Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday
![]() |
Kariokskoe of battle[edit]
- Kariokskoe of battle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A minor skirmish at best. Existing citations are all non-independent, 19th-century primary sources, and I can't find any significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Russia. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
World Unity Football Alliance[edit]
- World Unity Football Alliance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
An "international football" organization article that is a WP:HOAX in its current form. Walsh90210 (talk) 19:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Walsh90210 (talk) 19:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:02, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- No comment on GNG, but this is very clearly not a hoax. SportingFlyer T·C 19:21, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- As but one example: there is a "Karen" team listed under Asia, but it is a local group in Minnesota. Walsh90210 (talk) 19:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- You are likely unaware that the Karen are an ethnic group from Myanmar who have a diaspora in Minneapolis. SportingFlyer T·C 02:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- The Karen Football Association, which you can find can find plenty of details about through internet searches are a Karen diaspora group based in Minneapolis. Sherms95 (talk) 13:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- The Kashmir team is a local club in Bradford. The organization (and the article) pretense to be "national teams for sub-national entities", but it isn't; it's a few random local clubs with ethnic ties that signed up for a press release with this group. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:26, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- As but one example: there is a "Karen" team listed under Asia, but it is a local group in Minnesota. Walsh90210 (talk) 19:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – It may not be HOAX, but it didn't even organize any competition to be relevant. Svartner (talk) 13:27, 12 June 2024
- That's not true - the BBC even lists Chagos as the winner of one of their competitions: [1] SportingFlyer T·C 09:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 20:24, 12 June 2024 (UTC) (UTC)
- Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 20:28, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep Most of the coverage isn't independent, but there's some coverage, including from Bradford, [2], BBC mentions, the Non-League Football Paper, and the nomination was based on a mis-understanding. SportingFlyer T·C 09:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- They basically do not organize any relevant competitions, a single mention does not prevent failure in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 18:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep per above. This is clearly not a hoax, and SportingFlyer makes a good point. It's weak, admittedly, but it's a keep for me right now. Anwegmann (talk) 01:21, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- The article is a hoax, because it conflates "national team" with "expat team", and relies on puffery from primary sources to the degree that it makes claims that are demonstrably false. Some actual organization may exist; but it is entirely "we let people put out press releases that pretense to importance which we do not have". Walsh90210 (talk) 02:03, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, a hoax is generally something that's completely fictional, whereas this is an actual organisation similar to ConIFA. SportingFlyer T·C 09:45, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- The article is a hoax, because it conflates "national team" with "expat team", and relies on puffery from primary sources to the degree that it makes claims that are demonstrably false. Some actual organization may exist; but it is entirely "we let people put out press releases that pretense to importance which we do not have". Walsh90210 (talk) 02:03, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist as there is no consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep: There is some coverage of this alliance, [3], [4], talk about it but are not the primary subject of the article. Forbes article directly about the group [5]. Oaktree b (talk) 00:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. ✗plicit 06:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
François Thibaut[edit]
- François Thibaut (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article subject does not look notable generally or as an academic or educator. All of the citation links in the article are actually to the same New York Times article, which only briefly mentions the article subject: "In 1994, the school had fewer than 50 students learning Spanish; now, there are 180, said Francois Thibaut, the school's director. A class had to be added this fall to accommodate the increasing demand, he said." [6]. I was not able to locate most of the other links/sources, and what I found did not mention the article subject. – notwally (talk) 22:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Language. – notwally (talk) 22:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: France and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:30, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Appears to be a promotion for his business, with no in-depth coverage that would support GNG, neither in the article nor found elsewhere. It doesn't help that two of the three footnotes have the same url and that the further reading links are all deadlink copies of press coverage selected for display by the same business. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, lacking significant coverage and as such fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:13, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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.
Spaceballs (demogroup)[edit]
- Spaceballs (demogroup) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources and what's linked in the article doesn't establish notability. There is significant coverage of the group in Freax: The Brief History of the Demoscene, Volume 1 (2005) by Tamás Polgár , but that's only one source of unclear reliability. toweli (talk) 15:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Organizations, Computing, and Norway. toweli (talk) 15:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:47, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Pears Foundation[edit]
- Pears Foundation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I searched for some independent, reliable secondary sources to established this organisation's notability but it mostly just returned listings and a few press releases so I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this subject is not notable. 𝔓420°𝔓Holla 16:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- Delete - I see only WP:ROTM coverage in the style of "rich dude gives some money to [thing]". This lacks depth and is just a press release. Can't find any secondary criticism or discussion. BrigadierG (talk) 23:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, lacks significant coverage. WP:BEFORE returned only primary sources. Among the sources cited in the article only two seem reliable and one of those two is about the Pears property company not Pear Foundation. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Upwave[edit]
- Upwave (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails the notability guidelines for companies. Sources are trivial (routine funding announcements), non-independent, or mention the firm only in passing (e.g. for the fact it conducted a survey).
A previous AfD exists under the firm's old name Survata, but the result doesn't seem to hold under modern corporate notability standards: the WSJ source is brief, routine coverage of a funding round, HuffPost is a contributor piece (no editorial oversight) and TechCrunch is... well, TechCrunch. (Yes, I checked for sources under "Survata" as well).
Ordinarily I'd redirect this to List of Y Combinator startups as an alternative to deletion, but given the name change I think it makes the most sense to retarget the existing redirect "Survata" there instead. – Teratix ₵ 14:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising, Companies, and California. – Teratix ₵ 14:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 16:31, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Melon Dezign[edit]
- Melon Dezign (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources and what's linked in the article doesn't establish notability. There is significant coverage of the group in Freax: The Brief History of the Demoscene, Volume 1 (2005) by Tamás Polgár , but that's only one source of unclear reliability. toweli (talk) 15:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Visual arts, Organizations, Computing, Denmark, and France. toweli (talk) 15:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 16:32, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I can't find any other significant coverage of the group. The only somewhat reliable mention I've found is this article related to the Beatles which is not enough to establish notability.Uffda608 (talk) 22:29, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, nothing to prove that the subject is eligible for entry here. Standing on one source since its creation in 2004 yet no available sources that could improve it. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
New Zaire (government in exile)[edit]
- New Zaire (government in exile) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Do not meet with critera guideline. No centered sources before 2024 Panam2014 (talk) 17:05, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 25. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 17:16, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Democratic Republic of the Congo. Shellwood (talk) 18:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: WP:ATD can be a merge to Christian Malanga or United Congolese Party. Curbon7 (talk) 23:36, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or Redirect to either Christian Malanga or United Congolese Party, as suggested above. A check of the sources shows little evidence that this is an independent concept. DW and Reuters refer only to a "head of government in exile" and mention "New Zaire" only as a name used by others. One of the AP sources does likewise and the other does not mention New Zaire at all. Giving it an article like this one gives New Zaire WP:UNDUE weight. An article about the event of the attempted coup might be another matter, though. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Wheatley2 (talk) 09:16, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Not having enough sources isn't a good reason to delete a page of an organization, especially since it attempted a coup against the DRC Government. If people want to learn about said coup they would also like to learn about the organization that did it, deleting this would not be helpful. Eehuiio (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Article about coup and organization are both sufficiant. Panam2014 (talk) 12:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
7 Intelligence Company[edit]
- 7 Intelligence Company (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The article contains one reference which is not from an independent source. The subject of the article does not appear to be notable. PercyPigUK (talk) 17:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Canada. PercyPigUK (talk) 17:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- This unit is part of the Canadian Army Intelligence Regiment, part of the Canadian Intelligence Corps. Upmerge to Canadian Intelligence Corps. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Michael Hopfes[edit]
- Michael Hopfes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable figure skater; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:20, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Germany. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:20, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: There are some sources which mention the subject as a coach and skater such as [[7]] and [[8]]. Not sure if it merits being kept but this is not uncontroversial. Let'srun (talk) 17:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligiblle for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Luka Čadež[edit]
- Luka Čadež (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable figure skater; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:21, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Slovenia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:21, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Alexandra Kunová[edit]
- Alexandra Kunová (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable figure skater; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Slovakia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. There are two interlanguage Wikipedia in German and Japanese, but neither of them provide significant coverage in reliable sources. This article has been deleted from Slovak Wikipedia in 2009, possibly due to BLP concerns. My Google came up with other women of the same name than this figure skater, failing WP:V too. ⋆。˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚。⋆ 10:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Doesn't the win at the Slovak Figure Skating Championships qualify the subject for a WP:NSKATE pass? That being said, the subject may still not meet WP:GNG, but this is not uncontroversial. Let'srun (talk) 17:45, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- I was told over and over that WP:NSKATE is merely a guideline, and in this case, one national gold medal didn't lead to any sort of notability or significant coverage. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:08, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Correct. However, the subject meets that guideline so why would you cite it in your nomination statement as a reason to delete the article? Let'srun (talk) 18:27, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- I was told over and over that WP:NSKATE is merely a guideline, and in this case, one national gold medal didn't lead to any sort of notability or significant coverage. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:08, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Andrea Diewald[edit]
- Andrea Diewald (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable figure skater; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Germany. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I removed the PROD as I am concerned with the BEFORE being conducted by the nom. Let'srun (talk) 17:13, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Ian Whitting[edit]
- Ian Whitting (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Fails WP:GNG. Uhooep (talk) 22:37, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Iceland, Montenegro, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:27, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Stuart Gill[edit]
- Stuart Gill (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Fails WP:GNG. Uhooep (talk) 22:38, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Iceland, Malta, United Kingdom, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:27, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Important Ambassador key to negotiations on the completion of the EU’s Single Market. KEEP Cantab12 (talk) 07:50, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - if not notable then this list List of high commissioners of the United Kingdom to Malta is just useless. Twinkle1990 (talk) 12:14, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I disagree. The list is not useless even if not all office holders on the list are inherently notable. The ones with knighthoods/damehoods would be considered notable, almost by default. Uhooep (talk) 15:42, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Session capping[edit]
- Session capping (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article is dependent on a single reference that is browser session preservation and migration (BSPM) infrastructure, and does not have the term "session capping" anywhere in the document. Subsequent searches through Google and other reputable resources. The only loose references on session capping can be found at there places https://www.thedrum.com/industryinsights/2017/03/08/the-importance-getting-creative-when-optimising-your-programmatic-ads and https://forum.revive-adserver.com/topic/3018-an-ad-is-not-returned-on-first-pageview-when-banner-session-capping-is-enabled/, both of which are not reliable sources to reference. Additionally, there is a page Frequency (marketing) that encompasses this topic, whic I've already gone ahead to copy over. Erictleung (talk) 19:17, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:20, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- I personally would have just been WP:BOLD and redirected the page without opening an AfD. The page is a short and poorly referenced stub; given the content has already been moved, a Redirect to Frequency (marketing)#Frequency capping is the only thing left to do. Broc (talk) 12:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- I appreciate your comment. I did try and just remove it, but it was reverted and I was told current protocol says to opening an AfD; see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Session_capping&oldid=1211953598. But I would agree with your solution to remove and then redirect. Erictleung (talk) 22:22, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Ami Dar[edit]
- Ami Dar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Can't find anything beyond a story in the wrap and a handbook by his organization (which has been deleted). Given the lack of an Israeli page, it seems Israeli sources are unlikely as well. One source is not enough for WP:GNG Allan Nonymous (talk) 23:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Israel. Shellwood (talk) 23:47, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak delete: Might be notable, seems to be mentioned in a book: [9], but that is a tertiary source about it. Very brief mention here [10]. Oaktree b (talk) 00:43, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Merge into Idealist.org -- which he founded, leads and for which he is known -- as a an unnecessary WP:SPINOFF/WP:CONTENTFORK, per WP:ATD and WP:CHEAP. Note the huge overlap. gidonb (talk) 16:41, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Content can't be merged to Idealist.org as this page is a redirect. Is there a different target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Hypo (rapper)[edit]
- Hypo (rapper) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NMUSIC with no chart activity, discography, or notable label work, while any coverage is only about his death. 💥Casualty • Hop along. • 23:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and United Kingdom. 💥Casualty • Hop along. • 23:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:13, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Coverage of the murder, trial and suspect are what I find. Nothing about the musician while he was alive, other than an article about who he was dating. None of these things contribute to musical notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 00:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Tim Sheehy (American politician)[edit]
- Tim Sheehy (American politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject does not meet WP:GNG. I would like to see this restored as a redirect to 2024 United States Senate election in Montana, but my attempt to redirect this was reverted (as was a previous attempt) and this is my best option. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Montana. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Military. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Flemeth[edit]
- Flemeth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I tried to do BEFORE, but most of them are just passing mentionsthat talk about Flemeth or trivial content. The onlt SIGCOV we got is the scholar "Powerful elderly characters in video games: Flemeth of Dragon Age", but I don't think it is enough to carry the article's notability. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 23:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Shellwood (talk) 23:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Kai Rooney[edit]
- Kai Rooney (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I believe that the subject fails WP:GNG (another case of WP:TOOEARLY). Let's just take a step back here. Are we being serious? Why is a 14 year old playing in an academy getting a Wikipedia article? There is nothing to suggest this kid will be a professional one day. He's just Wayne Rooney's kid playing for Man United's academy. There is no article about Cristiano Ronaldo Jr., although there is arguably more coverage there. Are we gonna make articles for all football-playing sons of famous footballers? I think we need to really take a step back and think before we make such articles way too early.Short: I don't think Kai Rooney is notable.
I wouldn't be against either merging this to Wayne Rooney or just draftifying and seeing how the next few years go (with someone upkeeping the draft as time passes). Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and England. Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - this article was created by the same user who created Cristiano Ronaldo Jr — see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cristiano Ronaldo Jr as this may be a very similar situation. Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:44, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or redirect to Wayne Rooney. In addition to too early and GNG, this is also a clear case of WP:NOTINHERITED. 💥Casualty • Hop along. • 23:09, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, or redirect to Wayne Rooney - My personal view on articles on minors is that they need to be held to a higher standard than other BLPs, since a Wikipedia article has the potential to irrevocably destroy the subject's private life. Another thing weighing against this is that, even when there were top-level-game appearance criteria in WP:NSPORT, U## leagues (read: leagues specifically for minors) were never considered acceptable. I'm not impressed with the sourcing here, as it seems to be entirely routine stuff only being amplified because of his parents' notoriety. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 23:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, or redirect to Wayne Rooney—I personally think these types of articles are useless. I also agree with Jéské Couriano above. Anwegmann (talk) 02:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Ozone Peak[edit]
- Ozone Peak (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No sources of notability in article or available on the web. It mostly lists facts from a table in a catalog. See WP:NOTCATALOG Gumgl (talk) 20:02, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating a bundle of 107 articles for deletion. These were all created by one user in late 2016 with the same format. The only source in all the articles beyond the subjects' manufacturer's listing page is World Directory of Leisure Aviation 2003-04. This seems to clearly go against the WP:DIRECTORY policy. I fly paragliders and the lifespan of a model is at most 10 years after its production/release although this upper bound is very rare. The vast majority cease to be used after ~6 years for safety concerns (aging of the fabric). Therefore at the time of creation, all the data was about models at least 13 years in the past, and thus obsolete and long forgotten. None of the models listed below have any notoriety nor any relevance today in an industry/sport with dozens of brands each releasing multiple models every year. Recent models might actually have a web presence with reviews and news articles on the Internet, but none of the models below do as they largely predate the popularization of the Internet.
