Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday

WP:AFD/Y

Purge page cache if page isn't updating.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< August 23	August 25 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

My Name Is Mangamma

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

No evidence for notability under WP:GNG or WP:TVSERIES; coverage is limited to tabloid journalism and thus not WP:SIGCOV per WP:SBST. Proposing a redirect to List of programmes broadcast by Zee Tamil (India) Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:16, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_programmes_broadcast_by_Zee_Tamil_(India)#Soap_operas: notable cast; so opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_programmes_broadcast_by_Zee_Tamil_(India)#Soap_operas. Page fails notability for TV series with poor and unreliable sources and no significant coverage in reliable secondary independent sources. RangersRus (talk) 12:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas Day YouTube hack

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

Non-notable event that lacks SIGCOV and doesn't meet GNG. No real RSs seem to exist, in fact the only real mention of it seems to be in a handful of YouTube videos. Bestagon ⬡ 23:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Internet. Bestagon ⬡ 23:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, it shows how far we have come as the YouTube Community. As well as this, it has Significant coverage. Also, they have independent sources. I have spent a lot of time researching this please do not take it down :( Soundbrews (talk) 11:57, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unger Steel Group

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

nonnotable business, tagged since 2015 meaning nobody cares --Altenmann >talk 22:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Austria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unger Baptist Church

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

nn church; tagged orphan and unreferenced since 2018, menaing nobody cares --Altenmann >talk 22:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Nagaland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:ORG as an unsourced article about a non-notable local church. Nagaland is a predominantly Christian state in India with a Baptist majority, so Baptist churches are common in its region. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 00:14, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Olympic medalists in figure skating by age

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

All unsourced. Also, why do we even have this? Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Skating. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jana Jones

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

WP:notability, Wikipedia:Notability (academics) Fails notability criteria, WP:notability and Notability for academics criteria Wikipedia:Notability (academics) She was never a professor and the number of citations arising from her PhD is small. Anubus13 (talk) 09:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 August 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:00, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep What is the evidence that she was not notable? static shakedown ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ 11:33, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. This appears to be a case of WP:BIO1E. Her "Evidence for prehistoric origins of Egyptian mummification in late Neolithic burials" (first of five authors) has 107 citations on Google Scholar, which may be high for Egyptology (I'm not sure), and appears to be the basis for all the mainstream-media coverage in our article. I don't think we can base WP:PROF#C1 on a single work, and the rest of her publications are not as well cited. I cannot even verify the basic biographical milestones listed in our article (degrees, employment as a research fellow, and date of death). There's a more colorful biography than ours at [1] but equally unverifiable and I think not really usable as a source. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The book on Helwan excavations of which she is co-author is also cited 44 times, and "Excavations at Hierakonpolis" 39 times. static shakedown ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ 21:23, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete She meets neither the notability guidelines nor the notability for academics guidelines. MargaretRDonald (talk) 22:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you familiar with the field of Egyptology ? Again I ask what makes her not notable? According to notability guidelines: A person is notable if

The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times; or
The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field; or
The person has an entry in a country's standard national biographical dictionary (e.g. the Dictionary of National Biography).

Her contribution to textile analysis from ancient Egypt is widely cited and widely known in the field. Her most famous work was shortlisted for a 2015 Times Higher Education Award as mentioned here. static shakedown ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ 17:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The question is whether she is notable (ie, it requires a proof of a positive case for notability). And in terms of these specific points:

1. She has not received a well known or significant honour or been nominated for one several times. A single shortlisting for an award which is, with respect, not a particularly significant honour cannot satisfy this criterion.

2. Her contribution is not widely recognised. She has done no more than most other PhD and single contributing authors. I have several family members with PhDs and academic publications who have exponentially citations than her and are not in Wikipedia. 107 citations of her Phd, 44 for a co-authored book and 39 for one article is not something which, by itself, is objectively capable of being considered "wide". Unless some verifiable identified expert and notable person in the field gives such an opinion despite her limited contribution and citations, this criterion cannot be met.

3. She does not have an entry in any country's standard national biographical dictionary. Again, this criterion is not met. Anubus13 (talk) 08:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete agree with the above. Not notable. Bduke (talk) 22:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Pondicherry Premier League

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

Don't need separate season article for this local league, where none of the players are notable. This season article fails WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and India. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2024 Delhi Premier League is a local league but you not delete only delete 2024 Pondicherry Premier League why? What's your Problem tell me 2409:40E5:1017:2724:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 13:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, that article should also be deleted. The matter is that nobody has yet bothered to spend their time in nominating the article for deletion, as all are volunteers here. Robo^Cric Let's chat 14:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please I request don't delete indian T20 league articles. Indian Government Policy Wikipedia Block in India

Because All article delete voilince in india 2409:40E5:1017:2724:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 14:12, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple Articles Tamil Nadu Premier League All Season Not Delete Why? 2409:40E5:1017:2724:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 14:14, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i provide multiple sources but you not delete I need 10 day only 2409:40E5:1017:2724:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 14:19, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this IP user has been WP:Canvassing on user's talkpages: [2], [3], [4]. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: @Joseph2302: Shouldn't the parent article Pondicherry Premier League also be deleted? I don't think that one to be notable either per WP:GNG. Robo^CricLet's chat 14:13, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No Don't Remove first remove Tamil Nadu Premier League 2409:40E5:1017:2724:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 14:15, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i live in Pondicherry please not Delete 2409:40E5:1017:2724:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 14:20, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2024 Top End T20 Series local tournament but you not delete only you delete Indian what's your Problem indian league are you Pakistan 2409:40E5:1017:2724:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 14:22, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not from Pakistan. And stop spreading communal hatred. I'll keep saying everything which are legitimate. No matter if the article is from India or not, and nobody even bothers if you're from Pondicherry or not. Robo^Cric Let's chat 14:30, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok Thanks For you Information i request please delete this list.
2024 Delhi Premier League

2023 Tamil Nadu Premier League

2024 Bengal Pro T20 League

2022 Tamil Nadu Premier League

2021 Tamil Nadu Premier League

2020 Tamil Nadu Premier League

2019 Tamil Nadu Premier League

2409:40E5:1017:2724:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 14:34, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you want these articles to be considered for deletion, you have to make a separate bundled AFD nomination. Just mentioning them in the middle of an AFD discussion will lead to nothing happening. You have to read the instructions at WP:AFD, CAREFULLY, and formally go through the nomination process. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:43, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would support an AFD discussion on these, however not here, as it would make this too unwieldly. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:25, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm relisting this discussion as there is discussion but no actual "votes", as they are used in AFDs, regarding what should happen with this article. We have one editor who is insistent that this page not be deleted and asks for more time to work on the article so this relist can offer a short delay on closure. But we really need more opinions for editors who browse through AFD discussions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Another mass created non-notable league. Fails WP:GNG. AA (talk) 22:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Please check the Tamil Nadu Premier League pages, including those dedicated to individual annual editions like the 2022 Tamil Nadu Premier League, 2023 Tamil Nadu Premier League, and 2024 Tamil Nadu Premier League. Separate pages exist for each team as well. Similarly, the Delhi Premier League T20, which is also organized under the directions of Board of Control for Cricket in India BCCI, has gained significant coverage after the successful completion of its seasons. Given this, it would be beneficial for Wikipedia readers to have dedicated pages for each annual edition of the Delhi Premier League T20, as well as individual pages for each team, similar to those for Tamil Nadu Premier League teams like Salem Spartans, Chepauk Super Gillies, and Lyca Kovai Kings.

Note Several Twenty20 pages have existed includimg thier annual leagues for many years, and in my opinion, it is not appropriate to nominate them for deletion.

It appears that certain teams are selectively promoting specific and state-level leagues while pushing for the deletion of others. This practice seems to favor the retention of pages related to their preferred leagues, potentially at the expense of others.

Wikipedia is a global platform that should uphold the principle of equality for all pages that have significant coverage. It's important to ensure that all state and national leagues with significant covearge, regardless of their popularity or backing, are treated fairly and given the opportunity to be represented. Consistent and unbiased application of Wikipedia's guidelines is crucial to maintaining its integrity as a reliable and inclusive source of information. Davidrun99 (talk) 10:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malcom Kyeyune

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

Self-promotional and self-penned promo bio of yet another right-wing podcaster, Digital Creator and Twitter troll. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 21:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Malcom Kyeyune has been a columnist for Göteborgs-Posten (the dominating newspaper in western Sweden), Fokus (magazine) (one of the most important political magazines), w:sv:Dagens Samhälle and so on. While I'm sure the article can be improved improved (it really looks like it's been written to convince the reader of Kyeyune's importance), the nomination makes him sound like a someone who writes on social media and tries to use Wikipedia to inflate his own importance. Kyeyune has had regular access to key print platforms, across several publications. Nor am I entirely convinced this article is self-penned, looking at the main editor's contributions and how they connect across Swedish political topics. /Julle (talk) 23:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not only is the writer mostly involved in left-wing publications, he is in a sufficient number of mainstream international/English-speaking ones. 1 2 3 I think he's notable enough to meet notability criteria. Additionally I don't think there is any rule against authors about people based on them being right or left-leaning, or on their activities on social media. By all means though if anyone thinks the article warrants improvement go ahead of course. FelipeFritschF (talk)
Keep per Julle. Thriley (talk) 16:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep if improved, the only secondary source with significant coverage is the ETC article, but there seems to be at least one other source here [5] (along with several other articles at Flamman). This is extremely borderline for WP:NBASIC but given his still somewhat significant role in Swedish political debate I'm leaning towards notability. AlexandraAVX (talk) 18:35, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Wisdom Bridge

