Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday

WP:AFD/Y

Purge page cache if page isn't updating.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< October 08	October 10 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Lego Minions: The Rise of Gru

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

A short-lived Lego toy line created to promote a film and discontinued after its release is likely not notable for its own article (note: the toy line lasted two years because the film was delayed for two years due to COVID, not because they continued to sell toys long after the film came out due to its popularity). In fact, probably a bunch of Category:Lego themes need to go, but that just opens a can of worms. We don't need an article for every Lego product line, and especially not "one-off" ones. This article doesn't seem to contain anything significant other than toy specifications that read like WP:NOTCATALOG and a single review. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Comics and animation, and Toys. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Lego themes: There isn't enough here to support a standalone article - Almost all of the sources are catalog entries, press releases, or fan blogs. The sources that appear more reliable don't do anything to support WP:GNG because they're either not about the line itself (Variety, SyFy, Mashable) or are listicles (Chicago Tribune, New York Times). I could not turn up any independent reliable coverage on my own. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 23:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Union Pacific 9000

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

Non-notable locomotive. Had a normal career and was then placed on static display. Nothing to make it notable enough for its own article, and most of the sourcing is from the museum it is located at. Could be redirected to RailGiants Train Museum, where it is located. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and California. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to RailGiants Train Museum#Displayed locomotives: Not notable. Redirect as WP:ATD TarnishedPath^talk 04:48, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as proposed by TarnishedPath - the museum page already has roughly the same information and photo, and I've added the refs that weren't there before. (It also has a link to the class, which the locomotive article is currently missing.) Adam Sampson (talk) 12:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

High Commission of The Bahamas, London

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

Based on primary sources and a directory listing. No third party coverage to meet WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 23:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, United Kingdom, and Bahamas. LibStar (talk) 23:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Foreign relations of Jamaica: Fails WP:ORG (no inherent notability, and there's no inherent notability to a diplomatic mission separately) and I cannot find significant independent coverage. Most mentions of the mission seem to be about events that are being hosted there and not about the building itself. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 00:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean Foreign relations of the Bahamas? Mccapra (talk) 06:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Transit

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

Utter fail of WP:NCORP and any imaginable rule about neutral writing. Sourced to press releases, sponsored content masquerading as being from a reputable source (FreightWaves), and other sources that are obviously promotional and not objective. Article reads like it was written by an intern with little ability to write objectively. Just give the lead section a read: "Universal Transit is an AI-powered all-in-one platform designed to enhance auto transportation. Based in Manalapan, New Jersey, the company focuses in automating the car hauling process, and improving workflows for carriers, shippers, and dispatchers. Leveraging advanced technologies such as machine learning and predictive analytics, Universal Transit aims to make vehicle logistics smarter, faster, and more cost-efficient." We don't need blatantly promotional articles that fail GNG in Wikipedia. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Transportation. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete You can stuff a company full of technology, but in the end this is just a generic car transporting company that still uses 20th century tech (trucks) to get vehicles from point A to point B. It's WP:PROMO. Nate • (chatter) 01:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bergen Commuter Rail

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

There exists no such entity as "Bergen Commuter Rail". Neither reference in the article mentions this fictitious entity, and a quick web search only returns Wikipedia articles, mirrors, and blogs that are most likely WP:CITOGENESIS. No Norwegian public body mentions this term on their website. The railway line between Bergen and Voss is documented at Voss Line. The service between Bergen and Arna is known as the L 4 line, and between Bergen, Voss, and Myrdal, as the R 40. Official route map. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 22:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Norway. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 22:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: At first I thought this could be the result of a poor translation, but it does seem to be entirely fabricated. The sources provided do not support the claims either (the annual ridership claim never appears in the provided source, for example). ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 00:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Does this fall into WP:G3 territory? Esolo5002 (talk) 03:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please avoid verging into a Wikipedia:Personal attack on the creator. It is obvious that the article was created in good faith. Geschichte (talk) 08:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, this article was created in 2008 by a very productive user. It clearly represents a good-faith effort to write about the local and regional train routes ending at Bergen, but grouping them together like this isn't actually supported by anything. In fact, the supposed Norwegian name, Vossebanen, is actually just the name of the Voss Line. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 08:24, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dejan Crnomarković

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

Rejected draft. The included sources are of poor quality, and I couldn't find any others on Google. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:41, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, Serbia, and Yugoslavia. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:41, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
nb I just linked it to the sr-wiki page, which appears to have additional references (I haven't checked them). -- asilvering (talk) 20:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve. I've worked on the article a bit. — Sadko (words are wind) 09:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Zivkagobelic (talk) 16:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — CactusWriter ^(talk) 22:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hari Sharan Karki

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

Fails WP:GNG since coverage from secondary reliable sources is clearly lacking, and some of them only mention the subject in passing, or not at all. Therefore, the subject does not appear to be notable enough to warrant a standalone article. Also, the page appears to have been copy-pasted in its entirety, and COI issues are somewhat evident as well. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. GNG is not the correct guideline here, this subject should be evaluated through NPROF. That said, he also doesn't seem to meet NPROF C1, with only 399 citations and an h-index of 11. No other NPROF criteria appear applicable. JoelleJay (talk) 23:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree that PROF would be the more natural notability criterion but I don't usually raise as much of a fuss in cases like this one where there is no evidence of passing PROF. The citation counts are certainly too low for PROF#C1. There is also no evidence of passing GNG or any other notability criterion. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Tarsus (1165)

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

The existing references are all to medieval chroniclers. I cannot find any significant coverage of this battle in independent modern reliable sources. The article was previously draftified by asilvering, but was moved back to mainspace without the issues being adequately fixed. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Armenia, and Turkey. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Six5Six

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

Fails WP:NCORP. References are routine announcements and churnalism. CNMall41 (talk) 19:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, Sports, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 19:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Badminton, Cricket, Cycling, Football, Sport of athletics, Tennis, Delhi, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naveen Sachchidanand Tewari

AfDs for this article:

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

Created under different name but previously deleted pursuant to discussion twice and also speedied due to recreation by likely UPE. Strange this was created with full name when the references do not mention it. Relevant discussion for that is here. I do not see anything that has changed since the last deletion discussions. References are about his company, brief mentions, or otherwise unreliable. CNMall41 (talk) 20:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

pinging previous participants @Aoidh:, @UtherSRG:, @AABC234:, @Khorang:, @Lordofhunter:, and @Bearian:. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Businesspeople. CNMall41 (talk) 21:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - While there are more sources in the article compared to when this was deleted last year, in terms of notability nothing has changed as far as I can tell as this subject still does not meet any of the relevant notability guidelines. A previously non-notable subject can later become notable, but there's no evidence that this is the case here. Note that I became aware of this discussion because of the above ping due to previously commenting in the 2023 AfD. - Aoidh (talk) 21:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: At the very minimum, gaming the system to avoid the existing rejected draft and the previous two AFD deletions. UtherSRG (talk) 01:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt: both this version and 'Naveen Tewari.' Enough is enough; let the next one to take a swing at this convince an admin to release it. One might hope that by then they'll have found genuine significant coverage in third-party sources, rather than this mishmash of press releases and namedrops. Ravenswing 05:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, London

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

Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. A protest outside the embassy does not contribute to notability. AusLondonder (talk) 20:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and United Kingdom. AusLondonder (talk) 20:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:ORG. The protest itself does not contribute to notability. Embassies are often locations of protests. LibStar (talk) 22:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Demir Kadrić

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

Despite his 2 league matches a decade ago, I can't find any sign of WP:SPORTBASIC. Searching in Serbian ("Демир Кадрић") yielded no decent coverage. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Serbia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 20:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, never had a career and as such no coverage. Geschichte (talk) 09:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ammar Rashid

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

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NPOL: lacks direct and in-depth coverage. Gheus (talk) 19:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Politicians, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I found some coverage, but I’m still assessing whether it meets GNG. However, the BLP is overly PROMO. @Gheus: You nominated this just five minutes after this nomination. Are you confident you couldn't find enough coverage ? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have created CSE Google search of all reliable Pakistani references. I tried a few search terms, but nothing significant appeared. Gheus (talk) 20:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is similar to this: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Search engine. If you think this can help find reliable references quickly and save time, then I can share the files via email to you. You can donate it to WP Pakistan without my permission after some adjustments ofc. Gheus (talk) 20:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gheus, Special:EmailUser/Saqib. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will do. Gheus (talk) 20:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nikola Nedeljković

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

Played 74 mins in the Serbian top flight but with no evidence of meeting WP:SPORTBASIC. The best source found was Zlatibor press, which falls some way short. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Serbia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 20:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It seems that the creator has been "discovered" recently, and has had dozens and dozens of articles, if not over one hundred, deleted. Geschichte (talk) 09:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The All Girl Band

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

This is an interview and other than a few mentions, the coverage is mostly in unreliable publications. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 19:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yusra Amjad

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

This is an interview, and this is a one-line coverage. There are a few other mentions and self-authored articles, but there is no independent coverage about her. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Poetry, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. I also couldn't find any significant coverage, so it fails both GNG and NAUTHOR. Also, the BLP was created by @Junaidwriter, an editor who has created several BLPs on non-notable individuals, which leads me to suspect that there may be some paid editing involved. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seymur Mammadov

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

Potentially fails WP:GNG despite playing in 2 league matches and 1 cup game. He has played about 9 minutes of football at senior level and the best source that I can find is Idman, which falls short of WP:SPORTBASIC, since it contains no content about Mammadov outside of the quote. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Azerbaijan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nom, not enough coverage.

UserMemer (chat) Tribs 19:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 20:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arman Ali Pasha

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

Twice interviewed by Asif Khan: [1], [2] (friend?) and on Daily Times as well. But we need secondary references (missing) to pass WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 19:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The PROMO BLP was created by a blocked sock and later edited by a SPA which raises my suspicion of UPE. The subject fails GNG, as noted by the nominator, and also does not meet NACTOR, as I don't find any major roles in the TV series in which he appeared. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not really much found, [3], is an interview. There is nothing used in the article that's a RS. I see much otherwise we can use. The UPI is concerning. Oaktree b (talk) 21:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: has a few significant roles in notable productions, which has him meet WP:NACTOR, the applicable guideline. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Mushy Yank, Could you please provide evidence for those significant roles? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roles in the main cast can reasonably be considered significant.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saba Khalid

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

Aurat Raaj is possibly notable, but there is no direct and in-depth coverage about her with proper byline.There is some coverage but it is marked as PR, web desk report, our correspondent, etc. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 18:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Journalism, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: i also couldn't find any significant coverage.. fails GNG as well WP:ANYBIO. Again, this BLP was created by Junaidwriter—an editor known for making several BLPs on non-notable individuals and I suspect there may be some paid editing involved. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saman Aslam

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

Non-notable Graphology expert. Likely a paid article, subject herself edited the article once it was on the mainspace (User:Saman Aslam). This article is basically an interview and clearly fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 18:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. This is a shameless autobiography written by the subject themselves Saman Aslam (talk · contribs) / Graphologist saman aslam (talk · contribs). The BLP was created by Junaidwriter —an editor who has produced several BLPs on non-notable individuals. I also suspect there might be some paid editing involved. I also couldn't find any significant coverage, so it fails GNG. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ledja Liku

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

Not seeing any evidence of passing of WP:GNG. Article was created by a new user with a likely conflict of interest. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Entertainment, and Albania. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:GNG. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Evidences are her ImBDPRO official profile and her mentions in Interviews by main Albanian tv media Top Channel, please dont delete this page ,we will continue to submit new infos respecting Wikipedia Guideliness,i appreciate in advance. 81.26.202.125 (talk) 18:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)— 81.62.202.125 (talk · contribs) has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and this XFD page. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Sir MemeGod  18:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I've had a good search and come up with nothing. I could only find one article with a passing mention, I can't find anything that indicates she passes WP:GNG. Knitsey (talk) 19:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The references are closely connected to the subject of the article, and there is no notability established by any of the categories for living people. Ira Leviton (talk)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Are we even sure that the one source on the article meets the high standards we impose on BLPs? Just checking. Oh, and when there’s only one SPA IP or account trying to keep an article, that’s usually an unofficially good counter that the article deserves to go. Other than that, Knitsey has already said what I’d say. MM (Give me info.) ^(Victories) 08:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dua Malik

AfDs for this article:

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

While this BLP was approved through AFC, I don’t believe it meets WP:N. The subject clearly fails GNG, as I couldn’t find enough significant coverage beyond name-checks or coverage in unreliable sources. It also doesn’t seem to meet NSINGER, as none of their work is notable. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. Shellwood (talk) 18:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Coverage is about her personal life published in gossip-style and marked as "web desk" etc. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 19:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woh Aik Pal

AfDs for this article:

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

While I found a lot of name-check coverage, I couldn't find any SIGCOV. Therefore, I'm taking this to AFD. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: https://www.gqindia.com/binge-watch/collection/7-best-pakistani-dramas-mx-player-offer-unique-entertainment-experience/ and similar coverage (this one bylined) ; +coverage about production+ notable cast and crew+ mildly significant nomination= all in all, a certain notability; if other users judge this is not enough, redirect to the page about the writer, Samira Fazal, and merge (or with/to List of programs broadcast by Hum TV); opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- For the record, I’m also open to the idea of redirect/merging it. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Socialist Alternatives

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

When I stumbled across this article, I was quickly struck by how many of the cited sources were the Socialist Alternatives magazine itself, making up more than half of the cited sources. Then I noticed quite a few citations were to self-published wordpress blogs, which wasn't encouraging. The Encyclopedia of British and Irish Political Organizations doesn't give much more detail other than it being the short-lived British section of the IRMT, and gestures at a couple other organisations it may have been connected to.