- Ozone Proton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Ozone Vibe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Ozone Vulcan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Ozone Mac Daddy Bi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Ozone Atom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- UP Makalu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- UP Pulse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- UP Sherpa Bi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- UP Summit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- UP Targa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- UP Trango (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- UP Kantega (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Zero Gravity Flow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Zero Gravity Windstar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Advance Alpha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Advance Bi Beta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Advance Epsilon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Advance Omega (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Advance Sigma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Aeros Mister X (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Aeros Rival (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Air-Sport Chinook (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Air-Sport Ajos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Air-Sport Pasat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Apco Fiesta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Apco Keara (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Apco Presta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Apco Prima (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Apco Simba (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Aeros Accent (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Adventure A series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Adventure R series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Adventure S series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dudek Action (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dudek Lux (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dudek Max (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dudek Rex (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dudek Shark (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dudek Twix (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dudek Vox (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dynamic Sport Enigma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dynamic Sport Gravis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dynamic Sport Magnum (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dynamic Sport Raven (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Dynamic Sport Viper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gin Bolero Plus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gin Bongo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gin Boomerang (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gin Gangster (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gin Nomad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gin Oasis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Nova Aeron (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Nova Artax (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Nova Pheron (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Nova Phor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Nova Phorus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Nova Radon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Paratech P25 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Paratech P26 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Paratech P43 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Paratech P70 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Paratech P Bi4 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Paratour SD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pegas Arcus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pegas Avis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pegas Bain (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pegas Bellus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pegas Certus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pegas Discus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pro-Design Carrier (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pro-Design Effect (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pro-Design Jazz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pro-Design Pro-Ject (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pro-Design Titan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Sky Fides (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Sky Atis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Sky Brontes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Sky Flare (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Sky Flirt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Sky Golem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Sky Paragliders Lift (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Skif Raptor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Skif BigSkif Bi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Skif Skif-A (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Swing Arcus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Swing Astral (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Swing Mistral (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Swing Stratus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Trekking Carver (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Trekking Elise (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Trekking K2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Trekking Sebring (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Trekking Xenos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Windtech Bantoo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Windtech Coral (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Windtech Nitro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Windtech Pulsar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Windtech Quarx (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Windtech Syncro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Windtech Tonic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gradient Aspen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gradient Avax (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gradient BiOnyx (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gradient Bliss (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gradient Bright (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Gradient Golden (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Walsh90210 (talk) 21:17, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I spot-checked two (Trekking Carver, Windtech Coral) which had nothing close to notability in a search, though I did find a list of Trekking aircraft. I'm loathe to !vote delete on all of these, though, without reviewing them, which is the problem with these bulk nominations. SportingFlyer T·C 22:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I just added 6 more from Gradient. Note that this list is not exhaustive, there would be about as many articles of paramotors and another equal amount about hang gliders that are in the same situation but since I am more familiar with paragliders I decided to start there. Gumgl (talk) 23:41, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Why hasn't the author been notified?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 22:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group Headquarters and Signal Squadron[edit]
- 1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group Headquarters and Signal Squadron (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The article contains one reference, which is not from an independent source. The subject of the article does not appear to be notable. PercyPigUK (talk) 18:55, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Canada. PercyPigUK (talk) 18:55, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to 1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group. Because almost nothing is sourced, there's no point in making an effort to merge material. Indefatigable (talk) 19:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 22:23, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Saint Joseph's–Temple rivalry[edit]
- Saint Joseph's–Temple rivalry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article is largely unsourced original research. I found some articles about rivalries within the Philadelphia Big 5, but nothing about these two schools specifically. Any content about this rivalry specifically should probably be added to Philadelphia Big 5 instead. This was dePRODed without any sourcing changes. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:25, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Basketball and Pennsylvania. Shellwood (talk) 15:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Coverage exists at [[11]] and [[12]]. At the very least, this should probably be merged with Philadelphia Big 5 rather than outright deleted. Let'srun (talk) 20:52, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- [1] is about the coaches of the two teams. [2] is more about the Philadelphia Big 5. I think that it's a stretch to say that there's coverage from either of these two sources. HyperAccelerated (talk) 02:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- On the other hand, I am comfortable with merging with Philadelphia Big 5. HyperAccelerated (talk) 03:25, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Additional thoughts on a merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 22:17, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Sporgery[edit]
- Sporgery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Wholly non-notable, and seemingly not a clearly independent concept. I think this article only exists for the very incidental Scientology connection. Remsense诉 22:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Remsense诉 22:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: This seems like it would be a notable concept, but all I can find are blogs, WP mirrors, and archives of Usenet discussions. References cited are all from 1998-99, unsurprisingly. I could maybe live with a redirect to Spamming or a partial merge with the "In different media" section of that article, if the Scientology connections were removed or slimmed down to a sentence or two. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Charlie Olmstead[edit]
- Charlie Olmstead (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails both WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC #5. This is a stub that I created when we presumed notability for those who played in the NFL. (Olmstead appeared in six games as a guard for Louisville in 1922 and 1923.) The presumption was revoked by community-wide consensus, and I have searched extensively (including searches in the Louisville newspaper) for SIGCOV without success. I did find and add the family's paid death notice (here), but such a notice lacks the required independence to contribute to notability. (As far as I can see, there is no obvious redirect target. Cbl62 (talk) 22:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- According to Pro Football Archives and this source, the Olmstead who played for Louisville was actually named Larry. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- No SIGCOV under "Larry" either. Cbl62 (talk) 22:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, and Kentucky. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Hung Cao[edit]
- Hung Cao (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Page was previously deleted because the subject is non-notable and does not meet WP:NPOL or WP:GNG, this has not changed since and there has been no new coverage significant enough to make him notable. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 21:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 21:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Was not notable a year ago; all that's changed since then is running for re-election. Frankly, the list of military medals isn't notable, but it makes up a good third of the article. The rest is a biography. Oaktree b (talk) 00:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per previous discussion. The only thing that changed since then, winning a primary, does not confer notability (see Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill#Political candidates). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 00:17, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to 2024 United States Senate election in Virginia as he is not notable at this time. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep It makes sense to have an article for Cao because he vastly overperformed against Wexton in ‘22 and he is now the nominee for Senate. Joe Kent of Washington, who is not a horribly notable figure has his own page and they both have somewhat similar political backgrounds.
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good argument. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. The subject seems to meet WP:GNG§WP:SIGCOV guidelines through his major political party nomination in two national elections and the coverage of him in the interim with a decent amount of coverage in foreign media. WP:POLITICIAN reads "being...an unelected candidate for political office...does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline". WP:ROTM § Political candidates is an essay, not a policy or guideline, and even it does not preclude articles for non-incumbent candidates if GNG standards are met. — AjaxSmack 01:57, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- While ROTM is not a policy or guideline, it gives the condition that
The person was already notable enough for a Wikipedia article for other reasons as it is
. So, not just meeting GNG for the election coverage itself like you seem to imply. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- While ROTM is not a policy or guideline, it gives the condition that
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Vietnam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. He is a US Senator candidate, covered in a lot of articles. Thus, saying that he is not well-known is a weak view. People may need to search for more details about him to have a better decision in the election or for other reasons. I think content about him as a politician will increase significantly in the near future. Given that he has some possibility to be a senator in the near future, deletion of his page at the moment is not a good choice. Zenms (talk) 05:02, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
C. J. Chatham[edit]
- C. J. Chatham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Career minor-league player who last played professionally in April 2022, topped out in Triple-A. Not notable to warrant a Wikipedia page; citations fall in line with what is expected to be published about any minor-league professional athlete. Dmoore5556 (talk) 21:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Baseball. Dmoore5556 (talk) 21:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Some coverage: [13] [14] [15] [16]. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: The first two sources proffered by BeanieFan11, combined with [[17]] and [[18]] each provide multiple paragraphs of WP:SIGCOV with which to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 22:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Table (landform)[edit]
- Table (landform) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Although this is used in the name Table Mountain, I couldn't find reliable sources to show this as notable. Boleyn (talk) 20:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Charlie Lanham[edit]
- Charlie Lanham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails both WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC #5. This is a stub that I created when we presumed notability for those who played in the NFL. (Lanham appeared in two games as a lineman for Louisville, one in 1922 and one in 1923.) The presumption was revoked by community-wide consensus, and I have searched extensively (including searches in the Louisville newspaper) for SIGCOV without success. (Unfortunately, there is no obvious redirect target. Cbl62 (talk) 20:39, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, and Kentucky. Shellwood (talk) 21:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Venality of offices[edit]
- Venality of offices (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The article defines a concept that does not seem to consistently go by this name, the sale of offices is a concept, but this article does little to characterize it (and what it did do is the work of an LLM of dubious accuracy). Allan Nonymous (talk) 20:17, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Allan Nonymous (talk) 20:17, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and France. Curbon7 (talk) 21:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect. Not a rationale for deletion but I don’t think “venality of offices” is actually an English term, and seems to be a direct translation from French. “Sale of offices” would be fine as a title but as it happens we’ve had the article Venal office since 2006 so I suggest we just redirect to that. Mccapra (talk) 23:13, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)Redirect to Venal office. I mean,
it's not the most plausible redirect butIt's mentioned at the target so it's more plausible than I thought it should prevent future WP:CFORKS. Also oppose merging due to the WP:LLM concerns, not that there's anything to merge other than the claim that the practice occurred in Early Modern Europe as opposed to just Ancien Régime France. Nickps (talk) 23:16, 2 July 2024 (UTC) edited:23:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC) - Redirect per Nickps. hinnk (talk) 05:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
OWL (Orphaned Wildlife) Rehabilitation Society[edit]
- OWL (Orphaned Wildlife) Rehabilitation Society (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article is created to probably promote the society and creator may havehas a conflict of interest (asked at their talk page) Edited: Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 20:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 19:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- KEEP - Wikipedia has numerous articles on wildlife rescue, rehabilitation and and preservation. Whole categories of such articles, in fact. Suggesting these articles, any of them, are created for promotion is uninformed. And saying the author has a vested interest in the subject is equally misguided. If you believe you have evidence of such, than link it, don't just toss accusations around. — Maile (talk) 21:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Diff for claim: Special:Diff/1232260375. Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 21:13, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 21:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Lifestar[edit]
- Lifestar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I couldn't find evidence that it meets WP:ORG / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 19:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Tennessee. Shellwood (talk) 21:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
The Rudiments[edit]
- The Rudiments (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I couldn't find convincing evidence they meet WP:NBAND / WP:GNG. They have been with more than one record label, so there are several potential redirect targets, though I am not sure which would be preferable. I wouldn't propose a merge as there is no sourced information. Boleyn (talk) 19:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: No sources, article does not have an encyclopedic tone. Also I couldn't find how they were notable for a Wikipedia article. Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 20:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. Shellwood (talk) 21:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Stella Assange[edit]
- Stella Assange (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject fails WP:ANYBIO. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. Any coverage of her that would be used to establish notability is only in the context of her relationship with Julian Assange, including the sourcing currently in the article. She is not independently notable. Longhornsg (talk) 19:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, Politics, Spain, and Sweden. Longhornsg (talk) 19:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Stella Assange just spent the last 13 years of her life securing Julian Assange's freedom. This represents a significant legal victory, and indeed, would be considered a considerable career achievement for any attorney. The fact that she is also Julian's wife does not detract from the significance or notability of this accomplishment. Were Stella only Julian's wife and not his attorney, I'd agree that she's not independently notable. However, her legal accomplishment is what makes her notable, rather than her marital status. If you were to strip away the fact that she's Assange's wife, then it seems you'd have to admit that her legal accomplishments and advocacy make her notable. Ben.Gowar (talk) 20:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: coverage is strictly sourced to Julian Assange articles, or to stories about their family. I don't see notability outside of the Julian Assange connection, so nothing needing an article. Oaktree b (talk) 00:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: A factual article about a notable woman. Published author. Sourced and referenced. Wikipedia stop eating your tail and deleting good encyclopaedic content. Firefishy (talk) 01:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. – Joe (talk) 06:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Gustave Lefebvre[edit]
- Gustave Lefebvre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:COATRACK. This is not a biography of Gustave Lefebvre. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Withdrawn by nominator. The coatrack has been replaced by an actual biography of Lefebvre. Though sourcing seems sparse, and we may well end up with little more than a stub, WP:GNG seems to have been met. AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Archaeology, Africa, and Egypt. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and France. Shellwood (talk) 21:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- ? Nomination is unclear. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC).
- Keep but replace content. I agree that the article in its nominated state was a WP:COATRACK. I have stubbed it back down to a single sentence with his birth and death dates and occupation (the state in which it was created) but added three published sources about his life. I think that's enough for WP:GNG, and WP:TNT would only have applied if there were no valid version to revert to, not true in this case. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep' following David's improvements. It's also worth noting that the article was created as a plain stub and the coatracky stuff was only added later. – Joe (talk) 06:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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.
