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 28	October 30 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Andrea Jutson

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

Fails WP:AUTHOR. A search on google news found articles authored by her but nothing meeting WP:SIGCOV. This article she is merely quoted as a cafe visitor. LibStar (talk) 23:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Journalism, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 23:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Baghdadiyun, Akhbaruhum Wa Majalisuhum

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

Article about a book that is currently entirely lacking in in depth coverage in reliable independent sources so appears not to pass WP:NBOOK. Better sources may be available in Arabic but I haven’t found any. Mccapra (talk) 23:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Iraq. Mccapra (talk) 23:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cyprus–Georgia relations

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

Article solely based on primary sources from Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Cyprus). Lacking third party coverage to meet GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Cyprus, and Georgia (country). LibStar (talk) 23:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not seeing sources that could established notability. Yilloslime (talk) 04:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sistani of Golestan

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

This article is very difficult to understand. Some people moved from Sistan to Golestan for reasons that are largely lost in translation. Is this movement notable? Between Farsi and Russian sources, hard to say. I don’t think our readers are well served by having something so garbled in mainspace, so suggest draftifying for further work. Mccapra (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Afghanistan and Iran. Mccapra (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Trump town hall in Oaks, Pennsylvania

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

Some of Trump's rallies are independently notable. This one is not. This isn't the one where he was shot at or the one evoking comparisons to the 1939 Nazi rally at MSG. This is the rally where Trump decided to stop taking questions and start swaying to music. It was in the news for a bit, but two weeks later, WP:SUSTAINED coverage is absent. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Events, and Pennsylvania. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this is a WP:News article with only a brief burst of news coverage. Wikipedia:Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article is also good to keep in mind, both for Donald Trump topics and in general. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: More of a list of songs than anything else, other than the groovy dance moves, I don't see notability. There is no lasting coverage of the event. Oaktree b (talk) 23:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. No sustained coverage. Esolo5002 (talk) 06:16, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This might warrant a sentence in a larger article about the campaign, but its actual significance looks like a footnote at best, barely a blip in the heavy media coverage cycle. Bludgeoning the article with near-duplicate sources from the same tight timeframe doesn't change that. Mockingbus (talk) 07:22, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and wait: the event did receive widespread coverage after it took place, and if Trump's mental acuity continues to be questioned (or worsen), this event might receive lasting coverage if people look back to it as "that moment when the decline was on full display", particularly if he manages to become President again. I think a wait and see approach would be best. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 16:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This feels like a "Gerald Ford forgot to shuck a tamale" kind of situation, even if it gets there (i.e. worth a sentence or two in the context of a larger article). In the biggest (and two weeks out, seemingly unlikely) case that this is "the turning point", that article probably looks very much different from this one, to the point that I would argue it would need to be rewritten from scratch even then. Mockingbus (talk) 18:12, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG and WP:HEY. The article has been significantly expanded since being nominated for deletion less than 2 hours after creation. Of course not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article, but this event has received significantly more coverage than most Trump events. It was covered by numerous international news publications, as well as reliable entertainment, LGBTQ, music, political, and popular culture publications. The article includes reactions by both campaigns, the RNC, notable political commentators, notable politicians and former staffers, and notable musicians. I strongly disagree that this article is "more of a list of songs than anything else" that should be distilled down to a single sentence for another article, as suggested above. The article is a work in progress and I invite others to help expand and improve. --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have expanded it, but you haven't demonstrated notability IMHO. The latest date I see on a reference is October 17, much like my WP:BEFORE search, indicating the lack of SUSTAINED coverage. As said above, there was a brief burst of news coverage that died out within 48 hours and this article is more of a Trump playlist than NEVENT article. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree to disagree. Happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boracay International Funboard Cup

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

Fails GNG and WP:SPORTSEVENT. The CNN link would be reliable but links to the general CNN travel website. LibStar (talk) 23:24, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sports, and Philippines. LibStar (talk) 23:24, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Centenary Action

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

A poorly formatted article; most of the sources in the article and the before search seem to revolve around Helen Pankhurst. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 18:46, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Politics, and United Kingdom. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 18:46, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:24, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the information has been deleted from the page.

The information deleted was a description of this organisation. Why?

https://centenaryaction.org.uk/ Kps2015 (talk) 21:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in your explanation is a reason for deleting the article according to the guidelines. Kps2015 (talk) 21:19, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

— Note to closing admin: Kps2015 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.

@Kps2015 Notability isn't inherited; this is both a deletion argument to avoid and referenced in the biographical notability standards. The spirit of this guideline quite likely applies to companies people own. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 21:45, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your response (although I don't fully understand it!).

The problems with this page arise from the fact that fuller information about this organisation has been deleted (on grounds of copyright). The solution is to restore the full information about this organisation, not to delete the page. I will endeavour to sort this out. Kps2015 (talk) 08:50, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kps2015 I really doubt that restoring the information will help with keeping the article. It's probably best to find sources that talk about centenary action without centering Pankhurst. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 11:17, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That page doesn't "centre Pankhurst" it makes one mention of her. That is not a valid reason for deleting the page. Kps2015 (talk) 14:07, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Notability isn't inherited" - I think what you are saying that it isn't of interest that the grand-daughter of those who campaigned for women's suffrage is campaigning in this area today. I would have thought that is arguable. Either way, how is that a reason for deleting an entire page about a major campaigning organisation, rather than simply amending it? Kps2015 (talk) 11:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kps2015 You misundertand. I'm saying that it appears that Centenary Action is inheriting notability from that great-grandaughter, which I interpret to be something in violation of an invalid way to get notability. Please read the link I gave you. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 11:49, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@I dream of horses - if you look at the organisations which are members you will see that this is a serious lobbying organisation. Your personal feelings about the founder aren't a reason to delete a Wikipedia page. Kps2015 (talk) 14:15, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Draftify~~ to allow work on improving sourcing. PamD 13:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PamD I'm open to this. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 13:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @PamD. I think that you can see that this is a serious organisation with a good cause. If you can suggest any improvements, that would be welcome. If you would like me to supply any further information, do let me know. Kps2015 (talk) 14:19, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kps2015 The truth of the matter is, there are many, many serious organizations that have good causes that either don't have Wikipedia articles, or have surprisingly short ones. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 01:36, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a reason to delete a page. Please state on what grounds you believe that the page should be deleted. Kps2015 (talk) 08:11, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kps2015 I've already explained my concerns over notability on this very page. I don't need to explain them again. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:11, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response.

Your objection makes reference to a company. There is no company and no ownership. This is simply a campaign organisation to increase the representation of women in the UK parliament.

Please either provide a reason for deleting this page that falls within the guidelines for deleting a page or remove your objection. Kps2015 (talk) 10:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kps2015 My objection in my first reply here to is within guidelines. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 15:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify per PamD to give time and scope to improve the article - including the formatting, referencing, text and removal of some puffery (WP:NPOV). Note - this is an organisation, but is non-commercial therefore the stricter notability guidelines for WP:NORG do not apply and the subject is expected to meet WP:NGO in its own right. ResonantDis_tortion 11:45, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as created by a paid editor, who has taken six days since first being told about the need to declare this before doing so. PamD 16:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can only find hits on the words, nothing about this organization. Could perhaps be a line or two in women's voting rights in the UK or something, but we don't have coverage in RS. Most of them in the article are primary. Oaktree b (talk) 00:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Day (BoyNextDoor song)

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

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NSONG... b-side song, didn't chart, no significant coverage in independent sources (all the news coverage references seem to be just regurgitated press releases from the group's agency saying the song exists).

Some of the article's content could maybe be salvaged and put into a newly-created article about the song's parent maxi-single (along with information on the other 3 songs, maybe?) but as it stands it doesn't fit the criteria. RachelTensions (talk) 23:57, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. RachelTensions (talk) 23:57, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Earth, Wind & Fire (song) § Japanese version per nom. Nothing came up for my search Mach61 17:13, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Japan and South Korea. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:54, 24 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!} 22:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Lee (darts player)

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

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 20:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:20, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I lean keep because he's listed here[1] as having won the News of the World Darts Championship 1984-85. There's also mention of him in newspapers [2][3] [4][5]. He was also a competitor in the WDF World Cup in 1985 [6] and won the BDO Gold Cup in 1985[7]. --Brocade River Poems (She/They) 11:19, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is any of this significant coverage? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 18:37, 28 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!} 22:33, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As far as I know there's no WP:NSPORT sub-criterion of presumed notability for darts based on a championship, so we have to rely strictly on WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources. The examples linked by the "Keep" !voter above are all WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS and do not qualify toward a WP:GNG/WP:NSPORT pass. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:04, 29 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!} 22:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2007 Gerry Reilly Cup

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

Non-notable edition/staging of amateur sports event - that doesn't meet WP:NSEASON or WP:SIGCOV or WP:NEVENT. Even if the competition as a whole (the Gerry Reilly Cup) has notability, there is nothing to indicate that this single running of that event has independent notability. Certainly the text of the article, the refs within it, and a WP:BEFORE search for other sources do not appear to establish independent notability. If not deleted, as an WP:ATD, the title could perhaps be redirected to Gerry Reilly Cup (perhaps to a section WP:WITHIN it dealing with the 2007 event). But there is otherwise no apparent sources/rationale for a single instance of this (non-national, provincial, amateur, childrens/schoolboy) competition has independent notability. (By extension I would question the expectation/presumption, in this template, that every annual occurrence of this amateur/teenage competition warrants a standalone WP:NSEASON/WP:NEVENT article....) Guliolopez (talk) 20:57, 15 October 2024 (UTC) Guliolopez (talk) 20:57, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 21:03, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 21:04, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I intend to create more articles for annual events of this provincial underage football competition, which has grown in stature with each passing year, with counties beyond the province of Leinster now participating. The 2007 Gerry Reilly Cup article was created because when I located the Gerry Reilly Cup article, I found it to be in a very unsatisfactory condition. It was possibly created in 2007 as it focused very much on that year's competition. I tidied up the article and thought it best to create a standalone 2007 Gerry Reilly Cup article to place the bulk of content that I found on the main page. The format of the tournament has also changed since 2007 so the content had become dated and no longer accurate in the way that it appeared on the main page. It was also quite challenging to source references for that renewal of the tournament which happened seventeen years ago. Moresthepity (talk) 21:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your note. If it's "challenging to source references for [..the event..] which happened seventeen years ago", would that not indicate that WP:SIGCOV isn't met? And that, perhaps, (whatever about the competition as a whole or instances of the competition held on other years) the 2007 staging doesn't/didn't warrant a standalone article? Guliolopez (talk) 14:31, 16 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!} 22:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Spleodrach (talk) 13:03, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is an unbolded Keep here so I don't think this is eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boğaziçi (Istanbul)

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

Tagged uncited since 2009 and Turkish article is also uncited. Sounds plausible but probably needs a native speaker living in İstanbul to say whether this is notable. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have left a message on WikiProject Turkey if they could help with this. TNM101 (chat) 15:48, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have tagged the Turkish article as uncited in the hope that native speakers might add good sources Chidgk1 (talk) 06:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep: There are whole books written about this subject such as "Bogaziçi Gezi Rehberi" by Jack Deleon , and "Boğaziçi sayfiyeleri" by G. V. İnciciyan. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 04:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is also an article in Istanbul Ansiklopedisi, which is available online. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 04:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah interesting. I had never heard of tr:İstanbul Ansiklopedisi before Chidgk1 (talk) 06:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This AfD does not qualify for a Speedy Keep.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have announced this AfD on the Turkish Wikipedia's Village Pump for anyone interested in participating. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 22:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TheJoyfulTentmaker, this could be seen as canvassing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, @Liz. I thought this would be considered an appropriate notification as stated in the canvassing guideline, since that is a central location and I was completely open about it. (A more conventional noticeboard for this, WikiProject Turkey, is unfortunately very inactive lately, and maybe this could attract the interest of some existing/prospective project members.) TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 04:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz @TheJoyfulTentmaker I am happy with any of my AfD being publicised on Turkish Wikipedia. In very many cases there is either no Turkish article or it is completely uncited. Many of the Turkish editors would be able to contribute here, but even if they don’t want to come to enwiki if they could cite on trwiki we could simply copy the cite to enwiki. Especially for the many uncited Turkish music, TV and film articles they will be far more knowledgable than me. Chidgk1 (talk) 10:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess there is no problem here then. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 22:27, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Bosphorus in the absence of input from native speakers or Istanbul residents. I can't find other sources that verify this use of the term "Boğaziçi," and the Turkish version doesn't provide sources either. Finally able to view the encyclopedia link provided above now that IA is back online, and it does seem to say this term may be used to refer to the neighborhoods adjacent to the Bosphorus. However, I don't know that the sourcing is strong enough to warrant a standalone article. (I'm open to changing my view if additional sources are presented or a local expert can provide perspective. FWIW, my spouse, while not a Turk, does speak some Turkish and has lived in Istanbul and she knows "Boğaziçi" as a reference to the strait, not as a collective term for the neighborhoods that border it.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dclemens1971 I have no strong objection to a merge for now, since the there seems to be an overlap with the Bosphorus article. However, if anyone is interested in splitting it back and writing a standalone article, I'm pretty sure there will be no shortage of sources. Side note: adding this poem, which I believe is notable on its own, for demonstrating common references to the neighborhood in Turkish literature. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 15:56, 29 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 Merge. The correct target page though is Bosporus, the page mentioned in the comments is a redirect page for it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Boyarski

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

Subject notable only for one event. Hirolovesswords (talk) 22:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hirolovesswords (talk) 22:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Agree with nominator, otherwise ordinary citizen who received brief attention for action that while laudable, does not attribute him with notability (or coverage demonstrating such) warranting inclusion in an encycloapedia. Keeping would cross BLP1E and NOTNEWS.— MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does his MB qualify him for The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor? Cremastra (u — c) 23:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no. It's not nothing, but it's not highly mega-notable enough to render him permanently notable in the absence of sustained WP:GNG-worthy coverage in reliable sources. Bearcat (talk) 22:07, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:42, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per WP:ANYBIO "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor". He was awarded both a Carnegie Medal for heroism and a Canadian Medal of Bravery. — Maile (talk) 02:54, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Maile66 an award alone does not confer notability. Per WP:N - (in reference to notability guidelines including WP:ANYBIO): People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards… meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Awards don't make people notable enough for encyclopedia articles if your source for the award is the award's own self-published website about itself — that's a primary source, not a GNG-building one, and that wipes out two of the three footnotes here. The key to making him permanently notable on this basis would require coverage about him in third party sources unaffiliated with the statement — namely media coverage and/or books — and just one hit of that isn't enough all by itself. Bearcat (talk) 22:07, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There's no way that this wasn't covered in newspapers when it happened in 1985. I'm skeptical that this is more than WP:BLP1E, but if no one's even found those news articles I don't think we can say we've done a full search for sources yet. -- asilvering (talk) 02:21, 29 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!} 22:26, 29 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 redirect‎ to 2023 Virginia House of Delegates election. Closing early. This should not have been de-redirected in the first place without going through WP:DRV. I'll salt. asilvering (talk) 19:57, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Susanna Gibson

AfDs for this article:

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

Consensus in the previous AfD that this was a WP:BLP1E due to the only coverage being in the context of a failed election campaign. Was recreated by a new user with few edits outside of this page. Don't think anything has changed since the last AfD (there's been some minor coverage of a bill she advocated for a few months later but nothing substantial), and the article should be redirected back to 2023_Virginia_House_of_Delegates_election, with the title ECP'd. I also think having an article about a person whose apparent sole reason for notability is a sex scandal is inadvisable. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Medicine, and Virginia. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect or Delete - I defer to more experienced Wikipedians than me. Thank you for the summary. I'll add three main points. Pmcc3 (talk) 15:34, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A) One significant change since the last AfD wrapped up is that S.G. lost the election which makes her less notable than if she had won ("Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline." in Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Politicians and judges with emphasis added).

