cambridge High School in various national newspapers. The present article just needs updating and more information added. Definitely notable. NealeWellington (talk) 10:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Every article I looked at there is not only trivial in coverage (the school is closed, the school won an a sports competition), they are also primary sources. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above comments. Satisfies WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is a clear consensus to Keep this article but none of the arguments to Keep can identify specific sources that provide SIGCOV. Many of you are very experienced editors and you should know we can't accept your avowal of importance of the article subject, you need to bring reliable, secondary, independent sources to this discussion. I'm relisting this discussion to offer you more time to do so. But that is what is needed to Keep this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This and this may constitute WP:SIGCOV. Hitro talk 12:12, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First Digital USD

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable stablecoin. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 01:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cryptocurrency-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. RS coverage fails WP:ORGDEPTH and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Cryptocurrencies. An independent search for RS coverage found just routine crypto-oriented articles. • Gene93k (talk) 14:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This discussion could close as a Soft Deletion but looking at the article page history, I am very certain that it would be pretty much immediately restored. So, I'm relisting to get a stronger consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: sources fail WP:NCRYPTO. Everything is from industry publications. C F A 💬 01:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete rejecting "industry publications" (a position we should reconsider at an appropriate time and place, but not here and not for this article) I found one brief source. This claim is repeated in other HK media, so just counting once:

First Digital 擬參與香港金管局的穩定幣沙盒 Techub News reported that the Hong Kong Monetary Authority’s consultation on legislative supervision of stablecoin issuers ended at the end of this month, and many financial institutions are preparing to submit applications and participate in the sandbox. Among them, First Digital Group, a Hong Kong cryptocurrency asset custodian, issued the US dollar stable currency FDUSD in Hong Kong last year. It is now traded on 4 virtual asset platforms, with daily trading volume once exceeding US$6 billion. (plus another paragraph quoting company)

Oblivy (talk) 03:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Dan Yemin

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Yemin's name gets mentioned a lot in punk zines, but as far as I'm aware, none of those are considered reliable, and he's not mentioned frequently enough outside of them to pass notability. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enterr10 Television Network

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Attempted to clean up but found a bunch of WP:FAKEREF and unreliable sources. Everything here appears to be a WP:WALLEDGARDEN created by UPE Sock in an attempt to show notability. There are sources about some of the individual networks but as a whole there is nothing that meets WP:ORGCRIT which is required to show notability under WP:NCORP. CNMall41 (talk) 01:17, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, Companies, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 01:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Other pages that are part of the WALLEDGARDEN (many of which do not appear notable) are:

Have not sent any of those to AfD as of yet. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chimele Usuwa Abengowe

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Firstly, the content on ref 1 which is a magazine can't be verified by any reliable source same as ref 5. Ref 2 and ref 5 are also the same link on the article current state. The only source here was this which just only talk about his death. Ref 7 which is a YouTube video showcasing a church service cant be use as a source neither any YouTube link can be use as a source. Ref 3 which just only mentioned his name as part of the medical list and not like he was talked about. Subject just totally fails WP:GNG. Gabriel (……?) 01:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Nigeria. Gabriel (……?) 01:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clearly a much respected citizen but WP:NOTMEMORIAL Xxanthippe (talk) 01:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
thank you for your response. Please note that @Gabriel601 has been trolling my articles and marking them for deletion. There's an established case of "nominations in bad faith here". Cfaso2000 (talk) 05:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