George Meinhardt[edit]
- George Meinhardt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails both WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC #5. This is a stub that I created when we presumed notability for those who played in the NFL. (Meinhardt appeared in 6 games as a lineman for St. Louis in 1923.) The presumption was revoked by community-wide consensus, and I have searched extensively for SIGCOV without success. (Note: There was another George Meinhardt football player/coach in St. Louis born c. 1911 who has more extensive coverage, but that's a different person.) A redirect to 1923 St. Louis All-Stars season may be appropriate as an alternative to deletion. Cbl62 (talk) 18:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, and Missouri. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:39, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Red X[edit]
- Red X (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This page is a disaster. It's completely uncited, provides zero real-world context besides listing issues that the character appears in, and doesn't illustrate notability at all. Not to mention that the page doesn't even clarify that it's about a comic character, and the lead just presents the subject as if it's a real person. I don't know if this character is actually notable, but even if it is, this page seems unsalvageable to me except for a complete rewrite. WP:TNT. Di (they-them) (talk) 18:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. Di (they-them) (talk) 18:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:TNT. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Nothing indicating why this might warrant an article. If the fictional character has no out of universe analysis then they clearly aren't notable. -- D'n'B-t -- 19:17, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of Teen Titans (TV_series) characters#Red_X - The state of the article is so terrible at providing context that its hard to tell, but this actually about a character that appeared in the Teen Titans (TV series). They already have an appropriate section in the main character list for that series, so this should simply be redirected there. As this is a complete mess of unsourced, in-universe plot information, any kind of merging would not be appropriate. Rorshacma (talk) 20:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect and semi-protect: This is an uncredited copypaste from Fandom by someone who either won't or can't hear that we don't need it, and therefore keeps re-creating it. - Sumanuil. (talk to me) 21:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect per Rorshacma. Fandom content is freely licensed, but there's more than one site hosting the article and nothing much worth keeping, so probably best to delete the article and its history first. hinnk (talk) 05:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
National Popular Consciousness[edit]
- National Popular Consciousness (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The article does not meet the criteria of being notable. There are numerous trivial references to its leader, Yannis Lagos, but nothing about his presence on the political scene, his actions, his positions and his ideology. After all, the party did not really have autonomous action since it soon became part of an alliance.
The abundance of pieces is only due to the fact that its leader was a prominent neo-Nazi but in wikipedia Wikipedia:ORGSIG
In fact, it's not even active today, it's been dismantled which means there will be no future references that might make it notable. Wikipedia:NTEMP D.S. Lioness (talk) 18:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 July 2. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 18:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Conservatism, Organizations, Politics, and Greece. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Oppose deletion. The party was connected to an MEP, a highly unusual case as he spent the majority of his tenure as an MEP in prison. This party emerged following the tumultuous events surrounding the ban of Golden Dawn. Deleting a well-sourced article that documents the continuation of Golden Dawn and its efforts to persist is illogical. It should remain on Wikipedia. Michalis1994 (talk) 19:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Keep. The fact that the party holds or has held representation in the EU Parliament makes it notable. It also has plenty of sources also helping its notability, for if it wasn't notable, you would have so many sources talking about it. Helper201 (talk) 02:24, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep For similar reasons as above. Vulpicula (talk) 04:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Herm Young[edit]
- Herm Young (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails both WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC #5. This is a stub that I created when we presumed notability for those who played in the NFL. (Young appeared in 3 games as a backup player for Providence in 1930.) The presumption was revoked by community-wide consensus, and I have searched extensively for SIGCOV and the best I found was this piece announcing his selection as captain of his high school football team. A redirect to 1930 Providence Steam Roller season may be appropriate as an alternative to deletion. Cbl62 (talk) 17:56, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, Florida, and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Alternative title (publishing)[edit]
- Alternative title (publishing) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Duplicate topic of Subtitle (titling). — Moriwen (talk) 17:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
1234 (number)[edit]
- 1234 (number) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unsourced article about a rather unremarkable number. Lacks notability. Fram (talk) 15:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; other than "the digits are in order" there is nothing interesting about the number. Recently created. Walsh90210 (talk) 16:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. It's trivial. Athel cb (talk) 17:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. I have added some sourced properties, not all of which are "the digits are in order". The article is now significantly expanded from its nominated sub-stub version, which didn't even say that much. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:08, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I need more numbers in Wikipedia because Wikipedia is helpful also, I made this page because I need more numbers in Wikipedia, so don’t delete it. It is a good page. Highway Helper (talk) 23:45, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! Enthusiastic editors are a great thing to have. However, before you create any more pages, you might want to carefully read WP:GNG, which talks about when a topic is sufficiently important to have its own page. PianoDan (talk) 16:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Ldm1954 (talk) 07:40, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as insufficiently notable. PianoDan (talk) 16:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I am adding more sourced properties as well. Radlrb (talk) 19:25, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Evaluating this number by the relevant guideline, the big question is
Are there at least three unrelated interesting mathematical properties of this integer?
I think we can lump together all of its appearances in various lists made by concatenating numerals ("triangle of the gods", the sequence, and the Yates-order thing). Then we've got the counting of independent vertex sets, which is in the OEIS as both "nice" and "hard". We could also include this along with that and maybe mention this as well. The "finite Sturmian words" sequence is also "nice", though what it's actually counting seems harder to explain... The rest of what's currently in the page can be summarized, I think, by saying, "1234 is also the answer to various partitioning problems, such as" and giving a few examples. Counting rooted trees of a fixed height and digits in Fermat numbers could also be included. Overall, I think this one is salvageable, somewhat to my surprise. XOR'easter (talk) 01:18, 28 June 2024 (UTC)- Partitions are tricky, mainly because all small enough numbers will be some partition values of different integers in many ways, so at least two coinciding values in different enough ways (or similar too), makes pairs of integer partitions or more worthwhile to mention (here we have two for 44 and two for 24, for example). Else partition values obtained that are factors of each other is another order of interest, especially if the partitions are defined in similar ways... and so forth. Actual uses of select partitions become most notable, of course. We can remove some from here (like those in the note). Radlrb (talk) 05:33, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- @XOR'easter: I think you are misinterpreting the guideline (it isn't the clearest in this regard). For a number to be considered notable, it needs to meet all three bullet points, not just one of them. Above, there are similar lists for "kinds" and "sequences" of numbers, and there it is explicitly noted that we need an "affirmative" answer to the questions, not just to one of them. You can also see in the "Disposition of examples" for the numbers, that the example meets all three questions and thus is notable. For 1234, so far only meeting question 1 has been demonstrated, positive answers to question 2 and 3 are missing, and this means that it doesn't meet the guideline and isn't notable. Fram (talk) 07:49, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- I said "the big question". Question 2 is the most subjective, and in this case is arguably met because the number in question is, well, "one two three four". It's the ATM PIN for people who don't care about their ATM PIN, and all that. The answer to question 3 is yes; 1234 appears on Friedman's webpage (I haven't checked the other two, but it doesn't have to appear in all of them). XOR'easter (talk) 15:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Worth mentioning also, this article as it currently stands also satisfies guidelines found at WikiProject Numbers (aside from maybe, finding a good cultural point referenced, or otherwise). Radlrb (talk) 16:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Wholly non-notable by any reasonable interpretation of the idea. Any number of this magnitude is likely to crop up in dozens, if not hundreds, or thousands, of OEIS entries. A laundry list of such appearances does not an encyclopedic subject make. I'd go so far as to say that numbers above 100 (and I'm being really generous by cutting off at 100) are not notable unless they have some overriding cultural significance or for some other special reason. "1234" does not fit into this, and indeed, even after attempts to flesh out the article, all we have is a list of numerical trivia. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:02, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Zero sense, and that will never happen anyways. It's not just about OEIS, and guidelines are clear in what is required to be included here as an article. For example, take 1024, or a small number such as 144, and you'll get very important properties arising. Radlrb (talk) 19:32, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- You may disagree with me, just as I disagree with you, but saying my reasoning makes "zero sense" makes zero sense. And I even said I'm open to exceptional cases, but this isn't one of them. And the guidelines on standalone notability for integers are, frankly, bullshit. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 19:46, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- I welcome you to make suggestions for better notability guidelines at the proper project pages, then. Note, that these have been "fleshed out" quite a bit. Radlrb (talk) 20:26, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- You may disagree with me, just as I disagree with you, but saying my reasoning makes "zero sense" makes zero sense. And I even said I'm open to exceptional cases, but this isn't one of them. And the guidelines on standalone notability for integers are, frankly, bullshit. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 19:46, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Zero sense, and that will never happen anyways. It's not just about OEIS, and guidelines are clear in what is required to be included here as an article. For example, take 1024, or a small number such as 144, and you'll get very important properties arising. Radlrb (talk) 19:32, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I found a published source for the frequent pin code usage. I'm not a big fan of crufty number articles, but I think the grid independent set property, the cultural usage as a pin code, and the appearance of this number in recreational mathematics works such as Pickover's are enough for this one. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:11, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- The PIN referenced is not really about the integer 1234, as its a string of digits for a code, and people usually would not think of "one thousand, two hundred and thirty-four" when putting this pin down, more so "one two three four". But, it can go either way, so I think it's somewhat admissible (if that's all that we can find culturaly, or in society, so to speak, for this article so far). Radlrb (talk) 20:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The article is now greatly expanded and much better sourced than it was when nominated. A (re-)assessment of sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. non-notable and insufficient coverage. S-Aura (talk) 22:56, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Air Europa Flight 045[edit]
- Air Europa Flight 045 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Failure to comply with WP:NOTABILITY. Jetstreamer Talk 16:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Brazil. Shellwood (talk) 16:56, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep This was a similar incident that happened to Latam Airlines Flight 800 in March 2024. 71.114.103.105 (talk) 16:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete clearly WP:NOTNEWS. SportingFlyer T·C 16:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Firstly, this deletion seems like a WP:RAPID move to me. Sufficient secondary sources do exist at the moment and serious injuries have also taken place: [19], [20], [21] and plenty more. GalacticOrbits (talk) 16:59, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Turbulence occurs in such a way that passengers are injured very frequently and it makes a news cycle. There's nothing to suggest this will be any more notable than any of those non-notable events. SportingFlyer T·C 19:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- But this is a larger than normal number of people who have been injured. 65.132.132.162 (talk) 20:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Look at LATAM Airlines Flight 800... Wonder what you'll say now huh. 2605:8D80:400:9392:D5DE:BDDD:4CB:2DBE (talk) 21:11, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Turbulence occurs in such a way that passengers are injured very frequently and it makes a news cycle. There's nothing to suggest this will be any more notable than any of those non-notable events. SportingFlyer T·C 19:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Turbulence is such a regular occurrence in planes, but I'm assuming from the plane's flightpath, from it going from Spain to Uruguay which crosses the Equator. The "extreme turbulence" mentioned in the article might have been caused by the Equator's turbulence. A regular plane incident isn't worthy of Wikipedia standards.
- |
- Anybody who wants to know if the article is worthy of being an article should read WP:PLANECRASH. 71.223.74.246 (talk) 20:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Said this like you've never did any research before, congrats. You didn't even acknowledge the amount of injuries and fatal injuries on this flight, take a look at LATAM Airlines Flight 800 and its the same exact incident. 2605:8D80:400:9392:D5DE:BDDD:4CB:2DBE (talk) 21:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by sources indicated above and by others per WP:NEXIST. While turbulence is common in aviation, 40 injured by turbulence not as much. gidonb (talk) 01:52, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Unrelated to the discussion, the IP user above gidnob's post appears to be a troll acting in similar patterns to other deletionist trolls, if someone could get a mod that would be great. 174.27.146.142 (talk) 05:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- You yourself are using an IP aswell, you have no room to talk. Mad for what? 2605:8D80:400:9392:D5FE:E7B5:F498:F52C (talk) 05:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not going to fight back, just going to give you a reminder to stay civil, I have an account on my school laptop if that helps you, this is a discussion not an arguement. 174.27.146.142 (talk) 06:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm also not a "troll" so be careful what you say. 2605:8D80:400:9392:D5FE:E7B5:F498:F52C (talk) 05:38, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- You yourself are using an IP aswell, you have no room to talk. Mad for what? 2605:8D80:400:9392:D5FE:E7B5:F498:F52C (talk) 05:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Unrelated to the discussion, the IP user above gidnob's post appears to be a troll acting in similar patterns to other deletionist trolls, if someone could get a mod that would be great. 174.27.146.142 (talk) 05:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT #4. The comparison with LATAM Airlines Flight 800 is irrelevant: firstly, WP:OTHERSTUFF doesn't determine the notability of this event, and in any case the fatality on LA800 and the procedural changes that resulted from the flight add notability that isn't present here. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Brian Campbell (game designer)[edit]
- Brian Campbell (game designer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I cannot find any independent reliable sources with coverage of Campbell. As one of teams of people, he is credited on multiple notable role-playing games. I think it's stretching NAUTHOR #3 beyond the intent of that SNG to consider every person who is credited on those games as inherently notable. (#3: "...has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work"
) I cannot find any reviews of any of those games that call out Campbell's contributions. Schazjmd (talk) 14:10, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Science fiction and fantasy, and Games. Schazjmd (talk) 14:10, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - I fully get how annoying White Wolf Publishing's approach to book credits has been, over the years - by crediting the contributions of everyone involved, they often don't end up attributing authorship clearly to anyone.