B) Also, "it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives" in Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons

C) Examining the WP:BLP1E standard, the first two criteria arguably are met (1, only in context of the single event; 2, low profile) but what of criterion 3? There my assessment is that it is not "well documented" because there is one WaPo article and then many reports essentially parrot the WaPo article uncritically (or copy it inaccurately). If the WaPo article gets anything wrong, so will its derivatives. In the case of Joe Gow for comparison, there was much adversarial analysis in committee hearings at a University with lawyers present over the course of months (with no politics or election deadlines) in order to try to determine the truth, and many independent reporters, and still many facts are in dispute. The WaPo article about S.G. was published rapidly in the middle of a political campaign. It describes its own "Deep Throat" as follows: "The Republican operative who alerted The Post to the videos ... provided the information on the condition of anonymity to avoid being drawn into the controversy." The WaPo article is based in part on audio in the videos, but fake words trivially could have been dubbed, not even requiring sophistication of deep fakes. The WaPo, like TwitterX, is owned and controlled by a single individual, sullying each one's trustworthiness. Pmcc3 (talk) 03:19, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pmcc3: You're obviously new to AfD. When you comment in the discussion, you're supposed to provide a clear indication of your position. If you support deleting the article, you should place a bolded Delete at the front of your comment, or in the case of redirecting, a bolded Redirect. Hemiauchenia (talk) 03:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I am indeed a novice to almost every aspect of contributing to Wikipedia and have always been impressed that it works as well as it does. Apologies and thanks again. Pmcc3 (talk) 15:32, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to 2023 Virginia House of Delegates election per Hemiauchenia. And then protect the redirect. Polygnotus (talk) 06:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect with salt. Nothing has changed since the first discussion that would give her a stronger basis for permanent notability now than she had a year ago. As always, the test that has to be passed is not "has been recently present in the news cycle", it's "she's done something of such enduring significance that people will still be looking for an article about her ten, twenty or thirty years from now", and nothing stated here reaches that standard of importance. Bearcat (talk) 16:48, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Agree with the OP and other commenters, as well as the admin closure in the prior AfD: "Please do not convert this Redirect into an article until she is notable for her political achievements and not a scandal". – notwally (talk) 19:15, 30 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.

Sons of Azrael

AfDs for this article:

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

Band exited, two of the members died.. existence is not notability. WP:NALBUM not established. Graywalls (talk) 21:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New York. Graywalls (talk) 21:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep They probably meet WP:BAND criteria #1 with coverage like [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]
And definitely meet criteria #5:
Has released two or more albums on [...] one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).
Metal Blade Records has been established for 42 years and has numerous other notable acts; a quick search shows this group has released at least two albums on that label. RachelTensions (talk) 02:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Much of those coverage are reflections/opinion blogs. Graywalls (talk) 03:13, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even if you disregard all the reviews I linked to (but you shouldn't), they still unequivocally meet WP:BAND notability criteria #5. RachelTensions (talk) 16:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Allmusic bio and two reviews, Blabbermouth review.. Reviews are opinions, but are considered reliable if there is editorial oversight. The previous AFD also mentioned a couple of finds in Newspapers.com. Geschichte (talk) 08:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There's also a review from Metal Injection. toweli (talk) 10:28, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yakiv Pavlenko

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

Article by a novice editor of an academic with unclear notability and which has too many unsubstantiated claims. H-factor of 28 with 2574 cites so does not pass #C1. Page contains both significant WP:MILL (e.g. giving a seminar) and unsubstantiated claims such as "published more than 300 papers". GS shows 141 total, many uncited conference papers. Editor claims that he qualifies under #C2 which I am very dubious about since at most the Ukrainian State prize comes close. I tagged the page with notability questionable, and asked for verification of claims. Appsoft4 ignored request, so now it needs a wider discussion of notability (or not). Ldm1954 (talk) 21:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Astronomy and Ukraine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please note that the author has strong views on this article but has been temporarily blocked from editing. In the interest of fairness, please consider this diff, which they indicated were their views on the AFD. OXYLYPSE (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The subject is not completely unnotable under PROF, the citations appear reasonably healthy. As the subject recently died, it is possible that more obituaries will be published (there is one in memoriam already in the article) which will provide GNG. There's a uk article that appears to predate the subject's death and was apparently not created by Appsoft4. Perhaps draftification is an option? Although the creator appears to have been quite disruptive, imo blocking them from participating in this AfD is not really in the interests of assessing whether or not the article subject meets our threshold. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They were warned and asked repeatedly to stop removing the AfD tag and blanking this AfD but refused. They did so at least 10 times. AusLondonder (talk) 12:55, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree that it is not impossible that he may end up passing NPROF. Not on citations, as it is not a low citation field and many of his papers have multiple authors. Maybe #C2, although I am not convinced. It might be good for an independent editor to cut the MILL, sources & irrelevant material and add other independent material for us to look at. Ldm1954 (talk) 04:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Balobanian

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

No refs on the page for a long time. I'm not seeing RS that show WP:V or notability, but I don't speak the relevant languages. A redirect to Sarai Alamgir might be suitable if the details can be verified, although this place is not mentioned at the target as far as I can tell. JMWt (talk) 21:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Pakistan. JMWt (talk) 21:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - fwiw this page was nom for a speedy more than a decade ago. The nom was removed without improvement and no refs have ever been added. JMWt (talk) 21:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Sarai Alamgir#Villages. I have moved one line of this page there.--Gul Butt (talk) 21:09, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shinya Tokuni

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

Massively fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Was rightfully prodded only 5 minutes after it was created, but now it's time to end it once and for all. There is no claim to notability whatsoever, and if anything, the speedy deletion criteria should be amended to include cases like this. Creator is blocked indefinitely. Geschichte (talk) 20:58, 29 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) 22:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Corresponding article on Japanese Wikipedia is also unsourced. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:38, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Calder Hill

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

Fails WP:NATFEAT. "Named natural features are often notable, provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist. [...] If a Wikipedia article cannot be developed using known sources, information on the feature can instead be included in a more general article on local geography. For example, a river island with no information available except name and location should probably be described in an article on the river". The rather small hill seems to be of little significance, with no hope of expanding it to an encyclopedic article. Geschichte (talk) 20:59, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and New York. Shellwood (talk) 22:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports in Kilgore

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

Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:SIGCOV. Subject is of a very small town. Only sources are primary. All relevant information is already in Kilgore, Texas -1ctinus📝🗨 20:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Sports, and Texas. Skynxnex (talk) 21:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kilgore, Texas#Sports. Agree with nom that this doesn't appear to be a notable standalone topic; I searched for sources and couldn't find anything meaningful to establish notability. Left guide (talk) 04:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete, information is already in the main article. Frietjes (talk) 15:28, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify - The references are all league information pages being hosted by a web hosting provider. They are not independent, and do not meet Wikipedia's standards of reliability because they are content provided by the web hosting customer, the league.

Reference Number	Reference	Comments	Independent	Significant	Reliable	Secondary
1	d2o2figo6ddd0g.cloudfront.net	A web host of information by the league	No, hosted for the league	Yes	No, user-supplied content.	No
2	d2o2figo6ddd0g.cloudfront.net	A web host of information by the league	No, hosted for the league	Yes	No, user-supplied content.	No
3	d2o2figo6ddd0g.cloudfront.net	A web host of information by the league	No, hosted for the league	Yes	No, user-supplied content.	No
4	d2o2figo6ddd0g.cloudfront.net	A web host of information by the league	No, hosted for the league	Yes	No, user-supplied content.	No

Reliable independent sources may exist, but are not in this article, so it is reasonable to move the article into draft space and allow the originator time to find sources (but not reasonable to leave the article in article space while reliable sources are lacking). Robert McClenon (talk) 15:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul D. Pantera

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

Failed WP:BEFORE search. So unsourced that I missed the one source that was there and accidentally BLPROD'd initially (it was rightfully reverted by GB fan). Unfortunately, I find that non-BLP PRODs get reverted by article creators pretty quickly. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Businesspeople, Military, and Maryland. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carmel Pine Cone

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

The opening line says it all: "The Carmel Pine Cone is a small weekly Californian newspaper." and it's been one since its inception. Carmel-by-the Sea is a tiny town. The fact the the Pine Cone has an article here has been used to suggest that articles in it carry notability. That has been used in the construction of a walled garden by a single editor to boost the reputation of this tiny place. Despite a reference in the NYT (close inspection will show it to be a passing mention) not one of the ten references verify any notability. WP:V is one of our key tenets. No V? No article. Fails WP:GNG. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Business, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a four-column long feature story in the Los Angeles Times, a major newspaper. Furthermore, Newspapers.com brings up a total of over 2,000 mentions of this paper, including other coverage such as [13] [14]. Sufficient to pass GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Aside from the fact that it was deployed by the COI/UPE creator as boosterism for promoting Carmel-by-the-Sea. The weekly tabloid newspaper, Carmel Pine Cone has a small circulation serving a town of about 3,000 people. It does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (media)#Newspapers, magazines and journals or Wikipedia:Notability_(periodicals)#Criteria. As a business/company, it does not meet WP:NCORP, and as mentioned in the nom, does not fulfill verification of notability. Note to BeanieFan, best practices is WP:THREE, plus the newspaper fails WP:NCORP notability criteria for organizations or companies which is required and overrides GNG. Netherzone (talk) 19:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Since when can GNG be "overrided"? Three sources were listed above, including a near-full-page feature story in one of the largest papers in America – in what way does that not satisfy GNG or NCORP? BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The paper has been around for more than a century. It has been featured in 60 Minutes and the Los Angeles Times for its reporting. It's also adjudicated as a newspaper of record by Monterey County. If we delete a newspaper Wiki article with this level of notability, then we'd have to delete most newspaper Wiki articles. Eric Schucht (talk) 20:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: sources show this meets the general requirements for notability. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can we slow down Carmel-related AfDs please? Thank you very much. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - The Newspaper.com link above is pretty impressive. 2,223 (1,262 in California) matches for "Carmel Pine Cone". Click on that list, and it looks to include each of the Unitied States. — Maile (talk) 23:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - To provide a short backstory for context, this article is part of a "walled garden" of Carmel promo; here is a link to ANI that will provide more context:[15]. This was the final ANI discussion that led to the creator's site ban after many, many discussions.The editor had a long history of COI and undisclosed paid-editing, poor sourcing, self-published sources, COI sources, and deliberately misrepresenting sources to make subjects appear notable. Additionally, there was LOUTsocking. The editor, Left guide who deleted some of the material, was working on clean up efforts removing hyperlocal sourcing, paid-COI sources, self-published sources, and questionable sources. These were not some random drive-by deletions as problems went on for over a decade before the editor was community blocked/banned. Netherzone (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tooth & Nail Records discography

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

I don't believe it passes WP:LSC WP:NLIST., because this is essentially a product "catalog" of a record label, which is a publisher. Graywalls (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, and Lists. Graywalls (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Record label discography lists are useful and common. Since the label itself is notable, I'd argue the set of releases is notable. Since it is too large to roll into the main article, it makes sense to retain as a standalone list. glman (talk) 20:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Withdrawing my hasty thoughts for more reflection. glman (talk) 20:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]

Restoring my original opinion. glman (talk) 18:24, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Discographical information is encyclopedic and necessary for robust coverage of bands and labels. This is, unquestionably, a notable record label. The size of the list does mean it makes sense to have as a standalone article, though a merge is also an option. Chubbles (talk) 07:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just a refresher on a relevant discussion from the past Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not/Archive_59#WP:NOTDIRECTORY,_NOTWEBHOST_for_companies_and_bios which didn't find consensus on exhaustive product catalog for publishers. So, simply splitting off as "product catalog of a publisher" standalone seems like getting around the loophole.*:Graywalls (talk) 07:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Lists such as these are useful for sure. However, they must still meet WP:NLIST by having significant coverage that discusses the discography as a group. Are these sources available? --CNMall41 (talk) 20:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Herbert Heron (writer)