welcome again for marking another article of mine for deletion. After the last episode, you should have recused yourself from my articles and leave other editors to go through and arrive at their own conclusions. Cfaso2000 (talk) 05:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can't verify certain details about this person like the date of birth and death. My search for the various information yielded "result not found" and I was wondering about the origin of other information like the award, OFR. After all these, I can say that the article doesn't meet WP:NPROF and WP:SIGCOV. Also, Gabriel's source analysis is thorough and well-documented. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Due to being a recipient of one of Nigeria's highest national awards (WP:ANYBIO The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor) National Honour of Member of the Order of the Niger (OON) by President Olusegun Obasanjo on the 16th November, 2000 - now sourced to Federal Republic of Nigeria Official Gazette. (Msrasnw (talk) 09:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC))[reply]
The link you provided still doesn’t have his name on it that the president honors him with the title of OON. I opened the link used the control+F to find and paste his name still zero not found. Subject still fails WP:GNG. Gabriel (……?) 10:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It has on page 605 as the third entry.... under the heading OFFICER OF THE ORDER OF THE NIGER (OON) Professor C. U. Abengowe ... Abia
  - https://archive.gazettes.africa/archive/ng/2000/ng-government-gazette-dated-2000-10-09-no-69.pdf Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 11:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC))[reply]
    @Msrasnw, winning an award is a WP policy/guide that WP:SIGCOV may exist for an article. Oppositely, there isn't any coverage for this article, hence doesn't meet our general notability guidelines. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:38, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - I think there is significant coverage in Nigerian media for eg in an important newspaper Independent Nigeria ... we have Emejor, Chibuzor (2023) NGO Immortalises Prof Abengowe, Featured News, Independent Sep 4 [34]
    - and Vision Africa (2013) Professor Abengowe Chimele Usuwa: Pragmatic Icon In The Field Of Teaching And Guidance, Profiles, Vision Africa 08/04 [35] And here (https://archive.upf.org/united-nations/international-day-of-peace/2013/5312-conference-in-abuja-on-education-and-national-development) he is giving a keynote at a serious conference. And there is lots more. I think it is shame that too many Wikipedia editors are too willing to delete what are to my mind clearly notable people that can with a little effort be reasonably sourced. (Msrasnw (talk) 16:18, 13 September 2024 (UTC))[reply]
      Vision Africa is a non notable platform. Upf is a non notable platform. There is till nothing notable about this man as per Wikipedia notability. If he was that respected a lot of news papers would have carried his news death. But nothing rather than just one news that’s not even all about his death. Gabriel (……?) 13:41, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Subject satisfies notability guidelines as have been severally outlined above. Cfaso2000 (talk) 13:25, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One source ain't enough to justify notability. Other editors needs to be aware ‘Cfaso2000’ was the article creator. Gabriel (……?) 11:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is a disagreement over the quality of sourcing. A source assessment at this point would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brenda Schad

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails WP:GNG for not having significant coverage from independent, reliable sources. COI history doesn't help either. Gheus (talk) 01:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: From the article: "Brenda and Jeannine McCann co-founded the company Tribe of Two". So all those references are primary sources, too. _signed,Willondon (talk) 01:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Japan, France, Italy, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:13, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:03, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grange Road, Adelaide

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GEOROAD. Most of the references are simply maps like https://location.sa.gov.au/ . LibStar (talk) 00:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Australia. LibStar (talk) 00:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Skagit Environmental Endowment Commission

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP for not having significant coverage of independent, reliable sources for verification. Cassiopeia talk 00:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Cassiopeia talk 00:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:16, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I think with enough digging that sources could be coughed up. I have three sources ([36][37][38]) but they might be WP:PRIMARY or may not do enough coverage of the topic at hand. ✶Qux yz ✶ 00:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it is kept, I might work on improving this article. ✶Qux yz ✶ 00:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the Narwhal reference is excellent! I can't see the text of the Seattle Times one. See also this article in BC Studies. It's hard to imagine that an binational commission with jurisdiction on the environment wouldn't be notable. Nfitz (talk) 19:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim conquest of Mediterranean islands