- However, for Ratkin (1999), Umbra (2001) and Tribebook: Bone Gnawers (2001) Campbell is listed as sole author - that satisfies WP:NAUTHOR for me. Newimpartial (talk) 14:44, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Fails WP:NBASIC, no secondary coverage. I don't think he meets WP:NAUTHOR either, only major work seems to be Victorian Age: Vampire. --Mika1h (talk) 15:46, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:47, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per the arguments of Newimpartial, but failing that we could always merge or redirect to List of role-playing game designers. BOZ (talk) 21:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
List of chief executive officers[edit]
- List of chief executive officers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Ephemeral list with unclear criteria for inclusion. Category:Chief executives by nationality includes more then 12,000 notable subjects, which could potentially all end up in this list. Broc (talk) 12:25, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Lists of people, and Lists. Broc (talk) 12:25, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- DELETE - WP:NOTDIRECTORY also delete subcategories on a separate AFD deletion. Why do we need this list, or any of the other similar lists? There's a whole bunch of this stuff we could delete. See Category:Lists of businesspeople - why do we need to know how many Jewish persons are in a given area of corporations? And why do we need to know their specific names and birth-death dates? It just goes on and on, with probably nobody updating these lists. — Maile (talk) 13:38, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Maile66 I've noticed those other lists such as List of Jewish American businesspeople in finance which do not seem to fulfill WP:NLIST. However, they can't be grouped with this nomination, as my concerns for this list are more about WP:SALAT (selection criterion is too broad) and WP:LISTOUTCOMES (ephemeral listings are usually deleted). Broc (talk) 14:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Understood. Just mentioning in case anyone else wants to create an AFD for any of those . — Maile (talk) 15:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Maile66 I've noticed those other lists such as List of Jewish American businesspeople in finance which do not seem to fulfill WP:NLIST. However, they can't be grouped with this nomination, as my concerns for this list are more about WP:SALAT (selection criterion is too broad) and WP:LISTOUTCOMES (ephemeral listings are usually deleted). Broc (talk) 14:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep This list appears to only have current CEOs of notable companies, even though it's not clearly stated; skimming the categories, I see a lot of former CEOs and executives of non-notable companies or other types of entities. This list could probably be reorganized to be sorted by country or further limited to, say, Fortune 500 or equivalent companies, as well as removing the few CEOs listed who don't have their own articles either, but it serves a valid navigational purpose. These categories have a lot of people who aren't corporate executives or are notable for other things, so it's not very useful for navigation. I'd further note that the item on the Common Outcomes page was added in 2011 as "Ephemeral listings of current personnel", which is often seen as non-notable people; this is by no means a precedent that applies here and does not ban the concept of things being up to date. Reywas92Talk 15:13, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep If the list gets too long, it can split out by nationality. This is far more useful than a category that only list their names, this showing what company they are in, what years they held this title, and how they got their position. Perfect valid navigational list. Dream Focus 16:45, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Unable to understand the selection criteria for what constitutes a "notable company" or how a "position corresponding" to CEO is defined. As such, this is a WP:NLIST violation. Let'srun (talk) 17:40, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- If the CEO and the company both have their own Wikipedia articles, then they are notable. If its notable enough for a category, you can make a far more useful navigational list out of it. Dream Focus 23:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, is a random list with no clear boundaries. What defines a notable company? There must be thousands of CEOs, if not more, this article lists a few hundred. Would be more useful if there were defined boundaries, e.g. of a FTSE 100 or Nasdaq 100. Heronrhyne (talk) 04:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- — Heronrhyne (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Dream Focus 04:37, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: This list doesn't seem to be simply a directory, as it provides info about each entry. As for the consern of the list becoming to large, it could always be split into different articles, say by country, if we come upon that bridge. GrayStorm(Complaints Dept.|My Contribs.) 00:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Useful list, passes WP:NLIST. Of course it is incomplete and not always up to date, as inevitably with any such list. Edwardx (talk) 08:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:23, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
M-T pronouns[edit]
- M-T pronouns (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Almost exclusively from a single source, and fails to establish WP:N. Practically zero mention of the concept outside of that single source and veers dangerously into WP:PROFRINGE territory with the WP:OR links to fringe theory language families like Nostratic, which aren't mentioned in the source. Without establishing notability this seems to not really belong here, and I'm unable to verify that this is at all taken seriously in linguistics.
For anyone unfamiliar with this topic:
- "The M-T pattern is the most common argument for several proposed long-distance language families, such as the Nostratic hypothesis, that include Indo-European as a subordinate branch. Nostratic has even been called 'Mitian' after these pronouns."
Nostratic is emphatically a fringe theory within linguistics and is not mentioned in any of the sources, and this article seems heavily like WP:ADVOCACY. Any sources linking Nostratic to M-T Pronouns are inherently fringe sources, but even then many of the claims here are entirely un-cited. It doesn't seem this article can be saved. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 09:51, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 09:51, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Feels like Original Research to me. Only two sources though the Google search gives plenty sources. Whether they back up the article and are reliable or not I have no idea. Not my field — Iadmc♫talk 10:02, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Asia and Europe. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not advocating for Nostratic. This is simply a piece of evidence claimed by those who do, and Nostratic has been deemed appropriate for a WP article.
- As noted, the M-T pronominal pattern is well attested in the lit. I relied on a single source to create the article, but others could be added.
- Some conclusions drawn from the pattern, such as Nostratic, are FRINGE. Yet we have articles on them. WALS is most certainly not a fringe source. IMO it's worth discussing one of the principal pieces of evidence given for fringe hypotheses when we have articles on them. A similar pattern in America, N-M, has been used to justify the FRINGE hypothesis of Amerind. Yet it is discussed in non-fringe sources, which conclude that it's only statistically significant for western North America, and disappears as a statistical anomaly if we accept the validity of Penutian and Hokan. That's worth discussing, because it cuts the legs out from under Amerind; without it, people might find the argument for Amerind to be convincing.
- I have yet to find a credible explanation for the M-T pattern. But the lack of an explanation for a phenomenon is not reason to not cover it. There are many things we can't convincingly explain, but that's the nature of science: we don't refuse to cover them. — kwami (talk) 11:49, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ seems to be motivated to object to this because they think I have a PROFRINGE statement on my user page. What I have is a sarcastic statement, one that other WP linguists have laughed over because it is obviously ridiculous. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ fails to see the sarcasm.
- An equivalent might be to say that our personalities are governed by Arcturus, which is in Gemini; therefore we're all Geminis and have share a single hive mind. That wouldn't be advocacy for astrology. (Though I'm sure people have come up with more imaginative ways of mocking it.) — kwami (talk) 12:05, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- It’s not exactly obvious sarcasm when you’re making articles that advocate the perspectives of fringe theorists, but sorry if I missed that. It wasn’t my intention to have it sound like an attack. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 12:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not advocating the perspectives of fringe theorists, I'm describing a pattern that they have used to justify their theories. I've done the same for Amerind; there the conclusion is that if we accept Penutian and Hokan as valid clades, then the statistical anomaly (and thus the purported evidence for Amerind) disappears. I don't know of any similar conclusion in this case, but the pattern remains and is worth discussing if we're going to have articles on Nostratic and the like (and we have quite a few of those articles!)
- What comes off as advocacy to me is covering FRINGE theories in multiple articles and then refusing to discuss the evidence, when consideration of that evidence would cast doubt on the theories. That would be like refusing to discuss the evidence posited for astrology or UFOs, leaving readers with only the perspective of advocates to go by. — kwami (talk) 12:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- This is WP:Original research, by your own words, and has no place in the encyclopedia. Use a blog to promote your personal research. Delete — Iadmc♫talk 12:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Nostraticists have a long and storied history of claiming basically anything they can as evidence. These claims aren’t taken seriously among linguists for good reason. I’m unaware of a single piece of scholarship that’d pass WP:RS (or even not those that’d pass) claiming this as evidence for Nostratic, and frankly I find your accusations here inappropriate so I’ll bow out of engaging and let the rest of the AfD play out. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 12:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- It’s not exactly obvious sarcasm when you’re making articles that advocate the perspectives of fringe theorists, but sorry if I missed that. It wasn’t my intention to have it sound like an attack. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 12:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note — kwami is the creator and sole contributor to this article— Iadmc♫talk 12:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I'm speaking as a non-expert, but I would like to get more context on the matter. Do such patterns, outside of advocating for certain theories, have any value? Could, for example, there be a place in the Nostratic article to add a few more of these details to the Proposed features section? I'm not familiar with the sources in the article, what is their reputation generally? AnandaBliss (talk) 16:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- As far as credible sources go, which is just the one page linked as the main source in the article, it's a statistically noted feature but no signifficance has yet been attributed to it. Certainly not to Nostratic. Nostratic is itself a fringe theory and likely doesn't need more on the proposed features as none of the proposed features are real, and nobody is proposing a link to Nostratic because of this as far a sourcing goes except the author of the article and perhaps some blogs. This article has, frankly, some big "teach the controversy" energy.
- @Austronesier is a little less viscerally anti-Nostratic-on-wikipedia and may have a different perspective, however. Also, I think this should probably be my last reply here lest I WP:BLUDGEON.
- Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 16:50, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, or probably expand and modify its scope to include the other notable pronoun pattern (N-M) along the lines of the WALS page cited in the article. As is, it is underreferenced, but we can easily get more sources by following the trail of Johanna Nichols's paper on this subject and subsequent papers by other scholars who take a typological look at the matter. Sure, this pronoun pattern is cited as evidence by Nostraticists, but they don't own the topic. Yet, you can hardly leave Lord Voldemort, uhm I mean Nostratic unmentioned in relation to this notable topic, because most mainstream linguist writing about the topic of global pronoun patterns will at least mention the fact that Nostraticists have tried to build a language relationship hypothesis out this real observable. You can't blame observables for the bad and motorious hypotheses that are made to explain them.
- Finally, this is not advocacy, and to believe so earns you a megatrout, @Warren. Kwami has built literally hundreds of language family and subgroup articles in WP from a mainstream perspective, generally leaning towards a "splitter" approach (ala Hammarström or Güldemann). Ok, unfamiliarity with kwami's role in this project is one thing, but jeez, labelling an important piece of Nichols's research as fringe just because of an indirect association to the Nostratic hypothesis is a knee jerk that makes the knee jerks in WP:FTN look like an élevé. –Austronesier (talk) 20:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- For all the "delete" !votes because of WP:OR issues, there's WP:NOTCLEANUP. Here's more sources covering the topic:
- Needless to say that these book chapters do not promote or endorse long-range fringe speculations. –Austronesier (talk) 22:13, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Moving this to 'M-T and N-M pronoun patterns' might be worthwhile. The latter is already written and referenced, so we only need to merge it in. Nichols et al. note that these are the only two patterns that jump out in a global perspective. There are others at a local scale, of course, such as the Č-Kw pattern in the western Amazon, but these tend to not be all that contentious as arguments for the classification of poorly attested or reconstructed families. They also don't lend themselves to fringe ideas, because really, who but a historical linguist (or the people themselves) care whether Piaroa and Ticuna are related?
- I wonder whether a Pama-Nyungan-like pronoun pattern extends beyond that family, as a pan-Australian feature. If it does, that -- and how people explain it if they don't believe it's genetic -- might be worth discussing as well. — kwami (talk) 06:36, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, I took your suggestion and merged in the N-M stuff and moved the article to M–T and N–M pronoun patterns. I haven't had a chance yet to incorporate your sources, and this week's going to be rather busy, but it's on my to-do list. — kwami (talk) 07:36, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This is definitely original research. The article presents this as related to Nostratic and Etruscan language families, neither of which are mentioned in the source the article is based on. A lot of the article needs to get deleted, probably. Mrfoogles (talk) 21:18, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. At the very least, this is a non-notable topic propped up by a healthy dose of OR. There's a single source for the main article topic along with who-knows-how-much-personal-observation in the article currently, such as
"However, doubling the number of pronouns to be considered in this way increases the possibility of coincidental resemblance, and decreases the likelihood that the resulting pattern is significant."