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

Yet another hyperlocal politician in the walled garden created to boost Carmel-by-theSea who fails WP:NPOLITICIAN as mayor of a tiny town, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. The article is filled with fluff and neither demonstrates nor verifies notability. He acted in a play which had 1,000 attendees. This is true barrel scraping. This is a Born - Lived - Died article about a WP:ROTM person who was doubtless notable to the who loved him 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:02, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Politicians, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:02, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Poetry, Theatre, and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Carmel-by-the-Sea,_California#Modern_era: where he is listed with a source; coverage exists so that other sources can be added and some content merged. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Someone has eviscerated this article -- I don't know if they were right or wrong to do so, but it is impossible to evaluate the article without this material, and so clearly it should be kept unless someone explains why they though the deleted sources were not acceptable even for non-controversial material. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Yes, indeed, removed sources tend to prove a much better article is possible, I am therefore not opposed to a plain Keep, another solution being a Merge with Forest Theater. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:57, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Eviscerating and then nominating this article makes sense if you understand the context of User:Greghenderson2006's eventual site block. Greg spent many years building a "walled garden" of articles about people, buildings and institutions that were famous in the small community of Carmel-by-the-Sea. His articles all used self-published sources, no matter how often he was told to stop, and that's what was deleted in this article. If you're interested, here's the final ANI discussion which led to Greg's site ban. Toughpigs (talk) 21:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not satisifed with your response, because the edits that were made in deleting the sources and content were really bad edits that left the article (and the other similar articles) ungrammatical and virtually unreadable. It would be expremely helpful for someone to list the specific sources that you object to and detail why they are not acceptable, even for non-controversial facts, and then we can make better edits or, possibly, merge, redirect or delete. But these arguments that the article should be deleted simply because the person who created it was blocked, and/or because it was one of several articles used to build out information about the locality, does not explain why the person is not notable. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, just to be clear: I personally had nothing to do with deleting anything from this article. I just remembered the ANI discussions, so I wanted to provide that context. Toughpigs (talk) 23:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions Djflem (talk) 17:13, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Djflem, pray elaborate: regarding whose comments and for what reason should we read this extremely long essay? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:32, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this clarification of the context. I still don't think eviscerating and then nominating a page is a good approach, but, honestly, that's just me. As for "self-published sources", maybe that was the reason you blocked that user but may I ask if Watkins, R. G., Hoyle, M. F. (1925). History of Monterey, Santa Cruz and San Benito Counties, California: Biographical S.J. Clarke (1925) was self-published? It was removed (used 5 times). Thanks again. (I will stand by my triple !vote, if I may; opposed to deletion). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of mayors of Carmel-by-the-Sea, California. Djflem (talk) 16:19, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Guillod

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

Declined four times in AfC, and after the fourth decline the draft creator moved it to mainspace. I've removed a BLP violating section with various very poor sources including Google Docs pages(!).

There is no actual claim to notability. The only independent, secondary source that provides more than extremely minimal coverage is the NYT article which is not enough. WP:BLP1E also applies to that source. bonadea contributions talk 18:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. bonadea contributions talk 18:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Television, Management, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kenny Inglis

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

A search to check if he was notable only returned interviews and other primary sources. As notability isn't inherited from something else, I don't think he's notable. Tavantius (talk) 18:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. Tavantius (talk) 18:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fahad Shaikh

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

This BLP was created by Fadushake (talk · contribs) - the subject themselves, as shown in the edit summary. I did a quick G'search and found nothing substantial to establish GNG, so I’m nom it for deletion. The subject has had roles in a few TV series, but that doesn’t guarantee their standalone BLP on Wikipedia. Anyone arguing that they meet NACTOR should keep this in mind when voting. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:49, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:49, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: He does seem to meet WP:NACTOR fairly with multiple significant roles (including more than 10 lead roles [I would not call this "a few"]) in notable productions. And that is verifiable through various sources on the page (even if some sources are not great) or via the articles about the productions when they exist (note that the absence of a page for any given production is not necessarily the sign of non-notability (nor of notability, clearly)) Also note that various sources and lead section used Sheikh (not Shaikh) for his name (example: https://theazb.com/fahad-sheikh-to-star-in-pakistans-first-ever-digital-feature-film/ https://www.mangobaaz.com/23-things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-actor-fahad-sheikh/) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:26, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: In the list mentioned in the Television section, 11 of his dramas are notable enough to have a separate Wiki Page. In many, he is in the lead role. Still not met NACTOR?--Gul Butt (talk) 21:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can cleanup page or put COI tag, reason everyone knows. Gul Butt (talk) 21:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Humayun Bashir Tarar

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

@Crosji: flagged this BLP and questioned its WP:N. I suggested they take it to AFD, but since they haven't, I'm stepping in to nom it for deletion because I don’t see it meeting GNG, even at the borderline. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karl Altau

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

Being the managing director of JBAN, a non-profit organization, does not make a politician inherently notable. A non-elected politician in a nationwide office fails to meet WP:NPOL. Additionally, I could not find significant coverage in reliable sources, so they also fail to meet WP:GNG. GrabUp - Talk 18:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Estonia. GrabUp - Talk 18:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The person has been interviewed by major outlets DW, VOC, ERR. He has appeared on C-SPAN, and has several articles in Estonian and English media.

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19] Tore Eestimees (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! To sustain a Wikipedia biography, we have to have enough sources that are about the person, more so than feature the person. Geschichte (talk) 21:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INTERVIEWS. We're not looking for sources in which he's speaking about himself or other things, we're looking for sources in which he's the subject being spoken or written about by other people. Bearcat (talk) 16:54, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. He has not held any political role that would qualify as "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL, but the sourcing is not adequate to get him over WP:GNG either. Bearcat (talk) 16:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Synchronized down shift rev-matching system

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

No refs on the page for many years. Appears to be a highly promotional page about a Nissan proprietary product with no indications that I can find of wider notability and importance JMWt (talk) 18:24, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. JMWt (talk) 18:24, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The term exists [20], but beyond sites using the phrase, there isn't anything at length about this. Not meeting notability requirements. Oaktree b (talk) 18:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Transportation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The French Wikipedia article has nine references. Left guide (talk) 21:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gunnar Norberg

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

Yet another hyperlocal politician in the walled garden created to boost Carmel-by-theSea who fails WP:NPOLITICIAN as mayor of a tiny town, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. The article is filled with fluff and neither demonstrates nor verifies notability. Even the NYT reference is a passing mention. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm not seeing notability, this is more of a play-by-play of the person's life, career and death. Sources are pretty much is discussed in the nomination. I don't find anything esle. Oaktree b (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This is another article on a non-notable mayor of Carmel-by-the-Sea, a town of about 3,000 people. The sourcing is hyper-local or sourced to their own autobiography. The article is part of what some editors have called a "walled garden", the purpose of which was boosterism and WP:PROMO. Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN, WP:GNG and WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. Netherzone (talk) 19:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Oaktree b, I don't know if you saw that someone removed a lot of the content and sources before the article was nominated for AfD. I don't know if they were right or wrong to do so, but it is impossible to evaluate the article without this material, and so I think it should be kept in until someone explains why they though the deleted sources were not acceptable even for non-controversial material. I have restored some of it pending the result of this AfD. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's quite a bit more in the article now, but I'm not sure if it makes this person notable. Being in the War, acting, politician. Seems like an interesting life, but this still feels like an extended CV, nothing really for a wiki article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ssilvers, this is part of a "walled garden" of Carmel promo, this ANI will provide more context:[21] (final ANI discussion), which led to the creator's site ban.The editor had a long history of COI and undisclosed paid-editing, poor sourcing, self-published sources, COI sources, and deliberately misrepresenting sources to make subjects appear notable. Additionally, there was LOUTsocking. The editor who deleted some of the material, u|Left guide|Left guide, was working on clean up efforts removing hyperlocal sourcing, paid-COI sourcing, self-published sources, and questionable sources. These were not some random drive-by deletions. The problems went on for many years before the editor was community blocked/banned. Netherzone (talk) 00:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I just read the thread over at ANI, what a situation that was. Oaktree b (talk) 02:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The deletions made to the article left it ungrammatical and were done very poorly, leaving a highly misleading picture of the article for reviewers at AfD. Let people review the article with the sources, and we'll see what the result of the AfD really is. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Outlands_in_the_Eighty_Acres#History: mentioned there; merge necessary content if possible. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Re dir can always be created later, but deleting it first gives a level of protection against surreptitious resurrection by COI editors, a real concern with articles around Carmel-by-the-Sea topic demonstrated by multiple block evasion attempts by a certain editor. Graywalls (talk) 06:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Jeff

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. References are bios, links to released songs, and some unreliable sources. In fact, many of the references listed are with titles that are not actually stated in the reference. A WP:BEFORE found nothing that would add up to notability. CNMall41 (talk) 18:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Uganda. Shellwood (talk) 18:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Uganda. CNMall41 (talk) 18:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perry Newberry

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

Yet another hyperlocal politician in the walled garden created to boost Carmel-by-theSea who fails WP:NPOLITICIAN as mayor of a tiny town, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. The article is filled with fluff and neither demonstrates nor verifies notability. Even the NYT reference is a passing mention. As for the play, 1,000 theatregoers is woefully small. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, Politicians, Theatre, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is an interesting entry about a small-town Mayor and newspaper publisher, but it is horribly written. Someone had removed a lot of the content before the article was nominated for AfD. I don't know if they were right or wrong to do so, but it is impossible to evaluate the article without this material, and so clearly it should be kept unless someone explains why they though the deleted sources were not acceptable even for non-controversial material. I have restored some of it pending the result of this AfD. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC) -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This article is another entry in ~~the "Carmelopedia"~~ what some editors have called a "walled garden", the purpose of which was boosterism and WP:PROMO effort to promote all things Carmel-by-the-Sea. This mayor, whose term ran for two years, of a town of less than 700 people during his term, does not meet notability criteria for an encyclopedia article. According to the article, he is "best known" for his efforts to keep Carmel free from tourists; this does not confer inherent notability. Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. He was also a non-notable writer (fails WP:NAUTHOR) and he acted in a play at a local theater in Carmel (fails WP:NACTOR). (The Forest Theater section is because he acted in a play there - this is typical bloat/puffery from the editor who is now blocked for COI/UPE and poor sourcing.) The sources are all local or hyper-local, or sourced to the Carmel Residents Association (COI), or the questionable "Arcadia Publisher" Images of America series of books for the tourist trade. The New York Times citation does not mention him at all. Netherzone (talk) 18:59, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious: How do you know that he only served as mayor for 2 years? The article says that the was elected for a 2nd term as mayor. Most mayors serve for 4 years, so that would indicate that he was mayor for 8 years. If that is not true, you should add refs to the article to make that clear for reviewers. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox states that he was In office 1922–1924. I have no idea why his term was so short. Netherzone (talk) 21:18, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There's extensive coverage of him in California papers, see San Francisco Call and Post, Fresno Morning Republican, San Francisco Chronicle (2), Oakland Tribune (2). Easily passes GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: sources presented attest of his notability; a redirect and merge should have been considered anyway. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources listed above seem to be enough for GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 02:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources or redirect top List of mayors of Carmel-by-the-Sea, California. The so-called derogatory Carmelopedia rationale is NOT a valid one for nomination for AFD. Djflem (talk) 16:17, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liangyou Group