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a compilation of wars that are mostly unrelated other than that they were waged by Muslim rulers/states. There is no one "Muslim conquest of Mediterranean islands". It neither describes anything that is unique to itself nor properly covers a broader history that reoccurs among sources as a common theme. This article pretty much synthesizes some sort of a narrative and pushes a vague grouping of events. Aintabli (talk) 00:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Islam, Algeria, Syria, France, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Turkey. Aintabli (talk) 00:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The topic of the article seems too broad and without a well-defined scope. It's a collection of various, many of them unrelated, wars waged by various muslim rulers all over the Mediterranean throughout the centuries. Modern scholarship doesn't really treat all these events in a unified manner. @Cplakidas explained it more thoroughly in the talkpage discussion "Article scope is utter WP:OR". Another issue that was pointed out by an editor is the fact that the content might potentially be one-sided, as the article was translated from the Arab wikipedia and uses mostly Arab-language, and many of poor quality, sources. Piccco (talk) 11:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I tagged the article for all the reasons mentioned in the talk page, but there definitely are more problems in terms of source adequateness and verifiability, as well as balance of viewpoints presented. To be clear, the topic, if carefully redefined, has merit. E.g. something on the 'Early Muslim naval campaigns in the Mediterranean', if we consider the early Muslim world as fairly homogeneous during the first centuries of its existence, or the Muslim-Christian naval wars along the lines of Ekkehard Eickhoff's Seekrieg und Seepolitik zwischen Islam und Abendland or the multifaceted Muslim experience of the Mediterranean as in Picard's La Mer des Califes, but it cannot be a catch-all for cherry-picked Muslim naval activity that happened between Muhammad and the Ottomans; it should also not be one-sided, taking only the perspective of the Muslims, or treat only the 'conquests' in detail and gloss over the losses in quick order. Furthermore, much if not all of the topic is actually covered in other articles such as Early Caliphate navy (which also has its problems, but at least has a more clearly defined scope) or Fatimid navy. A pity for the immense translation effort that went into it, but IMO this is a case of WP:STARTOVER. Constantine ✍ 15:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 17:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Airnav.com

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't seem to find any WP:SIGCOV and there is no clear reason why this is a notable website. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 00:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The article itself has no reference. I cannot find any sources talk about it, only WP:PASSINGMENTIONS Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 01:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It is very heavily cited (see Google books, Google scholar). There is a page of coverage here and a paragraph of coverage here. I imagine there is more so I suggest participants take a good look at Google books for significant coverage. C F A 💬 02:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a fixed Google books link. tedder (talk) 01:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, while CFA didn't cast a "vote" in this discussion, they have brought sources to the discussion which should be reviewed. Soft deletion doesn't seem appropriate as deletion is no longer "uncontroversial".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:33, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There's hardly more than a passing mention to be found (who runs it? etc), but wow, the quantity of mentions in articles, journals, and websites is - in this case - informative. tedder (talk) 01:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus in this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bandial railway station

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Absolutely no claim to notability, and no sources. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 00:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:16, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:17, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG and no sources. Xegma(talk) 05:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of railway stations in Pakistan for now. Colonial era station, likely notable. Someone with access to local library may find good amount of coverage. Gheus (talk) 10:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per the above. No justification for deleting a highly plausible search term. Thryduulf (talk) 09:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the village that the station serves, Bandial Janubi, with a mention in that article that "the railway station is northeast of the village", pretty much the only fact that I was able to verify from the given coordinates. I found nothing about what trains service the station, its history, or even whether or not the station is still operational. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse. I think this is the best non-delete option.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 01:03, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We have a rough consensus to Redirect this article but we have two target article suggestions. We need to get that down to one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of railway stations in Pakistan: Should be a better redirect choice. Wikibear47 (talk) 03:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian American Women Foundation

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Isn't a notable organization. jwtmsqeh (talk) 07:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There appears to be sources for this organization including the LA Times, Santa Monica Daily Press, an interview with a local radio station, and a doctoral dissertation. I'll add them to the article a bit later tonight or tomorrow, just wanted to put them here for anyone else to evaluate etc. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Santa Monica Daily Press seems like a press release? The LA Times is actually a localized sub paper, not sure if that or the local radio is considered since Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) specifies that articles "solely from local media (e.g., the weekly newspaper for a small town), or media of limited interest and circulation (e.g., a newsletter exclusively for people with a very unusual job), is not an indication of notability". Also, the article is about an event but the same guideline says "an organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it". Happy to withdraw this if I'm misreading though. jwtmsqeh (talk) 20:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Strong Support~~ ~~As per the wiki notability principle I don't think this article fulfil the minimal criteria prior to Subject Consideration possible reason fair enough~~ भारतसरकार-विभाग (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC) (sock strike Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:04, 14 September 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We don't have enough opinions here on what outcome is appropriate for this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]