Where does this come from? Where does any of these statistical conclusions come from? It's not in the source. This is a pretty concerning case and may warrant further scrutiny. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:22, 18 June 2024 (UTC) - Agree that this isn't a fringe theory, but it does seem hard to find secondary sources on. Keep assuming any other secondary sources exist. Mrfoogles (talk) 21:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, make that Delete unless at least one more secondary source can be identified, after looking at the article again. Almost all of it is not based on the source it actually uses, and it seems difficult to write an article given nobody seems to have any other sources than that one. Mrfoogles (talk) 21:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Would a redirect to Nostratic languages be possible here? This seems to be WP:SYNTH. Walsh90210 (talk) 19:29, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, not a good idea. The topic is notable outside of the Nostraticist bubble. The author that has most contributed to our understanding of the topic, Johanna Nichols, does not endorse long-range speculations. –Austronesier (talk) 17:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and probably clean up. Gbooks turned up this sound-looking source. Johnbod (talk) 03:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- This is a brief mention simply referring back to Nichols again; there's not the sort of in-depth analysis that you'd expect for a notable topic...or any analysis for that matter. The OR/SYNTH here is strewn so inextricably throughout the article, and the topic so niche, contributed by a single author, that cleanup seems exceedingly improbable. At the very least, WP:TNT applies here if anyone thinks that they can demonstrate notability. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:44, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Inextricable? Don't turn subjective unwillingness to extract the obvious bits of OR/SYNTH into an intrinsic property of the text. WP:TNT is not an excuse for laziness. –Austronesier (talk) 17:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- This is a brief mention simply referring back to Nichols again; there's not the sort of in-depth analysis that you'd expect for a notable topic...or any analysis for that matter. The OR/SYNTH here is strewn so inextricably throughout the article, and the topic so niche, contributed by a single author, that cleanup seems exceedingly improbable. At the very least, WP:TNT applies here if anyone thinks that they can demonstrate notability. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:44, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please do not move articles while their AfD is open.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:47, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm leaning delete, but I think kwami is right that there can be articles about arguments used for dubious language families, and I think calling the article "original research" is overly critical. However, the WALS map is not clearly about an argument used for certain proposed families, but about the distribution of sounds in certain pronouns - whether or not these have been used as arguments for Nostratic/Altaic/Indo-Uralic or whatever - at least in my reading. I would like to see more sources that are specifically about the pattern, otherwise it seems to get undue weight by having an article. The topic could instead be covered under the name of "(Personal) pronouns in Nostratic/etc", which would make sense under a very different structure (so not sure a move would be useful, or?), and maybe even better to start it as a subsection in the relevant proposed family's article. This would probably better reflect the context that the pattern is discussed in, in the sources. //Replayful (talk | contribs) 18:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:16, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but rename to "phonetic patterns in pronouns" or something like that. The best of multiple bad options. Walsh90210 (talk) 18:48, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Nowhere girls[edit]
- Nowhere girls (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
article is written to legitimize this term, making it seem its use is widespread. there isn't even a chinese wikipedia article about this term. search up "沒女", most results (and most sources in the article) are about the tv show 没女大翻身. ltbdl (talk) 08:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, China, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Taiwan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep for now: Could the nominator clarify what is the rationale for deletion? The Wen Wei Po, U Beauty, and the South China Morning Post sources currently in the article may not be the best, but already demonstrate that the term exists and is notable enough to pass GNG. In addition to these sources, a simple search has provided me with numerous other sources, including some Chinese sources that document the origin of this term (see Economic Daily[24] and The Sun[25]), how it spread to and became popular in Hong Kong (see Hong Kong Economic Journal[26], Wen Wei Po[27], and She.com[28]), as well as the subsequent social influence and some recurring usages after it gained popularity (see BBC[29], Ming Pao[30], HK01[31], and Oriental Daily News[32]). I have not yet looked for academic sources, but I have already come across two academic journal articles that cover this term when I was searching for media sources ([33] and [34]), so I do not believe academic sources would be difficult to locate either. :The fact that it does not currently have a respective article on the zhwiki means nothing, and it is clearly an argument of WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST. Most of the sources mention the TV show Nowhere Girl is understandable, because that show popularised the term. There are many other instances of the term being used, such as the drama series The No No Girl (全職沒女), the film Love Detective (沒女神探), and a non-fiction book Mei nü Yao Fan Shen (沒女要翻身) written by Queenie Chan[35], where the English translation of the term may differ. So the claim that the term is only used in one particular TV show is false as well. Could the nominator please elaborate a bit more on the specific rationale being used for deletion? —Prince of Erebor(The Book of Mazarbul) 15:34, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Since about a week has passed but the nominator did not further elaborate on the deletion rationale, the current nomination statement is based on WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST instead of notability guidelines, and I think it should be considered Speedy Keep per WP:CSK#1. —Prince of Erebor(The Book of Mazarbul) 07:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per the excellent research by Prince of Erebor (talk · contribs), who has definitively shown that the topic passes Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. Cunard (talk) 10:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- Keep per clear pass on WP:LASTING which is usually the death of flash-in-the-pan neologisms - the originating influence is from 2001, and I am satisfied that the articles posted by Prince of Erebor are sufficiently far apart that this is a notable concept. BrigadierG (talk) 00:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Maximum engineering data rate[edit]
- Maximum engineering data rate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Could not find sourcing for this concept or term. The only use I could find of this metric that predates the article was: "Initial Cassini propulsion system in-flight characterization" (2002) [36] — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 16:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Technology. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 16:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I couldn't find reliable sources discussing this term. Boleyn (talk) 19:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per above, I was also unsuccessful when looking for evidence of WP:V BrigadierG (talk) 00:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Labingi[edit]
- Labingi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG seems like an list disambiguation. Both articles link to each other in the lead. Could possible be redirected to Westron language? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:17, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Fictional elements, and Science fiction and fantasy. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:17, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Appears to be real, but so trivial as to not merit a mention in Bilbo's article as it stands now. Is there more context to these supposed names that would fill out a stub, or another article that explains the context here? Jclemens (talk) 04:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Disambiguations. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, certainly real and readily sourced, and a reminder that we should certainly make more of Westron names, in fact the whole language, throughout the WikiProject. The prime concern across the project has been notability, given that there was a large legacy of what seemed to be fan-created articles with (at best) primary sourcing. Now that that's been fixed, looking at the development of names and of characters, all the legendarium side of things, is an obvious next step: i.e. we should add the "Labingi" element to many articles. I'd hope it'd go without saying that you can't decide notability by looking at Wikipedia's gaps, but perhaps that's worth repeating here. Tolkien devoted enormous effort to the names in multiple languages, complete with Pseudotranslation from Westron to English; scholars are starting to catch up with these legendarium (Silmarillion without italics) aspects, so there is potentially large scope for article improvement in this direction. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:16, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Question Judging from the description in Template:Surname and many examples I see, it seems that name pages do work differently with regard to notability requirements as compared to "normal" articles. They seem to be more or less a special type of disambiguation page. Is that correct? Daranios (talk) 15:19, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- That's right, they are basically navigation lists. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- The thing is this is a fictional name with only two uses. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 23:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- When things need disambiguating, it doesn't matter if there are 2 or 20. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Except in this instance disambiguation isn’t needed. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 23:19, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- When things need disambiguating, it doesn't matter if there are 2 or 20. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- The thing is this is a fictional name with only two uses. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 23:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- That's right, they are basically navigation lists. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep As a name page this does not need to fullfill WP:GNG as discussed above. I think a sentence adding the Westron version of the name to Bilbo Baggins in the way it does appear at Frodo Baggins#Concept and creation is warranted, and can be verfied by both primary and secondary sources. (I only now have seen that the name appears in the very beginning at Bilbo Baggins, so I am not sure if more is necessary for the name as such. Daranios (talk) 15:06, 19 June 2024 (UTC)) Partially answering Jclemens' question, I did see small pieces of further context, which are probably best included in other articles: The Hobbit Encyclopedia, p. 201, states how we see that the connection between Baggins and Bag End is deliberate, because it also appears in the Westron names. Probably best suited for the Bag End article. This snippet view from Myth Print magazine has criticism on the introduction of the Westron names, referring to Maura Labingi, as they can detract from appreciating the names commonly appearing in the books, like Frodo Baggins. Probably best suited for the Pseudotranslation in The Lord of the Rings article. This article has a bit of commentary on how the names Baggins and Labingi, which both can be related to (to) bag/(to) pocket, are suitable for the character of Bilbo (and Frodo as his heir), i.e. suited for the Bilbo Baggins article. I don't quite get what kind of publication that is, though. Daranios (talk) 10:04, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Both of the two things disambiguated are not common names for the characters by a longshot. Per WP:NAMELIST, articles on people should be listed at the disambiguation page for their given name or surname only if they are reasonably well known by it. I assume this also applies to fictional characters, making this DAB page blatantly violate policy. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:25, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm, I think WP:NAMELIST refers to a very different case than ours here, with their example of Lincoln (disambiguation): If there is a term with a number of different meanings, which includes both persons' names and other things, then one should only include very prominent examples (like Abraham Lincoln) in the main disambiguation page, while other persons' names should be spun out into a page like Lincoln (name). Here, we only have names of (fictional) persons. Secondly, the guideline says why it exists in the first place: To prevent disambiguation pages from getting too long. That is very much not a problem here. Daranios (talk) 15:06, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Well, the article is presented as a name list, and uses the templates that are intended for real life people. So I have no choice but to judge it as one - if I don't, it has even less of a claim for existence due to violating WP:PTM. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:20, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I see this also as a name list. WP:NAMELIST, despite its title, does not deal with how to construct name lists, but how to deal with regular disambiguation pages which also contain names, and the relationship between regular disambiguation pages and name lists. The part you have quoted therefore does not apply to our name list here, as is directly present in that part:
...should be listed at the disambiguation page...
. So no violation of that guideline here. Daranios (talk) 09:57, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I see this also as a name list. WP:NAMELIST, despite its title, does not deal with how to construct name lists, but how to deal with regular disambiguation pages which also contain names, and the relationship between regular disambiguation pages and name lists. The part you have quoted therefore does not apply to our name list here, as is directly present in that part:
- Well, the article is presented as a name list, and uses the templates that are intended for real life people. So I have no choice but to judge it as one - if I don't, it has even less of a claim for existence due to violating WP:PTM. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:20, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm, I think WP:NAMELIST refers to a very different case than ours here, with their example of Lincoln (disambiguation): If there is a term with a number of different meanings, which includes both persons' names and other things, then one should only include very prominent examples (like Abraham Lincoln) in the main disambiguation page, while other persons' names should be spun out into a page like Lincoln (name). Here, we only have names of (fictional) persons. Secondly, the guideline says why it exists in the first place: To prevent disambiguation pages from getting too long. That is very much not a problem here. Daranios (talk) 15:06, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Angara Airlines Flight 200[edit]
- Angara Airlines Flight 200 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Per WP:NOTNEWS. The majority of sources constitute those of primary sources with a lack of reliable secondary sources. The event does not have in-depth coverage with a failure of continued coverage with lasting effects having not been demonstrated. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:07, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, and Russia. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:12, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep this is not the best article, but there are clearly sources on the Russian language article showing sustained coverage of this fatality-causing incident. SportingFlyer T·C 12:13, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- The russian article on Angara Airlines Flight 200 has been nominated for deletion since 2021 with those three sources talking about the heroic actions of the flight attendant. I don't mind including this in the article but there needs to be more coverage talking about the accident for a sustained amount of time for the accident to be considered notable.
- "of this fatality-causing incident."
- Per the event criteria, criterion #4, Routine kinds of news events (including most crimes, accidents, deaths, celebrity or political news, "shock" news, stories lacking lasting value such as "water cooler stories," and viral phenomena) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance.
- There doesn't seem to be much that would give this accident, whilst tragic, additional enduring significance. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- I completely disagree with you. Whether something is notable on another Wikipedia does not matter. We usually keep articles on fatal commercial plane crashes, and those articles in the Russian article discuss the flight attendant being honoured by Putin, so a big deal, and retrospectives in Russian such as [37]. SportingFlyer T·C 13:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has deleted fatal aviation accidents involving commercial airliners. "Usually keep" doesn't always mean "keep" unless something gives the accident enduring significance.
- You mention the flight attendant but what makes the accident notable in itself? The article fails multiple guidelines for a stand-alone article. In my opinion, there isn't enough that gives this accident enduring significance that would warrant a standalone article. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- The death of the flight crew in normal passenger aviation combined with the lasting coverage of the event through the honouring of the flight attendant clearly gets it over the bar. SportingFlyer T·C 17:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- The sources covering the flight attendant's honouring are primary sources since they reported on the news when it came out without actually doing much analysis. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, the articles on the flight attendant are clearly secondary, not "breaking news." See [38], that is clearly not a primary source. SportingFlyer T·C 19:21, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- There's needs to be a consistent pattern of secondary sources. One secondary source does not make the rest secondary. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- There's plenty of secondary sources available for this incident. I don't really know why you're trying to discredit this on that ground. SportingFlyer T·C 21:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- There's needs to be a consistent pattern of secondary sources. One secondary source does not make the rest secondary. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, the articles on the flight attendant are clearly secondary, not "breaking news." See [38], that is clearly not a primary source. SportingFlyer T·C 19:21, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- The sources covering the flight attendant's honouring are primary sources since they reported on the news when it came out without actually doing much analysis. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- The death of the flight crew in normal passenger aviation combined with the lasting coverage of the event through the honouring of the flight attendant clearly gets it over the bar. SportingFlyer T·C 17:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- I completely disagree with you. Whether something is notable on another Wikipedia does not matter. We usually keep articles on fatal commercial plane crashes, and those articles in the Russian article discuss the flight attendant being honoured by Putin, so a big deal, and retrospectives in Russian such as [37]. SportingFlyer T·C 13:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep. The community has a longstanding consensus that the crash of a regularly-scheduled commercial passenger flight resulting in a total hull loss, fatalities, significant impacts aside from the crash of the aircraft, and/or long-term regulatory changes meets notability standards. RecycledPixels (talk) 16:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Could you link an established consensus on this matter? You're saying that the accident resulted in long term effects, changes in regulations but I haven't been able to find those. Could you explain where you're coming from? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 17:15, 18 June 2024 (UTC) Note that this comment was broken up into two parts by the following reply. I have reinstated my full reply. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:54, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe, but I'm busy. I don't expect to be able to spend much more than casual morning coffee drive-by's until mid-July at best. You could try searching youself? It shouldn't be hard to find. RecycledPixels (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Which is what I did and it turned up nothing, so unless you're referring to the essay of WP:AIRCRASH, I don't see what longstanding consensus you're talking about. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not aware of, nor have I been able to find, any such consensus either. WP:AIRCRASH is merely intended to help assess whether an event is worthy of mention in lists of accidents and incidents, and sure enough this accident is quite rightly listed on the airline, aircraft and airport articles. Just possibly, we could redirect to one of those rather than deleting it outright. Rosbif73 (talk) 13:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- See for example Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VASP Flight 210, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2022 Jubba Airways crash, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Air Astana Flight 1388, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ural Airlines Flight 178, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ozark Air Lines Flight 982, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miami Air Flight 293, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biman Bangladesh Airlines Flight 60, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lao Aviation Flight 703. I'm sure there's plenty of others, but those are ones I found by searching my contribution history. RecycledPixels (talk) 06:19, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- But could you link an established consensus? Community "consensus" doesn't override policy and guidelines which the article/event fails and does not excuse it from not meeting multiple guidelines. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 17:15, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- The fact it's consistently brought up shows that it demonstrates at least some sort of "consensus" about how these articles are reviewed at AfD. In this instance, it was a passenger flight which resulted in fatalities, and received sustained coverage "after the event," which usually results in a keep. I don't know why this would be different. SportingFlyer T·C 19:26, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's been brought up but it has never been established as an actual consensus.
- Some articles, such as Lao Aviation FLight 703, Biman Bangladesh Airlines Flight 60, Miami Air Flight 293, Ozark Air Lines Flight 982 were nominated shortly after the creation of their article. Some articles such as Ural Airlines Flight 178, Air Astana Flight 1388 and VASP Flight 210, in hindsight, were very serious accidents due to their unique circumstances.