What is left over then are mostly sources about Keir Starmer's relationship to the magazine. When I looked up Socialist Alternatives on Google Scholar, I likewise only found biographies of Starmer. I haven't been able to find significant coverage of the group/magazine itself.

Given all this, I'm unconvinced that this group/publication is independently notable. Its only significant coverage in reliable sources are about its connection with someone that became important decades after his involvement with the group. As such, I'm proposing it for deletion; I'm not sure whether the articles on the IRMT or Starmer himself would be more appropriate redirect targets. Grnrchst (talk) 10:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, Social science, and United Kingdom. Grnrchst (talk) 10:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - If Wikipedia was around in the late 1980s or 1990s then this magazine\political tendency would easily meet notability criteria - it was an active political group and it managed to get a good number of the British left to contribute, including Tony Benn, Ralph Miliband and Hilary Wainwright. The person "that became important decades after his involvement with the group" was the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom - and it's not unusual that large articles like Keir Starmer's will tend to have "sub articles". The basic argument for suppressing pages about movements that were notable once was that they didn't last - but even though I'd argue that Starmer's not the only reason we should keep the article, his political development as currently the most powerful single person in the UK is a sufficient reason. (It should also be noted that "half the sources are internal, misses out that there are currently 11 external sources, so it seems externally notable). JASpencer (talk) 20:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per JASpencer. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:35, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with International Revolutionary Marxist Tendency. As noted by the nominator, most content is cited from the magazine itself, however, as per JASpencer, it was important in many current British politician's careers. Both of the articles are relatively short, and the magazine could be a section in the IRMT article. --Cmrc23 (talk) 05:33, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aviation accidents in Japan involving U.S. military and government aircraft post-World War II

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

WP:NLIST Laun chba ller 13:12, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Aviation, Japan, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 15:02, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:33, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet WP:SAL. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:22, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Appears to meet WP:SAL. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. Aviation accidents in Japan involving U.S. military and government aircraft have been discussed as a group eg. [4], [5] Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Hawkeye7.cyclopia ^speak! 16:21, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Hawkeye7, the topic of the list is one which is regularly talked about in the press in Japan, as well as in scholarly works. Absurdum4242 — Preceding undated comment added 21:11, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:05, 9 October 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. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Imaginary voyage

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

Pointless original research. There are zillions of novelized fictional voyages. --Altenmann >talk 21:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Literature. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete the article is an under-sourced mess, and has no examples from post-1750. Certainly "fiction about traveling" exists, but I don't see any source that defines the term to require it to be "utopian or satirical" as the article currently claims. I don't see a plausible redirect target; there are a variety of categories (such as Category:Space exploration novels, Category:Science fiction submarine films or Category:Literature about pilgrimages) that could fit this title. If a redirect is suggested, I will consider it. Walsh90210 (talk) 21:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article is certainly in a sorry state, but this is a widely-recognized literary form that is known by a few different names. See e.g. the "Fantastic Voyages" entry in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and the "Travel Tales" entry in Science Fiction Literature through History: An Encyclopedia, and the sources they cite in turn. TompaDompa (talk) 03:50, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not arguing that there are zillions of fictionalized travel novels. But did you read the lede? The article deserves WP:TNT starting from the very its title. TompaDompa, I know you can do this: please figure out a correct article title and subject definition, and write it from scratch. BTW the author of the ext link in the article is "Derrick Moors is a Librarian at State Library of Victoria based in Melbourne," i.e., hardly an expert in literary criticism; he is an amateur, just like we are, so I will strongly object using him as a reliable source. --Altenmann >talk 06:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - I might find the time to do so, but right now the odds of that happening during the course of the AfD are not looking great. Draftification to allow improvement to happen without the looming deadline of AfD closure could be a cromulent WP:Alternative to deletion (still, no promises about finding the time to fix the article if that happens). TompaDompa (talk) 19:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @TompaDompa: Are you voting "Draftify", then? --Altenmann >talk 19:41, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not really voting for any particular outcome at all at the moment. I'm just making a bunch of observations and suggestions to help us work out what the best course of action might be here. TompaDompa (talk) 20:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Even if the name was debatable, the topic is notable based on such secondary sources athe suggested entry in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, as well as sources like The Imaginary Voyage in Prose Fiction. Why was that not considered in the nomination? If the topic were pointless, why is there a book-length treatment by a university press? The article as it is now has many problems, but until someone decides to improve it, it is still better to have then no article. It contains a lot which would also be contained in an improved version, and therefore does not deserve WP:TNT. It is also not the duty of anyone specifically to improve it at any given time. Wikipedia was not built in a day, and this may still be the basis to a good article. Daranios (talk) 15:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- All is good and well, but any unreferenced information in wikipedia may be deleted on sight. Yes, sources do exist, but the article in question is an unreferenced personal essay, starting with a dubious definition, and I strongly disagree that someone's personal musings, however educated they are, "are still better". --Altenmann >talk 18:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll note that the article has been in this sorry state all since its creation back in 2008. I think its fair to say that it is not now, nor has it ever been, ready for mainspace—and had it been in draftspace it would have been deleted long ago as stale. TompaDompa (talk) 19:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am leaning that there is something worth keeping here, but it needs a serious rewrite. Are there suggested renames for the article title that might link this subject to more reliable sources? Shooterwalker (talk) 15:44, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keeping what? list of novels? An article with highly dubious definition inte leder cannot be rewritten, only WP:TNT. --Altenmann >talk 17:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Indisputably notable, but needs a full rewrite per WP:TNT, right now it is unencyclopedic. If it gets rewritten I am willing to modify my view. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:25, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

Delete per WP:TNT, because it’s essentially an unsourced essay mixed with original research. If someone wants to rescue this, please ping me. Bearian (talk) 01:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Allright, I have started a bit of reworking with references. I am still convinced that most of the content is correct. Especially, I believe that most novels listed can be verified to be part of the genre by one of the sources found or out there. Pinging @Zxcvbnm and Bearian: Daranios (talk) 14:58, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Adding sources to content that was originally added without any, but rather based solely on an editor's personal feelings about should be included, is a very surface-level approach to improving the article. I would go so far as to say that it only gives the appearance of improvement. The contents of the article should derive from the contents of the sources, rather than sources being added to justify the contents after the fact. TompaDompa (talk) 15:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - is a very surface-level approach to improving the article - Probably. - so far as to say that it only gives the appearance of improvement - I would disagree here. The verifyability has been called into question. If references can verify content, I see no reason to/no benefit in removing them just because they were unreferenced in the past. I am sure things can be done better, but I personally only have energy for these surface-level improvements. As soon as someone wants to go more in-depth, they are most welcome to overhaul everything. Also, the article did have sources before, but was lacking in-line citations. These sources were not completely sufficient, so I agree with some criticism, but again not to the point of WP:TNT, which would mean that all current content is useless and would not be part of an improved article. That's my viewpoint, which might be influenced by what I've seen on German Wikipedia, where it is common that not everything is referenced, but rather editors write what they know about (of course still no personal musings) and are fact-checked by others who themselves know about the topic. Which is probalby an inferior approach to putting in the secondary sources right away, but is not viewed as inherently problematic. Daranios (talk) 17:12, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'm sure we'll eventually just have to agree to disagree, but As soon as someone wants to go more in-depth, they are most welcome to overhaul everything is kind of my point—your approach basically just kicks the can down the road (if it will have to be completely overhauled later regardless, then it hasn't really been meaningfully improved, now has it?). I can't claim to be particularly familiar with the culture of the German-language Wikipedia, but I think it's fair to say that the English-language Wikipedia is in a sufficiently mature state that it is reasonable to expect/require all content to be properly sourced—the early stage where expansion is what is most needed is in the past, and now (focusing on) improving the quality of the content serves the encyclopaedia and its readers better than increasing the quantity thereof. Obviously there is still a fair amount of "missing" content that should be added, but doing so without regard for maintaining a decent standard of quality is not helpful. Lest we forget, sources are not only for WP:Verification, they are also for establishing WP:Due weight of different viewpoints and aspects. This is one reason I do view editors writing about what they know about without deriving the contents from appropriate sources as inherently problematic—it inevitably reflects the viewpoints of the editors rather than the sources in terms of relative weight and so on. The fact that experience shows that this approach also leads to the introduction of a lot of subtle errors that were presumably added in good faith—as well as some outright egregious falsehoods that certainly were not but nevertheless remain unchallenged alongside the more-or-less correct but equally unsourced content—only compounds the issue. I don't doubt that your intentions are good, but I think your approach is misguided. TompaDompa (talk) 17:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

James W. Fuller III

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

He doesn't appear to meet WP:BIO / WP:GNG. Possible WP:ATD of merge/redirect to one of the companies, but no clear target. Boleyn (talk) 16:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find confirmation this person existed, [6], but with no sourcing at all in the article, I don't have much hope that we'll find anything else. Oaktree b (talk) 23:02, 9 October 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. Might seem very early to call, but due to two considerations; (A) the name of the nominator - Articledeleter3 - and that this is their only edits in Wikipedia ever, as well as (B) the multitude of sources already uncovered, I'm invoking WP:BOLD and (C) questioning the good faith of the nomination and doubting how much leniency should be extended to a single-purpose account of this nature, as well as (D) calling a WP:SNOW outcome. I am also adding the sources to the article as external links, but encourage their integration into the article. (non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte (talk) 09:29, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Walter Congdon

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

God awful sourcing and isn't notable in the slightest. Articledeleter3 (talk) 21:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC) — Articledeleter3 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and History. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I only got a fraction of the way through a JSTOR search before running out of time to continue, but already I found well more than enough published reviews of many books for a pass of WP:AUTHOR. Review of George Kennan: A Writing Life: JSTOR 25655879. Review of Hungarian Intellectuals in Exile: JSTOR 20081345. Reviews of Exile and Social Thought: JSTOR 2500388, JSTOR 2164815, JSTOR 573995. Reviews of Seeing Red: JSTOR 3218223, JSTOR 40345786, JSTOR 10.1086/532830. Reviews of The Young Lukács: JSTOR 20099357, JSTOR 1862668. Review of Baseball and Memory: JSTOR 10.5406/jsporthistory.40.1.167. Review of Solzhenitsyn: The Historical-Spiritual Destinies of Russia and the West: JSTOR 45097144. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per David. Note: The nomination does not include a signature.--User:Namiba 20:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

AFC Ajax in the KNVB Cup

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

Fails WP:NOTSTATS, we do not need a listing of every single cup match for every football club around the world plays. No other clubs have similar articles. An overall summary can already be found at List of AFC Ajax seasons, and any notable statistics could go to List of AFC Ajax records and statistics. Match-by-match details belongs on season articles for either the club or competition, not in one massive table. I am also nominating the below article for the same reason. S.A. Julio (talk) 16:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Netherlands. S.A. Julio (talk) 16:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 16:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both I agree with you, it does feel like overkill. Clearly not a GNG issues, but I agree that this is against NOSTATS. Govvy (talk) 17:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – These are relevant lists (especially the Ajax one), but I understand that the precedent this could set is bad in a broad sense. Svartner (talk) 20:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Svartner: Have you found any sources to indicate this is notable as an independent topic? From searching I just get databases and statistics, not in-depth coverage from secondary sources indicating notability. The only reference on the Ajax article is a WP:FANSITE, while the PEC Zwolle page is devoid of any sources. And of course there is hardly any prose to provide further context/explanation to the tables, in violation of WP:NOTSTATS. S.A. Julio (talk) 04:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Pence's fly