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

Only one source listed is an actual review/has outside commentary and what seems to be independence. I was unable to find anything else. A lot of the sources fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA which further confuses matters. Redirect to Kamlesh Patel (Daaji)? PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:48, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:48, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I contest this as the article as sufficient references as suggested per Wikipedia Policies for a book. The article has also been reviewed by other editors.Gardenkur (talk) 13:34, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the references are press-release tier material which per NBOOK do not count for notability. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:06, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 22:20, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The references are promo, paid coverage, wire stories, etc. I started clearing out the worst offenders to see if there was anything hiding in there, but it's just a WP:REFBOMB. If I cut all the not-qualifying coverage there won't be anything left. -- asilvering (talk) 04:25, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Although a lot of sources have been removed from this article since its nomination, a source review or current references would be helpful to see if WP:NBOOK is met as one editor is arguing (in a roundabout way).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source analysis for the fns in this version:

short wire article; looks like paid coverage
not independent (by author of book)
not independent (by author of book)
has a byline, not short, not in an obvious ads-only section; the best source in the article at present, but it's still not... great
not independent (by author of book)
basically a celebrity endorsement? really don't think this is fully independent
no byline, obvious marketing copy
no byline, obvious marketing copy + promo excerpt
not sigcov

-- asilvering (talk) 01:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, asilvering. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Livio Mayr

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

Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Found some sources [6] and [7] which are trivial. However [8] appears to be extensive, but I don't think its enough for WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Austria. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: My searches yielded lots of passing mentions in "match" reports. The Salzburg24 article linked by the nom has a few sentences of coverage, but nothing approaching WP:SIGCOV. The subject fails WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Thanks for the source; it's been added to the article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is disagreement on whether or not the sources are sufficient.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil 2019 (Association football event)

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

This doesn't serve the purpose of a disambiguation page. Such a listing is better served by Category:2019 in Brazilian football. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 21:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Disambiguations, and Brazil. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 21:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't believe this is a useful disambiguation page. Alternatively, I'd support a redirect to 2019 in Brazilian football. Hey man im josh (talk) 21:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes it does. There are multiple association football events that happened in Brazil in 2019. They are: 2019 Copa América and 2019 FIFA U-17 World Cup. Abhiramakella (talk) 21:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This would be like creating "United States 2019 (American football event)", then including Super Bowl LIII and 2019 College Football Playoff National Championship, and calling it a disambiguation page. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Just strange and unnecessary. Brazil 2019 without the disambiguator redirects to 2019 in Brazil, which is the appropriate venue to list such things. Geschichte (talk) 08:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was speedy keep per WP:SK#6. No prejudice against immediate renomination after this has rolled off‎. (non-admin closure) Laun chba ller 22:47, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Richard Swanson

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

Minor flash-in-the-pan news of the wierd, rightly forgotten…except, of course, on wikipedia. Qwirkle (talk) 21:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This made DYK and was therefore verified to be within Wikipedia policy (including notability). I take it "minor flash-in-the-plan" is a claim that this is not notable? Seems like it has sufficient coverage from reliable sources, and I agree with the DYK reviews' call to keep this article (and promote it to DYK). Upjav (talk) 21:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Galactic Theme

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

Fails WP:NALBUM. Sources are announcements of the album or unreliable. CNMall41 (talk) 19:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Music, and Nigeria. CNMall41 (talk) 19:56, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: While the sources are reliable, the pieces are unreliable. I can't rely on a news piece that lacks a byline. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guda Endla

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

I couldn't find sources to verify this. Boleyn (talk) 19:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Rajasthan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anabwani I of Bunyoro

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

This appears to be a hoax, or at the very least non-notable. The article was created by User:Anabwani2007, whose only edits consist of creating and editing this article, as well as adding a mention of Anabwani to Omukama of Bunyoro. None of the links presently given in the article even mention Anabwani. I wasn't able to find even a mention in reliable sources either. A Ugandan newspaper, Daily Monitor, mentions him in an article, but that's it (and their list is sourced to the monarchy's website anyway, where he's similarly merely mentioned once). toweli (talk) 19:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Uganda. toweli (talk) 19:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep most sources on the article are self-published, however per WP:MONARCH he is considered automatically notable as a sovereign ruler. Azarctic (talk) 23:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the issue is, I'm not sure if he's even real (I haven't seen a mention of him predating the 2010s), and even if we count that particular newspaper article as reliable (which I'm not certain that it is), the only thing we can say is that he existed, which isn't enough for a standalone article. toweli (talk) 23:19, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In general, the Daily Monitor holds a left-leaning editorial bias and is reasonably fact-based; however, they poorly source information. The articles does really need more reliable sources for verification which is why I made my vote a weak keep. Azarctic (talk) 11:11, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 00:04, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep note that the source used for this was likely oral, and his being mentioned in a literate source should be enough to put it beyond reasonable doubt of him being genuine

Kowal2701 (talk) 15:17, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only source stems back to an honours mill that just had a half-dozen articles deleted within the last month for self-published promo. How is this any different if it’s all stemming from an interested party? —Greens vs. Blacks (talk) 04:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Dubious at best. Each source finds its way back to a self-published honours mill. Wikipedia is not here to boost the claims of unreferenced, unverifiable pedigrees. —Greens vs. Blacks (talk) 04:41, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shwa Losben

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

The only coverage of the subject in reliable sources that I was able to find is this 2009 NBC Philadelphia article. toweli (talk) 18:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, California, and Washington, D.C.. toweli (talk) 18:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lazy Mutha Fucka

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

Non-notable rap group who doesn't appear to have ever charted anywhere. Although the article does contain a lot of information, most of it is either unsourced or badly sourced (and it doesn't help that it reads as though their relatives wrote it). Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 18:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Hong Kong. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: added sources to the article, including from HK major news outlets SCMP and HK01, an authoritative independent music blog article, two pages in a book, and an entire book chapter; should be enough to meet NBAND1/6/7. The article is rambling and somewhat contradictory but deletion is not cleanup Oblivy (talk) 00:19, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Johann Nepomuk von Lobkovicz

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

The seemingly extensive page describes only his family tree and property, but does not mention anything that makes him notable for a separate encyclopedia article. The mere fact that he was from a noble family does not make him notable. FromCzech (talk) 18:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility, Austria, and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 18:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pere Joan Tomas Sogero

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

Article about former ambassador, who has apparently been deceased for several years, which describes him as the "current Andorran ambassador to the Russian Federation" despite him having left the role in 2010. Fails WP:BASIC. Lacking secondary sources. AusLondonder (talk) 18:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Andorra, and Russia. AusLondonder (talk) 18:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete he appears to have been honorary consul not ambassador which is a part time unpaid role. In any case fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 04:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Luís Pérez Alvarado

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

Zero secondary sources. Single source from the Russian government. Completely fails WP:BASIC. AusLondonder (talk) 17:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Russia, and Dominican Republic. AusLondonder (talk) 17:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fasl-ı Cedid

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

Probably need a native speaker to figure out whether this is notable from sources such as http://bodrumkoro.org/cevdetcagla.html Chidgk1 (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clete Patterson

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

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of significant coverage from secondary sources. A redirect to 1924 Kenosha Maroons season may be preferred as a WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 16:37, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Let'srun (talk) 16:37, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paharer Alo

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

Non-notable regional news portal/paper. The article shows zero evidence of notability. Fails WP:ORG. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 16:30, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Bangladesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:56, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not in the ABYZ directory or Ulrich's periodicals. Searches in English and Bengali found no independent sources, and none are cited in the article. So the topic fails WP:NPERIODICAL, WP:NMEDIA, WP:NEWB, and WP:GNG. Off hand, the same appears to be true of several other of the author's recent creations in this space, such as Dainik Khagrachari and Daily Rangamati. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Objections to deletion on the article talk page so I don't think Soft Deletion is an option here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Parbatta News

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

Non-notable regional news portal. The article shows zero evidence of notability. There are also some incorrect fact in the article like it says it is a "National News Media", "first and most popular national media" etc. (Do not be confused by the Category:Bengali-language newspapers published in Bangladesh in the article, Parbatta News is not a newspaper.) আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 16:18, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Bangladesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:57, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Cox's Bazar or Chittagong Hill Tracts in one of the sections, without the primary sources. Svampesky (talk) 19:25, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because searches in English and Bengali found no significant coverage that would meet WP:GNG, and the topic fails WP:NWEB, WP:NMEDIA, and WP:NPERIODICAL. Merge doesn't make sense to me in this case. The only independent non-primary source is the self-published dailybanglanewspapers.com, a directory listing which has no reputation for accuracy or fact checking (they say their data was collected by searching Google). Should Wikipedia advertise this news portal anywhere just because it exists and an editor with no understanding of notability created a stub about it? --Worldbruce (talk) 06:11, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bruno Font

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

Fails GNG. All I could find was mentions in routine match coverage. Dougal18 (talk) 13:33, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Spain. Shellwood (talk) 14:29, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:24, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. No significant coverage. C F A 💬 18:57, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. There does seem to be some coverage, e.g. 1 2 3 4. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:17, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not finding enough coverage about the subject to meet the WP:GNG. What has been brought to the discussion thus far is more about other things besides the BLP or not have depth otherwise, and a search for additional coverage failed to uncover anything worthwhile. Let'srun (talk) 19:10, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:09, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:31, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pan American Airways (disambiguation)

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

Redundant disambiguation page. There is already a comprehensive dab page at Pan Am (disambiguation); this page instead only disambiguates between two articles which could be disambiguated via hatnote if necessary, or not at all, now that their leads have been clarified, and the relationship between the articles in question has been explained much more meaningfully there. --Deeday-UK (talk) 11:45, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Disambiguations. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:39, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Not much to discuss, really. But if you delete it, just make sure that "Pan American Airways" (Pan American world Airways's earlier name) redirects to the "Pan Am (disambiguation)" disambiguation page. Otherwise you will recreate the problem the deleted disambgation page was trying to correct. (Making sure users can find what they want easily always is a higher priority than curating the numner of disambuguation pages.) Mdnavman (talk) 15:17, 17 August 2024 (UTC)mdnavman[reply]