- Notability isn't immediately inherited just because the event involved a commercial airliner. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:54, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- No one is saying notability is inherited because of that, but look at the fresh deletion nomination Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virgin Atlantic Flight 024 - it lists all the reasons when we generally characterise coverage of an aviation incident as lasting. SportingFlyer T·C 21:50, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- The fact it's consistently brought up shows that it demonstrates at least some sort of "consensus" about how these articles are reviewed at AfD. In this instance, it was a passenger flight which resulted in fatalities, and received sustained coverage "after the event," which usually results in a keep. I don't know why this would be different. SportingFlyer T·C 19:26, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- But could you link an established consensus? Community "consensus" doesn't override policy and guidelines which the article/event fails and does not excuse it from not meeting multiple guidelines. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 17:15, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe, but I'm busy. I don't expect to be able to spend much more than casual morning coffee drive-by's until mid-July at best. You could try searching youself? It shouldn't be hard to find. RecycledPixels (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Could you link an established consensus on this matter? You're saying that the accident resulted in long term effects, changes in regulations but I haven't been able to find those. Could you explain where you're coming from? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 17:15, 18 June 2024 (UTC) Note that this comment was broken up into two parts by a previous reply. I have reinstated my full reply. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:54, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- WP:AIRCRASH is not policy and it specifically recommends not being used at AfD. That being said, it absolutely does reflect how we tend to assess these sorts of articles for deletion, and is referenced over 800 times. SportingFlyer T·C 17:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Then it is being referenced over 800 times incorrectly. As you said, WP:AIRCRASH is not a policy, so actual policy based arguments take precedence over essays. I don't see much evidence of this essay being thoroughly supported by the community. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 17:59, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, it's not being used incorrectly. It's been mentioned at several AfDs recently and is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Air Senegal Flight 301 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rimbun Air de Havilland DHC-6 Twin Otter Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RA-78804 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 SkyJet Elite Astra crash and you yourself used it in March here to delete Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Airlines Flight 35. You can't have it both ways... SportingFlyer T·C 21:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes and I used it incorrectly. I was told on another AfD to not use it as it was an essay which I have not since. As for the other Afds linked, just because they're used doesn't mean it's being correctly used. I can't speak for the others but let me remind you that consensus was quite clear cut in the others so arguments mentioning WP:AIRCRASH probably were not given too much value. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 23:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Additionally, in all those that you linked except for UA35, it was stated the use of WP:AIRCRASH was flawed and should not be used. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, it's not being used incorrectly. It's been mentioned at several AfDs recently and is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Air Senegal Flight 301 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rimbun Air de Havilland DHC-6 Twin Otter Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RA-78804 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 SkyJet Elite Astra crash and you yourself used it in March here to delete Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Airlines Flight 35. You can't have it both ways... SportingFlyer T·C 21:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Then it is being referenced over 800 times incorrectly. As you said, WP:AIRCRASH is not a policy, so actual policy based arguments take precedence over essays. I don't see much evidence of this essay being thoroughly supported by the community. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 17:59, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, there's an "and/or" in that sentence. So one or more of the items in that list. RecycledPixels (talk) 21:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- My question still stays. [...] and long-term regulatory changes / [...] or long-term regulatory changes, it doesn't matter since it's being mentioned. Why mention it in the first place if it's being discarded and not going to be elaborated on? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 00:03, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- WP:AIRCRASH is not policy and it specifically recommends not being used at AfD. That being said, it absolutely does reflect how we tend to assess these sorts of articles for deletion, and is referenced over 800 times. SportingFlyer T·C 17:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Wikipedia is not a repository of news stories. Airplane crashes do not have inherent notability. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:35, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:41, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: If the decision is not to keep, it should be redirected to Angara Airlines#Accidents rather than being deleted, noting that this article is linked not just from the couple of navbox templates, but also from a few pages. It's reasonable for at least some of those appearances to remain, so interlinking is a net benefit. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 11:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:08, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep by sources indicated above. gidonb (talk) 22:50, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Could you explain what you mean? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 05:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry. Typo. Fixed in the source. gidonb (talk) 09:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Still, which sources are you referring to? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry. Typo. Fixed in the source. gidonb (talk) 09:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- Weak keep - I found some evidence of WP:LASTING from mention 4 years later in The Sunday Times -https://archive.is/OZXqk. I believe this crash may be plausible (barely) notable as part of a wider phenomenon cited by the times of Antonov An-24 airplanes being disproportionately involved in fatal accidents. BrigadierG (talk) 00:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
List of Epic Games Store giveaways[edit]
- List of Epic Games Store giveaways (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails NOTCATALOG. A similar page listing these was deleted in 2019 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of free Epic Games Store games. Info about the free giveaways can be kept at the main EGS page Masem (t) 15:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Masem (t) 15:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 15:59, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete As per the previous nom, same reason; WP:NOTPROMO. This would be like us listing Black Friday deals from KMart for every year; it's pointless to the regular reader and none of the deals apply any longer, and this shouldn't even be listed in the main article. Nate • (chatter) 16:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per my comment last time - it's about as literal of a WP:NOTCATALOGUE violation as it can get. Sergecross73 msg me 17:23, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE, there needs to be a stated reason why listing giveaways is encyclopedic. The data is interesting but more within the purview of a different Wiki project or site. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
New York Show Tickets[edit]
- New York Show Tickets (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is an article created by recently banned User:Nytix, who appears to have a clear conflict of interest. The article has been around for 15 years, and has a lot of stuff in it, but without accumulating any meaningful reliable and verifiable in-depth sourcing about the company; nor are there any meaningful links from other Wikipedia articles showing that the company is integrated into the encyclopedia. The businesses website appears to be entirely oriented towards selling tickets.
My WP:BEFORE search on Google didn't turn up anything meaningful to support a claim of notability. Alansohn (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and New York. Alansohn (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete COI and PROMO, this is also a seriously out-of-date article (1iota handles most TV show ticketing these days, online, and networks generally don't cooperate with independent resellers because it's 2024 and they can manage tickets online). Nate • (chatter) 16:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes we dont handle TV show tickets anymore - but we ran TV show ticketing for many shows for years in the early days - where are we saying that we do TV show tickets now? 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:22, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- I feel you arent really reading the wikipedia page - just glancing at it. 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:32, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- We don't do TV shows anymore - we are 100% focused on Broadway show marketing - I would edit the wikipedia page to make it even clearer, but you have locked our account. On https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Show_Tickets we do say however state, "Today, NYTIX sells Broadway show tickets and provides discount offers to Broadway shows through an online information guides (accessible through their website) that explain how to get discounted tickets to Broadway shows"
- I am not sure how that is stating we do TV show ticketing. 24.46.132.52 (talk) 03:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- I feel you arent really reading the wikipedia page - just glancing at it. 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:32, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes we dont handle TV show tickets anymore - but we ran TV show ticketing for many shows for years in the early days - where are we saying that we do TV show tickets now? 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:22, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Theatre, Advertising, and Companies. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- We now cover Broadway shows in New York City and our news stories have nothing to do with selling tickets https://www.nytix.com/news 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:24, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- So it is an incorrect statement to say that
- "The businesses website appears to be entirely oriented towards selling tickets" 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:26, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Also - the statement that there is no "meaningful reliable and verifiable in-depth sourcing about the company" is incorrect - we attempted to add the DUNS link, but editors removed it. 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- It seems whenever we attempt to include a reference or link - its gets blocked by editors. 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Please explain how this page is not acceptable, but another similar organization is acceptable - we fashioned our page on theirs as we imagined that was the correct method - their page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TodayTix
- We attempted to add a reference from NBC that you deleted - I don't understand why:
- https://www.nbcnewyork.com/entertainment/the-scene/broadway-cheap-how-to-score-discount-tickets-to-a-show/3684562/
- Please advise. 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- As that and many other references have not been allowed to be added to this page. 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:54, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- It seems whenever we attempt to include a reference or link - its gets blocked by editors. 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Also - the statement that there is no "meaningful reliable and verifiable in-depth sourcing about the company" is incorrect - we attempted to add the DUNS link, but editors removed it. 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- We were banned because we tried to update the content - not much of reason to get banned - it was accurate content 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Similarly I see tons of mentions on Wikipedia about NYTIX over the years at:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?go=Go&search=nytix&ns0=1
- Why is no one else seeing that? I am very confused. 24.46.132.52 (talk) 02:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
DWAD-TV[edit]
- DWAD-TV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This was marked as {{db-hoax}}
by Myrabert01. Not sure whether it is a hoax or not, but it is certainly unsourced and was until recently about a different station of the same name. Expert attention needed to decide what should be done here. See also the talk page. —Kusma (talk) 15:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. —Kusma (talk) 15:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Looking at the (blocked) page creator's talk page and other contributions certainly makes "hoax" look very likely. —Kusma (talk) 16:11, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy delete I see trouble ahead. The details in the infobox do not make sense to anyone who understands the history of All TV or ABS-CBN. Even if this wasn't a hoax, I'd have problems with sourcing and possible existence thereof.I am pinging one user whom I trust to have the final word: WayKurat. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- Revert, then delete or redirect to a list of ABS-CBN transmitters. Even de-hoaxing it does not provide significant coverage to work from. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Revert to older version This is the last stable version of this article, before it was bombarded with hoax information by several IP editors. Deleting this article should not be done since the hoax edits were just made last June 2024. -WayKurat (talk) 01:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Nothing Lasts Forever (Maroon 5 song)[edit]
- Nothing Lasts Forever (Maroon 5 song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NSONG. This had been redirected but the redirect was reversed by an IP, who I imagine is the banned editor BoxxyBoy who was very keen to keep this article before. This song spent a single week in the lower reaches of the Billboard Bubbling Under chart, so hardly a major hit. Of the six sources used in the Background section, only one of them actually mentions this song, and it's just a passing mention that it uses the same chorus that Adam Levine wrote for Kanye West's "Heard 'Em Say" – all the other sources are about that track, not this one, and don't give this song WP:INHERITED notability. So we have three one-line pieces of information: (1) it was a very minor hit on the Bubbling Under chart; (2) Levine appropriated his own chorus from a previous song; (3) it briefly featured in the background of two TV shows (both of which use bad sources). All of this information is already in the article for It Won't Be Soon Before Long... we don't need a separate poorly-sourced article to repeat these small pieces of information. Richard3120 (talk) 14:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Richard3120 (talk) 14:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Richard3120 (talk) 14:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect - per nom. I agree with the breakdown, and can't see a path to satisfying WP:NSONGS. Sergecross73 msg me 14:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect per nom. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 17:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect per nom A #123 song (or 122, whatever, that chart is a pain to begin with) being used as background in a couple of works and with a collaboration with a singer you'd think won't be collaborated with anytime soon isn't N in any way.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. ✗plicit 23:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Libertarian Socialist Caucus[edit]
- Libertarian Socialist Caucus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This was already deleted as it disambiguated between two entities without their own articles and that weren't explicitly referenced in the linked articles. This disambiguation was apparently recreated only a few months after it was deleted, but this time with an extra "caucus" that is also not mentioned in the linked article. None of the original deletion rationale appears to have been addressed in its recreation, so I'm nominating it for deletion a second time. Grnrchst (talk) 12:25, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, United Kingdom, and United States of America. Grnrchst (talk) 12:25, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:47, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Nothing has changed since the first Afd that warrants a different consensus. Sal2100 (talk) 19:16, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator's rationale. Nothing here warranting reversing the prior AfD outcome. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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.
Ali Maisam Nazary[edit]
- Ali Maisam Nazary (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for politicians and living persons WP:GNG and WP:Politician.A significant part of the text in this article lacks reliable sources. The sources provided only mention this person in passing, without significant coverage that would establish their notability in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines. Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 12:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I believe this page merits retention. Several notable news sources have published articles in which Nazary figures prominently, such as this one by the New York Sun. Dan Wang (talk) 22:31, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Afghanistan. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 13:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
6 Engineer Squadron[edit]
- 6 Engineer Squadron (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The subject of the article does not seem to be notable. There is a lack of independent references provided. PercyPigUK (talk) 11:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Canada. PercyPigUK (talk) 11:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Johnny in the Middle of the Park[edit]
- Johnny in the Middle of the Park (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Zero mentions in reliable sources. Does not meet notability guidelines. Skyshiftertalk 10:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. Skyshiftertalk 10:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 12:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I would normally suggest a redirect to Piero Cotto as WP:ATD, but that page also seems to have notability issues and should probably be brought to AfD as well. Broc (talk) 19:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Air Force Sustainment Center[edit]
- Air Force Sustainment Center (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article is a carbon copy of https://www.afsc.af.mil/About-Us/, which is in public domain, but retains tone issues. I do not believe there exists sufficient amount of information in independent sources to justify a article instead of a section in United States Air Force. My search in Google News is unfruitful, and while I did find some coverage in Google Scholar, they are either written or sponsored by the US Air force, like the RAND air force. , Ca talk to me! 10:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Ca talk to me! 10:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Aviation, and Oklahoma. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Crookton, Arizona[edit]
- Crookton, Arizona (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Can't keep using WP:NPLACE as a rational and seems to fail WP:SIGCOV. It's just a point on a railway line and I've found no indication that that particular point is of any notability. TarnishedPathtalk 09:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Arizona. TarnishedPathtalk 09:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete It is not a legally recognized place, and my search on DDG, Google Books and Scholar turned unfruitful. WP:NPLACE says to defer to GNG in this case. It is misleadingly categorized as a populated place in the navbox. Just look at the satellite map to see why that is wrong.
- Ca talk to me! 10:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - This source calls it a railroad station. No indication this was ever a populated place. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to George Crook, for whom it is named. — Maile (talk) 12:11, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Why? That article has no mention of the place, nor should it, as it's a completely non-notable unpopulated railroad waypoint with no connection to its namesake. They might as well have named it King Henry VIII. In the unlikely event anyone wanted information about Crookton, they would probably search for the railroad division, not the historical figure. Delete. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Maile66, I don't think redirect is a viable alternative to deletion as there are multiple alternative redirects that could be used. E.g. U.S. Route 66 in Arizona or Southern Transcon could also be used in addition to George Crook. I considered redirect prior to nominating this and didn't precisely for that reason. TarnishedPathtalk 03:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. TarnishedPathtalk 03:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Joseph James Nantomah[edit]
- Joseph James Nantomah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Life coach, serial entrepreneur, but I don't see any significant independent coverage. The only articles I see are praising the guy's amazing skills in his voice. BrigadierG (talk) 09:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Sourced to advertorial/puff pieces.-KH-1 (talk) 03:04, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Shahmar Movsumov[edit]
- Shahmar Movsumov (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The person does not meet WPGNG or Anybio; he was the head of some state-owned companies or held other similarly non-notable positions. BoraVoro (talk) 08:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Azerbaijan. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
EdgeX Foundry[edit]
- EdgeX Foundry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails GNG, no reliable sources BoraVoro (talk) 08:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Andrew Kneisly[edit]
- Andrew Kneisly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I am unable to find enough coverage of this American rugby player to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTSPERSON. My searches yielded only trivial mentions. A possible redirect is 2017 Rugby League World Cup squads#United States. JTtheOG (talk) 06:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and Pennsylvania. JTtheOG (talk) 06:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep 25 international appearances is quite notable plus I have been able to fine a few more sources [39][40][41][42]. Mn1548 (talk) 11:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- The first three sources are from USARL, which is the competition the subject played in and thus not independent. The fourth source is a blog post with a passing mention of the subject, and thus is not reliable OR in-depth. JTtheOG (talk) 16:31, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, I've seen similarly irrelevant sports players with articles about them. Maurnxiao (talk) 19:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not an argument to keep an article. JTtheOG (talk) 19:41, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- From that website:
This may be an argument that this article is not bad enough to be speedily deleted; but that does not mean it should be kept.