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

I feel this is an WP:NEVENT fail. There is little lasting effect or sustained coverage, and information about the fly could be readily incorporated into the article on the 2020 debates itself. Unlike something like Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy the fly hasn't really become a staple that is looked back upon by later press; the sole reference here after October 8th 2020 is a USA Today article that briefly mentions it in the context of a fly landing on Trump during a press event. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Politics. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as the one that moved it to mainspace. I think this passes GNG pretty handily and is one of the more well-remembered aspects of the 2020 US election. If it cannot be kept, I would ask at the very least that it to be merged into 2020 United States presidential debates. Di (they-them) (talk) 16:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That may possibly be an argument about the event being notable, but this is an article about the specific fly, not the event. RecycledPixels (talk) 16:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Pence fly was created in 2020 as a redirect to 2020 United States presidential debates. RecycledPixels (talk) 16:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As I think it has been shown to have been looked back upon. An example would be this article from this year which mentions Mike Pence’s fly. 92.9.187.249 (talk) 16:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the article is about the literal insect, which is ridiculous. The event has been mentioned in retrospect, but only in passing and without any sustained importance. It should get a brief mention in the article about the 2020 presidential debates. It would be like giving the meme about Tim Walz's confused expression at the recent debate its own article. PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 17:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The “it about a literal insect” point is ridiculous as they are plenty of articles on individual insects. Such as Number 16 (spider) and Nadezhda (cockroach) 92.9.187.249 (talk) 17:17, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But those insects actually did things (live a long time or conceive in space). This article is about an event (albeit a trivial one). Like how the Jimmy Carter rabbit incident is about the event and not the particular rabbit. If there is an article it is about 'the event in which a fly landed on Mike Pence'. Not 'the fly that landed on Mike Pence.' Even the event-based article is absurd, but the insect-article is even more so. PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 18:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to 2020 United States presidential debates. Ridiculous that this was made in the first place. Reywas92^Talk 17:31, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok fuck it. Wikipedia is ridiculous. The standards, rules and everyone is just ridiculous. The entire idea is ridiculous if you really think about it. We are humans. Us humans do stupid shit on the internet. Why should we edit on a site that claims to “spread knowledge” editable to everyone. Wikipedia is just some crappy website that got popular and has companies like Google supporting it. The only reason people never use alternatives is because Wikipedia basically has non-commercial monopoly on online encyclopedias. Any attempt to make a online encyclopedia about every that is notable and has sources that isn’t Wikipedia is just ignored and doesn’t get the variety of people interested in different topics that Wikipedia gets.

What should happen is that everyone just ignores Wikipedia and we go through a process of Wikibalkanisation in which wiki websites are created for certain subjects. This would make it so articles on things that would be considered insignificant or not notable of having its own article on an encyclopedia trying to compiling information on pretty much any major (or even minor) topic imaginable. Also I am talking about real life subjects here I know there are plenty of big wiki websites on fiction and stuff like that.

I also know saying stuff like this will get me banned or warned and that this is completely irrelevant to this discussion but god damn it I just have wanted to rant about the feelings I have been getting on Wikipedia. And this will probably be the last contribution to Wikipedia. Also yes I know you probably don’t care but it matters to me. Bye! 92.9.187.249 (talk) 18:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yikes worst take i have seen •Cyberwolf•talk? 18:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. Good for you. You are free to disagree. Wasn’t trying to force my opinion on anyone though I do think a Wikibalkanisation would be a beneficial to everyone even though it may seem like a bad idea on paper (or I guess on a digital dicussion). Just wanted to say my own feelings. Anyway bye (for real this time). 92.9.187.249 (talk) 18:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous red herring of an argument. People reading this discussion should discard what this IP has written in this argument. -1ctinus📝🗨 21:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry dude, just because something trended on twitter and was made into memes for a couple days doesn't mean it should have a standalone article. Not how this site works, so go make your own wiki if you want that. There's barely any substance to this, so it can be covered in the main article. Reywas92^Talk 22:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Internet, and New Mexico. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Reywas. -1ctinus📝🗨 21:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to 2020 United States presidential debates#October 7: Vice presidential debate (University of Utah). I literally declined a draft about this situation two days ago! Draft:The fly (2020 vice presidential debate). Bkissin (talk) 22:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Di is a great contributor and writer, and i did quite enjoy the fly story, but Generalissima is right that this is basically what NEVENT was made for. RSes never came back after the story to provide any real analysis on the fly (not... you know what i mean), in the form of dissecting what it says about culture or politics or discussing any impact it might have had. Without a solid assertion of why the fly has enduring significance, the article should probably be merged. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 23:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to 2020 United States presidential debates#October 7: Vice presidential debate (University of Utah). No sustained coverage of the fly. Honestly I'm surprised at so many merge votes. Usually these kinds of AFD pages quickly are filled with keep votes from people who have a partisan desire to keep a page like this one. Esolo5002 (talk) 03:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to 2020 United States presidential debates#October 7: Vice presidential debate (University of Utah). Per the rationale of the nominator and other merge !voters, this doesn't pass the WP:NEVENT bar. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 14:13, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Holocaust (Marvel Comics)

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

No secondary sources, notability dubious PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 15:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 15:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Dubai explosion

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

Signally fails WP:LASTING and WP:NOTNEWS. A single event, with no enduring impact (no impact on legislation or practice, no sustained coverage or commentary, no consequent change in regulation). Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Middle East, and United Arab Emirates. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Just a WP:News article with no sustained coverage. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel

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

WP:REDUNDANTFORK of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel. मल्ल (talk) 15:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Lists, Israel, and Palestine. मल्ल (talk) 15:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Grigoryan (actress)

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

No evidence of any notability. This article has been persistently recreated and there are two existing drafts and at least one redirect created by an editor who seems resolutely determined to have this person featured in Wikipedia. Just a single IMDB soure and a YouTube video. Fails WP:GNG by a very wide margin. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 15:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Armenia. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 15:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:GNG, lacks WP:SIGCOV. Demt1298 (talk) 15:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Russia. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 17:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets WP:NACTOR with at least 3 significant roles in notable productions. Also, please perform a search in Armenian "Աննա Գրիգորյան" (+դերասան, as this is a rather common name). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prabowo Cabinet

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

WP:CRYSTAL Not even inaugurated or named yet Nyanardsan (talk) 15:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Indonesia. Shellwood (talk) 15:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep I see several names here already, are those fictional or not? If anything is speculative then remove that specifically but the article does not violate Crystal as a whole. Obviously there will be an article for Prabowo's ministers, and since he'll be taking office with his cabinet within two weeks, I'm not sure what the point of deleting this a week from now would be. Cabinet of Joe Biden was created over two months before members were inaugurated. Reywas92^Talk 17:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep per Reywas92. Sal2100 (talk) 21:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep at any speed, as the proximity to the event that is determining further content is hardly an issue, and the notability of the component parts of the article is impending and closer than the US election, for instance, I see no purpose in AFD at this point. JarrahTree 08:13, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep because ministry list will be announced on 14 October 2024,^[1] while the ministers will be inaugurated later on 20 or 21 October 2024.^[2] Mmnashrullah (talk) 10:20, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Even if the AfD result is to delete, the article will be recreated within next 1-2 weeks. If the AfD result is to keep, the article will still be moved to its official cabinet name after the announcement. In any case, this placeholder name will not be used in the future and will most likely end up as a Redirect. Ckfasdf (talk) 12:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Paula Klien

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

Lack of reliable sources for biography. Molochmeditates (talk) 15:52, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, although I do not like that the second source (Invisibilities) does not seem to actual be from Wall Street International. Otherwise, the article appears to include several international, significante sources.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 16:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Women, and Brazil. Shellwood (talk) 16:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joan Catoni Conlon

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

Doesn't meet WP:NACADEMIC. Esprit15d • talk • contribs 15:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No indication of her work making a significant impact. Mentioned in only in a journal or two being interviewed and isn't cited much. OzzyOlly (talk) 17:02, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Esprit15d • talk • contribs 15:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:14, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Colorado, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I have started adding in reviews of her work and some lifetime achievement recognition of her work. DaffodilOcean (talk) 16:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Democratic Center Party (Turkey)

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

Yet another completely uncited article about a defunct Turkish political party. Although I found https://ceres.isp.msu.edu/index.php/download_file/view/490/335/ that is not enough to show notability Chidgk1 (talk) 11:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect I don't think this party is notable enough to have its own article, you can probably redirect it to Liberalism in Turkey.

IMMMMMMMM ENCAMS 12:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect I’d suggest to Bedrettin Dalan where it’s mentioned, but I’m happy with the other proposed target too. Mccapra (talk) 16:52, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Two different redirect target articles suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Neculăescu

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

Diplomats are not inherently notable, they must meet GNG and I don't see that happening in this case. They don’t even have a BLP on their local language Romanian Wikipedia, yet most of the cited coverage is in that language. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Military, and Romania. feminist🩸 (talk) 14:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it passes WP:GNG. The nominator did not perform WP:Before before nominating this to AFD for the reason that diplomats are not inherently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The subject is not just a career diplomat but his country's permanent representative to NATO speaking on behalf of the entire country and had held various political appointments before appointed to NATO. The sources in the article provide WP:SIGCOV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piscili (talk • contribs) 14:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marek Varga

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

Diplomats are not inherently notable, they must meet GNG and I don't see that happening in this case. Fwiw, they don’t even have a BLP on their local language Slovak Wikipedia, — Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Military, and Slovakia. feminist🩸 (talk) 14:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Varga has never been elected to any public office nor has he even been a member of any Slovak political party. The term "Marek Varga" on Google may find other men with the same name instead of this diplomat, failing WP:V too. In its current state, the article is written like a WP:PROMO and does not contain anything about what Varga accomplished to prove that he deserves a Wikipedia article. By the way, what is "FWIW"? Is there any ambassador or diplomat who actually meet WP:GNG? ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Clariniie, "For what it's worth." — Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Show the guidelines that state that one must have been elected to a public office or holds a membership of a political party before they qualify for a Wikipedia article in their name. And be instructed that WP:PROMO is never a criteria for bringing an article to AFD as it can easily be deleted via CSD G11 but that is not the case here. Piscili (talk) 13:45, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, it passes WP:GNG. WP:Before was not performed before nominating this to AFD for the reason that diplomats are not inherently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The subject is not just a career diplomat but his country's permanent representative to NATO speaking on behalf of the entire country. The sources in the article provide WP:SIGCOV and those are enough to pass. Piscili (talk) 13:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Konecký

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

Diplomats are not inherently notable, they must meet GNG and I don't see that happening in this case. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Military, and Czech Republic. feminist🩸 (talk) 14:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Konecký has never been elected to any public office nor has he even been a member of any Czech political party. In its current state, the article is written like a WP:PROMO and does not contain anything about what Konecký accomplished to prove that he deserves a Wikipedia article. Corresponding article on Czech Wikipedia likewise only provides announcement news, nothing to indicate significant coverage. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Show the guidelines that state that one must have been elected to a public office or holds a membership of a political party before they qualify for a Wikipedia article in their name. And be instructed that WP:PROMO is never a criteria for bringing an article to AFD as it can easily be deleted via CSD G11 but that is not the case here. Piscili (talk) 13:31, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, it passes WP:GNG per all the sources in the article. The subject is not just a career diplomat but a permanent reprehensive of an entire country to NATO and speaks on behalf of the country. Before this appointment he served as Political Director of the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs. There is sufficient coverage that easily pass all requirements. Piscili (talk) 13:38, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bastard Fairies