I'm not sure what you suggest is necessary: Pan American Airways currently redirects to Pan Am, and on that article there is a rather prominent hatnote that lists both the Pan American Airways articles in question. That seems adequately disambiguated to me. --Deeday-UK (talk) 18:51, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect to Pan Am (disambiguation). Pan Am's hatnotes and the Pan Am dab page already solve all issues. – sgeureka ^t•c 07:37, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Two options presented, it would help to hear more opinions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16th Artillery Brigade (Ukraine)

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

Fails WP:GNG. Can't find any sources online, possibly redirect to National Guard of Ukraine? ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 09:27, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Ukraine. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 09:27, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61559047920465), (https://www.ukrdruk.com/product/flag-00853/), (https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-ato/3888632-u-nacgvardii-stvorili-centr-upravlinna-bezpilotnih-sistem-komanduvac.html) Mgfdhsrhe (talk) 10:59, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[9] - gives short description, commander, where it's based from MUN number.
[10] - article about drone hunting group of brigade not receiving bonuses. 13:21, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Ceriy (talk) 13:21, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A brigade is clearly notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:17, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a notability guideline which states that? LibStar (talk) 10:32, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly an opinion based on the much mocked (by deletionists, of course) WP:COMMONSENSE. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:56, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please answer the question. Which notability guideline grants inherent notability to brigades? LibStar (talk) 23:19, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your tone is most unlike any admin I've encountered. LibStar (talk) 23:19, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. First artillery brigade of the National Guard. [11] Ceriy (talk) 20:36, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:36, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to National Guard of Ukraine. In the absence of a notability guideline granting inherent notability which I have asked for and received no response. LibStar (talk) 04:27, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. First artillery brigade of the National Guard. Article has references. Ceriy (talk) 15:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zion Webb

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

fails WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 16:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and American football. Joeykai (talk) 16:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject meets the WP:GNG with sources such as [[12]], [[13]] and [[14]], which provide significant and independent coverage of the subject. Let'srun (talk) 13:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sinefekt

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

Unsourced and probably not notable Chidgk1 (talk) 16:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tai Lavatai

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

fails WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and American football. Joeykai (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject meets the GNG with sources such as [[15]], [[16]] and [[17]] providing significant, independent coverage of the subject. Let'srun (talk) 19:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the coverage presented above by Let'srun in addition to this news archive showing 19 instances of SIGCOV from various outlets across a period of about two-and-a-half years. Left guide (talk) 02:23, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gölcük Plateau

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

I found a cite https://izmir.ktb.gov.tr/EN-348122/picnic-spots.html but that seems to be İzmir not Konya Chidgk1 (talk) 16:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Mangoe (talk) 02:47, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Flinn (American football)

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

fails WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 16:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and American football. Joeykai (talk) 16:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tanvi Patri

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

Fails WP:NBAD, WP:GNG. Actually its nowhere near meeting the basic badminton guidelines. zoglophie^•talk• 15:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Badminton, and India. zoglophie^•talk• 15:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Odisha. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Tanvi Patri has done very well at the youth level of her sport, and if she continues to play at adult level and to be successful, we may see her becoming notable enough to be the subject of a Wikipedia article in a few years. However, she isn't there yet, either by the general notability guideline or by the subject specific guidelines relevant to her. JBW (talk) 16:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I agree with the comment above, this is TOOSOON. Winning u15 and u17 tournaments isn't quite notable for wikipedia. Oaktree b (talk) 17:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beşkarış Dam

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

There are several uncited articles about dams - is there any specific guidance on how to tell whether a dam is notable? Chidgk1 (talk) 15:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - FYI, List of dams and reservoirs in Turkey (whichi includes this one) all seem to be created by User:Starzynka who has been blocked as a prolific sock creator, abusing multiple accounts. I don't know of any guide that mentions how to deal with this, but I would have no problem if there were some way to delete all of the damns on this user's list. — Maile (talk) 17:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Workers Vanguard Party of Kurdistan

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

Does not seem to be notable. Tagged unsourced for over a decade and the Kurdish article has no sources either. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:16, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Middle East. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:16, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - as usual, articles shouldn't be tagged for AfD based on the lack of references in the article at present, but based on the availability of potential sources for expansion. A quick google books search reveals plenty of material that could be used, based on both Kurdish and Turkish versions of the name, which could be used for sourcing and expansion before bringing the article to AfD process. --Soman (talk) 15:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- For example, you might want to note wordings like "We will now briefly go through the expressions employed about the 'armed struggle' by the three prinicipal groups which had remarkably drawn more popular support among the Kurds of Turkey than the PKK in the late 1970s. The Vanguard Workers Party of Kurdistan (PPKK ..." (Turkey's Kurds: A Theoretical Analysis of the PKK and Abdullah Ocalan, my emphasis) --Soman (talk) 15:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Diocese

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

Lacking secondary sources. Completely fails WP:ORGCRIT. There is no way that individual dioceses of the fringe Free Church of England are individually notable. AusLondonder (talk) 15:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a valid split from a notable main article it does not have to pass WP:ORGCRIT in my view. In any case WP:NCHURCH specifies that passing WP:GNG is enough, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:02, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Diocese

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

Lacking secondary sources. Completely fails WP:ORGCRIT. There is no way that individual dioceses of the fringe Free Church of England are individually notable. AusLondonder (talk) 15:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a valid split from a notable main article it does not have to pass WP:ORGCRIT in my view. In any case WP:NCHURCH specifies that passing WP:GNG is enough. Atlantic306 (talk) 18:58, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chulo Magazine

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

Reviewed for NPP. No independent sources. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Websites, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alejandra Villarreal

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

See also the article’s Talk page. This should be a basic redirect to The Warning (band) but I suspect it will be contested so I’m bringing it here for consensus. I am very familiar with The Warning and wrote a sizeable chunk of their article, but Alejandra simply has not achieved any individual notability outside of the band, per the requirements of WP:BANDMEMBER and WP:NOTINHERITED. This article merely repeats info from the band article plus some fan trivia, and rather desperately tries to beef things up with more trivia about her gear. Note that Alejandra’s sister/bandmate Paulina Villarreal also has her own article, but that one is a bit stronger because Paulina has earned notice from pro drumming publications. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Mexico. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article should stand and not be deleted.

Just because a musician is known for being a member of a band should not regulate them the band's article only.

This article should stand as a marker to add notes to, concerning further achievements Alejandra will make in the future. 174.165.130.146 (talk) 08:17, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read the "WP" policies linked above. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:58, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Zaius

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

Reviewed for NPP. Unredirected with little evidence for notability; the person who unredirected it redid it when this was initially reverted. Little non-in-universe content. Should be re-redirected to List of Planet of the Apes characters#Dr Zaius.

Of the three sources here, CBR is marginally reliable but not usable for notability. Den of Geek is a passing mention. Vulture is about the Simpsons episode. I did a source check and I couldn't find anything discussing him as a character outside of the larger movie plot. However it is a very famous movie so it's possible there's something I didn't find. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Science fiction and fantasy. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this is apparently a published scholarly paper with an extensive discussion of Zaius, which in combination with Vulture, makes 2 RS'es, clearing the bar for GNG. Now, having said that, I believe there are more out there, and this could be an interesting standalone article. Having said that, re-redirection is not the end of the world and while I don't think it's a great option here, it's certainly better than deleting this article which seems a good start at what a standalone article should look like. Jclemens (talk) 17:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't checked that article yet, so I'm not going to evaluate its contents at this second, but I don't think the Vulture article helps the character's notability. It has nothing about the character, it is about the Simpsons episode that has a pop culture reference to the Planet of the Apes. It would probably help A Fish Called Selma (where it is in EL). PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:31, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Whilst the Science for Seminaries may count towards GNG, Vulture certainly doesn't. --John B123 (talk) 20:46, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, as there are multiple academic publications that establish the character's notability (listed chronologically by year of publication with partial elaborations of the coverage included below each entry; these are nonexhaustive, and multiple of the sources include more material than can be concisely summarized here):
- Eric Greene, Planet of the Apes as American Myth: Race and Politics in the Films and Television Series (McFarland & Company, 1996)
  - Analyzes Zaius as an antagonist and critic of humanity and his character's references to American political contexts at the time of the film's release (50–51, 57). Also contrasts the character with other antagonists in the series, like Aldo (120).
- Sherryl Vint, "Simians, Subjectivity and Sociality: 2001: a Space Odyssey and Two Versions of Planet of the Apes", Science Fiction Film and Television 2, no. 2 (October 2009)
  - Coverage of two different versions of the Zaius character (in the 1968 and 2001 films) and examining the character as an antagonist who opposes yet resembles the protagonist (unpaginated version accessed)
- John Huss, ed., Planet of the Apes and Philosophy: Great Apes Think Alike, Popular Culture & Philosophy Series (Open Court Publishing Company, 2013)
  - Travis Michael Timmerman's chapter "Who Comes First, Humans or Apes?" assesses Zaius as an antagonist and as a depiction of speciesism in the franchise (69–71).
  - Bernard E. Rollin and Huss's chapter "Science's Crazy Dogma" also examines the Zaius character as a fictional exploration of conflating religion with science and of ideological commitment overshadowing rational observation (42–52)
  - Greg Littmann's chapter "Banana Republic" writes about Zaius's role in the story as an antagonist and in the setting as a character who fits the archetype of Plato's ideal ruler (131–134).
  - A book review in the journal Extrapolation states that "Planet of the Apes and Philosophy accomplishes its goals with energy and wit" (vol. 56, no. 1 [Spring 2015])
- Adam Jardine, "The Pedagogic Value of Science Fiction: Teaching about Personhood and Nonhuman Rights with Planet of the Apes", The University of Notre Dame Australia Law Review 20 (2018): 1–41, https://researchonline.nd.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1028&context=undalr
  - Covers the Zaius character as a main antagonist and connects his behavior to themes of personhood in philosophy and law (10–19).
- Julie L. Gittinger, Personhood in Science Fiction: Religious and Philosophical Considerations (Palgrave Macmillan, 2019), https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30062-3
  - Analysis of Zaius as a representation of church–science conflicts and of religious justifications for racism (186–187) and as a metaphor for midcentury American Christian conservatism (185)
- Nicholas Benson, "Apes on TV: Medium Specificity and Considerations of Continuity in Early Transmedia Storytelling", Critical Studies in Television: The International Journal of Television Studies 14, no. 1 (March 2019): 22–39, https://doi.org/10.1177/1749602018809790
  - Coverage of how the depiction of the character changed in different works in the franchise (28, 36–37)

Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 11:01, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Hydrangeans' sources, Greene and Benson sound especially good. Toughpigs (talk) 16:50, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll note that the Benson source is one of the thinner ones and doesn't have much more than key differences between the 1968 film version of the character and the television series version. But Greene's book is quite good and has a lot of depth and detail. The chapters in the Huss book also have solid amount, and I think the detail and analysis Vint provides is interesting and considerable. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 18:23, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yoruba Ronu

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

This is very much in alignment of WP:NOTNEO. This NPOV-violating article fails GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:21, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Aerogaviota Antonov An-26 crash

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

Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT. From what I've been able to find, only primary sources exist with no secondary sources existing on the event. The event does not have in-depth nor continued coverage with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the crash. No lasting effects nor long-term impacts have been demonstrated as a result of the accident. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, and Cuba. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Pardon me, but I don't really get it. This flight is listed on ASN, which is often used even as a sole source for some aviation accidents. Why is this article any different? --Global Donald (talk) 00:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Generally speaking, ASN is mostly reliable although you need to evaluate each source on their own merits. The ASN entry on this accident simply states, "An Antonov 26 aircraft, operated by Aerogaviota on behalf of the Cuban Armed Forces, impacted the Loma de la Pimienta mountain, north of San Cristobal in Cuba. All eight occupants sustained fatal injuries. The aircraft operated on a training flight.". In my opinion, I'm not exactly sure how this establishes notability. If other articles solely use ASN as their source, then either the article needs more sources (see Template:One source) or the article doesn't meet wikipedia's notability guidelines. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 04:58, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Only primary sources exist? What are you talking about? All of the sources referenced in the article (BBC, news outlets and the ASN) are secondary. Primary sources would have been any press releases from the airline involved, or from the contracting customer (the Cuban armed forces). --Deeday-UK (talk) 09:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ASN is a tertiary source as it summarizes primary and secondary sources. Per WP:SECONDARY, a secondary source "provides thought and reflection based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources." The BBC article does not contain analysis, evaluation nor interpretation of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources. Regardless, quoting WP:PRIMARY, "breaking news stories are considered to be primary sources." Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC article you linked is not a breaking news story; it's an ordinary news report – which admittedly does not contain a great deal of information. The ASN may be a tertiary source, but there's no ban on using 'reliable tertiary sources', per policy that you linked (and the non-user-generated content on the ASN is generally reliable). You could argue that there aren't enough sources covering this event, but not that they are the wrong kind of sources, or else the vast majority of sources used for accident articles that we all agree belong to Wikipedia would fall foul of such characterization. --Deeday-UK (talk) 18:31, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mahmoud Rashdan

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

Has been tagged for notability concerns for a while and I can't find any clear evidence of actually meeting WP:SPORTBASIC. My Arabic searches didn't yield anything about the Qatari footballer of this name and Arabic Wikipedia has no valid sources. All I can find is Soccerway, which fails to give any notability. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:46, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Qatar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:46, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Just a sentence with a single source. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 14:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. By the way, Spiderone, I kinda like how you mentioned the corresponding article on the article's original language in AfD! ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sultan Al-Qurairi

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

To date, he has only played in one professional match and the coverage isn't looking good enough for WP:SPORTBASIC. My Arabic searches yielded Al Markhiya, which is a mention of being injured from a non-independent source (his club), and Marsal, a squad list mention. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Qatar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jalal Eddin Omar

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

Jalal has played in the lower levels of Qatar for most of his career and does not seem to meet WP:SPORTBASIC. My own Arabic searches yielded QFA, a passing mention, Al Arab, another passing mention, and Raya, which has a few sentences about him working hard in training and playing a few matches because the main goalkeeper was injured. I am not seeing enough significant coverage. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Sudan, and Qatar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roger S. Hayes

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

Biography of a judge for whom I cannot find in depth coverage coverage. None of his roles provide a presumption of notability. Mccapra (talk) 13:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and New York. Mccapra (talk) 13:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I don't see any BLP notability there; no source and is an orphan. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 14:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable lower-level judge with no assertion of notability. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Created some time ago, but no real substantive claim to notability. No secondary sources. Nothing to indicate they exist somewhere. AusLondonder (talk) 16:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by Stephen Curry

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

Similar to other articles in the Career achievements of basketball players category, this is a collection of indiscriminate trivia with trivial statistical cross sections sourced primarily to non-secondary sources such as the AI website StatsMuse and Basketball Reference. As such, this is a violation of WP:NOTSTATS and does not meet the notability criteria under WP:NLIST. Let'srun (talk) 13:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Basketball and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 13:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, the most pertient info is already found in the main article. Let'srun (talk) 13:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alot of what is in the article should go but there are sources out there that specifically discuss Curry's career achievements such as from Sky Sports and NBC Sports. Whether it is enough for a standalone article, I'll let others decide. Alvaldi (talk) 14:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Some relevant policies are WP:INDISCRIMINATE:
To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources. As explained in § Encyclopedic content above, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.
WP:NOTSTATS:
Statistics that lack context or explanation can reduce readability and may be confusing; accordingly, statistics should be placed in tables to enhance readability, and articles with statistics should include explanatory text providing context.
The article lacks the context that those policies expect to put the collection of bullet items into perspective for the reader.—Bagumba (talk) 15:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The AI site StatMuse is cited almost 200 times on the page. Consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 400 § StatMuse and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association § Statmuse is that the site is not reliable and the AI nature of the site amounts to WP:OR, as the editor enters queries to get results from a WP:PRIMARY source database. Per the WP:SECONDARY policy:
Wikipedia articles usually rely on material from reliable secondary sources.
—Bagumba (talk) 15:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jassem Al-Mulla

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

The current sourcing is far from enough for WP:SPORTBASIC and I found little better in Arabic searches. Al Sharq has an article about him but the coverage is not significant. It merely confirms that he signed a 2 year contract with Al Ahli, having moved from El Jaish. There is nothing that we can build a biography from here. His professional career has lasted only 27 minutes to date. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Qatar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Just a sentence and with just a single source; no mainspace articles which link it.MAL MALDIVE (talk) 14:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I am unable to find enough coverage to meet WP:GNG. Please ping me if in-depth sources are found. JTtheOG (talk) 01:57, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. Azarctic (talk) 11:57, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dumitru Găleșanu

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

There is no clear evidence of notability. The subject has won three obscure prizes: that’s it. I also suspect paid editing: the article is by a new account, with links to google.pk. I would imagine that someone from Pakistan whose very first article is about a random Romanian poet was paid to publish. Biruitorul ^Talk 13:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Law, and Romania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: Some reviews/critical discussion in Romanian sources [18] and [19], might be more in Romanian sources. Oaktree b (talk) 17:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shabbir Ali (footballer, born 1986)

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

Appears to fail WP:SPORTBASIC. The best sources found were News18, a trivial mention, and The Hard Tackle, a squad listing. According to Soccerway, his league career only lasted 55 mins. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom and per WP:BIO. The subject does not meet notability and biography is not enough to deserve attention or to be recorded. Poor 2 sources with one "The page you were looking for could not be found". No WP:SIGCOV. RangersRus (talk) 12:57, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Via Vision Entertainment

AfDs for this article:

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

Subject is a home entertainment company, distributing television and film on DVD and Blue-Ray. A WP:BEFORE found no IS and RS to qualify WP:NCORP nobility guidelines. Was deleted in AfD before and rejected 7 times on AfC. Suggest to salt. Cassiopeia talk 11:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, Entertainment, Companies, and Australia. Cassiopeia talk 11:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was speedy keep‎. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of video games featuring real-life actor likenesses

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

Reviewed during NPP. Unsourced and does not satisfy WP:NLIST. The lead also seems to be AI-generated. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 11:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...and the list was draftified as I was writing the rationale, so I'm withdrawing this. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 11:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment it looks like something went malformed with the nomination. I can’t see the article with the current revisions. -1ctinus📝🗨 11:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Martin Macho

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

Macho played a total of 210 minutes before being sent to 3. Liga club FC Slovan Galanta. My searches did not show any WP:SIRS of him. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. Please ping me if in-depth coverage is found. JTtheOG (talk) 01:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - couldn't find anything decent. Best I can find is this image caption. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:07, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Winky Hicks

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

Biography of a musician that does not pass WP:MUSICBIO. I’m not seeing in-depth coverage in any sources, Mccapra (talk) 10:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Alabama. Mccapra (talk) 10:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Musician, instrument maker, promoter of local culture--it may be skinny and local but I think the coverage is enough, and some friendly editors added a bit more: thanks Knitsey and The Banner. Keep, in case anyone was wondering how I felt. ;) Drmies (talk) 15:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I did add a reference when I saw the PROD. Other references have also been added. Per WP:MUSICBIO, I would suggest they fulfill Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself. Knitsey (talk) 17:16, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment All the sources I could see came from a couple of county newspapers in Alabama. It’s clear he’s well known locally but what specifically shows that he passes WP:MUSICBIO? National or international concert tours? Charting records? Released an album in a major record label? I don’t see anything like that. Mccapra (talk) 22:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I did as thorough a Google search as possible, but the independent coverage is minimal, entirely local, and mainly for his turkey callers (secondarily for his mandolins). Clearly a fine craftsman, but being a fine local craftsman does not equate to national (even if sales are national) or international notability without the corresponding independent coverage. Lastly, even a lot of the minimal local coverage is behind paywalls, and no one has bothered to add quotations to the citations from those paywalled local mentions. Softlavender (talk) 23:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nakita Kertnark