- So unless I misinterpreted which is possible, is there any rush to get this article removed? Why not improve it? Maurnxiao (talk) 19:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your response. In this case, "speedily delete" refers to speedy deletion, a separate, much quicker procedure which does not need a discussion to delete a page. This rugby article is not eligible to be deleted through that medium. However, in my opinion, the subject has not received significant coverage from reliable sources that cover him directly and in detail and thus might fail our general notability guidelines, which is why I brought it to a discussion. JTtheOG (talk) 20:51, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I see, thank you. Maurnxiao (talk) 20:58, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your response. In this case, "speedily delete" refers to speedy deletion, a separate, much quicker procedure which does not need a discussion to delete a page. This rugby article is not eligible to be deleted through that medium. However, in my opinion, the subject has not received significant coverage from reliable sources that cover him directly and in detail and thus might fail our general notability guidelines, which is why I brought it to a discussion. JTtheOG (talk) 20:51, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- From that website:
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not an argument to keep an article. JTtheOG (talk) 19:41, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 08:23, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Mahatma Gandhi International School, Ahmedabad[edit]
- Mahatma Gandhi International School, Ahmedabad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Delete Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NSCHOOL The sources are almost entirely PR-based or non-independent. No actual in-depth coverage in reliable secondary sources, just press releases and blog posts. Wikilover3509 (talk) 13:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Gujarat. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:16, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: I have fixed spacing in the headers that broke some of the links, but have no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 15:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:21, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Matěj Kvíčala[edit]
- Matěj Kvíčala (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
With only database source listed, the article of this luger certainly fails WP:GNG. All that came up in my Google search were an interview and trivial mentions; no indication of independent fact checking. Corresponding Czech Wikipedia is an unsourced stub, which might help copy over English article otherwise. He was not even one of the top three luge winners at the 2010 Winter Olympics. ⋆。˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚。⋆ 10:10, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Czech Republic. ⋆。˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚。⋆ 10:10, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Jite Agbro[edit]
- Jite Agbro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NBIO; no WP:SIGCOV. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 06:34, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Visual arts, Nigeria, and Washington. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 06:34, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Several of the references are SIGCOV from newspapers or magazines such as https://www.realchangenews.org/news/2019/11/20/figurative-collage-artist-jite-agbro-explores-who-belongs I think they are enough to establish notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 09:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I would prefer it if my page was not deleted, please tell me how to move forward. I did not write this page, and I'm not a regular Wikipedia user so I'm not sure how to do anything about this. OnaJiteA (talk) 04:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: User:OnaJiteA just edited this article to make it read like an autobiography (hence the username). I reverted the edit and warned the user. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- I did realize I was not supposed to edit this page, I got an email saying I should enhance it. I just updated it again, so my apologies. I will stop
- editing it now OnaJiteA (talk) 04:56, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I did not realize I'm not supposed to edit the page OnaJiteA (talk) 04:59, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- @OnaJiteA Hi, from who did you get the email saying you should enhance it? Random emails are highly suspicious and they might be trying to scam you. Read this Wikipedia scam warning and stay aware. Ca talk to me! 10:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - fails WP:ARTIST. Nice stuff but WP:TOOSOON. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:14, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://www.realchangenews.org/news/2019/11/20/figurative-collage-artist-jite-agbro-explores-who-belongs | ? Real Change News is a publication of Real Change Homeless Empowerment Project | ? | ![]() |
? Unknown |
https://artisttrust.org/artists/jite-agbro/ | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
https://www.pccmarkets.com/sound-consumer/2020-09/new-jite-agbro-art-at-pcc/ | ![]() |
![]() |
Promotional article about an exhibition | ✘ No |
https://www.biartmuseum.org/exhibitions/jite-agbro-deserving/ | ![]() |
![]() |
? Listing of "Jite Agbro: Deserving" exhibition at BIMA (Bainbridge Island Museum of Art) | ✘ No |
https://www.4culture.org/gallery_work/jite-agbro/ | ![]() |
![]() |
? Listing of exhibition by 4Culture - the venue | ✘ No |
https://museo.cc/jite-agbro | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
https://web.archive.org/web/20190925163156/https://www.thestranger.com/events/26432310/jite-agbro-skpt | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
https://www.juanalonsostudio.com/front-room-gallery/2017/1/31/guest-artist-jite-agbro | ![]() |
![]() |
? Gallery site | ✘ No |
https://madartseattle.com/artists/jite-agbro/ | ![]() |
![]() |
? exhibition listing for MadArt - local art space | ✘ No |
https://www.bainbridgereview.com/life/bimas-six-new-seasons-shows-open-oct-12/ | ![]() |
![]() |
Multi event listing in Bainbridge Island Review | ✘ No |
https://www.4culture.org/public_art/your-proper-name/ | ![]() |
![]() |
exhibition listing by sponsor 4Culture | ✘ No |
https://artgallery.seattlecentral.edu/jite-agbro-armor | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
https://www.seattleu.edu/su-today/announcements/blue-is-our-color-black-memory-identity-and-protest.html | ? | ? | ? dead link | ? Unknown |
https://www.cornish.edu/news/2019-neddy-at-cornish-award-finalists-announced/ | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
https://www.southwhidbeyrecord.com/life/art-galleries-spring-forth-in-may/ | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
https://artxchange.org/show/artxchange-gallery-bloodlines | ? | ? | ![]() |
✘ 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}}. |
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Nashville SC-Inter Miami Rivalry[edit]
- Nashville SC-Inter Miami Rivalry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Per WP:NRIVALRY, sports rivalries are not presumed notable. The article is fully unsourced and there is no evidence of notability of this rivalry (no coverage in reliable sources found, and the article itself claims the rivalry has only started in 2020). Broc (talk) 06:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and United States of America. Broc (talk) 06:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Florida and Tennessee. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 08:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – Zero sources, no indication that there is a real rivalry. Svartner (talk) 10:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 12:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Another pointless head to head, WP:NOSTATS article! The people that create these need to be WP:TROUTed. Govvy (talk) 12:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strong delete. No references, no mention of this as a rivalry at either of the clubs' articles. —C.Fred (talk) 13:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per nominator. Doesn't meet WP:NRIVALRY. Also, I did some googling on this subject and couldn't find anything that said anything about a rivalry, but I did find matches against one another. I'm concerned about the article's creation being nominated by an apparent new user who created it on the same day. Normanhunter2 (talk) 13:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Once Messi leaves Inter Miami, this is going to be just as much a rival as Dolphins/Titans (as in non-existent). Would've been rejected in draftspace, where it did not originate. Nate • (chatter) 16:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: This article seems to lack reliable sources to back up the rivalry claim. While matches exist, rivalry needs a stronger foundation. Waqar💬 17:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Even though there is probably something of a burgeoning rivalry between the teams, this is definitely a WP:TNT situation. Doesn't help that all of the citations are primary and are predominantly routine match reporting. Maybe someday, but not this article. Jay eyem (talk) 22:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Divedapper[edit]
- Divedapper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Draftification was undone so I'm bringing it to AfD. Both the sources used in the article and the sources found online as part of WP:BEFORE are uniquely interviews with the founder, with no sign of independent notability. In particular, WP:ORGCRITE is not met because of the lack of secondary sources. I suggest a Merge or Redirect to Kaveh Akbar as WP:ATD. Broc (talk) 05:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and United States of America. Broc (talk) 05:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
E@I[edit]
- E@I (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Notability. I'm just not finding secondary coverage of this. Nor anything primary that's really convincing me of its significance. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Nothing found for this educational conference, only things hitting on Euler's complex numbers. Sourcing used appears primary. Oaktree b (talk) 23:01, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Education, Technology, Internet, and Slovakia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This organization is well known in Esperanto-speaking circles, and I would expect most sources to be in that language. This search found a number of articles in news org sources that discuss the organization: [43] (takes a moment to load the results). I think they're enough to demonstrate notability. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:41, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:23, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Not finding significant coverage in reliable and independent sources. Tagged "This article relies excessively on references to primary sources" since March 2017. -- Otr500 (talk) 04:20, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- What about the numerous Esperanto-language sources from the search results I linked above? —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:08, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- It would be helpful if you could pull out a WP:THREE from those search results. -- asilvering (talk) 05:30, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- What about the numerous Esperanto-language sources from the search results I linked above? —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:08, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 05:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Ukkulankulam Sivan Kovil[edit]
- Ukkulankulam Sivan Kovil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG, no sources, and I could not find any. Same issues as previous AfD. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 03:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Buddhism, and Sri Lanka. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 03:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, as the nominator of the previous AfD this article lacks any reliable independent sources and as previously indicated a search doesnt come up with any either - still fails WP:GNG. Dan arndt (talk) 04:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I did not find any sources in a BEFORE search. Fails to meet WP:GNG. – DreamRimmer (talk) 04:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Clayton Brown[edit]
- Clayton Brown (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Olympic rower who did not receive a medal and does not meet either Olympic notability for athletes who received medals or general notability based on significant coverage. The only reference is a database entry. Heymann criterion is to find significant coverage within seven days and expand this stub.
- Draftify as nominator to allow six months to find significant coverage. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Canada. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, passes WP:GNG, see sigcov here, here, here and here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: The sources provided by BeanieFan11 are more than suitable for meeting the WP:GNG, as they each provide in-depth coverage of the subject in reliable sources. Let'srun (talk) 14:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Not enough WP:SIGCOV from reliable, independent sources to meet the WP:GNG. There are recent articles about him being inducted in the HOF of his school, but that is mostly local coverage which is still not notable enough. Prof.PMarini (talk) 07:55, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Though the older sources presented by Beaniefan are mostly about Canadian football and not rowing, it seems possible to craft a decent article from them and they are reliable. Geschichte (talk) 08:10, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Melody & Harmony[edit]
- Melody & Harmony (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not yet notable per WP:BAND, with no significant coverage in reliable secondary sources, just a few album reviews on music blogs. Wikishovel (talk) 05:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New York. Wikishovel (talk) 05:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Draftify: One look at their Spotify page will show you they have 2 monthly listeners, clearly not WP:N. However, I don't want to be too rash when arguing for delete, and in this case, I think we could draftify the article so it can be improved, and inevitably apply for submission if/when the band becomes more notable. —Mjks28 (talk) 11:05, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is any more support for draftifying this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:14, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Couldn't find sources. Don't see a reason to keep a draft when sources don't exist to write an article. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 16:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Red Shurtliffe[edit]
- Red Shurtliffe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails both WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC #5. This is a stub that I created when we presumed notability for those who played in the NFL. (Shurtliffe played 4 games for Buffalo in 1929.) The presumption was revoked by community-wide consensus, and I have searched extensively for SIGCOV without success. A redirect to 1929 Buffalo Bisons (NFL) season may be appropriate as an alternative to deletion. Cbl62 (talk) 02:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, South Carolina, and West Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Speedy Keep. It appears as though multiple editors have a different assessment of the article than I do. I'll withdraw this. (non-admin closure) TarnishedPathtalk 03:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
2021 Canadian church burnings[edit]
- 2021 Canadian church burnings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is a hot mess of original research seeking to lump together the arsons of a group of churches to particular prior events on the basis of speculation only. Of the church arsons listed in the article no motive is cited to reliable sources. WP:TNT is required at the very least. TarnishedPathtalk 02:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Religion, Christianity, Canada, United States of America, Colorado, and North America. TarnishedPathtalk 02:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy keep: A CBC News investigation three years after the fact should be enough to evidence the notability of this subject. See coverage in the BBC, Guardian (and again), and New York Times. It was so notable, Trudeau had to make a statement about it. TarnishedPath, retract this AfD. ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:13, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy keep I am unable to see how this nomination represents a competent, good faith appraisal of the reliable sources. Existing references 1, 2, 6, 20, and 25 are to CTV, CBC, BBC, and two different CBC stories, respectively, which specifically connect the arsons to the mass graves allegations. The article's language documents speculation as speculation, attributes statements, and overall shows nothing remotely requiring TNT. Jclemens (talk) 03:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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.
Manyiel Wugol[edit]
- Manyiel Wugol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I don’t see how this subject article is notable. Not by anyway meeting the WP:GNG. On the reference section number 5. Instagram reels cannot be use as a source. His just an upcoming basketball player yet to gain fame and notability that meets the general notability guideline. Even the biography there’s no reference to back them up after making my research on Google. Gabriel (talk to me ) 02:15, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Sports, and Basketball. Gabriel (talk to me ) 02:15, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sudan and Australia. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails WP:GNG: The only potentially reliable source, the Herald sun article, does not mention his name. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 11:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, no significant independent coverage. Astaire (talk) 21:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete, fails GNG. SportsGuy789 (talk) 22:18, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Changing to weak keep per the sources below. A couple of major Australian news outlets wrote articles on Wugol, which is good enough for me. I still think the article needs those references incorporated as in-line citations, not as a vague external link dump. SportsGuy789 (talk) 16:28, 23 June 2024 (UTC)- Do not delete
- I found over 5 reliable sources and news article about Manyiel Wugol which shows he’s a well known basketball in Australia . See below
- https://pickandroll.com.au/p/bigger-than-basketball-manyiel-wugols
- https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8102113/sudanese-refugee-chases-basketball-dream-in-australia/
- https://www.sbs.com.au/news/podcast-episode/unstoppable-african-australian-athletes-smashing-through-the-barriers/97b7l6fjq
- https://thewest.com.au/sport/basketball/sudanese-refugee-manyiel-wugol-chases-basketball-dream-in-australia-after-death-of-close-friend-alier-riak-c-9888802 SportsFanatic220 (talk) 08:15, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further review of new soources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:46, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still waiting for a review of newly discovered sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Terry Long (white supremacist)[edit]
- Terry Long (white supremacist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I could not find in-depth coverage. He ran for public office but does not meet WP:NPOL nor WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 00:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Conservatism, Politics, and Canada. LibStar (talk) 00:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Agree that he doesn't pass NPOL or NBIO, but does clear WP:GNG with WP:SIGCOV in Atkins, Kinsella, Bartley, Sherren, and Perry and Scrivens, plus newspaper coverage. His notability seems to go beyond a single event so WP:BLP1E does not apply here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails notability and RS guidelines. Go4thProsper (talk) 12:05, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Dclemens. Some of the books linked go into a decent amount of detail. A non insignificant figure in Canadian white supremacist groups it seems. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete The author of this is a now-blocked sock puppet. The article has been here for 17 years, and only has 3 sentences. He doesn't even qualify as WP:SINGLEEVENT. We know he participated in one event where a cross was burned, but gives no details. He could have been just a spectator - or anything - we are not told. Given that the article claims, "he led Aryan Nations's Canadian branch and staged a major rally and cross burning in Provost, Alberta", sourced details are needed here. — Maile (talk) 01:54, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Did you look at the sources I linked above? We aren't evaluating the condition of the current article but all sourcing that's available. Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I don't even see coverage in Canadian sources. What's used now seem to be trivial mentions. Lack of sourcing Oaktree b (talk) 03:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Again, agree with Dclemens. Appears significant academic discussion of his role. Definitely seems notable and significant. Article should be improved with those sources, not deleted. Flatthew (talk) 16:44, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - The article is a mess. I believe the subject is probably notable, but I could make a case for good old TNT without prejudice towards recreation. Carrite (talk) 04:24, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- There's no point in TNTing a stub. PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, please review sources brought up in this discussion along with any in the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I disagree with some of the keeps; it doesn't meet WP:GNG because none of the sources are reliable sources, and there's no significant coverage in any of them. The first mentions the subject, not what he's about, when he was born, what he did in his life, and none of that (which should be a common start in a Wikipedia article). The second one links you to a Google book without telling you what it's about. There is no significant coverage in sight in that link. The third source is not specific; it just points to a list of books without telling you what the subject is about, like all others. Based on what I've viewed with the links and research, there aren't enough sources to meet WP:BLPS; since the person is living, precise sources are needed. Have a look at WP:NPF and WP:PROVEIT. Normanhunter2 (talk) 14:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Also, all of the links Dclemens1971 has sent are all broad, they don't really lead anywhere specifically and I think since this person is living, more precise sources are needed. Normanhunter2 (talk) 20:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Normanhunter2 They're books. You can't upload full copies of books online, as that is a copyright violation. I accessed them and determined most of them constitute SIGCOV. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Also, all of the links Dclemens1971 has sent are all broad, they don't really lead anywhere specifically and I think since this person is living, more precise sources are needed. Normanhunter2 (talk) 20:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. Source analysis, since no one else felt like doing it:
- Atkins: This is an encyclopedia of the far right, contains a full length entry on Long. Describes him as "one of Canada's leading" far right figures.