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

This band doesn't appear to be notable. There's an AllMusic biography and an AllMusic review of their only album. Most of the sources used in the article don't even mention the band, and PlugInMusic doesn't seem to be a reliable source. toweli (talk) 12:45, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and California. toweli (talk) 12:45, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd vote "keep" for the band name alone, but alas it's definitely a Delete. Fails WP:NMUSIC with no notable discography, awards or label work. And for being about a rock band, there's nothing about their music in the article, instead focusing on a documentary film and some meaningless YouTube video, not to mention being full of useless fluff and terrible sourcing. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 04:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Along with the Allmusic citations above, there is sigcov available on TWL. This includes a full page article in the Native Peoples Magazine,^[1] a 1300 word article in Morning Call,^[2] and a CD review of Momento Mori from the Calgary Herald.^[3]. That's more than WP:THREE thus meets WP:GNG. ResonantDis_tortion 17:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Poet, J (2008). "Keeping it Real: The Bastard Fairies". Native Peoples Magazine. 21: 64.
^ Chow, Greg (2007). "Bastards of new media ** By breaking away from major labels and dominating online, the DIY Fairies become the music industry's worst nightmare". Morning Call.
^ McCoy, Heath (9 May 2007). "The Bastard Fairies - Momento Mori". Calgary Herald.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky Ekeh

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

Poorly referenced and formatted. I tried draftifying, but it was moved back into mainspace. I tried googling, and almost all of the sources were press releases. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 13:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Ghana, and Nigeria. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 13:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I've had a look around and all I can find are promotional/paid interviews. I can't find anything independent of the artist. I will have another look but there doesn't seem to be anything that meets WP:GNG. Knitsey (talk) 15:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Article is sourced to paid contents like this. Fails the general criteria and that of musicians. Best, Reading Beans 03:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Who (Dalek films)

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

From what BEFORE I could undertake, I could find nothing discussing this character independently from the movies he starred in. While sources discuss and verify the character's existence, there is very little independent coverage discussing this character that would verify his notability outside of his source movies. Admittedly not sure on a viable AtD due to the character's unique naming, but regardless this character fails notability on his own. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 12:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Television. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 12:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I agree with the nom that there is not really any coverage of the character separate from the coverage of the two movies he appeared in, both of which already have full articles discussing them including the non-canon incarnation of the Doctor that appeared in them. Perhaps a Selective Merge to the main The Doctor article as a viable ATD? Currently that article only has a link to this page under the "See Also" section, so perhaps a couple sentences could be added to the main part of the article simply describing how a non-canon version of the Doctor played by Peter Cushing appeared in two films, with links to each of the films. Rorshacma (talk) 15:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly into the film articles? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sauna in the Dutch language area

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

This article looks like a blog. It contains unnecessary, unencyclopedic information; the rest can easily be summarized and briefly mentioned in the sauna article. There's only a handful of sources, most of them not in English, and simply aren't enough to fulfill the criteria for a standalone article. Wretchskull (talk) 12:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Belgium, and Netherlands. Shellwood (talk) 13:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Article lacks many inline citations, and seems to draw conclusions that aren't unique to these areas. I mean, we have bathrooms in Canadian houses and saunas are a luxury here too, but I don't see why this is different than the Dutch areas, or much of anywhere else that doesn't have a sauna culture. This seems like an essay that draws conclusions that don't seem to "fit". Some type of SYNTH. Oaktree b (talk) 16:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Aleeha

AfDs for this article:

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

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

The subject of this BLP may have directed a few Pakistani films, but he clearly does not meet the basic GNG or WP:SIGCOV. According to WP:BIO's additional criteria, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I've added Find Sources links for his other name above. Maybe that helps? --DanielRigal (talk) 17:51, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. It seems that this was on my watchlist due to a previous version that got deleted. I don't remember that at all so I'm looking at this as if I was seeing the subject's name(s) for the first time. There is some notability here but I'm not sure whether it is enough. The Google News hits show multiple sources talking about his movies and, to some extent, about him. His films exist and they get reviewed, sometimes quite poorly, so it is not just puffery. I can't easily tell which sources are Reliable though. There has been controversy about one of the films which may even have been banned to some extent. Based on the English language hits I'm very much on the fence. It's not an obvious delete but I don't see enough to say keep either. I Google translated the Urdu version of the article to see if there was anything there that was helpful but it doesn't say much of anything and none of the sources there look any better than the ones here. If an Urdu speaker was to search for better sources then they might or might not find something that pushes this over the line to a keep. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 18:16, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A clear WP:DIRECTOR and WP:CREATIVE pass with multiple films written and directed, that received significant critical coverage- -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Mushy Yank, Additional criteria also states meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included.— Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:33, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom.--Gul Butt (talk) 23:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:17, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. If it fell below WP:NDIRECTOR or WP:NCREATIVE it passes WP:GNG or WP:NBASIC based on the sources in the article. Piscili (talk) 13:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Piscili, One keep vote states that this meets NDIRECTOR/NCREATIVE, while your vote suggests it may not meet NDIRECTOR/NCREATIVE but does meet GNG. Why don't you take some time to demonstrate how the subject meets GNG. Also please steer clear of name-checking or routine coverage in your explanation. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tuirial Hydro Electric Project

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

Should delete due to a lack of significant coverage and reliable sources, which could indicate that it does not meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Additionally, if the content is deemed to be too promotional or lacking in verifiable information Jiaoriballisse (talk) 10:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 15:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable for an article as it passes WP:GNG. It is clear that WP:BEFORE was not conducted before putting up this article for deletion. Sources are available[7][8][9][10]. Piscili (talk) 15:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep although I am pretty much meh regarding the state of the article. It is not promotional, but it is not really anything at all! Not a huge facility, but it exists and the size (60MW) is large enough to attract notice. It has coverage in some sources as above, it is a visible feature in the locality. Needs improvement, not deletion. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 13:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. 2 sources on the page. One is a permanent deadlink and the other does not even have a passing mention. So there are no sources, no secondary independent sources, no significant coverage. This page fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 14:24, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Groupe 1981

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

Not notable organization with no relialbe independent non-trivial media coverage required by WP:NCORP. I did my best to find sources WP BEFORE but I was not lucky enough to find reliable - only trivial mentions Taking off shortly (talk) 10:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious Keep... this user appears to be copy-pasting the same AfD to stubs that are simply not yet developed in en.wp but which have clearly notable subjects. Cf. fr:Groupe 1981 for multiple RS. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 11:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 10:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ryu Miyamoto

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

Played 26 games in Japan's third league, but no tangible independent and significant coverage, so fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 10:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 10:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 15:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ergys Kuçi

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

Never played in Albania’s highest league, only in the semi-pro second tier. I found no sources that could constitute significant coverage, only three sentences and a quote and a match report. Geschichte (talk) 10:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Albania. Shellwood (talk) 10:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 15:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Salma Malik

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

@Crosji: flagged this BLP and I suggested taking it to AFD, but since that hasn’t happened yet, I decided to take the plunge myself. The BLP is PROMO and is primarily authored by a user @Mustafa54, who contributed about 90% of the content. It clearly fails to meet WP:NPROF and it also doesn’t appear to meet GNG. The subject is just a ROTM professor. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cagniog

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

Fails WP:NGEO, Mostly of the article is unsourced. Source 1 and 3 is WP:PASSINGMENTION. Source 4 is a database. The rest does not mention the barangay itself. Google News and Books yield nothing other than passing mention. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 09:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 09:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to Surigao City#Barangays as an WP:ATD. HueMan1 (talk) 09:48, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I have a feeling that the article was written by one of the members of the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) listed in the article. If you're gonna write an article about a [barangay], might as well start by writing down the Sangguniang Barangay officials before the SK members who don't really manage the barangay, no? It also doesn't help that the original creator of the article was planning to do just that, to post an article about one of the barangay's non-notable SK official. So...delete. --- Tito Pao (talk) 07:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Surigao City#Barangays. Fails WP:GEOLAND per nom. SBKSPP (talk) 07:59, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sumit Gupta

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

Fails WP:GNG since there is an evident lack of reliable sources to establish notability. Not sure if the subject warrants a standalone article at this time. CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Companies, and India. CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Upon my check, I found that the DNA article is just close to meeting WP:SIGCOV, while the other articles are trivial news about CoinDCX’s investments, business news, interviews, or statements from the subject. While doing searches for SIGCOV sources, I found nothing, currently no multiple sources provide significant coverage of the subject, hence the subject currently fails to meet WP:GNG. GrabUp - Talk 07:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next Byte Codes

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

Neither the article nor my BEFORE suggests this has a stand-alone notability. Sole footnote is to Sourceforge code repository. Per WP:ATD-R I suggest a redirect to Lego Mindstorms NXT. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Toys and Software. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. Aaron Liu (talk) 11:53, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it is to be redirected anywhere, it should be to Bricx Command Center which is a different component of the same sf.net project. However it is not some random project on sf.net. It is part of many Linux distros. c.f. https://repology.org/project/nbc/versions And the article has book sources (they were there when the article was created in 2007), and there are plenty more books about it that are easily found on Google Books. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bricx doesn't appear to be notable either. The book gives them both 2 pages in total, which is in-depth coverage, but just one source isn't enough for SIGCOV. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:18, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for redirect target consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect: As stated above, there is not enough significant coverage to justify a standalone article, and thus should be redirected to Lego Mindstorms NXT. JustARandomEditor123 (talk) 08:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tomomitsu Kobayashi

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

Played 38 games in Japan's third league, but no sign of significant and independent coverage (not in the ja:wiki either), so fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 07:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 15:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shu Kameshima

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

Played 24 games in Japan's third league, but no trace of independent and significant coverage (not in ja:wiki either), so fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 07:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 15:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not eXactly C

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

Neither the article nor my BEFORE suggests this has a stand-alone notability. Sole footnote is to Sourceforge code repository. Per WP:ATD-R I suggest a redirect to Lego Mindstorms NXT. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Toys and Software. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Lego Mindstorms NXT – programming languages aren't inherently notable, and the reference only shows that it exists, not that it is notable DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 13:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Odd Atelier

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

Propose to draftify and redirect to Jennie (singer) as it fails WP:COMPANY.

Currently no significant coverage of the company itself, and as a music agency for one person it is unlikely that any will develop at the present time.
Content of the article is all already covered at Jennie (singer).
Only one source actually mentions the company itself, and it is just quoting the caption from the artist's Instagram (not independent).
WP:INHERITORG: "An organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it" RachelTensions (talk) 07:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify as per nom. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Jennie (singer) § 2022–present: Acting debut and independent label. Most vanity labels are not independently notable, this isn't an exception. Oppose draftification, as the content of this article will remain in the redirect's page history. Mach61 13:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Jennie (singer). Piscili (talk) 13:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: as per above. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 03:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

D Fuse

AfDs for this article:

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

only reference is a searchpage. major contributing editor has dfuse in username (COI). little on google, sigcov/notability issues Canary757 (talk) 07:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Canary757 (talk) 07:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to add this manually yesterday but something went wrong half way through so I used twinkle today. I wanted to clarify why it might say 2nd nomination. (beginner error-sorry) Canary757 (talk) 07:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Texas. Shellwood (talk) 09:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: there's a bicycle [11] that isn't this... I find this, but I don't know if it's the same individual [12]... Is D colon Fuse the same person as D space Fuse? Regardless, we don't have enough sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 12:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, having a single source which is a search result and so difficulty to find sources to support it, it is destined for deletion at this time after spending so many years here in breach of all prerequisites. Piscili (talk) 14:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daisuke Tsuda (YouTuber)

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

WP:NPEOPLE Paradoctor (talk) 07:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Authors. Paradoctor (talk) 07:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Appears to fail the notability guidelines for WP:NPEOPLE. JustARandomEditor123 (talk) 08:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Mr.Tsuda is a prominent figure in Japan's internet scene, with over 20 years of experience. From the early days of Twitter Japan's service, he has engaged in various activities as a "media activist(a term he coined)", creating the buzzword "tsuda-ru". He served as a forum committee member for Asahi Shimbun, one of Japan's leading quality media outlets, from 2015 to 2019, and in 2019, he was the artistic director for the Aichi Triennale, an arts festival organized by Aichi Prefecture, establishing himself as a significant presence in the public discourse. His activities have been recognized by public institutions, having been appointed as a member of various government councils and positions in the aforementioned Aichi Prefecture events. Since 2020, he has shifted his focus to his self-established YouTube channel, "POLITAS TV", where he operates as a political opinion YouTuber, engaging in a range of discourse activities. Therefore, he should not be deleted. MihariHarukaze (talk) 10:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Please point to the independent sources that show him being "a prominent figure in Japan's internet scene". Geschichte (talk) 10:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Follower Count on X (formerly Twitter): As of October 9, 2024, Tsuda's X account has 1.466 million followers, ranking among the top influencers in Japan. For comparison, the Prime Minister of Japan, Shigeru Ishiba, has 418,000 followers (Shigeru Ishiba X account), and the left-wing journalist Isoko Mochizuki, known as the model for the Netflix global series "The Journalist", has 319,000 followers (Isoko Mochizuki X account). This shows that Tsuda is one of Japan’s leading left-wing influencers (Daisuke Tsuda X account).
  
  Official Profile: According to a 2017 profile published by the public relations department of Aichi Prefecture, Tsuda has been active as an internet expert since the 2000s and has appeared in various mass media outlets. He has authored several books on the internet and has held positions as a professor at higher education institutions and as a member of various government committees (Aichi Prefecture PR Document).
  
  Asahi Shimbun Opinion Committee Member: Tsuda served as a member of the opinion committee for Asahi Shimbun, one of Japan's leading quality media outlets, highlighting his recognition in the world of public discourse (Asahi Shimbun Daisuke Tsuda Opinion).
  
  Mention in Ryukyu Shimpo: In 2018, Tsuda was listed as one of the "famous people (著名人)" in an article by Ryukyu Shimpo, Okinawa’s leading regional newspaper, indicating his influence is acknowledged even in regional media (Ryukyu Shimpo).
  
  Artistic Director of Aichi Triennale: In 2019, Tsuda served as the artistic director of the Aichi Triennale, an arts festival hosted by Aichi Prefecture. This event was sponsored by global corporations headquartered in Aichi Prefecture, such as Toyota Motor Corporation, further demonstrating Tsuda's public activities and societal recognition. (Aichi Prefecture Document, Triennale Report)
  
  This evidence shows that Tsuda is not only an expert on internet issues but also a well-known figure with influence across multiple fields. MihariHarukaze (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Uh, have you read WP:NPEOPLE? If not, please do now. While you're at it, you may find Wikipedia:Why is BFDI not on Wikipedia? instructive.
  
  BTW, that "Official Profile" you mentioned? That's a one-page chronological list of Tsuda's contributions, basically what you'd find as part of a CV. That's not significant coverage in accord with NPEOPLE. Paradoctor (talk) 14:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Selected as a Young Global Leader (2013): In 2013, Tsuda was selected as one of the “Young Global Leaders Honourees” by the World Economic Forum in Davos. (The selection list is available here)
  
  Appeared in FOX News (2010): In June 2010, Tsuda appeared as an expert in an Associated Press's article titled "Twitter a hit in Japan as 'mumbling' tweeters give micro-blogging a distinctly Japanese flavor", which was featured on FOX News. (The FOX News article is available here)
  
  Controversy at Aichi Triennale 2019: In 2019, Tsuda served as the artistic director of Aichi Triennale 2019, which featured works such as a piece that involved burning an image of Emperor Hirohito and a statue symbolizing "comfort women". This exhibition sparked nationwide protests, with critics labeling it "disrespectful" toward the Emperor. The controversy received extensive media coverage, and Takashi Kawamura, the Mayor of Nagoya, staged a sit-in protest in opposition to the exhibition's content. The matter was also discussed in the Japanese parliament, leading to a prolonged national debate. Tsuda faced widespread criticism from various sectors. (NHK article, Mainichi article)
  
  Keynote Speech at "Critics in Residence @KYOTO EXPERIMENT 2024": On October 8, 2024, Tsuda delivered the keynote speech at the "Critics in Residence @KYOTO EXPERIMENT 2024”, hosted by the Delegation of the European Union to Japan. The event's introduction describes him as "widely known for his critical writing about recent shifts in the Japanese and international media environment as well as for establishing his own platforms for independent journalism".
  
  Cited in Google Scholar: A search for "Daisuke Tsuda Media Journalism" on Google Scholar reveals numerous academic papers citing Tsuda, showcasing his influence in the field of media and journalism. (Google Scholar search results)
  
  Appearances on NHK Programs: A search for "津田大介" of NHK’s program database reveals that Tsuda has frequently appeared as an expert on various programs. (NHK Archives search results)
  
  Mentions in CiNii: A search for "津田大介" on CiNii, the academic database operated by Japan's National Institute of Informatics, shows several articles related to media, internet, and journalism that mention Tsuda, aside from mentions of researchers with the same name. (CiNii Research search results)
  
  Featured in Major Japanese Newspapers: A search for "津田大介" in Japan's three major newspapers (The Asahi Shimbun, The Nikkei, and Sankei News) reveals that Tsuda has appeared in numerous articles, excluding those concerning a Dentsu employee with the same name. (The Asahi Shimbun search results, The Nikkei search results, Sankei News search results)
  
  MihariHarukaze (talk) 17:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I tired a .jp website search, nothing comes up. This in a Korean paper [13] briefly mentions this person. Likely more in Japanese sources? I don't know. Oaktree b (talk) 12:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- In today's Asahi Shimbun Digital article titled "How did you view the party leaders' debate before the snap dissolution? With Daisuke Tsuda and Seiko Mimaki (スピード解散前の党首討論、どう見た？　津田大介さんと三牧聖子さん)", Tsuda appears as one of the experts. While there are differing opinions about Tsuda’s political views and activities, it is undeniable that he is a well-known public figure. MihariHarukaze (talk) 13:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  We require articles about him, not just him speaking on a particular subject, that's the issue. Oaktree b (talk) 21:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  WP:NPEOPLE: "Notable" in the sense of being famous or popular—although not irrelevant—is secondary. Paradoctor (talk) 14:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cifonelli

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

Not notable organization with no relialbe independent non-trivial media coverage required by WP:NCORP. The best sources are Forbes contributor - deprecated not allowed self-published sources Taking off shortly (talk) 10:29, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Independent Minahasa Movement

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

Created by user known to make articles of political movements with questionable notability. Google search shows two different instances of the movement (back in 2006, and one again regarding Ahok). Neither seems to be a sustained movement. Probably could be notable if there's some other activities but not in current state. Nyanardsan (talk) 08:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Indonesia. Shellwood (talk) 08:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Questionable notability and questionable independent movement. Ckfasdf (talk) 22:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Allen (bridge)

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

I can find no significant or independent coverage of this bridge player, which is demanded by WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. The NYT source is not significant coverage, just a mention, and likewise the bridgewinners.com source. And the bulletin published by the American Contract Bridge League is not independent. Geschichte (talk) 07:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Virginia. Shellwood (talk) 08:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nano Quest

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

Niche event. Nothing in my article or my BEFORE suggests this has stand-alone notability (WP:GNG). Per WP:ATD-R I suggest merging this to FIRST Lego League Challenge it was a part of. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:28, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Toys-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:28, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom Andre🚐 06:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not Quite C

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

Neither the article nor my BEFORE suggests this has a stand-alone notability. Sole footnote is to Sourceforge code repository. Per WP:ATD-R I suggest a redirect to Lego Mindstorms (it is mentioned there, unlike in the Lego Spybotics). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Toys and Software. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doniyor Kayumov

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

Not notable per WP:NACTOR. He has not "had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." Furthermore, the sources cited in the entry lack WP:RELIABILITY.

Uz24: It is an online portal, as clearly stated on its about page and such is not a reputable source.
Qalampir: The article does not discuss Kayumov's work as an actor; instead, it focuses on his controversial calls for violence against women.
Sport.uz: This unreliable blog covers Kayumov's challenge to a Kazakh MMA fighter to face off in a cage match but does not substantiate his notability.
Hordiq: The article has been deleted.
Savol-javob: This is a Wordpress blog with no credible standing.
Malumot: Also a Wordpress blog (with an incorrectly spelled name).
Uz Daily: While potentially more reliable, this article raises suspicions of paid content, as it merely lists 15 trivia points without discussing his career in any detail.
Aniq.uz: This tabloid source reports on a video Kayumov made after allegedly being snubbed by Sitora Farmonova.
Yuz.uz: This entry appears to be an interview, also potentially paid content, discussing Kayumov's personal plans ("to take his parents on the Hajj pilgrimage and buy a new car for his dad") rather than his career.
Peoplenews: This online blog no longer has the entry about Kayumov available.

Additionally, Kayumov has publicly stated in a video podcast that he needed a Wikipedia entry to obtain a verified mark on his social media profiles. In the video, he states that he actively sought out local publications like Kun.uz to get articles written about him. He also mentions that in Uzbekistan, such publications can cost nearly 10,000 USD. He was negotiating to reduce this cost to 1,500-2,000 when the English Wikipedia entry was created – supposedly independently from his actions. Given that a flurry of articles were published right before his entry was created, I doubt he did not pay to have them published.

Lastly, it is worth noting that his entry has also been proposed for deletion on the Uzbek Wikipedia. Nataev ^talk 10:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Uzbekistan. Shellwood (talk) 12:18, 25 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!} 06:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emily Roberts

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

I am nominating this to become a redirect to the subject's band, The Last Dinner Party; I choose not to do this unilaterally because NPP reviewer Ipigott re-reviewed it after I unreviewed it. None of the article's current citations show WP:BANDMEMBER being met; they consist of two insta posts, two interviews, the subject's webpage, and a performance listing. My WP:BEFORE search showed coverage in the context of the band and interviews, not enough to meet BANDMEMBER. Mach61 16:46, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to move it back.--Ipigott (talk) 17:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ipigott Eh, If I've already started the AfD, I may as well see it to completion. I assume you mean't "feel free to unilaterally redirect the page", since the page was never moved. Mach61 18:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It started out as a redirect on 2 February 2024 as can be seen from the article's history.--Ipigott (talk) 07:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article presents significant background which extends beyond her membership of The Last Dinner Party band.--Ipigott (talk) 07:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ipigott It uses non-independent sources to do, which isn't enough to show that she should have a standalone article. If a notable band had a detailed biography of each of its members on its official biogrpahy, we'd have enough information to presents significant background which extend beyond [their] membership for every person in it, yet writing a standalone articles for each one would still be inappropriate. Mach61 23:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and England. Shellwood (talk) 17:48, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: According to the article, Roberts was member of a large number of bands and also performed as solo artist, so the article's content should not be merged into The Last Dinner Party. It's true that the current sources are not sufficient for this, however, if we believe the article's claims are not plain wrong I think it is possible to improve that. (My personal Google searches show a large number of hits, however due to the fact that I'm living in Germany Google gives me mostly German sources which are not helpful here.) --Cyfal (talk) 10:32, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyfal

Roberts was member of a large number of bands Yes, but only TLDP is notable, so no WP:BAND#C6 qualification

and also preformed as solo artist And as I explained in my source analysis she is not independently notable as one

if we believe the article's claims are not plain wrong I think it is possible to improve that As stated in the nomination I already looked for better sources and found none. The burden of proof is on those who wish to keep the article. Mach61 14:51, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If the article is kept, a lot of false links should be corrected because there exist also a footballer Emily Roberts (e.g., 2018–19 FA Women's League Cup). --Cyfal (talk) 10:48, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello - in case of interest, I have now cleaned up the incoming links as you suggest, and added information on the solo career Chaiten1 (talk) 15:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/Merge to The Last Dinner Party. Her notability stems solely from the being a member of the band, and if the fluff was removed, the key facts could probably be covered adequately in the (currently fairly short) article on the band. The content here is encyclopedic in part, so what can be properly sourced should be retained. --Michig (talk) 13:16, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The keep !votes above are incredibly weak and should all be disregarded. The first one is a form of WP:Subjective importance, the second one is more of the same plus WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES, and the third one is WP:INHERITED. The astounding part is these arguments originate from established editors with long tenure and high edit counts. Can anyone arguing to keep this article actually show significant coverage about the subject from independent secondary reliable sources? Also, German sources are fully valid per WP:NONENG, but the coverage needs to be proven, not merely asserted. Left guide (talk) 19:32, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:The current article is highly promotional and reads like PR. It actually increases the suspicion that TLDP are industry plants. --Ef80 (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: We should inform, not obscure. Tiny Particle (talk) 17:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia does not aim to contain all knowledge. Mach61 18:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A.K.A. WP:42. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 06:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to The Last Dinner Party per nomination. Opposed to merging given 1. the nature of the sources and 2. I don't believe this info fits within the scope of the band's article. It would be fine to include in this article if independent notability were established, but I don't believe it's remotely close in this state. Seconding Left guide's assessment of above votes. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 23:17, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The only sources I could find that are independent, reliable, and predominantly about Emily Roberts (as opposed to The Last Dinner Party) are: this review of her EP in Jazz Journal, and an article and an interview in Guitar World. Both of those publications are on our list of reliable sources at WP:RSMUSIC. I can't decide whether she just about scrapes WP:MUSICBIO - that's why I'm writing this as a comment. In any case, the current article is too promotional (is she really "known for...her eclectic musical influences"?).