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

Vice-chairman of Socialist Workers Thailand, which is also at AfD. I was going to send to draft as an unsourced BLP but Draft:Nakita Kertnark already exists. I can't find any relevant hits when searching in Thai and an English search only yields his Instagram page. I don't believe that he meets WP:NPOL but am happy to stand corrected on that. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Thailand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: First of all, when I declined the draft, it’s possible that the same user, using a different account, created the article in the main space. I tagged the draft with WP:G6 to move the article back to draft space, but the AfD is here, which has the advantage of WP:G4. However, we have to keep it for one week. In any case, there is nothing to establish notability. The article fails GNG and other criteria. GrabUp - Talk 10:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No third-party reliable source coverage at all. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:26, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish Informatics Olympiad

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

Tagged uncited for 15 years and does not exist on Turkish Vikipedi. If it is notable maybe some competitors or former competitors could cite this? Chidgk1 (talk) 09:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Süleyman Şefik Pasha

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

Surprisingly the Turkish article also has no sources. As a fair number of Turkish editors are interested in history I thought better to open for discussion rather than “prod”. Is he notable? Chidgk1 (talk) 09:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:47, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spindle (disc packaging)

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

Not really notable compared to any other kind of spindle Chidgk1 (talk) 09:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Optical disc packaging#Spindles and other bulk packaging ATD, concept is notable but better as part of an existing article more than its own. Nate • (chatter) 23:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kanchan Kamble

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

BLP of a city mayor in India. Though the city is large I don’t believe governing it makes a person notable. US equivalents would be Fresno or Tucson. I don’t see any in-depth coverage in English. Mccapra (talk) 09:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. Mccapra (talk) 09:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Youknow? (talk) 13:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. A local city politician who has not received significant press coverage. The politician has not made a significant impact or achievement to be worthy of notice. Sources are poor on the page. Source 1 is 404 error, source 2, 3 and 4 are passing mention. Source 5 is unreliable YouTube source. RangersRus (talk) 13:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Drum Corps International World Championship finalists

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

I don’t know what to make of this. WP:NOTADATABASE. Hodgepodge of unsourced statistics. MOS:ACCESS violations that I don’t even know how to begin to address. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts and Music. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. -- Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk / contribs)} 00:30, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:14, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Supreme God (Hinduism)

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

This article, which was whipped into existence just a few months ago, is negated by the very well-sourced and detailed God in Hinduism article we have had up for a long time (and is even specifically covered by other articles like Ishvara and Svayam Bhagavan). The new article also makes a lot of dubious and selectively-sourced claims, such as insinuating that all Hindus are monotheistic, as well as outright declaring that all schools of Hinduism believe in a supreme God (decidedly not true: many well-established and well-sourced articles, including the God in Hinduism article, cover this in detail). I believe the case for deletion is straightforward. HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 16:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 16:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just read multiple articles that talk about how the belief in Hinduism id all sects of Hinduism do have the core belief in a singular supreme being. So I don't understand why you would want to delete this article unless specifically in the one you are talking about that you apparently have you specifically mention that although there are other deities in Hinduism they do believe in an ultimate god. It actually comes off very much like you want this article deleted because you are bothered by the idea of all mainstream religions having the belief in a singular ultimate god. Also just a quick example a political figure named Tulsi Gabbard who comes from a Hindu background and attributes her beliefs to hinduism has also said that in the Hindu faith they believe absolutely there is a Singular supreme god above all the other gods. 24.49.133.48 (talk) 07:51, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:58, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple other repubatable Organizations that can actually be held accountable for their statements like Khanacademy(Professor Julius Lipner) have also argued it is not actually a polytheistic religion so again unless in the "wikipedia" entry that you are describing as context for deleting this article specifically outlines there is a singular Supreme Deity in hinduism then this article should remain. Also all information in all forms should be free and available to all human beings so that they can make their own decisions. 24.49.133.48 (talk) 07:59, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete as a highly dubious content fork. Mangoe (talk) 02:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kashmir Black Day

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

Appears like 2 articles exist for same context. Jammu and Kashmir Black Day. Why do we need 2 articles on same issue? Thewikizoomer (talk) 08:12, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Pakistan and Jammu and Kashmir. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:13, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Terrorism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:24, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~What's the second article then? It's not obvious from the article and your complete lack of description.~~ I see it now. I still wouldn't use AfD as an avenue as requesting a merge in the talk pages would probably be better. – The Grid (talk) 17:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It seems that Kashmir Black Day and Jammu and Kashmir Black Day are two different topics. I’m unsure if Kashmir Black Day meets the WP:N but the current AFD appears unclear. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:09, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, It would be better to request a merge in that case. The article in current state appear to be related to two different observances one celebrated by Pakistan and other by India respectively. _signed,511KeV ^(talk) 05:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I concur! — Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:25, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Fleeting Ends

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

Not seeing anything that would make this a pass under WP:BAND. No in depth reviews, charting records or significant awards or recognition. Mccapra (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Pennsylvania. Mccapra (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yogacharya Govindan Nair

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

I don’t see any sources in English to support WP:AUTHOR. The subject has written multiple books but I see no in-depth reviews, just online bookshops and Wikipedia mirrors. Mccapra (talk) 05:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, China, and India. Mccapra (talk) 05:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Twenty Seventh Edition of his book was released on the International day by the publisher who published his book nearly 4 decades ago. here is the link https://www.instagram.com/dcbooks/p/C8eOMOMyNxz/?hl=en&img_index=1 2405:201:E010:706F:F0B9:15A2:5E91:AA5B (talk) 13:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No sources on the page. Fails WP:NBIO. Fails WP:NAUTHOR, who is not widely cited by peers or successors. As Author and Yoga instructor, subject has not created a significant or well-known work and I cannot find subject's work in multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work. Fails WP:GNG too. RangersRus (talk) 13:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suborno Isaac Bari

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

An article on the same person was previously deleted (twice) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soborno Isaac Bari (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soborno Isaac Bari. It is now four years later and he has been admitted to college but he has still not reached the level of adult notability for his achievements in math or physics. (See WP:PRODIGY.) CapitalSasha ~ talk 05:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Mathematics, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:23, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dandenong West Football Club

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

Contested redirect (courtesy @Nyttend:) and N/C a year ago at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dandenong Football and Netball Club, but still no evidence of independent sourcing leading to notability for this team. Star Mississippi 13:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Australia. Star Mississippi 13:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When I came along, I found that it had been redirected on notability grounds, while other clubs in its league still had articles. I have no opinion on notability, but I believe it absurd to have articles on some clubs in a league while redirecting others. If this concludes in deletion, others ought to be handled likewise. Nyttend (talk) 23:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There's a few non-AFL club articles which are pretty rundown and poorly maintained, I've just done some work fixing this one and there's plenty of independent news coverage about it Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 00:24, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect (or delete, either would be appropriate) The references added since the original nomination all fall under the banner of WP:LOCALCOVERAGE (since most are from the local council newspaper) or non-independent sources. There are two references to the club from the website of the Herald Sun, which ostensibly meets the threshold of being a major statewide newspaper – but a closer look would suggest that those are both the 'Local Footy' section of the newspaper's website, which tends to be an online mirror of affiliated council newspapers – plus they're quite WP:ROUTINE. On the balance of everything I don't think it quite meets a GNG hurdle. Aspirex (talk) 12:05, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:41, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:56, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This should really be in 'Games and Sports', not 'Organisations'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aspirex (talk • contribs)

It's in both Aspirex, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sports. Star Mississippi 23:50, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What was the proposed Redirect target article? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:56, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect target was Southern_Football_Netball_League#Division_4 Aspirex (talk) 11:48, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit (talk) 04:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of electoral firsts in New Zealand

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

Fails WP:NLIST. Closest thing I can find is this: [20]. Ultimately this is WP:LISTCRUFT with no reliable source dictating which 'firsts' are notable and worthy of inclusion. All MPs are presumed notable so having them be notable by other characteristics typically involves original research. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and New Zealand. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DISAGREE Re ‘’ List of electoral firsts in New Zealand ‘’ Wikipedia articles on individual MPs frequently refer to an individual MPs claim to fame eg being the longest serving MP (Rex Mason), and the parliamentary website itself has a list of “longest serving Members of Parliament” [[ https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-and-learn/mps-and-parliaments-1854-onwards/longest-serving-members-of-parliament/ ]]. There are similar lists for other countries eg List of electoral firsts in Canada and List of electoral firsts in the United Kingdom. Hence I do not see the need for an item by item justification of this or similar lists. Hugo999 (talk) 10:49, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OSE and what Wikipedia writes isn't relevant here. WP:NLIST is which states: 'Notability guidelines also apply to the creation of stand-alone lists and tables. Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been'. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:28, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment can you explain your logic with All MPs are presumed notable so having them be notable by other characteristics typically involves original research.? I don't follow at all, and your point here seems to be adding 2 and 2 to get 7. Turnagra (talk) 20:22, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many of these entries involve original research, for example Iriaka Ratana's source here: [21] does not say she is the first. Instead someone has come to that conclusion via their own research. Stating that these MPs are notable for their 'firsts' is also typically original research, as without a source that states it it's an assumption that their 'first' made them notable rather than the fact that being an MP makes one notable. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Having sourcing issues doesn't necessarily mean that it's original research, though. A cursory google search of that specific example found this within about 20 seconds. I also still fail to see how their inclusion of a first leads to the assumption you're stating at the end, or how that somehow diminishes the notability of the list. I think at the moment I'm leaning heavily towards keep. Turnagra (talk) 20:59, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That still doesn't state she was the first MP to give birth. NLIST requires it to have been discussed as a group by a set of independent reliable sources and I do not see any group discussing it. I see no evidence of notability of a list of 'firsts'. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:31, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, tag it with Template:Citation needed. MPs are discussed as a group and first things are notable to mention - not to mention there are dozens of other "lists of firsts". I'm tapping out of this one now, so no need to continue responding to try and push your point further. Turnagra (talk) 23:21, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and NLIST. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:56, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you proposing to delete all "Lists of Firsts?" Hugo999 (talk) 04:27, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Any list (and especially lists of "firsts") should be discussed in reliable sources as a topic AND the criteria must not be indiscriminate. (see this recent discussion). So, this fails NLIST and WP:TRIVIA. --Enos733 (talk) 04:49, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Trivia. Fails WP:NLIST. Azuredivay (talk) 17:56, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per WP:NLIST and WP:TRIVIA. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 02:27, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I suggest that other "List of electoral firsts in ..." be added to this AfD. I get the trivia argument and think it applies to them all, not just this one. Kiwichris (talk) 04:56, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this AfD is successful I will nominate other similar lists. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:06, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The similar lists should be considered together as a group, not one by one, and should include the category Category:Lists of the first women holders of political offices. So are you prepared to resubmit a proposal to delete as a group all the lists you think should be deleted? This is so that people who object to List C being deleted are not told that it has already been discussed for List A and List B without your participation? Hugo999 (talk) 22:04, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to discuss how to go about deletion of other list articles we can do it on my talk page rather than here. Traumnovelle (talk) 01:08, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As I noted above the New Zealand Parliament website has a section called

”Longest serving members of Parliament” [ https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-and-learn/mps-and-parliaments-1854-onwards/longest-serving-members-of-parliament/ ] which has sections on Longest serving Members of Parliament – Longest, shortest, oldest, youngest, Maori, Asian, Pacific MPs,
Firsts for women in Parliament including Iriaka Ratana as the first MP to become a mother, Whetu Tirakatene-Sullivan as the first MP to become a mother while Parliament was in session, Jacinda Adern as the first (NZ) Prime Minister to give birth while in office.

Doubtless the Parliamentary staff (Parliamentary Library researchers ) got enquiries from both visitors and other MPs, and wanted a reliable source! Hugo999 (talk) 05:07, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the lists at [22] - this isn't random TRIVIA but is normal statistics of who has served in the legislature, and any cleanup of being discriminate (most of it is) can be performed in editing. NLIST requires sources, this is source-able. SportingFlyer T·C 04:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 19:20, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The arguments for deleting are either Trivia or I don’t like it. Objectively, this passes WP:N. There’s an authoritative source, and combine with other sources, constitutes significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. The only subjective issue is whether this is a valuable list. The other option is a category. A list is better here fir our core readership to see the information in one place, rather than a category of blue links, but it is a matter of opinion. Bearian (talk) 03:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Parliament is hardly an independent source here. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:43, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit (talk) 04:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Swedish detainees at Guantanamo Bay

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

Also nominating the following articles for the same reason:

Fails WP:NLIST. One of 20+ extraneous articles created by now-WP:CBANed user Geo Swan, unnecessarily breaking out the List of Guantanamo Bay detainees into country-by-country counts. The large list includes detainees' nationalities. If separating by nationality is necessary, the chart on that page can be reformatted to enable such an examination. What this has led to is pages of various encyclopedic quality and accuracy, when maintaining one article, out of date in its own right, is more than enough. Longhornsg (talk) 04:10, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Terrorism, Sweden, Cuba, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 04:10, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:11, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should we be deleting all of the nation lists on the Template:Guantanamo Bay Detainees? If not, why these particular ones? (I'm likely supporting deletion, just trying to understand the situation.) -- Nat Gertler (talk) 07:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that any list with only one entry should be a redirect to an article on the individual. AlexandraAVX (talk) 07:15, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the rest should be added to AfD. Longhornsg (talk) 07:59, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural keep, the nominated articles are very different from each other (Danish and Swedish has one entry each, Afghan states there have been over 200). AlexandraAVX (talk) 07:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, somewhat for the OP's concerns, somewhat for WP:BLPCRIME issues. I realize it's a broad interpretation, but these are lists of people who have been imprisoned by a government for doing something the government deems wrong, and generally have not faced a trial and conviction. Looking at the lists, there are a lot of non-linked names and red-linked names, and many of those that are blue-linked, their page is just about the fact that they were so imprisoned, so these qualify as otherwise-not-notable folks. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 13:56, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect all Duplicates main page, where I've combined the letter tables so the sorting works. No, these pages are not different from each other, they are all redundant to the main article and none are needed separately. Reywas92^Talk 17:15, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect all to one list. Guantanamo being Guantanamo I would argue that a list of all inmates is potentially encyclopedic but I don't see why we would need it to split it into multiple articles. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:36, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete List of Swedish detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Belgian detainees at Guantanamo Bay, List of Danish detainees at Guantanamo Bay, and List of Mauritanian detainees at Guantanamo Bay here as WP:NLIST violations, having fewer than a handful doesn't qualify you for a whole list, if the subject is notable bring it up there and if they're not List of Guantanamo Bay detainees is that way. Break out List of Afghan detainees at Guantanamo Bay into its own AfD, with over 200 detainees that's a whole separate issue worth examining and per AlexandraAVX should be discussed separately. Bestagon ⬡ 21:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Concur AlexandraAVX (talk) 17:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus and there is one argument to treat these articles separately(as opposed to an "All" outcome). Also, would editors suggesting a Redirect identify their target article of choice? Thank you.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:02, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Afghanistan, Belgium, and Denmark. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm probably neutral between redirect and deletion, but if you want to redirect I'd think the target would be List of Guantanamo Bay detainees. Bestagon ⬡ 14:03, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Guantanamo Bay detainees: as redirects are cheep. I can't see any reason for separating out detainees by nationality into separate lists as it is just duplicative. When we start getting down to lists which have just one entry it gets especially redundant and would not meet WP:NLIST. TarnishedPath^talk 08:41, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all as all covered already by List of Guantanamo Bay detainees which details nationalities and is sortable. Mztourist (talk) 06:25, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I still don't see a consensus here. My own opinion, weighing all of the arguments presented, is to Redirect All but there is not a clear consensus to do this yet so I'll relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Rumal

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

Low quality article about a relatively non notable event with limited coverage within sources. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 01:26, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Sikhism, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Jammu and Kashmir-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:27, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - from a quick glance at Google books there are various mentions of this battle. Notability is not temporary, so if it was notable at the time it is enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. AfD is not the place to raise quality concerns. --Soman (talk) 10:28, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Soman None of the sources have any WP:SIGCOV significant coverage of the topic. This seems like it would be better suited for a consolidated page like Hill States-Sikh wars. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 14:46, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- This all references incline in this article are more than sufficient with solidarity sourced apparently this article don’t need any kind of insertion 2402:8100:217A:E8B4:ADBA:BB28:A502:E613 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer: I am a frequent recipient of harassment and targeting by an incredibly pertinacious sockmaster-[23] who created more than a dozen burner accounts in just the past year solely to target me. His socks most recently targeted my AFDs and PRODs- [24] and [25] and [26] and [27]. The most recent examples are this- in which his IP/proxy removed my PROD on the article Katoch-Sikh war, 2 admins have stated that this was almost certainly HB block evading- [28] + [29]. He has also employed meat puppetry to target AFDs and PRODs. Note that this IP also created a draft for Katoch-Sikh war, the same page HB's sock targeted, very heavily indicating sockpuppetry/meatpuppetry at play here. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 21:43, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also the IP has the exact same writing style as HB. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 21:45, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Sorry what, It upon their own determination rather He isSockpuppet or intruder but definitely non of your expedition but suspiciously why did you creating pointless arguments you don't have any right to blast decretory statement on someone else you might face some serious consequences for such speculation @Southasianhistorian8 MasterofRepulse (talk) 22:14, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Newly created account creating same articles that were AFDed and successfully deleted by me-[30] + [31]. Thanks. Will be taking to SPI or AN. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 22:21, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: In addition to very obviously being HB's sock/meatpuppet, you can see the IP and the account are clearly operated by the same person since they both submitted their drafts (Battle of Rori Sahib, Battle of Ambala, and Katoch Sikh war) minutes apart from each other-[32] + [33]. At the very very least, these votes should be accorded zero weight and obviously proves my point of a sock/meat campaign to target AFDs/reinstate articles which aggrandize their religion. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 22:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to bother you but how regressively your oppressing other on behalf of their religion with propagating your pathetic statement you need to be calm down sir for our both MasterofRepulse (talk) 22:46, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: MasterofRepulse has been blocked as a sock of a banned user. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 20:45, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But not the blocked editor you accused him of being a sock of. Again, let's keep this out of AFDLand. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:50, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting this discussion in hopes of more participation. Please focus on the article, its sources and whether or not notability is established. Stop making accusations about other editors, it doesn't help whatever argument you are making. If you suspect sockpuppetry, head to SPI, don't bring it up here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:13, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Could only find trivial namedrops in books. No significant coverage. C F A 💬 18:29, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep-The source genuinely incline the subject sustainably prior to the broader spectrum of historical event took place in Punjab convicting Battle of Rumal and numerously mentioned on various intermediating topics so in this case deletion is unnecessary for sure 14.247.79.217 (talk) 17:00, 18 August 2024 (UTC) open proxy-[34][reply]
Delete as per nomination. No significant coverage. NorthSiderRock (talk) 11:40, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Even ignoring opinions from accounts with few edits, I don't see a consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Man or bear