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

Fails WP:NCORP. No reliable independent sources with significant coverage. Previous WP:PROD concerns still not addressed after many years. Imcdc Contact 11:18, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, and China. Imcdc Contact 11:18, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (soft) per nom. There’s no English language coverage of this company. If you find anything, please ping us. Bearian (talk) 04:52, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Bearian (talk · contribs), I've found Chinese-language sources that I've posted below. Cunard (talk) 11:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Luo, Yuyue 罗嵛月 (2015-04-15). "良友食用油曾经是上海老大，如今却输给金龙鱼" [Liangyou's edible oil was once the leader in Shanghai, but now it has lost to Golden Dragon Fish]. China Business News [zh] (in Chinese). Retrieved 2024-10-26 – via China Business Network.
  This article has a lot of negative coverage about Liangyou's business failures and also covers the company's history. The article notes: "据《第一财经日报》记者多方了解，这家2011年总资产已达154亿元、全年销售收入165亿元的老牌国企，这几年却不尽如人意。食用油是良友的主营业务之一，良友集团原领导曾有“海狮兴，则良友兴”的论断，一位资深业内人士如此告诉本报记者。现实非常残酷，上海作为良友的总部，占尽“主场”便利，良友不仅输给了跨国粮油品牌金龙鱼，在央企品牌福临门和台湾品牌多力冲击下，良友也应对乏力，市场份额下滑。"
  From Google Translate: "According to the reporter of China Business News, this old state-owned enterprise, which had total assets of 15.4 billion yuan in 2011 and annual sales revenue of 16.5 billion yuan, has not been satisfactory in recent years. Edible oil is one of Liangyou's main businesses. The former leader of Liangyou Group once said that "if Sea Lion prospers, Liangyou will prosper", a senior industry insider told our reporter. The reality is very cruel. As the headquarters of Liangyou, Shanghai has the convenience of "home court". Liangyou not only lost to the multinational grain and oil brand Golden Dragon Fish, but also failed to cope with the impact of the central enterprise brand Fortune and the Taiwanese brand Duoli, and its market share declined."
  The article notes: "市场人士分析，良友食用油售价低，是因为作为国企，担负了上海市平抑物价的责任，企业品牌投入资金相对较少。这导致良友在市场竞争中非常不利。"
  From Google Translate: "Market analysts analyzed that the low price of Liangyou cooking oil is because, as a state-owned enterprise, it bears the responsibility of stabilizing prices in Shanghai, and the company's brand investment is relatively small. This puts Liangyou at a great disadvantage in market competition."
2. "中国经济 '99" [China Economy '99]. Economic Daily (in Chinese). 1999. Retrieved 2024-10-26 – via Google Books.
  The article notes: "公司建于 1998 年 10 月,目前已开业 100 家“良友便利”连锁店。未来发展目标是三年内建成 300 家连锁便利店。上海良友集团是根据国务院《关于进一步深化粮食流通体制改革的决定》精神,经中共上海市委、市人民政府批准,以国有骨干粮食企业为主体,于 1998 年 8 月 8日成立。上海良友(集团)有限公司是上海良友集团的核心企业,注册资金 17 亿元人民币。主要经营:粮油批发、加工,资产经营,实业投资,房地产开发经营及物业管理,科研开发,咨询服务,国内贸易等。下辖 7 个全资子公司, 2 个控股子公司。上海良友集团承担上海粮食市场流通主渠道任务。"
  From Google Translate: "The company was established in October 1998 and currently has 100 "Liangyou Convenience" chain stores in operation. The future development goal is to build 300 chain convenience stores within three years. Shanghai Liangyou Group was established on August 8, 1998, based on the spirit of the State Council's "Decision on Further Deepening the Reform of the Grain Circulation System", approved by the Shanghai Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China and the Municipal People's Government, with state-owned backbone grain enterprises as the main body. Shanghai Liangyou (Group) Co., Ltd. is the core enterprise of Shanghai Liangyou Group with a registered capital of RMB 1.7 billion. Main business: grain and oil wholesale, processing, asset management, industrial investment, real estate development and operation and property management, scientific research and development, consulting services, domestic trade, etc. It has 7 wholly-owned subsidiaries and 2 holding subsidiaries. Shanghai Liangyou Group undertakes the main channel task of Shanghai grain market circulation."
3. Li, Jianzhi 李建致 (2019). "沐浴春风成长壮大——上海良友集团二十年之发展认领" [Growing Strong in the Spring Breeze: The 20-Year Development of Shanghai Liangyou Group]. 商业企业 [Commercial Enterprise] (in Chinese). No. 6. pp. 28–31. Retrieved 2024-10-26 – via CQVIP [zh].
  The abstract notes: "1998年,上海良友(集团)有限公司成立,从此粮油企业和职工,真正步人市场竞争的大海;2000年,改革、调整和转型,良友企业焕发出新的生机;2015年,联合重组,打造实力,良友集团风华正茂,昂首阔步。"
  From Google Translate: "In 1998, Shanghai Liangyou (Group) Co., Ltd. was established. Since then, grain and oil enterprises and employees have truly stepped into the sea of market competition; in 2000, reform, adjustment and transformation, Liangyou Enterprises have regained new vitality; in 2015, joint reorganization and strength building, Liangyou Group is in its prime and strides forward."
4. Liu, Lijing 刘丽靓 (2015-05-08). "光明食品集团与上海良友集团联合重组" [Bright Food Group and Shanghai Liangyou Group Jointly Restructured]. China Securities Journal (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2021-11-03. Retrieved 2024-10-26 – via Sina Corporation.
  The article notes: "上海良友集团是上海从事粮食经营的国有企业集团，承担着政府委托或指定的职能，为保障上海粮食安全和供给稳定服务。其经营领域涵盖粮油加工、仓储物流、便利连锁、粮油贸易、进出口业务、实业投资等。集团下属20家全资、控股子公司和13家参股公司，以及国家级粮油制品检验检测中心和上海市级集团技术中心。经过多年发展，旗下拥有海狮、乐惠、雪雀（福新）、味都、三添、友益等上海市著名商标和上海名牌产品，主要粮油产品上海市场占有率名列前茅。"
  From Google Translate: "Shanghai Liangyou Group is a state-owned enterprise group engaged in grain business in Shanghai. It undertakes the functions entrusted or designated by the government to serve the guarantee of Shanghai's grain security and stable supply. Its business areas cover grain and oil processing, warehousing and logistics, convenience chain, grain and oil trade, import and export business, industrial investment, etc. The group has 20 wholly-owned and holding subsidiaries and 13 joint-stock companies, as well as a national grain and oil product inspection and testing center and a Shanghai-level group technology center. After years of development, it owns Shanghai's famous trademarks and Shanghai famous brand products such as Sea Lion, Lehui, Snow Bird (Fuxin), Weidu, Santian, and Youyi. The market share of its main grain and oil products in Shanghai ranks among the top."
5. "日本九州农协与上海签订2000吨日本米出口协议" [The Kyushu Agricultural Cooperative in Japan has signed an export agreement for 2,000 tons of Japanese rice with Shanghai]. 中经网 [China Economic Net] (in Chinese). 2007-12-04.
  The article notes: "报道称，承销这批大米的是在中国具有大米专卖权的“良友集团”旗下的“上海良友公司”。"
  From Google Translate: "The report states that the underwriter of this batch of rice is "Shanghai Liangyou Company," which is under the "Liangyou Group," a company that has exclusive rights to sell rice in China."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Shanghai Liangyou Group (simplified Chinese: 上海良友集团有限公司; traditional Chinese: 上海良友集團有限公司) to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 11:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the sources found by Cunard added to the article, then I’m going along with a Keep per WP:HEY. Bearian (talk) 11:19, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Can we get a further review of newly found sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Albedo Space

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

Non notable; New York Times article (I read it completely) only provides general information (likely from the website or press-release, e.g.a "The company’s website makes no mention of imaging people, or the privacy issues. Even so, reconnaissance experts say regulators should wake up before its spacecraft start taking their first close-ups"). Also I found other sources to be not SIGCOV Qivatari (talk) 07:38, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Colorado. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 10:02, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Google News suggest no WP:SIGCOV and the NYT article seems like a passing mention Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 10:04, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spaceflight-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Very week keep actually. The NYT article meets WP:ORGCRIT. It has editorial oversight so unless OP is able to show the publication failed to do so it can be used towards notability. By weak, I mean the other reference I found was this in TechCrunch. Parts of the article are obviously supplied by the company but there does appear to be enough independent coverage within to meet WP:ORGCRIT.--CNMall41 (talk) 07:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Will solidify my opinion after a full source review, but after an abbreviated one I am currently inclined to redirect to Very low Earth orbit. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:48, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm going to go with redirect for this one, just seems too soon for now. I'm not entirely sold on the NYT article, but I think I would go for a keep if we had 3 sources of equal quality (though I'd prefer it if at least one of them was better of course). Even with how much of it is made of quotes, the parts of it that don't (and are actually about the company) clear my threshold, if barely. Unfortunately, we don't have three, and the TechCrunch doesn't quite do it for me, and nor do any of the news articles that cite the NYT article offer enough additional content to swing things. As a plus, that NYT article should be suitable as a source for a bit of content to use in Very low Earth orbit which I'm recommending as the target as well. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:49, 12 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!} 07:57, 15 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) 11:56, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Very low Earth orbit. This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. The NYT article talks "in general" about the impact of sophisticated cameras in the sky and provides no in-depth "Independent Content" *about* the company (which wasn't provided by the company and/or their founders). HighKing⁺⁺ 14:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely, this USA satellite company doesn't not meet GNG/WP:NCORP which requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. 2603:8001:7106:C515:7811:9D52:2B0E:FC2C (talk) 20:52, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why redirect to Very lo Earth orbit though? Could we not direct it to NASA? 2603:8001:7106:C515:7811:9D52:2B0E:FC2C (talk) 20:54, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Right now, there is no consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Attractions

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

No evidence of notability separate from Elvis Costello. Most information of importance already covered in Costello's page DeputyBeagle (talk) 15:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. DeputyBeagle (talk) 15:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:21, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Elvis Costello. The key thing here is the album they released on their own, which despite the nominator's statement, isn't even mentioned in the Costello article. --Michig (talk) 21:09, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not an album of any particular note. I'm not opposed to a merge but I don't think the Attractions doing an album without Costello is noteworthy for his page DeputyBeagle (talk) 22:14, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Elvis Costello. Note that not all of the article has to be merged, and most of the text in this article is merely a wordier version of history already discussed at Costello's article. A few band-specific events can be squeezed in over there. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:37, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did contribute some a bit to the article a few years ago, including adding the NF image and some sources. The only basis I'd argue the inclusion of notability would be the fact that the Attractions have been called one of the best backing bands in music history, but as the others have said, about 90% of their career is tied to EC. With that being said I think it would be fine to merge. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 14:06, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep . This band were the backing group to a leading New Wave singer, which surely makes them notable. YTKJ (talk) 10:13, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not sure if I understand the logic there. Nobody's denying Costello is notable, but they haven't done enough notable on their own to justify their own article. They need to have independent notability.

In the same way as how WP:BANDMEMBER doesn't give every member of a notable band its own, a backing band needs to be able to stand on their WP:BAND criteria seperately from Costello if they have their own article DeputyBeagle (talk) 08:49, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I take your point, User: DeputyBeagle. Having looked at WP: BANDMEMBER and read the first item on the list of notability criteria under WP:BAND, I can say that I would not be opposed to a merge with or redirect to Elvis Costello. Just so long as the outcome of this discussion is not deletion - the band were too closely linked with Costello for that. YTKJ (talk) 22:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Sources show this is clearly notable!!! -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:41, 27 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!} 17:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

D- Aside:@Liz, hello, if the undue bold mentioned in a recent message concerned this page, I am afraid it was not my deed but an unvolontary consequence of an edit by@YTKJ (fixed) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Notable, and also a very reasonable way of organizing content surrounding Costello. yes, there are other ways it could be done, but this way makes sense.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 13:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Government Degree College, Doda

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

Fails to meet WP:NSCHOOL. The currently cited sources are not WP:SIGCOV. While searching, I wasn’t able to find reliable sources with significant coverage. GrabUp - Talk 16:20, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Jammu and Kashmir. GrabUp - Talk 16:20, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to University of Jammu after adding a mention there. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:05, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also support a Redirect. GrabUp - Talk 17:15, 29 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!} 17:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dokuz Sekiz Müzik

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

Does not pass WP:NCORP. Mccapra (talk) 17:35, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Computing, and Turkey. Mccapra (talk) 17:35, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:18, 22 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!} 17:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Francis W. Wynkoop

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

An entirely blanked article because it fails WP:NBIO and has WP:COI issues. Somehow, nobody thought about making a deletion discussion throughout all of this process. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 17:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing there: delete. Athel cb (talk) 18:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Something now@Athel cb:. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:16, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Architecture, California, and Colorado. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:11, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hawaii-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: ~~and restore immediately the content!~~ This is not how things should be done. On top of this, Wynkoop is a notable architect. I understand the nominator has good intentions but this is a procedural keep. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:11, 29 October 2024 (UTC) I have restored the content. While BLARing and redirecting the page could have been acceptable (maybe not the best solution, but procedurally acceptable at least), the mere blanking of the page was disruptive, especially as the one !voter here does not seem to have looked at the history of the page.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Might as well ping @Left guide and @Arch2all to see what arguments they have. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 06:33, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the redirect, because it linked to a page which is not directly related to Francis Wynkop. I haven't deleted the previous content. It is not an acceptable solution to create misleading redirects in this case. Keep the old content or delete the whole page, if no one can create acceptable content here. Arch2all (talk) 09:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wynkoop is with 2 Os; and the redirect (although I think the page should be kept) was not misleading. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:53, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect per the edit summary argument which is still fully valid:
fails WP:NBIO, virtually all of the coverage available for this person is paid sources, passing mentions, and questionable sources that don't count towards notability
Also possibly the product of COI/UPE based on the banned article creator's history. Left guide (talk) 07:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure your general assessment of the sources as a whole is correct but WP:NPEOPLE indicates that persons meeting the following criterion may be considered notable: "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews;" That is obviously the case here. Your redirect was not misleading (see above) but I consider it is not necessary.

Also, @TeapotsOfDoom pinging the 2 contributors who redirected/blanked the page respectively might be seen as inappropriate, although it was limited, open and neutral in its wording, as the audience might fall under the category "partisan". I am certain you did it in good faith and both users were not selected for their opinion on the subject but their opinion on the subject was obviously clear to you before you pinged them. Thank you all the same.

Anyway, despite strong indications of notability, I stand by my procedural SK !vote. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:12, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Admin comment, I see no grounds for a speedy keep as BLAR is normal part of editing. Please focus on notability and not procedural issues. Star Mississippi 11:39, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But I will focus on procedural issues, though. Please look at the history of the page and of this AfD. And please read my comment with more attention. "Blaring" is not an issue. Blanking a page, however, is not, I must insist, normal part of editing. At all. And nominating a blank page, even in good faith, is sufficient ground for SK in my view, at least for procedural keep. See first !vote and see nominator's rationale. So, as your comment is apparently made in quality of administrator and my input seems to be the only thing you notice here, please kindly read: Wikipedia:Page blanking. It's a guideline. As for the rest, I mentioned notabilty too, myself (twice), but AfDs are not always about notability only and when a procedural flaw is patent, it is relevant to mention it and it is permitted if not recommended, to !vote accordingly. Thank you for your time and concern. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:48, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Starship Excelsior episodes

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

Fails WP:NLIST, references consists of primary sources and unreliable sources like WP:IMDB. Mika1h (talk) 16:59, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Radio, and Lists. Mika1h (talk) 16:59, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. Starship Excelsior was merged and redirected in 2023 following Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek/Archive_9#GNG? Vegantics (talk) 17:26, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as being sourced only to the IMDb and the subject itself. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 07:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto Ukrainian Genealogy Group

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

No refs on the page for a very long time. I see some passing references to the existence of the group but not substantial coverage in RS. JMWt (talk) 16:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Ukraine, and Canada. JMWt (talk) 16:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Does the article have notability and importance? Are the references you have found.