GanzKnusper (talk) 09:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neither the GW interview nor the article move the needle much (actually, the article is mostly quotes anyways), but the Jazz Journal review definitely does. If 1-2 more sources like that are found I might change to a weak keep. Mach61 16:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Those arguing for keep may want to try to reduce the promo tone of the article, which is a major concern of the non-keep participants here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 18:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've deleted a lot promo tone expressions now. --Cyfal (talk) 21:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. The article is better now, but there are still WP:NOTABILITY concerns. --Ef80 (talk) 11:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: edited again for tone; included several new references that explictly comment on Roberts, and on her performance style.Chaiten1 (talk) 07:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added additional independent refs on Roberts' other music project, Wednesday's Child. Chaiten1 (talk) 06:11, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - it’s been improved. Bearian (talk) 02:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Specific analysis of the recently added reference material would be quite helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Article improved since nominated. Robertjamal12 ~🔔 12:03, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Estonian exonyms

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

Wikipedia is not a dictionary; an alternative to reading this article would be reading an Estonian dictionary. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/French exonyms, which resulted in the French equivalent of this article being deleted. As argued there, this list is an indiscriminate list of place names. I agree that an article about the linguistic and historical aspects of the formation of place names in Estonian would be notable, but that is not what this is. SJD Willoughby (talk) 01:02, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Lists, and Estonia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trim: A few names in the list are evidently not cognate to the respective endonyms, and I'd preserve these. Otherwise, delete as trivial; each language adapts foreign words to its own phonology and orthography, okay, we get it. —Tamfang (talk) 03:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already at AFD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afrikaans exonyms) so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:26, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: While this Afd discussion was up, the articles for Galician/Maltese/Catalan/Swedish exonyms were deleted for the same reasoning

SJD Willoughby (talk) 02:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right but I know other articles on exonyms that were sent to AFD have been kept. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is a definition of exonyms given by the UN that means that such lists are not indiscriminate, but instead pass WP:LISTCRITERIA. By all means cull items that should not be there (such as toponyms that are the mere result of orthographic rules in different languages). But such lists themselves are encyclopedic. As for appealing to recent rulings, what's actually happened is that there has been a huge bunch of individual nominations, some closed very quickly, without any notification placed on the page most people interested in the topic would see: Talk:Endonym and exonym. OsFish (talk) 08:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Puerto Rico women's national under-18 softball team

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

Subject lacks the needed coverage to meet the WP:NORG. Let'srun (talk) 00:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Softball, and Puerto Rico. Let'srun (talk) 00:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Created by a user who once edited as "LauraHale" for a decade and resigned without a word in 2019. Anyone know what happened? --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 21:04, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slgrandson, that's not relevant to whether or not we Keep or Delete this article. What was your opinion on the sourcing here? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At your request, I see a redirect to or merge into Sports in Puerto Rico § Softball in this topic's future (WP:ATD). --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 07:34, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Let's see what editors think about a possible Redirect or Merge/
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Only primary sources provided. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 22:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ingemar Burgström

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. Only sources I could find were 2 directory listings in Google books. LibStar (talk) 02:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Boxing, Olympics, and Sweden. LibStar (talk) 02:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, there's 146 mentions in Swedish newspaper archives, of which a lot seem like they might contain sigcov. We need someone with access to verify their content though. AlexandraAVX (talk) 19:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article doesn't show significant independent coverage that meets WP:GNG. Losing in the first round of the Olympics and compiling an 8-7 record as a pro boxer means he also fails WP:NOLY and WP:NBOX. I can't comment on what coverage might exist in Swedish, so I am not voting as this time. Papaursa (talk) 00:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:45, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, appears very likely notable per AlexandraAVX. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which sources in Alexandra's search meet significant coverage for WP:BIO? LibStar (talk) 04:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are paywalled – however, given that we know that over 140 pieces of coverage do exist, someone would need to look at them to determine otherwise that he's not notable. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cincinnati nightclub shooting

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

Bar fight gone wrong turned shootout. No analytical coverage, just trial proceedings, which there is no more of past 2018. Not premeditated or really anything else to say or reflect upon. Fails WP:NEVENT. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Ohio. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Standard crime blotter material, and the club's building has long been torn down. Nate • (chatter) 19:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Nothing to indicate notability, just a WP:News article. Can't think of any way this would have a good merge or redirect target. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don’t delete. Vincent MOSCARITOLO made a significant contribution to the end to end cryptography used by modern messaging systems today.

He is still active, publishing on Substack. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4th-amendment (talk • contribs) 12:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

you might have posted on wrong thread 4th-amendment, this is for a nightclub shooting. Canary757 (talk) 12:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vincent Moscaritolo

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

Fails WP:NBIO, effectively zero reliable and secondary sources. Brandon (talk) 04:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Computing. Brandon (talk) 04:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nosral Recordings

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

NCORP fail Potential merge target Rottweiler Records too appears to be NCORP fail. Graywalls (talk) 23:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Wisconsin. Graywalls (talk) 23:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete same issues as with Rottweiler Records, the sources all check out, I’ll accept the source as a reliable one, but there isn’t enough extended coverage of the company itself to pass NCORP
Absurdum4242 (talk) 17:11, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. At worst, a merge to Rottweiler, which ought to be kept too, so ultimately this is a moot conversation, but it looks like this sublabel has enough of a roster and press coverage to pass muster on its own. I'm agnostic as to whether these label articles continue on as one or two separate articles, so long as the content is preserved. Chubbles (talk) 06:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which three sources do you believe would satisfy NCORP for this article @Chubbles: ? Graywalls (talk) 22:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yves Brodeur

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. This one fails WP:BIO for lack of third party coverage. LibStar (talk) 23:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Georgia (country), Turkey, and Canada. LibStar (talk) 23:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep he is a notable diplomat and meets WP:GNG and or WP:BASIC. He has served as NATO spokesperson and there are some coverage about him, though some are press releases or news conference transcript, they are reliable because they are issued by either national governments or international organisations. I found these sources [14][15][16][17][18]. I think more reliable sources are out there waiting to be picked up and if a deep search is conducted they would be found. Piscili (talk) 02:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This, this and this are not WP:SIGCOV of Brodeur, it is him making comments in the media and not about his life and career that would be significant coverage. This is a primary source from his employer NATO. I could not open the mid.ru source. LibStar (talk) 03:36, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. I also found this. I think on the whole he could be considered notable based on the breadth, if not depth, of coverage. While not current consensus, I am of the opinion that a diplomat who served in three countries or international organizations ought to be considered notable. Bearian (talk) 01:55, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

comment It’s frustrating. There are literally hundreds of articles out there where he is mentioned in passing, his position, his history, etc. They are all in reliable, independent publications, however, there is then either an interview, or it’s mostly a report of what he says in relation to another topic. I don’t think I’ve come across another case where the person themselves is obviously important, and is constantly being asked their opinion on important matters / doing important things politically, without there being a specific article written with them as the topic. Like Bearian I think he should definitely be considered notable, multiple ambassadorships over thirty years SHOULD trump say a one term state senator in terms of notability, but while minor state level politicians are automatically considered notable, career ambassadors are not? Seems backwards. Especially given just how much coverage of what he himself says there is. Ideally I’d like to see the article kept, but can’t hang my argument on any specific WP policy.

Absurdum4242 (talk) 15:53, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Hundreds of these articles have been deleted. LibStar (talk) 23:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

VASP Flight 780

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

While tragic, there is no indication that this airplane crash meets WP:GNG or WP:NEVENT; if there was significant, long-lasting coverage, I can't find any sources to prove it. And I have no reason to believe there is likely to be long-lasting coverage: three deaths, crashed into the forest, and the crash was caused by pilot error.

Current three sources/links, used here and on the deWiki article, are unusable for notability/unusable.[19] is a user-generated wiki, [20] is a government report on the crash (they're required to make these for every single incident), [21] is a YouTube video of a cockpit recording. My WP:BEFORE revealed two YouTube videos:[22] [23], both unusable.

I have no prejudice against selectively merging/redirecting, should a suitable target be found. Given the limited ramifications of the initial crash, even if the topic can be shown notable a stand-alone page would likely not be warranted GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 03:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Brazil. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 03:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: it received reasonable coverage in Portuguese-language sources, as per pt:Voo VASP Cargo 780#Referências (note: there was no interlanguage link before). fgnievinski (talk) 03:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the link! I'll have a look through them. The ptWiki does appear to be of better quality than the enWiki and deWiki articles.

[24] is user generated
[25] does not mention the plane crash or the plane itself
[26] is the same crash report (and cited four times)
[27] is the Aviationbase wiki again

Then there's four 1992 news reports, all dated to within a day of the accident. The ptWiki links are broken, but the headlines appear to be the fairly routine "a plane crash happened, people died" type story that, while useful, was something I knew was likely to exist and doesn't change my arguments about WP:NEVENT, lasting coverage, WP:GNG, and WP:PAGEDECIDE.

The information about a social media user visiting the plane crash is new to me, however. For reference, here are the links:

[28] (no author credited)
[29] (no author credited)

Both of these article, to me, mostly seem to focus on the influencer's trip to the site of the planecrash. They each spare a paragraph or two to sum up the crash itself, but it's mostly spent discussing the influencer. I'm also not an expert in Brazilian newspapers, especially very local ones, but I'm having a hard time finding information about either news source. juruaonline.com.br does not have an "about me" type page- all attempts to get one redirect you to their "advertise with us"/"submit a story" type pages. juruaemtempo.com.br does actually give you some information about its reporters, but none of them were apparently willing to attach their name to this piece. So far, they are still the only examples of any WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE we have for this crash. And while these two sources are not enough to prove notability to me (I really don't think this article says anything that isn't already covered in List of accidents and incidents involving the Boeing 737#1990s), they might be enough for somebody else to decide this is notable. So, thank you again for finding them @Fgnievinski! GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 03:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also did a quick search for sources and can't find any online newspaper articles about the event. [30] fgnievinski (talk) 03:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:33, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom – Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: The event does not have in-depth, significant nor sustained continued coverage. Additionally, no lasting effects nor long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated as a result of the accident. Criterion #4 of the event criteria states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this accident lacks. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:42, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to VASP#Accidents and incidents per WP:ATD-R. S5A-0043^Talk 10:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aquae Jewels

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

Likely to fail WP:NCORP. Sourced to promo pieces/advertorials. KH-1 (talk) 02:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and United Arab Emirates. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : The sources are advertisements and not reliable. --Gabriel (……?) 08:38, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete : The coverage is certainly not by any reliable sources and even if they were reliable it may still be too shallow. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 05:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naoto Ueno

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

Does not seem to meet WP:N WP:NBIO. No third-party sources indicating notability. Also severe WP:COI editing, including some that is clearly by the subject of the article. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk/Contribs} 02:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Medicine. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk/Contribs} 02:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Japan, Hawaii, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject lacks significant coverage to meet WP:BIO Tesleemah (talk) 07:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. Obvious WP:COI issues, an argument could possibly be made for WP:NACADEMIC. There are a handful of in depth interviews in academic journals, director of the UH Cancer Center, and while the highest cited papers on Google Scholar are with many authors with the subject in the middle, there are quite a few papers for which he is the lead/corresponding author that are relatively highly cited for the age of the paper. I'm not convinced of the magnitude of impact of the scholarly work and independence/possible journalistic COI of interview coverage is not clear.

Cyanochic (talk) 09:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, tentatively. He has 30,000 citations and an h-index of 84, but in a very high-citation field. However even ignoring the highly-cited consortia papers, he still has several impactful research articles as the last/corresponding author (top cites: 576, 342, 231) and as first author (223), not to mention a lot of reviews in those authorship positions (554, 538, 237, 208; 235), though I don't give these as much weight. I've collected some of the more in-depth secondary analyses of work attributed to him as first/senior author below, which might help demonstrate a stronger case for C1. These could also be used to make his research section more NPOV.