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

Notability; Wikipedia is not Know Your Meme, and not every Twitter drama or meme can have its own Wikipedia page. Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 02:25, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I won't cast an actual !vote because I found this AfD through an off-wiki discussion but... really, notability? The references in the article include extensive coverage from several major news organizations. A GNG pass with flying colors from what I can see. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 02:40, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:SUSTAINED. All the media articles are from within a timespan of a few weeks or months. Nobody's going to remember this meme a year from now. Hell, people barely remember it already. Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 02:56, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, WP:GNG clearly isn't a concern here considering how much sourcing is available, and we can't exactly predict whether the meme will remain popular or not. Di (they-them) (talk) 03:03, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we have to predict much; almost all the sources are from late April to early May. The meme's already long since died. Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 03:10, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Sexuality and gender, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:41, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article, with all of its references, makes it abundantly apparent that the subject was a flash-in-the-pan viral meme without any significance beyond how many people heard about it and talked about it for about a month or two. This wasn't a scientific study performed by people looking to answer a question, it was the results of a content farm hunting for clips to post online. Not to mention the article has a good number of glaring issues, from the completely unnecessary "illustration" made from image cutouts to the whole section on "Scientific Validity" focusing on a seemingly relevant statistic rather than any insight into the methodology (which, ironically, is found in a previous section, but still comes from purely journalistic commentary). Kodiak42 (talk) 14:39, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Notability is not temporary. Once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage. This is not a biography where WP:BIO1E might apply, nor is any of the coverage "routine" (where WP:NOTNEWS might apply). It is clear that the outside world has already "taken notice of it" and it is thus a notable topic. C F A 💬 03:34, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this isn't some flash in the pan meme, it's something that's been covered extensively by several reputable publications. Most memes are never notable and don't ever meet GNG, while this subject clearly does. I disagree strongly with Closed Limelike Curve's argument that no one will remember this a year from now given that plenty of coverage talks about this meme's wider context with regards to sexism and everyday culture. [35][36][37] There are easily many more sources out there, many of which are already in the article. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 22:40, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 22:52, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I struggle to imagine I'm on an encyclopaedia reading the pabulum in this article, half of it feels like a coatrack too. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:20, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Traumnovelle: Do you have a policy based argument for deletion instead of WP:IDONTLIKEIT? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 10:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They cited WP:COATRACK, but I don’t see how that essay applies. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:43, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As it stands the article is unencyclopaedic and I do not see any source that could improve that. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:50, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unencyclopedic how? It's a studied phenomenon/event. Aaron Liu (talk) 22:28, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there are studies they are not presented in the article. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By "studied", I don't mean the formal way. There are many news sources cited that analyzes the phenomenon. Aaron Liu (talk) 16:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to get a solid consensus. Remember, articles are not assessed on whether or not an individual editors sees their value but whether reliable sources establish that this is a notable subject. I'm sure we all know of articles whose value is doubtful but it's the sources and policies, not our opinions, that matter.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:23, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic Commercial Law

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

I added three sources to this article, as it had previously been unsourced for 19 years, but I don't think any are helpful for notability. The first merely says that the book was published and what it was about, the second is a book that cites the book and summarizes its arguments, and the third is a review from a British politician's personal website which would be useful however owing to its self published nature is probably not countable for notability. Nothing that actually discusses the book, not enough for WP:NBOOK.

It is frustrating that this book appears to be non-notable, as it appears to be very highly cited (confounding my effort to find discussion of it). Redirect to Mohammad Hashim Kamali? PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:02, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Islam. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:02, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Economics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:39, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If the book is "very highly cited" then it satisfies the guideline WP:TBK. NBOOK, like PROF, is, by design, not just a rehash of GNG. The book has some coverage in Reference and Research Book News, and a thorough description of the book (which will not fit in the author's article) is helpful. [I struck my previous !vote which discussed possible merger and redirection targets.] James500 (talk) 01:24, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@James500 My interpretation of WP:TBK is that it is a rationale for relaxing the degree of sigcov required for academic publications, but not that it is an excuse to not have any - it's phrased in a vague way that imply a combination of several of these factors may help, and this doesn't hit too many of them. The R&R Book News publication is two sentences which just summarize the book - they don't really do reviews, it's usually just a sentence on "this book was published and here is what it's about", which can be helpful but which does not help notability IMO. AFAIK it is generally frowned upon to only have material in an article that is sourced from the topic itself, and that's really all we can get here. "very" highly cited was probably an overestimation on my part, but it does have some yes PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:40, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your interpretation of TBK is mistaken. TBK says nothing about "significant coverage". The entire purpose of TBK is to disapply GNG. James500 (talk) 01:43, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well TBK is vague and does not have any clear-cut guidelines like NBOOK does, only "possible findings" and a suggestion to use common sense. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The possible findings for notability under WP:TBK, as listed without elaboration, are some combination of the following:

whether the book is published by an academic press, (no)

how widely the book is cited by other academic publications or in the media, (cited a decent amount, but not to an exceptional degree)

the number of editions of the book, (a few, not very high)

whether one or more translations of the book have been published, (none)

how influential the book is considered to be in its specialty area, (not very)

whether it is, or has been, taught, or required reading, in one or more reputable educational institutions (no)

Hence, I disagree with a keep vote. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:51, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at GScholar, Kamali seems to have an exceptional level of citation. The average h-index for a law professor is less than 3, because it is a low citation field for academics. He is said to be "the most widely read living author on Islamic law in the English language". I am tempted to invoke BKCRIT #5. James500 (talk) 02:01, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, he's definitely notable. BKCRIT #5 only applies to people whose "life and body of written work would be a common subject of academic study.", which he is not, but I guess I can see your case here. Unfortunate that we only have an article on what appears to be the least notable of his many works. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:07, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The book "Islamic Commercial Law: An Analysis of Futures and Options" has 333 GScholar citations. The preceding article "Islamic Commercial Law: An Analysis of Futures" has 75 citations. The preceding article "Islamic Commercial Law: An Analysis of Options" has 66 citations. That is a total of 474 citations. I would say that it actually is very highly cited. James500 (talk) 02:27, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was Withdrawn‎. Sources presented showing the parent topic is notable and this can be turned into an article on that with this as a subsection. This satisfies my notability concerns. (non-admin closure) PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Norsk ordbok (Riksmål)

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

I could not find anything about this dictionary, but it is admittedly in Norwegian and my source searching may have been impaired by that. There are a decent amount of non-sigcov hits for a dictionary which makes me suspect there is something I am unable to find, particularly due to the language thing. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:10, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Norway. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:10, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Then why did you nominate it to be deleted instead of asking a Norwegian speaker? Geschichte (talk) 14:34, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Who would I have asked? This article has sat untouched for twenty years. Afd is the only appreciable way to actually get eyes on it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: significant coverage here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, etc. C F A 💬 03:11, 18 August 2024 (UTC) [reply]
Are these all referring to the same dictionary? This article seems to be on the illustrated version. The title is common but I don't think they're all the same work. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:42, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. CFA, your search is unfortunately a bit misguided. Every single one of your sources are undoubtedly about Det Norske Akademis ordbok (NAOB). Geschichte (talk) 10:15, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Huh. Well I'm not going to be of much help then. I wouldn't know where to look for anything else. C F A 💬 14:10, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Either way you should be commended for your effort Geschichte (talk) 10:49, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Here's one review for 1993 edition: https://tidsskrift.dk/lexn/article/download/19107/16740 Jähmefyysikko (talk) 14:23, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we're halfway there. I'm still confused as to the scope of this page because I can't figure out if it's referring to a series of Riksmål dictionaries or just a 1993 edition. Are there sources for later editions of this same work? Because that would be fine. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:15, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The 1993 edition Norsk illustrert ordbok was a variant of the 1991 dictionary Store norske ordbok, which I found significant coverage for. The dictionary constitutes a bridge between bokmål, which is an official written form of Norwegian, and riksmål which is an unofficial written form maintained by a private organization - and was issued to replace the older riksmål dictionary which was going out of style in the 1990s. I would rather write an article about the 1991 dictionary Store norske ordbok and merge the successors into that one. Geschichte (talk) 10:49, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no opposition to this proposal, seems ideal to me. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:12, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Interesting proposal at the end of this discussion but I'm not sure how that development impacts what should happen with THIS article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Cupola (geometry)#Star-cupolae. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Crossed square cupola

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

No sources are mentioned about the crossed square cupola. It is merely an exhibition and the problem of arranging images had already been discussed in WT:WPM. Also, many related articles on those tables, I suppose, does not have any sources. That being said, I think they could possibly be deleted together in here, but sadly this is for one article only. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 01:35, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 August 10. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:48, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:31, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to Cupola (geometry) § Star-cupolae. Part of an infinite family of such shapes with no evidence of independent individual notability. If it had occurred to me to initiate deletion proceedings on this I would have tried WP:BLAR first, but apparently that was already tried unsuccessfully ten years ago. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:54, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:45, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Thailand women's national under-18 softball team

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Singapore women's junior national softball team

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

The subject does not meet the WP:NTEAM or WP:GNG due to a lack of significant coverage. The only sources in the article are primary and a cursory search didn't reveal anything that would establish notability. Let'srun (talk) 01:40, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Softball and Thailand. Let'srun (talk) 01:40, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:41, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 03:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Zero third-party coverage. --Paul_012 (talk) 19:24, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Denmark, Santiago

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

Fails WP:ORG. No third party coverage. Article simply states what all embassies do. LibStar (talk) 03:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Denmark, and Chile. LibStar (talk) 03:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Chile–Denmark relations in line with this discussion. There are several other Danish embassies which might also be merged into their respective international relations page. e.g. Embassy of Denmark, Beijing, Embassy of Denmark, Prague, and Embassy of Denmark, Moscow. Uffda608 (talk) 08:23, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Chile–Denmark relations. Should have been suggested upfront. This text is generic, not worthy of merger. gidonb (talk) 10:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémate

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

I cannot find any Reception on this game. I found this TheGamer source: https://www.thegamer.com/pokemate-pokemon-go-precursor/ but it was published before TheGamer's reliability date of August 2020, meaning it provides as much notability to the subject as an average Valnet source. Beyond that, Game Rant briefly discussed it, but it also does not add to notability and is part of this listicle. I checked Japanese sources, and found only passing mentions of the game's existence, and the sources in the article are either routine coverage of the game's announcement or not enough to establish notability. There is no Reception to really build this article with. A viable AtD for this subject is the "List of Pokemon video games" article, where the subject is mentioned, in order to preserve page history. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect I did find this, but it still isn't enough for GNG. It could have a brief list explanation for what it is. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of controversies of recent U.S. Presidents