1. Independent

2. Notable

3. Secondary

4. Strictly independent of the subject? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 16:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They're not substantial - they are passing mentions. As I said. JMWt (talk) 17:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unreferenced, and there really isn't any substantive WP:GNG-worthy coverage about the group in reliable sources to salvage this with — I've been able to find primary sources and glancing namechecks of the fact that this group exists, but absolutely nothing where the group itself is the subject of coverage and analysis. Bearcat (talk) 14:32, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Lane

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

Unclear notability, and the info is already covered in the The Yogscast article. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 16:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No point if he is already mentioned- lets create a redirect that redirects the simon lane visitors over to Yogscast's article. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 16:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Internet, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hejaaz International School

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

No refs on the page for many years. Schools are no longer considered to have inherent notability and few sources found to consider against the notability criteria JMWt (talk) 16:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Sri Lanka. JMWt (talk) 16:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, without significant coverage in multiple indepent secondary sources - fails WP:NSCHOOL. Dan arndt (talk) 21:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GITEX ASIA

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

Promotional article for non-notable upcoming technology expo. In a WP:BEFORE search, all I could find was more of what's cited here: press releases, routine coverage in expo listings, and paid placement. I was about to redirect it to GITEX as an alternative to deletion, but thought it was better bring it to AFD first. Wikishovel (talk) 15:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Business, Technology, and Singapore. Wikishovel (talk) 15:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gravity Rush (franchise)

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

Since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/True Crime (series) recently closed as delete, this article is suffering from the same problems. Gravity Rush, as a series, fails WP:GNG, and also goes against the guidelines established in WP:VG/POP#Remakes, expansions, and series articles (there are only 2 games and a film that is not yet in production) OceanHok (talk) 15:49, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. OceanHok (talk) 15:49, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'd agree that pretty much all of this is redundant with the page of the first Gravity Rush game and doesn't need to exist. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Redundant: all is covered in the game articles. Cameo appearances are actually covered twice since they're also in Kat (Gravity Rush)#Appearances. --Mika1h (talk) 16:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As mentioned, there's been a longstanding consensus that 2 entries in a series isn't enough to warrant a stand-alone series article, because generally all content can conceptually fit in either the existing first or second articles. Sergecross73 msg me 17:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per OceanHok. Not all series need a separate article. With only two original games, this continuity is already covered at the article about the first game. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:11, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aviencloud

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

No significant coverage. Borderline A7. C F A 💬 15:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Germany. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Only thing of relevance I found in the sources is "thanks to the song's distributing label, Aviencloud, whose releases are copyright-free." from edm.com IgelRM (talk) 00:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mozaic

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

Fails WP:GNG. BoardGameGeek lists reviews from HALL 9000 and Rainy Day Games but they don't seem like reliable sources. Suggesting a redirect to Mosaic as an alternative to deletion. Mika1h (talk) 15:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Mika1h (talk) 15:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have completely rewritten this article and removed the copypaste tag. I was able to find one review on a editorially independent German game review site. There may be more sources out there, especially on European websites and in European magazines. Guinness323 (talk) 18:41, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think H@LL9000 is a reliable source? It seems to be a self-published source. It isn't listed at WP:BGS. I don't see any credentials for the reviewer to qualify as "an established expert on the subject matter": [22]. Even then 1 review isn't enough. For example, I looked at magazine scans at Internet Archive, and found nothing: [23]. --Mika1h (talk) 19:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prison blogs

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

Fails WP:LINKFARM, linking only to external sites, with no other content besides that. Clearly unencyclopedic. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Internet. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unencyclopedic WP:NOTEVERYTHING JMWt (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rhys Allport

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

Fails WP:GNG. No evidence of notability from secondary sources. Only one appearance by a 4th tier team in English tournament. Demt1298 (talk) 14:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC) Demt1298 (talk) 14:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Wales. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:36, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:38, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan Robinson (footballer)

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

Fails WP:GNG No evidence of notability in secondary sources. One one match at the 4th level of English soccer. Demt1298 (talk) 14:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC) Demt1298 (talk) 14:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and England. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:36, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:38, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Cinemas

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

Failing to find "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" to meet WP:ORGCRIT. All sources are currently primary. AusLondonder (talk) 07:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and England. AusLondonder (talk) 07:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/7-things-scott-cinemas-bridgwater-2585607 ; https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/20307914.exmouth-cinema-gets-42-000-government-funding/ and multiple other sources indicate a certain notability imv; at the very least could be redirected to list of film theater chains (currently AfDed.; same nom.) for example. I DpD the page; same nom . -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:25, 15 October 2024 (UTC) (nb-Needless to say I am opposed to deletion)[reply]
This is very trivial coverage, certainly not sufficient per WP:ORGDEPTH AusLondonder (talk) 14:45, 21 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) 11:55, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Austerby

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

Really cannot see any case for a separate article; this was until recently a redirect to Bourne, Lincolnshire. Which seem s appropriate. TheLongTone (talk) 12:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England. Skynxnex (talk) 13:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The Austerby is described as a hamlet under the entry for Bourne in a Lincolnshire Trade Directory and appears on older Ordnance Survey maps. Austerby without "The" is a street name in The Austerby, Bourne. The ward's full name is Bourne Austerby. Pevsner has an Austerby Manor House as a titled entry, but notes it under Bourne. In a recent WikiProject UK geography discussion on whether UK wards required a separate article, most contributors thought they should be subject to passing the GNG - but one experienced editor was of the opinion wards come under WP:NPLACE and have a presumption of notability, so not clearcut. Close call but on balance, I support the nominator's redirect - to Bourne, Lincolnshire, though may change to keep, if further sources are put forward. Rupples (talk) 03:07, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Box Cricket League

AfDs for this article:

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

Not a G4, but nor have factors changed in the last month since the most recent AfD. Star Mississippi 14:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sports, Cricket, and India. Star Mississippi 14:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had no idea about the previous afds, I found information about this show on the internet, and I checked it has a wikidata page and Hindi Wikipedia, I just tried to translate the Hindi version to English with additional references and following editing policies, please let me know if I made a mistake.

Initially, I made this with the AFC template but because there’s a long waiting time, I moved it directly to the mainspace.

Thanks.

Zuck28 (talk) 14:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't do anything wrong @Zuck28 and you're not required to use AfC. Each Wikipedia has their own guidelines for notability. Discussions here have concluded that it doesn't meet the requirements. Since the last discussion was a month ago, it's unlikely but consensus can change. The community will decide here whether it has. Star Mississippi 14:53, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robin Radhakrishnan

AfDs for this article:

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

Promotional article created by a sock who was originally blocked for UPE. Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Most of the sources are WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The last AFD opened by TheWikiholic was closed as no consensus. However the editors I'm tla and Rydex64 (page creator) who voted to keep the article have been blocked for socking and UPE. Thilsebatti (talk) 13:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Internet, India, and Kerala. Thilsebatti (talk) 13:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Oaktree last time. I don't see any arguments against these sources... Aaron Liu (talk) 14:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm being cited as a "voice of reason" if you will, glad my contributions here help. Oaktree b (talk) 18:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Still a keep, with the same sources I cited in my last discussion. Oaktree b (talk) 18:51, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peruri 88

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

The article generally does not meet the WP:NBUILDING or WP:GNG guidelines. Had the building been constructed or been under construction, it might have qualified under these guidelines, as it would be the tallest building in Jakarta and likely attract substantial coverage. Unfortunately, it remains only a design proposal from 2012, and 12 years later, there have been no further updates or developments on this plan. Ckfasdf (talk) 13:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that we had a look for sources at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indonesia#Peruri 88. Also note that, at least for the coordinates of the purported site, very recent Google StreetView imagery shows no evidence of the site being cleared (there's still commercial and residential structures, apparently occupied), never mind construction. Ckfasdf has informed user:M R Karim Reza, the article's creator (who remains active on en.wikipedia), of the deletion.-- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 13:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Finlay McWalter: This is the latest Google Street View image, dated August 2024, showing no signs of construction or site clearing. The proposed location is still in use by Peruri as their office and facility Ckfasdf (talk) 14:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Indonesia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:08, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of prime ministers of the Netherlands by education

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

Does not meet notability guidelines for lists. Afaik, no sources in the Netherlands focus on the background of prime ministers in such a way. Dajasj (talk) 13:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Dajasj (talk) 13:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Education, and Netherlands. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NLIST. I would probably also nominate Religious affiliations of prime ministers of the Netherlands for deletion too, as I don't see any sources discussing that either. Procyon117 (talk) 15:33, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE and WP:NLIST. Conyo14 (talk) 23:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1927 Georgia vs. Yale football game

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

Regular season college football game that has not received continued coverage. Hirolovesswords (talk) 12:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, American football, and Connecticut. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:49, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Appeares pretty routine, not sure why this needs an article. Could be redirected to 1927 Georgia Bulldogs football team#Week 2: at Yale. Reywas92^Talk 20:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, there is nothing in the article or in any sources that explains why this game could be notable in the first place. A redirect seems pointless because this seems to be a very unlikely search term. Esolo5002 (talk) 06:18, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haven Village

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

This does not appear to be a notable place. It is not marked on Ordnance Survey mapping or included in List of United Kingdom locations: Has-Hd. Considering the references:

"Post office directory": the only hit for "haven village" appears to be the phrase "Skegness is a small haven, village ...": a red herring
Newcomb: confirms that "Haven Village" is a postal address but does no more
Hennessy: "lives in Haven Village, Boston, which is a block of flats run by Encore Estate Management."
Quadrant: survey is for "Haven Village ltd." - suburbs are not companies
Archaeological: confirms Haven Village as a location, former warehouse site and mentions "groundworks associated with a residential development at Haven Village"

Nothing here suggests that HV is a "suburb" of Boston. The encyclopedia does not need an article on every housing development. PamD 12:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. PamD 12:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have mentioned this AfD at Talk:Boston, Lincolnshire#Boston-related AfD to draw it to the attention of editors interested in Boston. PamD 12:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:47, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the moment. The street-map and the Quadrant source make it clear what this is: a housing-development that includes both small houses and blocks of flats over 15 acres of Boston. Not an insignificant development, but not a suburb, just a run-of-the-mill development. In consequence, our article has nothing much to say, is misleading in the little it does say, and relies on an unhealthy mix of not-very-secondary sources (developers, local authorities) and trivia (over-filled bins). Elemimele (talk) 14:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - appears to be a development with little else to show it has notability. This might change in time but at present it doesn't appear to meet the notability standards here. JMWt (talk) 16:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Dutch politicians with doctorates

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

Firstly, it's a pretty niche topic and I'm not confident it's notable enough. Second, it's orphaned and it's not obvious to me what other articles could link to it. Third, it's outdated now and cumbersome to keep up to date. Luxorr (talk) 12:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Lists of people, and Netherlands. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:47, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, afaik this gets no attention in the Netherlands and the article appears to be started only because there is an American version. There are not enough Dutch politics editors here, so it is unlikely to get ever updated because it is low priority Dajasj (talk) 13:03, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:08, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kazeem Aremu

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

Fails WP:NACADEMIC or WP:ANYBIO. Majority of the sources are primary sources like Google scholars and the article has been drafted before. Ibjaja055 (talk) 11:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Either draftify or delete, as it is not notable, as you said. Primary sources are not acceptable (i will place a maintenance tag if not there for now) and it doesn't follow the WP:ANYBIO terms. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 11:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Nigeria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don’t see any claim of notability here—GNG or NPROF. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 12:47, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't see a pass of WP:PROF (or anything else) from his position, citation record, etc. Also, although many of his works are in legitimate journals, I was a little troubled to see that his top-cited paper as listed by Google Scholar is claimed to be in a journal, "Journal of Nonlinear Functional Analysis", that I cannot find in MathSciNet or zbMATH, both of which should index all legitimate mathematics journals. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Delete doesn't satisfy WP:ANYBIO or even WP:NACADEMIC per lack of WP:SIGCOV and looks like it's a promo article even. Google News shows not the Guy but different one. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 22:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that the source #2 looks like a blog. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 22:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I think he has made a good start and in math citation numbers are low. Considering how long he has been active his publication record is impressive. Because the article was previously draftified it cannot be a second time, so delete is the only option. Note: Draft:Kazeem Aremu already exists, editor did a cut and paste. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:16, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've requested histmerge since BoyTheKingCanDance has made substantial edits. Sennecaster (Chat) 18:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Athletico Physical Therapy

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

Appears to fail WP:NCORP. Sourcing mainly consists of press releases, WP:CORPTRIV routine announcements, and non-independent sources. WP:BEFORE search wasn't of much help, mostly directory listings and passing mentions. Left guide (talk) 07:24, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, Sports, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Cant find any coverage to speak of. Gave up a few pages after the yelp reviews. Alpha3031 (t • c) 00:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, if you search on "Althletico" quite a lot comes up (not the football team). While it is not the world's largest PT, it is a well established one; I have in fact twice been a customer. I wonder if a detailed WP:BEFORE was done using all permutations. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:53, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ldm1954, I don't think I've seen you on CORP AFDs much, just wanted to quickly confirm if you're aware normally a lot of the search results we normally see are press releases, which are excluded under WP:ORGIND. For example, of the first 15 google results on my end for Athletico -paranaense about the company instead of the football club ([24] [25] [26] [27] [28][29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38]) only one (number 6 on the list) is not a press release, and even that is local coverage of the type of charity activities companies often do for publicity and composed of mostly quotes from the organisations involved. This is quite a common situation for NCORP because most companies interested in that kind of thing will put out press releases very regularly but it does mean that the number of times it comes up in search results (ghits) even when confirmed to be about the subject is quite often less useful for establishing notability than many other subjects. Alpha3031 (t • c) 22:56, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Alpha3031 I am not that familiar with CORP AfDs, although I have come across quite a few startups described in academic BLPs as part of claims for notability. I am also familiar with churnalism as that occurs with too many science blogs. Three points first:
I did not know much about PT, but over the last few years I have learned. I would not class the PT employees the same as nurses, but they are certainly grossly underpaid and their role is not that different.

It is a pretty bad page, clearly it was written by a novice as it does not hit the appropriate topics.

As an educated guess, each location sees 40 patients per day which, with repeat visits comes to about 100 per week. When the numbers are combined I think this is a significant health care effort.
Beyond that, the sources you quote in fact have material which I think should have been used:
([1] quotes the Big10 VP which could be used

[3] is an award from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services which can perhaps be found.

[7] is from another company so is independent.