Secondary/independent analysis

~60 words
Clinical evidence of graft-versus-BC effect has been reported in a limited number of patients (2/10) by Ueno et al,2 and in one anecdotal case by Eibl et al.1 However, the study by Ueno et al was different from ours in that it included patients without progressive disease, adopted a myeloablative conditioning regimen with demonstrated antitumor activity, and performed DLI in only one case without response.
~120 words
Meanwhile, other researchers think that looking at the top of a signaling pathway doesn't make sense when what really counts is whether the cell is proliferating or not. For that reason, Naoto T. Ueno, M.D., Ph.D., [...] has looked at the activity of a key cell cycle regulator, CDK2, in sensitive and resistant tumor cell lines. They found a correlation between increasing resistance and increasing CDK2 kinase activity, which promotes cell cycling. The amount of protein or activity of proteins in the pathway steps between EGFR and CDK2 do not seem to be related to erlotinib sensitivity, according to Ueno's data. [quote]
~160 words
An update of experience at the MD Anderson Cancer Center with inflammatory breast cancer over the past 20 years was published by Ueno and colleagues [4]. [...] ... Ueno and colleagues found that 71% of all patients had a response to anthracycline-based induction chemotherapy, with 12% of patients achieving a complete response [4]. In addition, [...] (truncated to avoid CV)
~120 words
Experience at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center over the past 20 years was reported by Ueno et al. [87]. One hundred seventy patients [...]. ... The study by Ueno et al. also showed the importance of response to induction chemotherapy. [...]
~50 words
Ueno and colleagues reported that 74% of patients with IBC experienced a response from an anthracycline-based regimen, and 12% had a complete response. ... Many of the women in the review by Ueno and colleagues initially presented with inoperable disease. After induction chemotherapy, 95% of these patients were able to have surgery.
~20 words
Current treatment recommendations for IBC are multimodal with combination neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by mastectomy and then concluding with chemotherapy and radiation. This regimen is reported by Ueno et al. 10to show a [quote]
~160 words
In 2008 Ueno and colleagues published a retrospective analysis of 66 metastatic breast cancer patients, 39 of whom had undergone myeloablative HCT/AT between 1992 and 2000. Data were [...]. These initial experiences showed that an allotransplant-based approach could result in long-term disease control in metastatic breast cancer, but the rate of TRM was a serious drawback. ... In the already mentioned retrospective analysis conducted by Ueno and colleagues [42], 27 of the 66 patients [...]
~120 words, but by a former coauthor
The first series of patients was reported by Ueno et al [6] from the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. Ten patients [...] ... The largest unpublished series was presented by Ueno and Niederwieser on behalf of the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplantation Research (CIBMTR) [...]
~45 words
Erlotinib inhibits triple negative breast cancer as shown by Ueno and Zhang[30] when they generated a SUM149 xenograft model by implanting luciferase expressing SUM149 cells into mammary pads of athymic nude mice. The results indicated significant inhibition of tumour growth at doses of 50 and 100 mg/kg.

JoelleJay (talk) 01:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Tinnesz

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

Non-notable musician. A few billboard chart listings doesn't satisfy WP:GNG. ZimZalaBim ^talk 02:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shibu Chacko

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

Chacko's claim to notability is that he was one of the 399 people who received a MBE in 2019, the lowest grade of all five Order of the British Empire awards that were given to a total of 1,073 people in the same year. He received some coverage for that by some newspapers in 2019, but the coverage was not WP:SUSTAINED.

Clearly, this is not the type of award that makes someone notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article, and I doubt that all other 1,072 mostly ordinary British citizens (list) who received the same general-purpose award or better in the same year are also notable. Badbluebus (talk) 16:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Medicine, India, and United Kingdom. Badbluebus (talk) 16:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Kerala and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. Little sign of SNGs. As far as GNG, there is some press coverage, all around the MBE. While some of it goes into a bit of detail, I think this still falls under WP:BLP1E. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I note that the article originator has been blocked for sock puppetry. Enough other editors have worked on the article that I think it's a little unlikely that it qualifies for G5 speedy deletion. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:28, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete with a little regret. Subject has clearly done good work encouraging people to sign up as organ donors, but the only coverage which profiles him is triggered by the award of an MBE, mainly in local, trade and community press/media, which routinely mines the awards for anyone in their locality/trade/community. We don't have independent coverage before or since, which we normally see for notable persons ("notable" in the Wikipedia sense). The MBE itself can't confer notability automatically; as noted above, it's the lowest state honour in the UK, and it is also the commonest, with 9,518 awards from December 2014 to June 2024 (total of "All - Including Unknown" for MBEs in downloadable spreadsheet). Personally, I thank Shibu Chacko for their achievement and hope this will later seem merely the start of a long and fruitful career. NebY (talk) 18:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Standing for Member of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, MBE is the third highest ranking Order of the British Empire level (excluding a knighthood/damehood), behind CBE and then OBE. Not the lowest state of Honour in the UK as claimed in this section. See reference below

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/awards-and-accreditation/content/103372 Shinomol (talk) 16:10, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's the third highest out of three. The lowest. As shown on the Gazette page you linked. Your assertion that Not the lowest state of Honour in the UK (sic) is contrary to the very source you just provided. All this is doing is reinforcing the point that this person does not as yet meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. You have convinced me that there'll be no point in my spending more time on this. NebY (talk) 16:36, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest you do your research first before making false claims. BEM is the lowest rank, not MBE . Sorry this is my last message to your malicious attempts to take this page down. I am not willing to waste my valuable time by engaging with these kinds of individuals at all; I have got patients to look after. Defending this page is not my priority. Best wishes for all your continued efforts. (Malicious obviously) Shinomol (talk) 19:33, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: After analyzing the entry and reading all the references, I agree that he passes GNG. More than enough news coverage suggested above and at the article, I'm convinced the person is notable and worth keeping on Wikipedia. I assess as probably reliable, covering multiple events / aspects of this WP:BLP. Keep, monitor for neutrality and overdetail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.155.200.34 (talk) 08:14, 6 October 2024 (UTC) — 119.155.200.34 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep: The process for nominating someone to receive an MBE is a very complex process and can take upto 2 years. The government and the various departments will go through rigorous checking during this process. All nominees will be checked by various government departments to make sure they’re suitable for an honour. I can see Chacko has gone through this process and received the honour. He is the first South Indian in UK to receive this honor, and he is the first Indian to work as a Donor Ambassador in the UK as well. The course he created is already completed by over 9000 individuals from all over the world. So I certainly recommend keeping this page live in view of the special achievements Chacko has gained. He is true inspiration to all the South Indians in the UK in terms of professional growth in Nursing, Research, Career Guidance and inservice education. Best wishes Mr Chacko Shinomol (talk) 14:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC) — Shinomol (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Nominating someone for an MBE is not a very complex process at all - start here. One of our sources says he "will become the youngest Malayalee ever to receive an MBE (Most Excellent Order of the British Empire) from the Queen",[31] which is a long way from being the first South Indian in UK to receive this honor. "Donor ambassador" is a term recently invented for health workers who encourage other people to sign up as donors; it doesn't have any particular distinction. NebY (talk) 15:18, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly agree with you; any one can make a nomination. But one certainly need to understand the process after receiving the nomination. Its a through process by the UK government, not all tom dick and harry will get through the process. You can refer to the process followed by the UK government here. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/how-the-honours-system-works

I can certainly feel your attitude towards a healthcare worker in your last sentence. Being a healthcare worker, I can certainly understand the value of such titles such as donor ambassadors, because they really make a real difference to several peoples lives. One should be in their shoes to understand the value of the work healthcare workers do especially in organ donation and transplantation as they work with real life scenarios everyday - life and death on a daily basis. It may not have any particular value, importance or distinction for lay people who doesnt have any medical knowledge or understand what is going on behind scenes. Shinomol (talk) 15:40, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Further re the first South Indian in UK to receive this honor: we have, for example, articles on M. V. Narasimha Rao and S. Muthiah, neither one relying on their MBEs for notability. NebY (talk) 15:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In response to the comment, it's important to clarify that while M. V. Narasimha Rao and S. Muthiah do not rely on their MBEs for notability, their achievements and contributions in other significant areas—such as sports and writing—elevate their prominence, with the MBE serving as an additional recognition of their impact. In the case of the individual under discussion, being the first South Indian to receive an MBE in the UK holds unique professional, and cultural significance. This milestone could be considered a notable achievement in itself, given its contribution to the UK healthcare especially organ donation and transplantation.

The individual's distinction as the first South Indian recipient of this honor may highlight not only personal achievements but also wider societal progress, particularly in the context of Organ Donation awareness and the role played in the educational campaigns. Thus, while an MBE alone may not confer automatic notability, the social and healthcare context and pioneering nature of this honor for a particular community could be a valid factor in establishing the subject's notability for a Wikipedia entry. Shinomol (talk) 15:54, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see no evidence that Shibu Chacko was the first South Indian recipient of this honor. NebY (talk) 15:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You could rephrase this to first Malayalee if that claim is too broad. Shinomol (talk) 16:01, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see no evidence that Shibu Chacko was the first Malayalee. NebY (talk) 16:05, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you share any other malayalees names? Shinomol (talk) 16:10, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right. You're making claims that you can't substantiate. I see no point in discussing this further. NebY (talk) 16:36, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am also disinclined to continue this conversation with you. If you assert that Shibu Chacko is not the first Malayalee to receive the MBE honours, it is essential that you provide evidence to substantiate this claim, rather than diminishing my argument and avoiding further discussion. Shinomol (talk) 16:42, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Past consensus in AfD discussions has generally been that an MBE does not suffice for notability, although of course it also does not prevent notability. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 15:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that an MBE alone may not automatically meet the threshold for notability under Wikipedia guidelines. However, it is important to consider that while an MBE itself does not confer notability, it can be an indicator of broader achievements and public impact on healthcare outcomes, especially when coupled with significant contributions in other fields such as training, volunteering and organ donation campaigns. Thank you Shinomol (talk) 15:59, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shinomol is a confirmed sock of Shibuchakson, who declared here to have a conflict of interest regarding the subject of this AfD. See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Monophile. Badbluebus (talk) 17:22, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Shinomol is not acting for Mr Chacko nor a proxy for anyone. I know Mr Chacko professionally as a Organ Donation Coordinator in my role as a senior nurse in intensive care. I was fortunate to work with Mr Chacko while facilitating several organ doantion operations and attended the classes organised by him as well. You can verify my identity through nhs credentials if required. I am unable to share those here. Shinomol (talk) 17:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: He meets WP:BASIC He was awarded a MBE in the Queen's Birthday Honours list for the work he did with the promotion of organ donation among the minority communities in the UK, he being accorded the MBE recognition for his services within the NHS Trusts in the United Kingdom. He also has reliable coverages for verifiability some of which are 1 2 3 4 5 6 Isha Sattar (talk) 01:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User Isha Sattar only has 18 edits and previously !voted keep at the AfD of an article created by Monophile, the same sockpuppet of Zimidar that created Shibu Chacko. Just like Jxggii and Fayyazwill, their first edits on Wikipedia were related to redirect requests. Badbluebus (talk) 21:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: With only the weak deletes from experienced editors, I think we need more discussion. I have semi'ed the page to allow for that
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The only coverage seems to be about the MBE, and there are thousands of recent recipients. Simply having a popular course and an award is not grounds for an article, however interesting the story may be - this makes it arguably WP:NSUSTAINED. If it is true that he is the first south Indian to recieve this award then my decision would instead be a weak keep, but as a user above noted, there is no evidence for this. Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 07:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This page on the subject is surrounded by sources on MBE WP:BLP1E but numerous have got this award. This one time award I do not believe is significant enough to warrant a page on the subject. If there is something more worthy of notice with sources with significant coverage on the subject, I would reconsider my vote. RangersRus (talk) 12:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Parker (security researcher)

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

Autobiographical article, content is not substantiated by the sources and it does not seem possible to write more than a stub about the subject. The sources almost entirely briefly mention the subject in connection with a security vulnerability, some include short quotes from the subject, none seem to provide details on the subject themselves. Brandon (talk) 02:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Computing. Brandon (talk) 02:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please provide more details about what isn't substantiated by the sources? The small handful of paragraphs without citations have information that's given in articles cited elsewhere. If you could point to any specifics, I would be happy to either show which article(s) it comes from, or if one of the more recent citations that discuss it have been missed, add them.

In a lot of cases, the notability of a subject comes from their work, so I'm a bit confused how this would be different from many other articles on Wikipedia. Is this simply a categorization problem? In the public sector circles where this information travels, the name and works are quite well known; the number of high quality sources would also suggest this.

As for your comment about it not being possible to write more than a stub, I have to disagree. There is a lot more detail about the works and their specific effects that could be added, but I didn't find it prudent for myself to add that. Additionally, WP:Stub suggests that some editors and the bot would find that 250, 300, or 500 words (this one is 650 as of this note) is an appropriate length to not be considered a stub.

Having said all of that, I note your status on Wikipedia, and understand that there is little likelihood of this article staying. NorthAntara (talk) 03:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please ignore the admin icon, I'm just someone who used to spend too much time on Wikipedia and enjoys computer security. My AfD nominations end with the article being kept as often as anyone else.

Being the primary author of an article about yourself is not recommended. You were extremely transparent, which is appreciated, it is just very challenging to write a neutral article based entirely on verifiable sources as the subject of the article yourself. With that said, here are some article about security researchers that have a tone and structure I'd suggest emulating: Tavis Ormandy, Eva Galperin, and Charlie Miller. Cutting inferences such as "leading to increased awareness and remediation of these issues" and the entire impact section would be the first edits I personally would make. Brandon (talk) 04:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Leaving aside the autobiographically-ness of the article, I think having ArsTechnica, a variety of legal sources, TechCrunch and SC Media go into depth about a specific vulnerability and explicitly accredit the discovery of said vulnerabilities to a person, should push the said person over the bar of WP:GNG, since, such coverage is pretty rare in the field of cybersecurity and would count as significant coverage (imo).Sohom (talk) 06:03, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nedd Brockmann

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

Contested redirect to List of people who have run across Australia, which is what it was originally created as. Sourcing present and via BEFORE does not establish notability for Brockmann as a businessman or athlete so bringing it here for discussion Star Mississippi 02:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Sportspeople, and Australia. Star Mississippi 02:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chelsea White

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

Fails WP:GNG with no evidence of WP:SIGCOV. Demt1298 (talk) 01:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and England. Demt1298 (talk) 01:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neil Crompton (diplomat)

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. The limited news hits this person gets are routine coverage and not WP:SIGCOV to meet WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 01:26, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Saudi Arabia, and United Kingdom. LibStar (talk) 01:26, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lacking "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject" to meet WP:BASIC. AusLondonder (talk) 20:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brussels International Festival of Eroticism

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

Fails WP:GNG due to not having any WP:SIGCOV. Only took placed for two years and doesn't not meet notability Demt1298 (talk) 01:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Entertainment, Events, Sexuality and gender, and Belgium. Demt1298 (talk) 01:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of world association football records

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

a jumbled mess of a list article, there is no clear criteria for what is included, and most of what is included is simply trivial information (most headed goals, most wins for a footballer, various random unproven goalscoring records). Any world records of actual merit already have their own articles (goals, appearances). All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I DON'T WANT THIS PAGE TO BE DELETED. IT IS A SACRILEGE.Juanan412 (talk) 13:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:48, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, Category:Association football records and statistics is sufficient. Giant Snowman 18:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Important list and compiles football records in general, there is no good reason to delete it. --Mishary94 (talk) 13:57, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and trim anything unsourced or any tenuous "records" (e.g. most goals scored with one foot) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Surely all but about five of the records in the article can be described as tenuous? I mean, any non-trivial goals and appearance records already have their own articles, and any other record of note would have its own article owing to notability, but they don't. "Youngest footballer to play in first division", "Footballer to play more years uninterruptedly", "Player to win most international club titles", "Most unbeaten matches", "Manager who won most finals", "Club with the most top tier-level titles", "Competition with most clubs participated in total", etc etc etc etc etc. This is all trivia, and this is the vast majority of the article. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:28, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: We can modify some things but keeping the most important ones. --Juanan412 (talk) 15:57, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you still of the belief that "most left foot goals" is an important one? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:29, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – The indication is not based on policy since a list of records will contain some specific information inherent to those who are familiar with the sport. I also disagree that just the existence of a category would resolve the situation. The existing problems regarding the scope of records can and should be resolved together in WP:FOOTBALL (I am personally critical of adopting the IFFHS as the main reference), but a WP:TNT seems completely out of proportion. Svartner (talk) 01:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I didn't know about this article, however I feel it has more than enough validity, it's pretty much well sourced. There are some qualms with it and the criteria might need to be adjusted. But the nomination hasn't provided any policy other than this is trivia and this feels like a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT from the nominator. Govvy (talk) 20:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The current contents of this list are irrelevant to this discussion. The question before us is whether having such a list, with the right content, could meet our inclusion criteria per the relevant guidelines. If so, this deserves cleanup, not deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Could use some clean up, but still deserves a page. Senior Captain Thrawn (talk) 00:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flagon and Trencher

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources, only mentions and brief descriptions (for example, on ProQuest). toweli (talk) 14:00, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, History, Organizations, and United States of America. toweli (talk) 14:00, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Found some pieces that document the activity of the organization. Take a look [32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39]. Piscili (talk) 14:48, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those don't provide significant coverage and/or aren't reliable sources. toweli (talk) 12:33, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I have to agree with the nom. The sources don't appear to be reliable and keeping this article based on the provided coverage doesn't make sense to me. Clearly fails GNG. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basque exonyms

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

Indiscriminate mostly unreferenced list of proper names, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Other such articles have recently been deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/French exonyms. toweli (talk) 12:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Geography, Lists, Europe, France, and Spain. toweli (talk) 12:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE and is consistent with similar decisions—I see no reason why so many exonym lists exist. Are any such articles notable? pluckyporo ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:41, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is a definition of exonyms given by the UN that means that such lists are not indiscriminate, but instead pass WP:LISTCRITERIA. By all means cull items that should not be there (such as toponyms that are the mere result of orthographic rules in different languages). But such lists themselves are encyclopedic. As for appealing to recent rulings, what's actually happened is that there has been a huge bunch of individual nominations, some closed very quickly, without any notification placed on the page most people interested in the topic would see: Talk:Endonym and exonym. OsFish (talk) 08:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LISTGLOSSARY provides that a list of words is encyclopedic only when the article provides an in-depth explanation for the significance of such a list (see, for example, List of English words containing Q not followed by U. I don't believe the list of Basque exonyms provides opportunity for such analysis. pluckyporo ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:54, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Trim: A few names in the list are evidently not cognate to the respective endonyms, and I'd preserve these. Otherwise, delete as trivial; each language adapts foreign words to its own phonology and orthography, okay, we get it. —Tamfang (talk) 23:55, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Yu-song

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep - The player is clearly notable. There are some significant coverage about him, such as this article from Choson Sinbo or this article from SPOTV. The player also finished as the top scorer of of the 2017 AFC Cup, which is the equivalent of UEFA Europa League in Asia.:Lâm (talk) 07:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I'm not sure whether these would satisfy WP:GNG to be honest. The first article is very brief and doesn't talk about the individual in any great detail. The second has two sentences about him having x number goals in the North Korean league.
Simione001 (talk) 07:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My bad for the second source, I agree that the coverage about the player is too brief. However the first source from Choson Sinbo has a paywall, who always does very detailed coverage about North Korean players. Since there is minimal source for WP:V regarding this player, I think it's enough to establish notability since it's extremely difficult to find numerous coverages for North Korean players. Furthermore, the fact that he played in the 2019 AFC Asian Cup and winning the top scorer award in the AFC Cup makes him valid to pass WP:SPORTSPERSON. Lâm (talk) 08:13, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak keep I believe there maybe some content there, but I really struggle to understand sources. But there appears there maybe one or two notable aspects about him that can pass WP:BASIC, my vote is a very weak keep know. Govvy (talk) 16:22, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Drafify - to give Thplam2004 the chance to improve the sourcing/article. Giant Snowman 19:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 04:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or draftify if Thplam2004 is interested. The top scorer of the 2017 AFC Cup, and would be the only one without an article. We need to remember that this is North Korea we're dealing with. The Choson Sinbo is probably good enough for sigcov (given that much of the article is paywalled) and SPOTV isn't bad ("Japan selected Kim Yu-song (4.25 Sports Team) ... as the players to watch out for the most in North Korea participating in the East Asian Cup ... The Japan Football Association introduced Kim Yu-song and An Byeong-jun as the most feared opponents from North Korea ahead of the 2017 East Asian Cup (EAFF E-1 Football Championship). Regarding Kim Yu-seong, ... 'He is a 22-year-old rookie who scored a hat-trick in the 2019 Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Asian Cup qualifier against Malaysia in October. He scored 8 goals in 2 games,' and [Japan] named him 'North Korea's ace' [and] as the player to watch out for ... Japan has identified players playing in the J-League and rookie Kim Yu-seong as targets of caution. All four players are key players in North Korea. Naturally, the four players mentioned above are also targets of caution for South Korea.") North Korean newspapers should be used with caution, but KCNA gives SIGCOV as well (see "The attacker who is considered a 'threat' to the opposing team's defense"). There's also some briefish coverage here and here. For a highly-accomplished North Korean footballer, this should be sufficient. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – I've added the sources to the page, and he is mentioned a fair bit in coverage, but not much in-depth. Difficult to find coverage on most North Korean players, unfortunately. Zênite (talk) 16:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or draftify?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep User Zênite had add the suggested references above to the article. It should pass WP:GNG now.::Lâm (talk) 14:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Johnson (actor)

AfDs for this article:

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

Couldn't find any SIGCOV, and while prolific, doesn't seem to be particularly notable. Unsourced BLP. GraziePrego (talk) 01:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Television, Video games, Advertising, California, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 9 October 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 merge‎ to List of battles in Rajasthan#18th Century. Sorry, I should have read this more carefully. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Mandan

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

There is no need of this standalone article as it is an insignificant event in the History of Rajasthan. The content should be merged into List of battles in Rajasthan or any article related to Shekhawats. There has been duplication of efforts by editors to convert minor events from some big events into seperate article leading to creation of WP: REDUNDANTFORK. Admantine123 (talk) 01:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and India. Admantine123 (talk) 01:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, and Rajasthan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/Merge to List_of_battles_in_Rajasthan#18th_Century seems like a good option.--Brocade River Poems (She/They) 21:14, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Redirect or Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Stephen Harrison (author)

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

As much as I think Harrison's writing about Wikipedia is insightful, I simply don't think he passes WP:NJOURNALIST. He's not really been the subject of significant coverage. I don't think interviews or reviews of his books in student newspapers (Student Life) are sigcov. The Fix interview might be significant coverage, but I am unfamiliar with the publication. 1A is a podcast interview, which I don't think counts for notability. The Salon, Slate and HuffPost links are just to his journalism and obviously don't count. The New America link is the description of an event that Harrison was participating in, and I don't think its sigcov either. The WashU entry is a "look what one of our alumni is up to" post and therefore it's not independent or sigcov. The Yahoo interview is part of the Yahoo for Creators program, which has an unclear level of editorial control from Yahoo itself, and may be published with little editorial oversight like WP:FORBESCON, but I'm not sure, and I think its status as significant coverage is questionable. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Technology, Internet, and Texas. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't find much beyond articles he's penned. Seems notable, but I don't find any sourcing we can use. Article now is mostly sourced to author profiles. Oaktree b (talk) 01:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: With the publication of The Editors, Harrison satisfies #3 under creative professionals. I also just added two more sources, including an ABC affiliate WFAA and NBC Bay Area. 1A (radio program) is not a podcast, it's a radio program. - Wil540 art (talk) 02:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Editors hasn't even received a proper book review by a professional outlet so I hardly see how it passes the part of #3 that says such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. The book was notably also deleted when taken to AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Editors (novel). I hardly see how being a guest on a radio or local television program is enough to pass GNG. Hemiauchenia (talk) 04:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://news.detik.com/berita/d-7581552/dasco-pembagian-komisi-dpr-final-besok-diumumkan-14-oktober

[2] ttps://news.detik.com/berita/d-7577570/dasco-nama-kabinet-prabowo-gibran-diumumkan-20-oktober

[3] Poet, J (2008). "Keeping it Real: The Bastard Fairies". Native Peoples Magazine. 21: 64.

[4] Chow, Greg (2007). "Bastards of new media ** By breaking away from major labels and dominating online, the DIY Fairies become the music industry's worst nightmare". Morning Call.

[5] McCoy, Heath (9 May 2007). "The Bastard Fairies - Momento Mori". Calgary Herald.

[1]

[2]

[1]

[2]

[3]