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

Very sparse article with a strange criteria (why only recent presidents?) and quite frankly, is only substantive for Trump (where it's a list of people who worked under him who now consider him to be incompetent). No substantive content besides the list of scandalous Trump politicians, which are covered elsewhere. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 02:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but expand substantially further back in time, and provide some refined guidelines for what constitutes a "controversy". An "impeachments" section that does not mention the impeachment of Bill Clinton is lacking, to begin with. While there are periods that historians would deem the cutoff for "modern" presidencies, I would think that this would go at least as far back as Nixon, and possibly as far back as Kennedy. BD2412 T 02:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: For one definition, see Stephen Hess and James P. Pfiffner, Organizing the Presidency, Third Edition (2020), stating "The modern presidency began with Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his leadership of the United States through the Great Depression and World War II". BD2412 T 03:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  I went ahead and expanded it back to Reagan since that was as far back as the Brookings analysis went on turnover by administration Superb Owl (talk) 06:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, Lists, and United States of America. Skynxnex (talk) 03:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I chose 2 presidents from each party for starters to try and keep it balanced. I will not object if other editors want to expand it. Do not see any reason for deletion. Superb Owl (talk) 04:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Satisfies WP:NLIST. High Crimes and Controversy: Noteworthy Presidential Scandals, Presidential scandals throughout history, Among 160 years of presidential scandals, Trump stands alone; What Was the Biggest Political Scandal in American History? 7 Historians Make Their Picks. Given the scope of this topic, reasonable to apply WP:LISTCRIT to limit to particular era. There are some problems: not convinced that "recent" is useful since it dates immediately, splitting by centuries might be useful; also, the table skates close to WP:OR - what source identifies scandals using that typology? Nevertheless, these are content issues, not notability issues. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 05:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Fine as long as only notable controversies are included. Dympies (talk) 17:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KHFD

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

Looking at a web search, the airport appears to be the overwhelmingly primary topic. The disambiguation can be replaced by a redirect and a hatnote at the airport article (a previous attempt at redirecting the article has been reverted by the page creator). 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 02:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 02:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Transportation. Skynxnex (talk) 03:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DB2 SQL return codes

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

These were created for ease of reference for people using the IBM Db2 software. Per the "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" policy (see WP:NOT), an article listing the error codes for an arbitrary system is unnecessary. There is almost certainly no coverage of the error codes specifically: have done some minimal WP:BEFORE and nothing showed up obviously; and if there is it can be better put into the main article for the product. Should be deleted. Mrfoogles (talk) 01:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Mrfoogles (talk) 01:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Software, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glasgow (band)

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

No reliable, secondary sources give significant coverage to the subject. Skyshiftertalk 00:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 August 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:56, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Scotland. Skynxnex (talk) 03:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KnowledgeFlow Cybersafety Foundation

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

Semi-advertorialized article about an organization, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for organizations. As always, every organization on earth is not automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article just because it exists -- we need to see evidence that the organization would pass WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH on third-party coverage and analysis about the organization. But this is referenced mainly to primary sources, such as its own self-published content about itself, the self-published websites of partner organizations and directory entries, that are not support for notability -- and meanwhile, the very few GNG-worthy media hits here just glancingly namecheck the organization's founder as a provider of a short soundbite in an article about something else, which is not about this organization and thus does not support its notability.
We're looking for reliable sources (not just any web page that exists) in which this organization is the subject of the coverage (not just a name that happens to get mentioned within coverage about something else), but none of the sources here footnotes here meet that standard at all. Bearcat (talk) 00:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 00:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional sources and references do exist.

Here are two more:

Cyber Security and Privacy: Key Principles and Tools for Older Adults - Elder Abuse Prevention Ontario (eapon.ca)

https://etalentcanada.ca/for-educators/programs/ictc-knowledge-exchange-hub Emmajp377 (talk) 02:11, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We require reliable sources, not just any web page you can find with the organization's name in it. Reliable sources means journalist-written media coverage and/or books, not the self-published websites of directly affiliated entities. Bearcat (talk) 16:11, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Bamlet Smallman

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

A successful but nonnotable businessman --Altenmann >talk 00:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Ireland, and Canada. Skynxnex (talk) 03:31, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If the Dictionary of Canadian Biography is Canada's "standard national biographical dictionary", as expected by WP:ANYBIO, then the subject is "likely to be notable" (although not definitively/automatically notable) under that guideline. Guliolopez (talk) 13:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed, an entry into such book is an argument, and I did write "successful", didn't I? nothing in the article indicates why he is better than tens of thousands of other minor retail store owners. But I may be mistaken in my opinion. --Altenmann >talk 18:28, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American Bully Kennel Club

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

Excessive use of WP:PRIMARY sources, as well as WP:GUNREL sources such as YouTube, Medium, and even blogs and forums, which count as self-published sources. Unable to find much of anything that would satisfy WP:GNG, most search results yield nothing of note for the organization itself; news articles are mostly about the dog breed, with some trivial mentions of the organization in a couple of articles, but nothing meeting WP:SIGCOV or even crossing the bar of WP:ROUTINE, like this article. Not opposed to redirecting back to the dog breed as opposed to deletion, where it already has several mentions within that page. SmittenGalaxy | talk! 00:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Organizations, and United States of America. SmittenGalaxy | talk! 00:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Josephine Musser

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

Subject of the article is not notable whatsoever, coverage seems routine for the election at the time, subject does not fulfill WP:GNG or WP:NPOL. -- Talthiel (talk)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 August 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have reapplied {{subst:afd2}}, as there appears to have been malformed formatting here. No opinion or further comment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:POLITICIAN No indication they did anything but get enough signatures to get their name on a ballot. No info of anything else about this person. — Maile (talk) 15:22, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Sharpless

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

Subject of the article is not notable whatsoever, coverage seems routine for the election at the time, if there is even any coverage at all, subject does not fulfill WP:GNG or WP:NPOL. -- Talthiel (talk)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 August 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have reapplied {{subst:afd2}}, as there appears to have been malformed formatting here. No opinion or further comment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Politicians, History, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Not enough to pass WP:Prof or WP:Politician or WP:GNG. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. The political career does not pass WP:NPOL, clearly; the more interesting question is whether he might pass WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR. But Google Scholar has only 11 hits for him giving a single-digit h-index (unsurprising for a historian), not enough for WP:PROF#C1. He retired as professor emeritus (in this context just meaning retired) apparently without any high-level awards or title of distinction beyond an ordinary full professor, making no case for other criteria of WP:PROF. I found only two books by him: City Growth in the United States, England and Wales, 1820–1861, his dissertation, was reproduced without additional polishing according to the one review I found (JSTOR 44609346). For the other, Wisconsin's 37: The Lives of Those Missing in Action in the Vietnam War (credited to Erin Miller, with John B. Sharpless in smaller type on the cover) I found no reviews at all. So I'm not seeing a pass of WP:AUTHOR. And there's a profile of him on the occasion of his retirement in his local newspaper [38]; I don't think it's enough for WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Merriman

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

Repeatedly moved from draft by conflicted user, this clearly fails WP:NFILMMAKER and WP:NMUSICIAN. Theroadislong (talk) 17:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Bands and musicians. Theroadislong (talk) 17:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:38, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misinformation corrected in regards to record deal not being secured -evidence of such clearly provided in articles . Personal information removed about family, as is appropriate. Denseem (talk) 08:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No point of view of skew was taken on this articl, simply correcting inaccuracy and removing personal information Denseem (talk) 08:51, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Denseem, you don't need to make 5 nearly identical comments saying the same thing. It can discourage participation from other editors and the best way to come to a consensus to have sufficient editor participation in deletion discussions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the duplicate comments, leaving only one copy behind. Left guide (talk) 11:03, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I see 1.5 good sources about him - the AL source is substantial; the first Irish Times is brief but is about him. In the rest he's listed as a collaborator with not much about him, or they are interviews. I didn't find anything else about him. NOM seems to be correct that there are COI issues and there appear to have been possible WP:SOCK issues as well. Good to keep an eye on. Lamona (talk) 16:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
two Variety articles and Screen magazine are substantial sources in the film business. 77.75.96.206 (talk) 14:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that those articles are not about him; he is only name-checked there. So those don't count toward notability, even though they can source some information in the article. Lamona (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 18:26, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aydo h8^[contribs] 14:30, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I stand by my original prod rationale "there is no significant coverage in reliable third-party sources that establish notability. The currently cited sources offer nothing beyond passing mentions or interviews, including a few hearsay articles". GSS ^💬 16:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 00:23, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I did a cursory search for independent, secondary WP:RS and what's available is pretty sparse. Yes, the Irish Times article is brief and is about him but that is arguably a local source. An independent secondary source that has in-depth, substantial coverage in one or more articles would be more clearly convincing. I got more more notability about the architectural professor of the same name, but relatively little outside exclusively local sources for this musician, lacking the widespread secondary coverage required for notability. GuardianH (talk) 20:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Magnum

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

Subject of the article is not notable whatsoever, coverage seems routine for the election at the time, subject does not fulfill WP:GNG or WP:NPOL. -- Talthiel (talk)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 August 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:22, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have reapplied {{subst:afd2}}, as there appears to have been malformed formatting here. No opinion or further comment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:15, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Radio, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:16, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Riener

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

Subject of the article is not notable whatsoever, coverage seems routine for the election at the time, subject does not fulfill WP:GNG or WP:NPOL. -- Talthiel (talk)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 August 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Offline} 00:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have reapplied {{subst:afd2}}, as there appears to have been malformed formatting here. No opinion or further comment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Military, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for running as candidates in elections they didn't win — the notability test at WP:NPOL is holding a notable office, not just running for one, while candidates get articles only if either (a) they were already notable for some other reason as it is, or (b) their referencing shows a credible reason why their candidacy should be seen as a special case of significantly greater notability than most other people's candidacies. But this shows nothing of the sort, and is in fact based entirely on primary sources that are not support for notability at all. Bearcat (talk) 19:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]