[10] has quotes from the Chicago Bears which could be used.
There might be more. There is a YouTube channel here which at a minimum goes as an external link Ldm1954 (talk) 17:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, in theory, some of these sources could plausibly provide information in an article, but the main point is we need sources establishing notability in the first place in accordance with WP:NORG. The three numbered points don't address Wikipedia notability. As to those sources, the Chicago Bears are a football team who appear to be one of the PT company's clients, so not an independent source, that's a WP:COISOURCE. The YouTube video is published by the company's account, so clearly not an independent source either. PRNewswire (or at least the link you provided) simply regurgitates press releases by the company, so obviously not independent either. The material published by another company that you claim to be independent is actually a WP:COISOURCE because it says NextGen Healthcare, Inc…announced its extended agreement with Athletico Physical Therapy. The article hosted on the Malaysian Reserve states that it's copied from PRNewswire which means it's another regurgitated press release. Left guide (talk) 01:55, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Another one of these 'sponsor everything but hard drugs' physical therapy chains that just blanket multiple Midwest markets and teams; yes, they're notable and advertise everywhere, but they provide a WP:MILL service that unless you get paid for a testimonial or send a novel to the BBB because they broke a rib, you're not going to hear non-neutral sources about them easily. Nate • (chatter) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fahrenheit (microarchitecture)

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

There is no evidence that an Nvidia GPU microarchitecture by the name Fahrenheit ever existed. At that time, NVidia simply gave each chip they designed a numerical codename based on the order they designed it - NV1, NV2, NV3, NV4 and NV5. Plus, in driver code from that time (unlike celsius and later) there is no evidence of a Fahrenheit. The only provided sources are websites that seem to have automatically generated pages and are therefore not reliable, or are from at least 25 years after the fact.

What Fahrenheit actually was was a cancelled 3D API intended to merge DirectX and OpenGL: https://www.techmonitor.ai/technology/nvidia_takes_the_3d_heat_with_fahrenheit (there is already a wiki article on this) - Skynorth/Starfrost^{my talk page} 11:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I dont see any evidence regarding this microarchitecture, "Fahrenheit" to be made by NVIDIA ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 11:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gymnasium Neufeld

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

No refs on the page for a very long time. I don't speak relevant languages but I'm not seeing the substantial RS needed to meet the notability criteria JMWt (talk) 11:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Switzerland. JMWt (talk) 11:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No references, clearly not notable and needs significant cleanup- no infobox. This feels more like a draft. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 11:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Seems like a half-assed copy and paste (and translation) from the German Wikipedia, including the contents. The first paragraph of the history in the German article matches the one here. Procyon117 (talk) 15:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John C. Catlin

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

WP:ROTM lawyer, and no-one knows what a "Blacksmith Mayor" is. This seems to be a soubriquet bestowed upon him by the creating editor, who created one or more walled gardens in and around Carmel-by-the-Sea, with distinctly useless hyperlocal referencing. WP:NOTINHERITED applies - look at the list of people he knew! Fails WP:V, fails WP:BIO, fails WP:NPOLITICIAN, fails WP:GNG. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this article on this former mayor and lawyer that is one of a series of articles written with a promotional tone of boosterism. The boosterism resulted in what some have called a "walled garden" surrounding the town and its inhabitants that connect the editor's articles with one another, usually through a hub like Timeline of Carmel-by-the-Sea, California, or Timeline of Carmel-by-the-Sea, California, or the The Carmel Pine Cone. Carmel had a population of around 2,000 when he was in office for two years. He was a run-of-the-mill politician who does not meet WP notability criteria for politicians. As to his title, "Blacksmith Mayor", it's a mystery as mentioned in the nom, and may be a neologism fabricated by the creator. Hyper-local sourcing. Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN, WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Editor Bearian has developed useful standards (not guideline or policy) for determining of attorneys HERE and mayors for HERE. (No ping because I do not want this to be perceived as canvassing.) Netherzone (talk) 14:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 14:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's a case to be made for GNG, with a three-column feature in the Sacramento Bee and a full-column long story in the Oakland Tribune. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Someone removed a lot of the content and sources before the article was nominated for AfD. I don't know if they were right or wrong to do so, but it is impossible to evaluate the article without this material, and so I think it should be kept in until someone explains why they though the deleted sources were not acceptable even for non-controversial material. I have restored some of it pending the result of this AfD. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Carmel-by-the-Sea,_California: especially the part about the Forge (limit merge to a reasonable amount of content) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources listed above in addition to this, this and this appear to be enough for GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 16:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flatiron School

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

Run of the mill bootcamp, coverage is all highly routine and of questionable independence. I can see maybe one source that's barely usable, but the rest are far short of what we'd need for NCORP, and we definitely need multiple. It might be possible to redirect this somewhere, but I can't think of any plausible targets. Also probably going to nom Chester Ismay later. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Education, Computing, and New York. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - in the immortal words of Frank Zappa, this article is "strictly commercial". Advertorial all the way. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 20:31, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I just took Chester Ismay to AfD actually while reviewing both that page in this in a WP:BEFORE. Flatiron School references fall short of WP:ORGCRIT in that they are routine announcements and basic churnalism. I would recommend a redirect to WeWork but looks like another company bought them since that acquisition so that would not be an option. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think someone forgot to check the book references 2603:8001:7106:C515:7811:9D52:2B0E:FC2C (talk) 21:19, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HellCup

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

Given sources don't show any evidence of WP:GNG, the first one being just match results and the second one being a user-editable wiki. A WP:BEFORE doesn't bring up much except more GosuGamers match results. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. Mid-tier Counter-Strike tournament series that has been around for a while, but there is little to no coverage of the events. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 13:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive.com.au

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

Suggesting a redirect to Fairfax Media § 2014 to 2018, with potentially some content merged to that section. I cannot find anything else useful, and keeping in mind that The Sydney Morning Herald is not independent of Fairfax, I find it unlikely this would benefit from a standalone page. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Companies, Websites, and Australia. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I almost AfD'ed this myself (see page history) but given the number of our articles using this site (validly) as a source, I considered instead that it made the grade for keeping. Being a stub is not in itself a deletion reason, even if it's not expanded immediately. Especially as this article is only a couple of weeks old and it does have adequate sources. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not asking for a delete though, and I never mentioned being a stub, so you're putting words in my mouth with that one. I did read what you and 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco were doing in the history, I don't believe this is suited for a standalone page, and being cited by Wikipedia is not a valid reason to keep an article. Being quoted in the media is in no way adequate sourcing. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need at least 2 in depth sources to meet WP:GNG and I am not seeing this at all. 2603:8001:7106:C515:7811:9D52:2B0E:FC2C (talk) 20:36, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Hunt (journalist)

AfDs for this article:

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

Apart from the subject doing his work diligently, there is nothing that is notable about him. The sources fail WP:GNG and not enough reliable sources to proof Significant coverage. The same article was deleted few months ago for the same reason Ibjaja055 (talk) 09:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

at the time, there was a strong discussion for keep with an improved, more concise approach. this should be kept and allowed to expand with the list of third-party sources provided. Journowatch (talk) 09:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Including this 1, 2 and several other references that are not even talking about the subject? Ibjaja055 (talk) 09:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed the link for 1 is an error. Updated now. Both reference the journalist's work. Journowatch (talk) 10:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"there was strong discussion for keep with an improved, more concise approach"

The only keep vote claimed that he's written about by and appeared on TV shows for the BBC (can't find anything to suggest this - only "Matt Hunt" on BBC were a NZ killer and a CEO of a bear NGO)

It was also from an account that was later blocked for undisclosed paid editing... Molecular Pilot 10:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Thailand, and Virginia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:53, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. It's clear that this person isn't notable. Tavantius (talk) 15:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete only references are author profile from a company he works for, the articles he himself wrote and a video from a time he appeared as a pundit. The later two don't even mention him... just the fact he was in them. I've done a through search and haven't found much else. Meeting WP:NJOURNALIST requires being:
- "widely cited by peers or successors" (no evidence of even 1 peer doing this presently from both existing refs & my search)
- or "originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique" (n/a)
- or "major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work". He's made some cool articles but I can't find any that are "well-known"

Open to reconsidering if evidence suggesting any of these can be found :) Molecular Pilot 10:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as nominator of the previous AfD. Nothing has changed since the last discussion five months ago, where the result was unanimously to delete (save for a UPE sock). --Paul_012 (talk) 11:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: It's nice that we have Eid pictures, but I'm not sure those give this person notability (source 3). I still don't see any notice of this person's work, not seeing that much has changed since the last AfD to be honest. Oaktree b (talk) 18:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Works for France 24 [39] among others, but so do many, many other people. Oaktree b (talk) 19:00, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I can't find any source to establish his notability. ManoiCMU (talk) 15:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Pfukhro Mao

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

Article about a local school that was WP:BLARed twice to List of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas (diff, diff). Article creator has reverted, and policy at WP:ATD-R states that "If the change is disputed via a reversion, an attempt should be made to reach a consensus before blank-and-redirecting again. Suitable venues for doing so include the article's talk page and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion." I suggest the redirect is a suitable alternative to deletion. Sam Sailor 09:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Manipur. Sam Sailor 09:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas. Current version of article is completely unsourced. Procyon117 (talk) 15:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AccessArt

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

I stand by my original PROD reason, which was that it seems unlikely there will be enough coverage to meet WP:NORG.

The Guardian article cited is written by Briggs and seems to be more about her opinions on art than the organisation itself. All the other coverage I've been able to find such as this 2002 article also from the Guardian barely goes beyond mentioning the name.

Deprodded with the reason charity affects education and culture for millions of young people nationally, which is a valid CCS preventing A7, but WP:NONPROFIT are still required to receive significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, which I have not been able to find. There are some brief mentions in trade journals, but they rarely go beyond just a name check. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Organizations, United Kingdom, and England. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find scattered mentions of this charity [40], [41] and [42]. Trivial mentions, not enough to build an article. Barely much more found in the refs now used in the article. Oaktree b (talk) 19:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: With an active fee-paying membership of 22,000 schools (together educating the majority of children in the UK), and with each school providing coverage of the charity's educational materials and each referring to the charity's guidelines when shaping their curriculums... coverage by the schools should be considered as significant, independent and reliable. ArtDataArt (talk) 17:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HypeClash

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

Fails WP:ORG. A search reveals no reliable sources. APK hi :-) (talk) 08:41, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising and Companies. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maxim Krivonos Battalion

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

No notability per WP:N. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 07:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 October 29. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:53, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Russia, and Ukraine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CU note The article author was a block-evading sock. I considered G5 deletion, but there have been a few edits by another editor in good standing, so we might as well allow this discussion to run its course. Girth Summit _(blether) 17:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kyohei Suzaki

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

Rightfully prodded by User:Spiderone back in 2009. The claim to notability, playing 6 games in Japan's second league and 1 cup game, is very weak. The sources (including those found in ja:wiki) are not enough to rectify that and as such he fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 07:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:22, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:01, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sokudo Electric

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

Promotional article from an SMM company using press releases, interviews, product and facility launches, and other announcements. ~~No coverage in reliable sources.~~ No coverage in independent reliable sources, fails GNG. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Products, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi, these coverages are all reliable, they are posted on reliable media sources like news medias, print magazines. please feel free to check all the links before making a decision. Pitchonepr SMM (talk) 07:24, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

at the very least Delete the sections of the article that are just listing products, but the article as a whole reads somewhat promotional. Gaismagorm (talk) 17:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I cannot evaluate the reliability of most of the sources used in the article but some of them sources that look alright, like Rest of World and News18. The topic of the article seems notable. Jeraxmoira, are you saying that all of the sources are unreliable? Can you explain why you think so? Needless to say all the promotional fluff that is not supported by sources or is supported only by the company's press releases should be removed. Alaexis_¿question? 22:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the proper process for dealing with the WP:COI has not been followed by Pitchonepr SMM, I urge them to disclose their conflict of interest immediately (full disclosure, I came here because asked me a question at my talk page). Alaexis_¿question? 22:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alaexis, the Rest of World article is an interview and the News18 article is a press release. They do not pass the WP:SIRS check that is conducted for articles about organizations and companies. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 04:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Sources are mainly WP:CHURNALISM, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, routine announcements, or press releases. I originally saw the News18 reference as meeting WP:ORGCRIT, but based on the search link provided by Jeraxmoira, I see that it is also churnalism (similar to how TechCrunch does a lot of stories). --CNMall41 (talk) 20:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Derek Popovich

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

I can't find any independent coverage passing WP:SIGCOV. Nothing in the article seems to indicate notability either; be it one single game in the USL First Division, some games in the USL Second Division which wasn't even an WP:FPL, or being on the hall of fame of a NCAA Division III team. Geschichte (talk) 06:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:22, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 18:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:01, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:GNG. No evidence of WP:SIGCOV. Demt1298 (talk) 14:19, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Boye

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

During a WP:BEFORE I was not able to find a single piece of independent and significant coverage about this bridge player. At best, there were sources published by his league, that are not independent. If shown a couple of independent and significant I might change my mind and think he meets WP:SPORTCRIT, but at the moment I do not. Geschichte (talk) 06:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:57, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kallakkadal

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

This is not a distinct phenomenon, but rather a local name for swell surge used in coastal Kerala, also known by various names in other parts of the world. Presenting it as a distinct phenomenon is scientifically inaccurate. Additionally, this is not the Malayalam Wikipedia. Per WP:CFORK, this is an unnecessary content fork. The Doom Patrol (talk) 13:50, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Environment, and India. The Doom Patrol (talk) 13:50, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Fair enough, and I agree that this would be better treated as a more general topic, but I note that Swell (ocean) does not actually contain the term "swell surge", and does not seem to cover this type of phenomenon. Thus more a case for rewriting and generalizing than for redirecting or deleting? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:26, 22 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!} 06:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Raw

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

Article fails WP:NMUSIC, there is some material online about him but none of it mentions things needed to support notability. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Nigeria. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: What? Reading Beans 08:44, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject passed ~~WP:MUSIC~~ WP:CREATIVE. He has released three different albums, he is a notable representative of Igbo raps with enough collaboration with other notable musicians. He also has reliable coverages for verifiability some of which are 1, 2, 3.Ibjaja055 (talk) 09:47, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Ibjaja055 so the sources you provided don't support notability as per WP:NMUSIC. But there might be sources in Igbo, do you know where I might be able to find them? I'm not an expert on Igbo or Nigeria so if you could point me in the right direction I'll try to find some sources and add them in. If you think there are offline sources then we can just send this to draft until they can be added.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table: prepared by User:Dr_vulpes
Premium Times	~ Looks to be independent but it's hard to tell.	Appears to be reliable after reading a few other articles	Article is 177 words and mentions that he has views on music piracy. Claims he's won awards but doesn't mention them	? Unknown
Daily Post	I'm not 100% sure but from reading some random articles it appears to be	Articles have writers and appear to be reporting properly.	Article is 125 words long and is about Mr Raw getting a shout out on Instagram	✘ No
Daily Trust	Appears to be, not 100% sure but I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt	Has other articles that appear to be	Entry in the article is under his old man and is only 119 words	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Dr vulpes (Talk) 15:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr_vulpes Thank you for your prompt reply and I am also sorry for my late reply too. The sources I provided establish that the subject is a prominent figure in Igbo rap, and successors have acknowledged this by referencing him. The citations in the article may not fully meet the criteria of WP:GNG but they should be sufficient to pass the WP:SNG for WP:CREATIVE
The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors; The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.
Therefore, Mr Raw is an important figure of Igbo rap creative community and he is even the one credited with creating the new concept (Igbo rap). Ibjaja055 (talk) 10:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : No other coverage to proof notable than being hospitalized due to a car accident. The rest news are interviews.--7G🍁 (🪓) 11:11, 13 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!} 06:11, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: @Ibjaja055, that seems like a good reason to keep the article but do you have any sources saying that (i.e. that he originated Igbo rap or is an important figure)? That is what I usually see asked for in these discussions, and I think it would be helpful. I see he says it in a source from the Igbo rap article but I can't find anyone other than him saying it explicitly. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:56, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mrfoogles Thank you very much. This is the source of another important figure in Igbo Rap confirming that Mr Raw pioneered it Ibjaja055 (talk) 07:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is a quote from someone else rather than the newspaper saying it directly, though (although its adjacent). This article also credits him as a pioneer, although it does seem rather promotional of its (not him) subject, but that could likely be just an enthusiastic journalist. This other article seems to have a good account of the origins of Igbo rap but is a 404 and not in the internet archive. Mrfoogles (talk) 15:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And actually here’s another article, oddly enough also talking about another person doing Igbo rap. Mrfoogles (talk) 15:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, based on the widespread consideration as the pioneer of a music genre. Mrfoogles (talk) 15:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pioneer of a what music genre.? Phyno is the Pioneer of Igbo Rap. Mr Raw was just also an igbo rapper. We cant justify a musician from naming thierself a title [43]. We need more of independent source to justify that than relying on interviews. 7G🍁 (🪓) 14:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@7G, What’s your source for this claim? Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 19:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Before Phyno, Mr. Raw was. This source confirms it, https://thenet.ng/enugu-world-phyno-become-igbolands-biggest-rap-export/. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 19:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can reply without mentioning my name. It’s then left for me to ignore you. They are more notification on my phone to attend than this @7g on Wikipedia. 7G🍁 (🪓) 21:05, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per Ibjaja and Mrfoogle. Also, this piece from Nigeria Entertainment Today and this from P.M. News. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 19:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Wp:Mr Raw is one of the known indigenous Igbo rap artists in Nigeria reported here and other sources. He was acknowledged by colleagues [44]as being the pioneer of Igbo rap music in Nigeria.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to see a more methodical review of sources brought to this discussion. I want to be sure they aren't passing mentions and that they provide SIGCOV.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz, what sort of “methodical review” are we looking at? We are using NCREATICE as a yardstick to determine notability for this subject and I think that it has been already established in this conversation? Are we neglecting NCREATIVE and focusing wholly on GNG? Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 08:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reading Beans, I was just referring to another source analysis table, this one for the sources that have been brought into the discussion since it started. I find them very helpful in AFD discussions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 06:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. As mentioned in the previous relisting, a thorough analysis of the sources is appreciated to determine if they pass GNG and other notability guidelines, along with SIGCOV.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:57, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject is a veteran musician in the Nigerian music industry, and is one of the earliest pioneers of Igbo rap. I'll admit that sourcing on older Nigerian acts are hard to find compared to nowadays. I will try to find reliable sources to support my statement. Off rip, Mr Raw received two nominations at The Headies 2007. The Headies is the biggest music awards in Nigeria. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 16:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per Ibjaja, Mrfoogle, and Versace. Here's another source by Daily Trust which calls him a pioneer in Igbo rap. JSYK, his original name was "Nigga Raw" and most sources that identifies him by that name are actually censored online because of the word "Nigga", which is why he had to change his name to Mr Raw because of all of those censoring, using ***** to replace his name in online platforms and refusal to perform in some countries. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 09:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International Cities of Peace

AfDs for this article:

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

Repost of previously deleted and salted article WP:REFBOMBED with passing mentions and press releases of individual cities becoming international cities for peace, which don't really provide significant coverage of the organization as a whole. Even the one "publication reference" that I was able to access through The Wikipedia Library doesn't provide anything close to significant coverage. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:11, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Pppery, for the feedback. I understand the concerns about notability and the type of references currently used. I am working to find more sources that offer comprehensive coverage of International Cities of Peace as an organization rather than passing mentions of individual cities joining the network.

I believe International Cities of Peace has demonstrated significant global impact as it has been active in hundreds of cities worldwide, promoting peace initiatives and even achieving Special Consultative Status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council. I’ll focus on finding additional independent, reliable sources that address this organizational reach.

Thank you again for your guidance, and I’m open to any further suggestions on how to ensure the article meets Wikipedia’s standards. WAASI TECH (talk) 05:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above reply came up as 76% AI-written on gptzero.me. Left guide (talk) 06:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I will monitor and help with this. I have read the article and find the organization has merit. Thanks to Wassi Tech and Pppery for the discussion. I will check to see if guidelines are followed. Be back soon. Vritta100 (talk) 14:32, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Ohio. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sopon Pornchokchai

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

Fails WP:BIO. 2 of the 3 sources provided are primary. Created by a single purpose editor so possible promotion. LibStar (talk) 03:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Thailand. LibStar (talk) 03:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Doesn't meet the people notability guidelines as mentioned by LibStar. I did a few Google searches, and the results were minimal to say the least. Nothing that indicates significance or notability as a person. Sirocco745 (talk) 04:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There was considerable press spotlight on him in 2013 when he ran for Bangkok governor. It's mostly reporting of his campaigning stunts (Thairath, Sanook, Prachatai), interviews focusing on his policies (MCOT FM 96.5, Voice TV), and profiles and campaign updates based on PR material (Isranews, Krungthep Turakij, Post Today, Sanook, Sanook, Sanook). Apart from that campaign, he's quite regarded as an expert in his field, and is quoted a lot in the press,[45][46][47][48][49][50] which should push his notability beyond that coming from the single event. That said, there doesn't seem to be much third-party coverage that looks at the subject's biography in depth. There's this Sanook article, though it's based on information in the Thai Wikipedia. And there's a recent interview on MCOT FM 100.5, but the info mainly comes from him talking about himself. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. His Thai name "โสภณ พรโชคชัย" should be used for searching. There are plenty of references, such as those provided by Paul_012 above. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 03:58, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per sources given by Paul_012 above—that's enough for him to pass WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. ManoiCMU (talk) 15:38, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great Regression

AfDs for this article:

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

Transparently political, wildly incorrect (wages have increased substantially since 1981). Lacks notability and appears to be a neologism. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 03:41, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 03:41, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Europe and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Massively noteable phenomena, there are hundreds of sources covering even just the intersection with the TradWife tend. (I.e. sources mentioning that back in the 1960s a good proportion of males without a colledge degree could still earn enough to support a familly with a stay at home housewife, whereas now only the most elite can affort that.) The phenomena helps explain many aspects of socio-political history, especially after 2016. It would be embarrassing not to cover it.

Nom is however correct on it being a neologism. If it survives AfD, I'll propose renaming to either Great Regression (Robert Reich) or Stagnating real wages for lower earning workers in the advanced economies since 1981 (Checking on google scholar, the vast majority of recent uses of "Great regression" are in completely different senses to that used by good professor Reich.) Being 'transparently political' is not a valid reason for deletion. I'd be inclined to accept it as an IAR reason if the article would be likely to increase US polarisation - but the phenomena reflects almost equally badly on both parties (Many would say worse on the Reps in the 20th century, but quite a few have argued the Dems have been more to blame in recent years, and there are global economic forces in play that neither party can easilly fully mitigate.) PS - I tweaked the wording to make clear the article if refering to real wages - thanks Nom for pointing out it could have been read as "wildly incorrect". FeydHuxtable (talk) 12:21, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I say wildly incorrect, I mean every sentence in the article is rejected by the consensus of mainstream economists and is not supported by the actual data. Real median wages are up substantially from 1980 (and more precise metrics, like median household income per head-equivalent after adjusting by PCEPI, have increased much faster). A framing that "reflects badly (or well) on both parties" is still an explicitly political framing, and in fact that's my main complaint here—the article is just uncritically repeating Robert Reich's populist talking points, despite wages, compensation, and consumption figures all disagreeing with him. If the article is kept, it should be retitled something like "Great Regression myth" and be devoted to explaining how this thesis has been thoroughly rejected by the consensus of mainstream economists. (Excluding parts like widening measures of relative inequality, where the field generally agrees that metrics like Gini are up, although there's some disagreement.) The consensus is that the period 1980-2015 was characterized by the poor getting richer at a slightly slower pace than the rich, a trend that reversed around 2015. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 23:37, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Only tangentially related, but if you want to understand American political trends since 1980, the most enlightening articles for me have been Center squeeze and McGovern-Fraser commission—this is pretty much exactly what social choice predicted would happen based on the changes we made to American political institutions.) – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 23:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining & for the tips on center squeeze etc. I can see you really know your stuff in this topic class! Sadly though, that's 100% incorrect on the mainstream consensus. When it comes to marshalling economic data, they don't come much more mainstream than Robert Reich. Just glance at the lede of his wikipage - even the conservative leaning Wall Street Journal placed him sixth on its list of Most Influential Business Thinkers . Granted, some of his favoured policy responses are a little outside of consensus, at least in US economic circles, but his command of data is masterful. It's important to note Reich was talking about workers who both live in the advanced economies and are in the lower paid brackets (especially bottom decile).

Even at the end of the 20th century, there was relatively little quality empirical work that differentiated between the pay brackets at good resolution. But between about 2000 & 2005, trailblazing work led by Tony Atkinson along with the likes of Emmanuel Saez & Thomas Piketty yield abundant data on these trends. There's likely still a few 10th rate economists who don't even know about it - but no one try's to seriously dispute the data as the empirical evidence is unassailable. (Disputing their fave policy recommends is of course another matter.)

Turing to your rebuttals, there's not really much conflict between your Fed link & what Reich said about median earnings. (He said "stagnating" not declining). The Fed graph may appear to show they're "up substantially", but a skilled analyst would immediately see the graph has misleading qualities if used to support that sort of conclusion (e.g. choice of extrema for the Y-axis). Take a look at the Great Regression infographic. Reasonable for Reich to say overall pay growth stagnated between 1980 - 2009 when it only totalled ~8% , compared with ~ 85% between 1947-79. And much of that rise is due to gains that overwhelmingly benefit those at the top. As is clear from the part of the infographic showing that pay for the bottom quintile rose by 122% in the 1947-79 period but actually fell by 4% for 1980 - 2009.

According to various datasets, you'd be right to say 1980-2015 was characterized by the poor getting richer at a slightly slower pace than the rich - but only from a global perspective rather than looking at the advanced economies. (Losses for the poor in Global North were more than offset by gains from the more numerous poor in Global South). Interestingly, believers in social choice & pubic choice type theories normally like to claim the trend didn't reverse until more like 2018, so they can blame the shift aware from free market liberalism after Trump & Brexit etc. (And the current revised World Bank, UN & IMF figures largely back that up, though they didn’t a few years back.) But as you mention 2015, here's a good source for showing that other mainstream economists saw the data in an almost identical way to Reich. Note fig 1.2 on page 9 which shows falling incomes for the entire bottom 90% in several advanced economies! Note the report was co led by Larry Summers himself, about as centrist a mainstreamer as they come. BTW, I met with Larry in London at the launch event for that report. Even back then, I was starting to think being an activist for socialist economics was not the best use of my talents, but I accepted the invitation as I was hoping one of the inclusive capitalists there could be talked into funding an Inclusionist version of Wikipedia, where folk like RAN, Anobody & Ikip could be installed as lifelong Arbs, and policy would be set so that no useful article would every be deleted. I did managed to have a ten minute chat with the biggest moneybags there ( Glenn Hutchins ) but sadly we got stuck on talking about the chances of implementing a generous universal basic income, and never got the chance to talk to him 1-to-1 again... Anyway, now I've hopefully clarified mainstream thinking for you, perhaps you might change your vote to keep so article can be saved? Or if you remain determined to delete, perhaps you could strike "wildly inaccurate"? This article was created the legendary RAN himself, a titanic contributor whose legacy we should not want to tarnish. FeydHuxtable (talk) 20:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:GNG - The term is not reliably used in ANY field; searches turn up a few occurrences of the term for Machine Learning and other areas, but NOT an accepted term or description of the allegedly connected social/economic changes described by a small number of authors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avatar317 (talk • contribs) 05:35, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep and expand. Widely used and discussed around the world right now, especially in Sociology. MaeseLeon (talk) 18:25, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you show any sources to back up your claim? ---Avatar317 ^(talk) 06:13, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Lots of discussion but we need more editor participation and evaluation of sources, not the article's content. If the article is poorly written, that can be improved editorially, this is a discussion of whether the article subject has independent notability as verified by reliable sources, regardless of editor's opinion of the subject.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

... um, isn't this the same topic as Great Divergence (inequality)? Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:06, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Draftify~~Delete: From the sources available this seems like nothing more than a not so newish neologism. From the sources available in the article that I can view the term is only used in passing or as the title and there is no great analysis of the concept as a thing in and of itself. Searching for the term results in similar with what sources that are available only mentioning the concept in passing. ~~I'm not discounting that sources exist though which could be used to further demonstrate notability so I suggest draftification with the understanding that any movement to mainspace go through AFC~~. If notability hasn't been demonstrated by there being significant coverage in multiple reliable source after 13 years then this ought to be deleted. TarnishedPath^talk 09:50, 30 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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Nyangon

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

Promotional resume-style bio for a non-notable economist, repeatedly moved into mainspace by quickie-autoconfirmed accounts following declines at AfC. There is no evidence of passing WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. Sources in the article are primarily the subject's own writings, plus WP:PRIMARYSOURCE bios and a few low-quality promotional WP:CHURNALISM articles that appear to be based solely on interviews with the subject (see here, here; this one is explicitly marked as sponsored content). With a relatively low h-index for an economist at his stage of career, I don't see a pass of WP:NACADEMIC either. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Economics and United States of America. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 22 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!} 03:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Google isn't revealing anything notable about him. Articles exist on Wikipedia because sufficient independent and reliable writings about the subject with no ulterior motive exist, and I don't believe Joseph is at that stage. The repeated mainspace moves are influencing my delete nomination, but I wouldn't go so far as to say "salt the page". He exists, he just doesn't pass the Wikipedia vibe check yet. ~~why did I say that~~ Sirocco745 (talk) 04:21, 29 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.

2025 in Somalia

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

I believe this page very much falls into the category of WP:TOOSOON and likewise lacks any notability, seeing as the page currently links to no year-specific articles in Somalia (i.e. an election, a sports event, etc.) just holidays which happen every year which are already listed on the page Public holidays in Somalia. Johnson524 02:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 October 29. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Lists, and Somalia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Nothing else in Category:2025 in Somalia. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 04:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hera Pheri 3

AfDs for this article:

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

Does not meet WP:NFF. Nothing in this article shows that the production itself is notable, as there is nothing about the production. Cast section is mostly unsourced, nothing about a release, nothing about filming. This should be a redirect to Hera Pheri (film series) at best. Ravensfire (talk) 02:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Ravensfire (talk) 02:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hera_Pheri_(film_series)#Hera_Pheri_3_(TBA) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peng Lifa

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

I haven't seen this person get any independent notability other than 2022 Beijing Sitong Bridge protest Coddlebean (talk) 02:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, and China. Coddlebean (talk) 02:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have to present sources as raw urls for now, lest I make myself late for work again. Will try to fix during the course of the day.
First off, Coddlebean, thanks for providing an actual deletion rationale this time. I don't think WP:BIO1E / WP:BLP1E applies here though: the criteria for the initial notability are not met, and the subject's status as a political prisoner still two years thence has generated continuing notability, per these ~~unannotated~~ sources:
- "四通桥事件"两周年之际人权组织呼吁释放彭立发. Deutsche Welle (in Chinese). 13 October 2024.
- 权禄军：敦促中共立即释放勇士彭立发. Epoch Times (in Chinese). 16 October 2024.
- "China: Free 'Bridge Man' Protester. Peng Lifa, Who Sparked 'White Paper' Protests, Forcibly Disappeared for 2 Years". Human Rights Watch. 11 October 2024.
- Jane Wang (王剑虹), ed. (2024). 自由张展 [Free Zhang Zhan] (in Chinese). pp. 221–224, 472–475.^{[self-published source]}
Not that we require better sources for the subject's initial notability from the lockdown protests, but there are book and journal sources: isbn 9798330208418, doi:10.1017/S1054204324000054 , doi:10.1097/YCO.0000000000000864, Xu 2024, doi:10.3390/philosophies9040118, Thireau 2023, Menegazzi 2022 pp. 2–3.
Apologies for the garbage formatting: already late for work just from the source searches and copypasta. Keep. Folly Mox (talk) 13:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the current sources are good enough to grant GNG. New sources pointed out in the comment above are good too wigh significant coverage. --NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 13:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Groww

AfDs for this article:

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

Not a G4, but no indication the issues raised at the prior AfDs have been addressed. A search is hard due to the name, but no indication of N:CORP. Star Mississippi 02:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Organizations, Companies, and India. Star Mississippi 02:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep not sure why this page is nominated, when there are ample amount of third-party secondary sources cited for largest broker in India (Groww). Google search results easily show numerous articles with deep-dive into this unicorn's background, starting from getting funding form Y Combinator to moving past Zerodha and then to be awarded as 'Forbes India Leadership Award 2024' for Promising Startup.--Curvasingh (talk) 10:00, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prior to me leaving a !vote, I am hoping you can point out the WP:THREE you feel meet the guidelines outlined in WP:ORGCRIT? I have started going through the references but there is a lot of churnalism and routine announcements so hoping as the creator you can point me in the right direction. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CNMall41 There are many reliable sources but I will point out these sources to claim notability:

--Curvasingh (talk) 02:13, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the Real

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

Probably should have discussed this along with Reel Tight. Looking at the sources (that aren't dead), the only source that somewhat confirms WP:NRV is an article by OffBeat and even then, the article doesn't elaborate much other than calling the band a success story. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:50, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - Given the concurrent discussion for the group at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reel Tight, the album has some notablitily for low chart placement and a couple of middling hit singles, but more reliable sources for those achievements are needed. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:14, 21 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!} 02:21, 22 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!} 01:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep either this or Reel Tight, merging text and redirecting to one or the other. It made three charts; the dead links don't matter as they can be resolved, and in the case of Vibe, the citation is to the mag; and the nominator gave no indication that a BEFORE was performed, let alone if the BEFORE used databases and non-Google methods to look for sources about a group from the late '90s... Caro7200 (talk) 21:49, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Cymmerman

AfDs for this article:

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

BLP tagged for sourcing issues since 2010. Only source is from her employer which lacks independence. Not clear that the subject meets WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 02:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. 4meter4 (talk) 02:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note. I didn't realize there was an earlier nomination in 2009 when I made this nom. Apparently un-named sources were identified at an external website during that discussion. However, the web archive url isn't loading for me so I can't see what these are...4meter4 (talk) 02:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – per WP:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles ("notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria") #6: she has performed numerous significant roles at several notable opera houses. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Michael Bednarek, subject must first meet WP:GNG because notability is not inherent. dxneo (talk) 18:55, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@dxneo Michael is citing an WP:SNG which is another accepted pathway to establishing notability other than WP:GNG. This is perfectly fine, although I note that the article currently cites no independent sources supporting the SNG being cited. We still need independent sources to prove an SNG.4meter4 (talk) 22:57, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, looking for editors to supply other sources that could establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Janicke Askevold

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

I don't think she meets WP:NACTOR, no evidence of significant roles. Directing non notable films doesn't really add to WP:DIRECTOR. And only 1 hit in google news, which is unusual for someone with a career in Europe. LibStar (talk) 01:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Norway. LibStar (talk) 01:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I would say she meets WP:NACTOR with her roles in My Way and China Salesman, two notable films. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:26, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:26, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My database access has borked so I can't evaluate these properly, but there are lots of Norwegian newspapers that mention her here. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 16:41, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee McKenzie (disambiguation)

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

Only one topic is not substantial for a disambiguation page. GilaMonster536 (talk) 01:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The other people that were listed here, have had their articles deleted.[51] Lee McKenzie is not just the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, but is now the only topic. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 03:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Disambiguations. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: looks as if it should never have existed, a hatnote to the now-deleted male of same name would have been enough, but certainly not a valid dab page now. PamD 10:00, 29 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 moved to draftspace‎ per creator request, deleted here. (non-admin closure) Nate • (chatter) 22:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ratio Technologies

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

Article fails to demonstrate notability under WP:NCORP. References are all either paid promotion or WP:ORGTRIV. Brandon (talk) 01:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Technology, and California. Brandon (talk) 01:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify the page needs more attention and time, please draftify it.--Hube Gybre (talk) 15:39, 29 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.

Amistad Onus

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

This is a hoax, right? Common poverty from 6 years of University fees to be paid? Send lots of Cake or Cookies? Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 01:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Medicine. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 01:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Education, and Greece. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as hoax. Literally nothing about this on JSTOR, Google and Google Scholar (except for a Wikipedia Mirror Site which surfaced on Google). The only references are looong books which are real but I highly doubt they actually mention it (creator just thought we wouldn't read them all) - Google Books text search for Amistad Onus yields nothing. Molecular Pilot 06:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - seems like it could be speedied under WP:G3 JMWt (talk) 07:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not really blatant tho a la "species of aliens discovered by Bill Gates", it could technically be plausible so I think AfD is the correct venue. If enough people realise how this is a hoax we might get a WP:SNOW hopefully Molecular Pilot 08:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not only made up, but article created on April Fool's day... Cringe_AG (talk) 15:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Also of interest is the talk page of the user who published this article, see User talk:Imperialmedicine. His article on Friendship Tax, presumably identical to Amistad Onus, was deleted and he concern about his user name was not contested.Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 23:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LMAB-Group

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

did this company even exist? the one reference included didn't even mention it Doprendek (talk) 00:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Switzerland, New Zealand, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:N and no sources to prove its existence as a company. ADifferentMan (talk) 06:02, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No sign of notability. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 07:22, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Searching all variations listed on the page, I was able to verify that it did in fact exist at one time but nothing showing where it is now. Regardless, there is no coverage meeting WP:ORGCRIT so fails notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm pretty sure this is a hoax, or at least details of it. A company with that much revenue will have more than three google hits (including Wikipedia) for it's full name. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KipTalk

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

(NPP action) Three of the cited sources (Business Insider, Similarweb, and Standard) are actually about Twitter, and don't mention a "KipTalk". All other citations are to a single website, kampalareports.com. I think this lies somewhere between hoax and spam. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Only hits are their website, then various social media sites. There are no mentions in Gnews. This doesn't appear to be a hoax, but no sourcing that I can find. Oaktree b (talk) 00:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Uganda. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Society for Navigation on Essequibo and adjacent Rivers

AfDs for this article:

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

Possible copyright infringement. The Dutch Wikipedia article was deleted because it was not clear where and when the text was first published and by whom; copyright infringement could not be ruled out. Same applies here; the first version of the english-language text is a straightforward translation from a Dutch original, possibly written by the same author of the Wikipedia articles, that appears to have been published in 2021 by the Bibliotheek van Zeeland. It has to be assumed that the Bibliotheek van Zeeland is the owner of the copyright. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 00:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Netherlands. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 00:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the deletion discussion on the Dutch Wikipedia. And paragraph 3 and 4 of this publication, is the original version. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 00:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Transportation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete until the copyright issues can be resolved and the page rewritten. JMWt (talk) 07:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I will trust Ruud's research on the copyrights. Thank you for investing time in this, Ruud! No objection to draftification, if someone wants to work on this. I have basically moved texts around so did not mitigate any copyvio issues. Only structural ones. gidonb (talk) 23:41, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Much appreciated, @Gidonb! I have mixed feelings about this. The topic of this article, SvE for short, is notable. Thanks to your effort to write a lead section, it survived the first AfD discussion. I am sure that researchers on slave trade would be very interested to know more about this trading company, that was small and short-lived, but certainly relevant. What needs to be clarified is if this article, published by Zeeland Library, is copyright protected. The third and fourth paragraphs, as well as the literature and references, are identical to the first version of this WP article on the SvE. If I understand the disclaimer correctly, the text is not intended for commercial use and the library does not take responsibility for improper use. In my view, the text cannot be published as is on Wikipedia. The Encyclopedie van Zeeland, another publication by Zeeland Library, also carries the same text. Since the EvZ does not have a disclaimer, we have to assume that the EvZ is copyright protected. For a Wikipedia article on SvE, the text needs more work. In my view, for example, the section on Essequibo at the start of the fourth Anglo-Dutch war, is only indirectly relevant for the SvE. The two main sections of the article really are two different topics. Unfortunately, this article cannot be cleaned up. It has to be deleted for copyright violation. A new article has to be created from scratch. I will have to leave that to someone else. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 14:55, 30 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 delete G4‎. (non-admin closure) Nate • (chatter) 22:51, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ashish Chanchlani (YouTuber)

Previous AfDs for this article:

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

(NPP action) Recreation of Ashish Chanchlani under a disambiguated title to avoid the salting. Deleted three times for notability issues, and this version doesn't look much better. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Semi RS [52], trivial coverage here [53]. Sources in the article aren't directly about this person. I still don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've speedy deleted the article under WP:CSD#G4. There was no new content lending itself to satisfying the notability concerns presented in multiple previous AfDs and once again an alternative title was used to circumvent the salting of the primary target.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:40, 29 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.

Bangalore Education Society, Malleswaram

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL. One source is a directory listing, the other is not significant coverage of this school. Since the last AfD we are a lot more stricter on school notability. LibStar (talk) 00:43, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Karnataka. LibStar (talk) 00:43, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd and brought to AFD so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:11, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete - RS not found. JMWt (talk) 07:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Russian violence in Chechnya (1991–1994)

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

WP:FRINGE theory and also violation of neutral point of view.--Fenikals (talk) 10:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, doesn't really seem like a fringe article, and I don't see how it violates NPOV. Some explanation would be good.

Gvssy (talk) 16:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I agree with the statement above, this article is written using different sources, highlight the aspects in which you feel that the article violates WP:NPOV.

Dushnilkin (talk) 20:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Discrimination, and Russia. Shellwood (talk) 22:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Listed at Fringe theories/Noticeboard § Anti-Russian violence in Chechnya AfD, as locus of dispute apparently involves WP:FRINGE. Alpha3031 (t • c) 06:06, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]