- That Wasn't The Plan, couldn't find a copy of this, but from the Google Books preview it seems to discuss Long in depth, going into his plans for racist groups in Alberta in some detail.
- Perry & Scrivens seems to be passing mentions
- Kinsella seems to have at least two pages of coverage on him on 135-136, as well as 158-159.
- Bartley contains sigcov throughout the book, describing Long as a "huge benefit" to recruiters for the KKK, and generally his involvement in these circles.
- In conclusion, he passes the GNG. PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Jon Kiper[edit]
- Jon Kiper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article was previously deleted last December because Kiper was deemed non-notable. An editor re-created the page today on the basis that Kiper was included in a single poll, which doesn't really address the fundamental lack of notability and is a perfect example of WP:ROTM campaign coverage (if you even consider it coverage). They also added 5 new sources: a press release from Kiper's website, three clearly WP:ROTM news articles (one just says he filed to run and the other two are about candidate forums he appeared at), and the aforementioned poll. I don't see how any of this overrides the finding of the previous deletion discussion. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 00:40, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Politicians, Food and drink, and New Hampshire. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Still a delete, it's all stories about what he wants to do if elected, nothing of which is any different than any other candidate's articles when they run. This is simple news reporting. A favorability poll isn't really notable here. Oaktree b (talk) 03:03, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or draftify: Article reads like an advert, and subject doesn't look notable enough. —Mjks28 (talk) 11:47, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I submitted a multitude of changes to the article today--cleaned up the sources, added missing information, changed the voice, and eliminated some information. Hope that helps. RainbowPanda420 (talk) 21:40, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your effort, but the new sources you added seem to be more WP:ROTM coverage from local outlets. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 06:13, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps if someone wrote a book and mentioned in it that he deserved a Wikipedia article, he might get on the front page. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 23:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Royal Autumn Crest: Really? That's your rebuttal? Do you have any actual reason why Kiper's page should not be deleted? BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 00:58, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- @BottleOfChocolateMilk: I just gave you one, the article I mentioned has nothing but ROTM and incidental references, and yet nobody's nominating that for deletion. Kiper is running for governor of an American state and is being included in debates and other events with the other candidates. Given your incivil tone, I honestly think that your nomination has some kind of ulterior purpose. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 12:18, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Royal Autumn Crest: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. You're right, I must have an ulterior motive for deleting this random dude's Wikipedia page. And all the other editors who are agreeing with me and voting to delete? I must have paid them to further my nefarious agenda... BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk)
- @BottleOfChocolateMilk: A "random dude" who has spoken at numerous events and been in polls along the other candidates he's running against who do have articles. Then again, if your argument was stronger, you wouldn't have to resort to your tone. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 07:36, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Royal Autumn Crest: Being included in a poll and speaking at events does not prove notability. That's to be expected of just about any candidate in an election. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's notability guidelines for politicians and political candidates. Then again, if your argument was stronger, you wouldn't have to resort to your tone. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 19:48, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- @BottleOfChocolateMilk: Luckily, that's just your opinion and not what is actually expressed regarding Wikipedia's notability guidelines you referenced. Then again, I would expect you to know that if you weren't so busy engaging in personal attacks against the opinions of others.
- @Royal Autumn Crest: Being included in a poll and speaking at events does not prove notability. That's to be expected of just about any candidate in an election. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's notability guidelines for politicians and political candidates. Then again, if your argument was stronger, you wouldn't have to resort to your tone. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 19:48, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- @BottleOfChocolateMilk: A "random dude" who has spoken at numerous events and been in polls along the other candidates he's running against who do have articles. Then again, if your argument was stronger, you wouldn't have to resort to your tone. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 07:36, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Royal Autumn Crest: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. You're right, I must have an ulterior motive for deleting this random dude's Wikipedia page. And all the other editors who are agreeing with me and voting to delete? I must have paid them to further my nefarious agenda... BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk)
- @BottleOfChocolateMilk: I just gave you one, the article I mentioned has nothing but ROTM and incidental references, and yet nobody's nominating that for deletion. Kiper is running for governor of an American state and is being included in debates and other events with the other candidates. Given your incivil tone, I honestly think that your nomination has some kind of ulterior purpose. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 12:18, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Royal Autumn Crest: Really? That's your rebuttal? Do you have any actual reason why Kiper's page should not be deleted? BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 00:58, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps if someone wrote a book and mentioned in it that he deserved a Wikipedia article, he might get on the front page. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 23:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your effort, but the new sources you added seem to be more WP:ROTM coverage from local outlets. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 06:13, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: User @BottleOfChocolateMilk should note that the "Granite State Poll" result they removed from 2024 New Hampshire Gubernatorial is currently included on the articles for the same gubernatorial race in 2022 and 2020. In this poll, Kiper was included and received 16%---more than candidate Volinsky received in the same poll in 2020.
- Coverage of Kiper is not ROTM---there is only one TV station in New Hampshire. Economies of scale. For example, nearly every one of New Hampshire's 400 state representatives is notable enough for a Wikipedia article, despite each only representing about 3,000 people. Consider this in comparison to the deletion of Manny Cid's article, a deletion attributed in part to his being a mayor of a city with "only" 30,000 residents. In New Hampshire, only 6 of 234 municipalities meet that population threshold. Notability must consider unique regional characteristics and local relevance. User @BottleOfChocolateMilk may be too inexperienced with the subject matter to effectively identify notability. (Ironic detail---two of Kiper's known endorsers have Wikipedia articles, and they are both New Hampshire state lawmakers.)
- From Wikipedia:Notability_(people)
- "The following are presumed to be notable:
- Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage."
- "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material."
- "A politician who has received 'significant press coverage' has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists."
- There is substantial news coverage of Kiper from multiple journalists in print and on television, and this coverage has included both trivial mentions as well as Kiper serving as the main topic of the source material. (see article references 8, 9, 14, 19, 21, 24, 26)
- In fact, Kiper has received coverage from NH's sole TV station while other candidates have not---Ballotpedia shows a 6-way Republican primary as well as two independent candidates. Four of the Republicans have not received news coverage, and neither of the two independent candidates have been covered. In a spread of 11 candidates, only 5 have received coverage, including Kiper.
- Additionally, of the 11 candidates to be listed on the ballot, only five were included in the Granite State Poll---Kiper among them. Due to contrast in local media coverage alone, Kiper is notable.
- Kiper article satisfies the criteria for notability. RainbowPanda420 (talk) 18:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- @RainbowPanda420: Rather than spreading conspiracy theories, you could simply have read my stated reason for removing the poll, which is that it only measured favorability and did not test the Democratic gubernatorial candidates against each other. Also, Kiper's news coverage doesn't become non-ROTM just because the state is small. ROTM means that the coverage is normal and part of a news station's regular, necessitated coverage of events, which is the case here. The argument about state legislators is irrelevant because state legislators are automatically considered notable. I'm not going to bother arguing against every stupid point you made, like how Kiper being endorsed by notable people somehow proves he's notable. Essentially, by your logic, every semi-serious candidate in New Hampshire would be considered notable, which I disagree with. Even ignoring your repeated personal attacks, your essay falls flat. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 19:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)\
- @BottleOfChocolateMilk: It's the height of hypocrisy to accuse someone of personal attacks and then claim their opinion is "stupid". I hope that the closing administrator here can take that into account when assessing this user's viewpoints in this discussion. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 12:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- @RainbowPanda420: Rather than spreading conspiracy theories, you could simply have read my stated reason for removing the poll, which is that it only measured favorability and did not test the Democratic gubernatorial candidates against each other. Also, Kiper's news coverage doesn't become non-ROTM just because the state is small. ROTM means that the coverage is normal and part of a news station's regular, necessitated coverage of events, which is the case here. The argument about state legislators is irrelevant because state legislators are automatically considered notable. I'm not going to bother arguing against every stupid point you made, like how Kiper being endorsed by notable people somehow proves he's notable. Essentially, by your logic, every semi-serious candidate in New Hampshire would be considered notable, which I disagree with. Even ignoring your repeated personal attacks, your essay falls flat. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 19:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)\
- Delete candidates are not notable just for being candidates, that is long standing consensus on this site, and he doesn't meet the exception (that their candidacy is LASTING). He would not be otherwise notable, so deletion is the correct result, and easily so. SportingFlyer T·C 16:50, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- In response to the note about GNG applying below, the political campaign stuff specifically doesn't apply and the other articles are not about him, so doesn't meet GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 13:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep He's received coverage from various outlets and he's also received coverage for his non-political work. There are plenty of other individuals on Wikipedia who have done far less and achieved notability and his notability is going to grow over the next several months as he campaigns. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 21:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's an argument for deletion unfortunately - political candidates are deleted unless they are otherwise notable, as they always receive a certain level of coverage and are rarely notable after the campaign finishes. If the campaign itself had sustained coverage that's a different story, but that is incredibly rare at this level of election. The coverage of his restaurant isn't coverage of him and would not make him notable enough for a Wikipedia if he hadn't ran for office, either. SportingFlyer T·C 21:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet. WP:NPOL is the relevant guideline and I don't believe the subject meets this standard so he would have to meet GNG. A source analysis would be helpful here. There are two other points, the previous AFD closed as a Redirect, not a Deletion. Secondly, there is subpar behavior on the part of several participants which are snide remarks. If this continues, I will block editors from particpating in this AFD during its duration. Please, this is not how experienced editors talk to each other. Very disappointing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment For the record, I would absolutely be in favor of a redirect. As for the question about sources, as has been mentioned previously by several voters, nearly every article cited on the page is WP:ROTM coverage of either the campaign or Kiper's restaurant (and, as others pointed out, coverage of Kiper's restaurant helps establish the notability of the restaurant, not Kiper himself). BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 01:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:POLITICIAN. In almost any political year, non notables run for office, for the free publicity it gives them and/or their non-political careers. This is one of those. He has no past history of political office experience. Most of the article is about is his non-political background. The section "Political career" is misleading, as he's had no career in politics other than a zoning board and town council. Attending a college rally as a spectator in the crowd is not notable. — Maile (talk) 12:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and/or restore redirect (probably with protection this time). As always, candidates do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates — the notability test at WP:NPOL is holding a notable office, not just running for one. Being included in public opinion polls is not a notability criterion, so the attempt above to claim that he's notable because he polled higher in 2024 than some other guy did in the past doesn't wash — that other guy actually held a notable office, so the fact that he didn't win one particular election is irrelevant because he's more than just an unelected candidate by virtue of having held a different NPOL-passing office. Obviously no prejudice against recreation after election day if he wins, but absolutely nothing here is already grounds for a Wikipedia article to exist now. Bearcat (talk) 13:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Given that the origional redirect was reverted, I would support any protection level that would keep that from happening again. — Maile (talk) 14:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect Candidates for a state-wide race should be redirected to the election race, as a usual and appropriate outcome, see WP:POLOUTCOMES. The sourcing does not suggest a GNG pass. I agree that protection should be given to prevent a new article from being created until such time as the subject wins election to an NPOL office. Enos733 (talk) 16:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2024[edit]
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2024 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There is an article List of Indian films of 2024 which covers entire Indian films box office and release dates, so having the article just for the sake of box office of every year is not needed. — Jayanthkumar123 (talk; contributions) 14:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages because they follow the same pattern similar to this article. Having a year-wise article just for the sake of box office collections, which merely has 10 entries is not necessary. Also, there are year-wise articles covering the entire Indian films and language-wise which has both release dates and box-office data.
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2023 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2022 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2021 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2020 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2019 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2018 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2017 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2016 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2015 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of highest-grossing South Indian films of 2014 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film — Jayanthkumar123 (talk; contributions) 14:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete This would be like having an article for List of highest-grossing films in Wyoming (2024); pointless and certainly not a normal classing list article. Nate • (chatter) 16:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- ...with all due respect, not exactly... the population of Wyoming is roughly half a million, South India would be something like 250 million people....not to mention the fact that South India is an extremely relevant region in the geography of the film industry, Wyoming, not so much. But I understand that's not the point.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:23, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to each to the respective List of Indian films of (the respective year); a section can be created there; or not, depending on what other users think. Or redirect all and merge into Cinema of South India#Characteristics and popularity, a section that lacks material, examples and sources. Thanks.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:23, 2 July 2024 (UTC) (I forgot to say that, because this is sourced, I am not opposed to Keep this, if other users accept the idea that it meets WP:LISTSPLIT, for example.
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India, Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Telangana. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retain, these articles may just mention few of the films that is just in South Indian territories, but it can be still used as the list for the selective fields to mention the highest grossing box office list of South India. I believe it can be better if we merge the lists of Telugu, Malayalam, Tamil, Kannada and Tulu films of each year to this article.
By Piruty Pipaty (talk) 23:44, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all. I was of the same doubt regarding all of these articles. Not sure why Tulu was mentioned above but its box office impact is essentially nil. DareshMohan (talk) 06:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
2024 Gazi University protests[edit]
- 2024 Gazi University protests (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:NOTNEWS, non Wiki worthy news event only covered by Turkish media. Creator has a history of pro-Kurdish agenda editing and creation of articles generally negative of Turkey, and Turkish government Ecrusized (talk) 22:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
2024 Beyoğlu protests[edit]
- 2024 Beyoğlu protests (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:NOTNEWS, non Wiki worthy news event only covered by Turkish media. Creator has a history of pro-Kurdish agenda editing and creation of articles generally negative of Turkey, and Turkish government. Ecrusized (talk) 22:23, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC)