Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday
- Josiah Akinloye (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG or any SNG, the sources are not speaking for the subject in question. Largely lacking WP:SIGCOV in WP:RSes. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep. Leaning weak keep, because there are sources that point to significant coverage about him. I am just that not sure if there is consensus (doesn't seem like it on archived RS feed) that conclude tribuneonlineng.com or guardian.ng to be generally unreliable. Those two plus a couple of paragraphs on thenationonlineng.net, make up reason to pass WP:SIGCOV and GNG. Prof.PMarini (talk) 06:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 20:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: very much not notable, from the "30 under 30 list" to the typical puffy articles from Nigerian media, this individual isn't suitable for wikipedia. I'm not finding any suitable sourcing either. Oaktree b (talk) 21:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wreckage (Pearl Jam song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Charts not withstanding, I don't see any coverage of this song besides the short, press release-derived announcement articles every single gets (stereoboard), or entirely derivative of Eddie Vedder's promotional interviews on the Sunday Times and the Howard Stern Show (Variety). Redirection is reccomended. Mach61 23:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Mach61 23:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - the album topped the US Mainstream Rock chart - that essentially means it was the most popular song at rock radio in the entire country. Beyond that, dedicated coverage was extremely easy to find:
- https://variety.com/2024/music/global/pearl-jam-eddie-vedder-donald-trump-wreckage-dark-matter-1235977926/
- https://www.billboard.com/music/chart-beat/pearl-jam-wreckage-mainstream-rock-airplay-number-one-1235725407/amp/
- https://people.com/eddie-vedder-says-donald-trump-desperation-inspired-pearl-jam-song-wreckage-8638662
- https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/pearl-jam-new-single-wreckage-1235006103/
- https://www.billboard.com/music/chart-beat/pearl-jam-wreckage-number-one-adult-alternative-airplay-chart-1235745408/amp/
- https://ultimateclassicrock.com/pearl-jam-wreckage/
- https://www.loudersound.com/news/pearl-jam-wreckage
- Normally, I'd suggest a WP:BEFORE search wasn't follows through on, but some of these were in the article already, so I'm not really sure what's going on with this nomination. This song topped multiple major song charts. Extremely bizarre to think this is the sort of song that isn't notable. Sergecross73 msg me 00:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Dark Matter (Pearl Jam album) per nomination.QuietHere (talk | contributions) 00:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)- QuietHere I'm quite surprised to see this response considering we generally have common readings on the notability standards, and this nomination is horribly flawed. Can you expand a bit more? This song didn't just chart, it topped multiple charts and there's no shortage of WP:RSMUSIC approved sources writing dedicated coverage centered around it. Sergecross73 msg me 00:19, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Sergecross73 I must've posted my comment at the same time as yours because I didn't see it. Seeing you put it in perspective and looking through the sources you posted, it does look a lot more convincing than I initially thought. I've stricken my vote; I think I come out neutral on the question now. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 00:30, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- QuietHere I'm quite surprised to see this response considering we generally have common readings on the notability standards, and this nomination is horribly flawed. Can you expand a bit more? This song didn't just chart, it topped multiple charts and there's no shortage of WP:RSMUSIC approved sources writing dedicated coverage centered around it. Sergecross73 msg me 00:19, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Looks notable enough to me. A prominent single from Pearl Jam's latest album, and the coverage is there. Personally I don't think rock radio number-ones matter so much in 2024 (or any radio format, because everything is so online), but without that I would still find it notable enough. Ss112 06:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: The sources both already in the article and presented above (albeit with some overlap between the two) are beyond sufficient. Left guide (talk) 06:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Easily passes
WP:NALBUMSwith the added sources above. cyberdog958Talk 07:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, easily. Something is off about this nomination because all the reliable sources we need were already in the article at the time of nomination. I will try not to speculate on motives. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Johnathan Davis (businessman) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
All the references listed are about businesses and organizations that they were apart of and not about the person themselves and I can't find any other coverage about them. Does not pass WP:NBUSINESSPERSON or WP:ANYBIO. Propose to redirect to Newsweek. cyberdog958Talk 23:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, News media, and Business. cyberdog958Talk 23:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. The reference Meet The Mysterious Duo Who Just Bought Newsweek is a profile of Davis, as is Faith and a media icon: Newsweek's unconventional new owners (which is characterized here as "a lengthy profile of IBT founder Johnathan Davis". --The Cunctator (talk) 13:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don’t think I would consider this source a
profile of Davis
as it’s more about his business partners along with most of the other references on the page. The second source is more promising but I don’t think that one source is enough to satisfy WP:SIGCOV. cyberdog958Talk 19:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don’t think I would consider this source a
- Eastern Shadows (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NBAND. I found no reliable sources about them. I see no verifiable claim of notability on the article. Badbluebus (talk) 23:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Arts, United States of America, and California. Badbluebus (talk) 23:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Hong Kong, and Arizona. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Wikipedia:Verifiability. I considered supporting a a selective merge/redirect to Rockit Hong Kong Music Festival because the article says, "The initial incarnation of the band appeared on stage at the final Rockit Hong Kong Music Festival, where the band was billed as Spencer Douglass." However, I decided against that because I could not find any reliable sources verifying this. I could not find any reliable sources that discuss Eastern Shadows, so I support deletion under Wikipedia:Verifiability. Cunard (talk) 11:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Math Lady (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There is no extra info here that isn't already present on Renata Sorrah#Meme. I propose that this page be redirected there. Babar Suhail (talk) 15:35, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Babar Suhail (talk) 15:35, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep there is enough WP:GNG for a separate article & potential for expansion. As a Brazilian, I can confirm that there are multiple other sources available in Portuguese that can be added to expand the article. Skyshiftertalk 15:50, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- While I would believe you, it'd be much better if you linked them. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Could you share some of these sources? My own search wasn't entirely fruitless but the articles I did find don't add much; certainly nothing that couldn't just be added to Renata Sorrah#Meme. GhostOfNoMeme 12:24, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Searching for "Nazaré Confusa" reveals dozens of sources. Some examples are [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]. It is also mentioned in multiple scholarly articles [9]. Skyshiftertalk 18:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! That's a greater number of sources than I had been able to find (my Google search for "Nazaré Confusa" was returning completely off-topic results by page 4). I got zero hits on Google News; I hadn't even thought to check Google Scholar, given the topic — good call. I've changed my !vote to Keep after reviewing the links. GhostOfNoMeme 03:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Searching for "Nazaré Confusa" reveals dozens of sources. Some examples are [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]. It is also mentioned in multiple scholarly articles [9]. Skyshiftertalk 18:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Mathematics, and Brazil. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: AfDs are for deletion not for discussing if a redirect is appropriate. That should have been made on the talk page of the article. And only if such a discussion had not allowed to reach any consensus should we have been discussing this here. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:16, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Mushy Yank, it's not unusual for a nominator to propose a Redirect or Merge instead of a Deletion. In fact, it's pretty common so I don't understand why you are scolding this editor. Liz Read! Talk! 01:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, sorry if I sounded agressive but I mentioned this because if they don’t wish deletion or think it’s a fair or even possible outcome, they should not open an AfD but rather discuss the merge on the merge discussion they can open and the redirect on the talk page, or boldly redirect the page and explain why. If my advice was wrong, I apologise. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- WP:ATD-R:
If the change is disputed via a reversion, an attempt should be made to reach a consensus before blank-and-redirecting again. Suitable venues for doing so include the article's talk page and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion.
Only applies to redirecting. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)- Thank you but please, I must insist, and quote your quote:"If the change is disputed via a reversion": was this the case here? and did I mean anything else in my initial comment? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's Math Lady, she deserves it. That being consensus before effectively blanking a popular thing on the internet. This is just WP:BOLD all over. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I have no idea of what you mean by that. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Due to the subject's popularity, BLARing might be controversial. In accordance with BOLD, such actions should be discussed. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:19, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying. But that was and is exactly my point: why take (potentially notable or apparently popular) pages to Afds if you suggest a redirect i.e. if you think a redirect is to be considered? Just ASK competent users. Discussions can happen ON TALK PAGES OF ARTICLES: that is why they have been created. USE TALK PAGES not AfDs. (I’m not shouting, nor upset, mere emphasis). Thanks again. I’ll leave this discussion now. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Due to the subject's popularity, BLARing might be controversial. In accordance with BOLD, such actions should be discussed. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:19, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I have no idea of what you mean by that. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- In practice, AfDs suggest redirects all the time. It's pretty much just accepted. See: Wikipedia talk:Speedy keep/Should we permit deletion nominations advocating for a redirect? which ended in:
Allowing the nominator to advocate redirect is current practice, and this debate shows no consensus to change that. The case is also well made that this has obvious utility in establishing an unambiguous consensus that an article should not exist in its own right, even if a redirect is appropriate.
- On the other hand:
There is a clear numerical and policy-weighed consensus that AfD is a right venue to seek for redirect(s), which have been challenged. The first attempt at redirection ought be directly attempted per our principles of being bold.
– from this discussion. Nevertheless, deciding to head straight to AfD is arguably itself WP:BOLD! Regardless, it's a fairly regular occurrence that rarely gets questioned or challenged. I don't see the harm in it, myself. GhostOfNoMeme 13:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)- Thank you. Am I therefore correct to assume that there is no consensus regarding the question? I apologise if I was wrong or too harsh but my personal view remains unchanged: AfDs take time and efforts and involve many or at least various users; they are limited in time; my point is that they should be used for deletion and deletion only or at least only if deletion is considered a fair outcome by the nominator. Talk pages exist for a reason and if a rough consensus is reached to redirect or if a redirect is explained and unchallenged on the talk page (or boldly performed, and not challenged nor reverted, obviously), AfDs should not even be considered (imho). Thanks again, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Candidates for BLAR often have little attention and little page watching. Combined with the absence of a categorizing template to attract foreign attention, I expect many such talk page proposals to have little participation.To me and many others, BLAR and merging are just deletion with extra steps: slapping a redirect on it and, in the latter case, adding content to the merge target. I don't see how that takes so much more effort, why it should take unlimited time, or how the core question on whether the article can stand alone is any different. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Films/television/music..and Web etc have categorized templates; and I beg to differ: AfDs take more effort, or at least a different kind of efforts, in particular because they are limited in time (I am not saying they should not), and the core question is not the same (should we delete this#can we redirect this?). Also, people on the talk page of an article are in general more competent regarding the topic and are generally there with the idea of improving the page (and with more knowledge or more interest for the topic) (with time), not getting rid of potential crap (in a hurry). Different mindsets (in general; obviously the same persons might show up at both venues). In the present case, if this had been discussed before, that would have saved us some time, I think, as this will be kept and should not imv have come here and wouldn’t have if it had been discussed thoroughly with knowledgeable competent willing users on the talk page. Also taking the page to Afd might be disheartening for the creator and casts a shadow of doubt on the page, it is not a random let alone insignificant maintenance process and this shows through the tag (during the 8 days or 1 month of the discussion) and through the Old Afd template (unexperienced readers might see it and think ’Hey, look, wait, they say this might be rubbish’) A talk page where redirect is discussed offers none of these shortcomings, at least in my opinion as reader. Anyway, maybe this is not the place for such a long discussion, and thank you for your input and time. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Candidates for BLAR often have little attention and little page watching. Combined with the absence of a categorizing template to attract foreign attention, I expect many such talk page proposals to have little participation.To me and many others, BLAR and merging are just deletion with extra steps: slapping a redirect on it and, in the latter case, adding content to the merge target. I don't see how that takes so much more effort, why it should take unlimited time, or how the core question on whether the article can stand alone is any different. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Am I therefore correct to assume that there is no consensus regarding the question? I apologise if I was wrong or too harsh but my personal view remains unchanged: AfDs take time and efforts and involve many or at least various users; they are limited in time; my point is that they should be used for deletion and deletion only or at least only if deletion is considered a fair outcome by the nominator. Talk pages exist for a reason and if a rough consensus is reached to redirect or if a redirect is explained and unchallenged on the talk page (or boldly performed, and not challenged nor reverted, obviously), AfDs should not even be considered (imho). Thanks again, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's Math Lady, she deserves it. That being consensus before effectively blanking a popular thing on the internet. This is just WP:BOLD all over. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you but please, I must insist, and quote your quote:"If the change is disputed via a reversion": was this the case here? and did I mean anything else in my initial comment? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- WP:ATD-R:
- Hello, sorry if I sounded agressive but I mentioned this because if they don’t wish deletion or think it’s a fair or even possible outcome, they should not open an AfD but rather discuss the merge on the merge discussion they can open and the redirect on the talk page, or boldly redirect the page and explain why. If my advice was wrong, I apologise. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Mushy Yank, it's not unusual for a nominator to propose a Redirect or Merge instead of a Deletion. In fact, it's pretty common so I don't understand why you are scolding this editor. Liz Read! Talk! 01:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Even considering Portuguese-language sources I was able to find, coverage doesn't seem significant enough that it can't, per nom, simply go into Renata Sorrah#Meme. A standalone article is unwarranted.GhostOfNoMeme 12:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Skyshifter kindly replied to share the Portuguese-language sources she had referenced some days earlier, and after reading through them I'm changing my vote. Her sources are more numerous than I had been able to find myself, and a majority appear to be WP:RS. The coverage is more than passing mention and the focus is on the meme itself; not wholly separate from Renata Sorrah, naturally, but sufficiently so in my view to establish separate notability. The Google Scholar search was an interesting avenue I hadn't thought to explore. With WP:GNG satisfied I think the article should be kept. GhostOfNoMeme 02:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Complex/Rational 23:54, 8 September 2024 (UTC)- Keep per Sky's linked sources. Aaron Liu (talk) 00:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Embassy of Laos, Moscow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Zero secondary sources. No indication whatsoever of notability. Fails WP:GNG. Previous AfD featured multiple false claims that "all embassies are inherently notable". AusLondonder (talk) 11:55, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Laos, and Russia. AusLondonder (talk) 11:55, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- redirect to Laos–Russia relations as is the usual outcome for these non-notable embassy buildings. Mangoe (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - it is possible that the building might have notability beyond its current function. Per Izvestii︠a︡: Vol. 13. Narodna biblioteka "Kiril i Metodiĭ". 1973. p. 538 at the same address there would have been the Czechoslovak embassy, but so far I haven't been able to decipher the chronology. --Soman (talk) 18:39, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - so ru.wiki has an article on the building per se, at ru:Особняк А. К. Ферстер — Михельсона as a historical architectural monument. I'd say that as such the notability can be established. Furthermore the article can be fleshed out with a bit of history of the embassy. --Soman (talk) 18:46, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- We still need sources, the Russian Wikipedia article is lacking them. It does not establish notability for this article. AusLondonder (talk) 21:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:ORG. The Russian article is lacking sources so hard to argue for notability on the basis of that. LibStar (talk) 07:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Important for Laos - Russia relationship Cantab12 (talk) 09:14, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Being "important" is not a criteria for notability. LibStar (talk) 09:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect per Mangoe. No extant sourcing discussed to warrant keeping in the above comments. Redirection is the preferred alternative to deletion. czar 18:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 20:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete fails WP:ORG. It can be redirected to Laos–Russia relations. The notability of the building, as mentioned above, does not establish notability for this article ג'ימיהחיה (talk) 11:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete nothing to rescue at the moment and very weak. Alon9393 (talk) 01:40, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Big Church Festival (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I boldy merged this article over a year ago, but just noticed that my redirect was reverted in October. This festival fails WP:NCONCERT/WP:NCORP (which I think applies because this is a non-profit festival, i.e., an organization that puts on an event once a year). I have been unable to find sustained, in-depth coverage of the festival. As there is still merged content in Christian music festival#Worldwide, I propose restoring the redirect. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Events, Religion, Christianity, and United Kingdom. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep There seems to be be enough coverage to warrant the page to be kept and improved on. cyberdog958Talk 02:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- We should not count Event Industry News toward notability; per WP:TRADES, there's a presumption against using industry trade publications to establish notability. Christian Today and Cross Rhythms are both from 2015, hence why I noted this event lacks sustained coverage. Those are the only sources with SIGCOV I could find; the rest of the coverage I've been able to find are routine announcements that particular bands are performing at the event. In sum, two reviews from 2015 isn't enough to establish notability in my view. Cross Rhythms is also an interview with the founder, which means it lacks independence. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep as per the Christianity Today piece and the Cross Rhythms piece which has a significant coverage prose introduction before the interview part, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Lil Tony (North Carolina rapper) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is very much centred on WP:BLP1E. Fails WP:NMUSICIAN, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:12, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Crime, and North Carolina. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 23:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The event in question that they are known for is a murder that has extensive coverage by news sources and should pass WP:PERP due to the obscene nature of the crime. cyberdog958Talk 21:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:PERP. The latter states that an article should exist only if
the motivation for the crime or the execution of the crime is unusual
, to the extent it has become awell-documented historic event
. Neither the motivation (to increase standing in a gang) nor the execution (drive-by shooting) are unusual. That it involved children is undeniably shocking and unusual. The article Murders of Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Peña, for example, covers two young children randomly murdered as part of a gang initiation. But WP:PERP also says that historic significance isindicated by sustained coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources which persists beyond contemporaneous news coverage and devotes significant attention to the individual's role
— this is clearly not met in the case of Lil Tony. There has been no sustained coverage; the killings made the news in 2019, at the time of the event, and briefly again at sentencing in 2022, but there has been zero news coverage since. Nothing written in 2023, nothing written in 2024. Contrast this with Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Peña, killed in 1993, who have been written about extensively, with entire books (Pure Murder) dedicated to their killing, news articles ranging from the 1990s all the way through to 2024, and even a 2023 ABC documentary. In the case of Lil Tony, coverage has demonstrably not persisted beyond contemporaneous news coverage, so WP:PERP is not met. Nor does he seem notable enough to satisfy WP:GNG either, and we're definitely in WP:BLP1E territory. GhostOfNoMeme 05:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Olivia McIsaac (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NSKATE; no significant coverage. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 23:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Embassy of Ukraine, Dublin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Based on primary sources. Fails GNG and WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 23:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Ireland, and Ukraine. LibStar (talk) 23:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Move and improve. Rather than delete. While it is likely true that the embassy (the office/building/institution/whatever) doesn't have independent notability, there is plenty of coverage of Ireland-Ukraine relations generally. So, personally, I'd suggest that the article be increased in scope slightly. And moved to Ukraine–Ireland relations. Similar to Ireland–Russia relations. Or Spain–Ukraine relations. Or others. With a redirect left behind. If that's "too much", the title should (at the very least) be retargeted to List of diplomatic missions of Ukraine. Personally don't think that outright deletion is the best approach here. Guliolopez (talk) 17:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- If Ireland-Ukraine relations are a notable topic, which is quite possibly true, then an article on that subject can easily be created. AusLondonder (talk) 10:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your note. There is already, on a second review, a title on the subject. At Ireland–Ukraine relations. So we wouldn't need to create an (additional) article on that subject. We'd just need to merge/redirect the content (on the embassy - which effectively covers foreign relations as a whole anyway) to the existing title. Personally I think that's the best course of action. Rather than deleting (and then effectively recreating) the content/topic/title. Guliolopez (talk) 09:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- If Ireland-Ukraine relations are a notable topic, which is quite possibly true, then an article on that subject can easily be created. AusLondonder (talk) 10:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep but concurring with the "move and improve" of User:Guliolopez - consider creating Ukraine-Ireland relations and move this into there with more on the relations rather than the embassy. I did find this from the Kyiv Post - it's part 2 so presumably part 1 also has useful info. And I assume that Dublin newspapers will also cover the topic. That seems much more important than the embassy. Lamona (talk) 04:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect and merge if salvageable Andre🚐 18:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus. There is a redirect at Ireland-Ukraine relations so there would have to be a different target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Aqua Security (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not meet WP:NORG: the article is entirely a list of acquisitions and funding rounds, referenced to trivial coverage ("inclusion in lists of similar organizations" and "of the expansions, acquisitions, mergers, sale, or closure of the business"). No significant coverage. Dan • ✉ 22:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Article really is littered with funding rounds. No coverage exclusively to the company in sources. Niashervin (talk) 22:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Israel. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 23:35, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The company is a notable player in the cybersecurity industry, particularly in cloud-native security. Aqua Security has significant media coverage from reputable sources like Bloomberg, TechCrunch, and The Wall Street Journal --Loewstisch (talk) 10:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The citations to Bloomberg are directory information. They do not indicate a WP:CORP that is distinguishable from all other cyber security firms worldwide. Being a financially successful corporation does not a notable one maketh. Ventric (talk) 13:39, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! I totally agree about Bloomberg, as it is just a directory. Loewstisch (talk) 08:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- As to the other references you mentioned - the Techcrunch articles are regurgitated PR on funding rounds with no "Independent Content" as required by ORGIND. The WSJ articles - one has a quote from a company exec, no in-depth information about the company as required by CORPDEPTH, the other is another rehash of a funding announcement, fails ORGIND. None meet GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability.
- Comment The citations to Bloomberg are directory information. They do not indicate a WP:CORP that is distinguishable from all other cyber security firms worldwide. Being a financially successful corporation does not a notable one maketh. Ventric (talk) 13:39, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as the company is well-covered in specific business and security literature (per my additional WP before search), such as books on DevOps, Kubernetes, containerized applications, and cloud security. The page and its sources are also about software. Some security-industry guidebooks also heavily analyze various Aqua software tools, including Trivy and Kube-hunter. --美しい歌 (talk) 10:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Your edit simply added three book titles to a new section, and did not connect these references to the prose or explain their relevance. Of the three, Rice (2020) is partially written by company representatives and is not a reliable source: "this work is part of a collaboration between O'Reilly and Aqua Security" (p. ii), Binnie & McCune (2021) is unavailable on Google Books so I can't confirm a reference to the article subject, and Aversa (2023) simply makes passing references for how to use Aqua Security products, but does not demonstrate any notability whatsoever. Dan • ✉ 12:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! I was not solely referring to those books, as there are many more. I agree that Rice (2020) is not an independent source. However, Cloud Native Security devotes a significant portion to the software, while Aversa's book covers the software side of Aqua Security in depth, including descriptions of various software structures, acquisitions, and principles. 美しい歌 (talk) 15:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Your edit simply added three book titles to a new section, and did not connect these references to the prose or explain their relevance. Of the three, Rice (2020) is partially written by company representatives and is not a reliable source: "this work is part of a collaboration between O'Reilly and Aqua Security" (p. ii), Binnie & McCune (2021) is unavailable on Google Books so I can't confirm a reference to the article subject, and Aversa (2023) simply makes passing references for how to use Aqua Security products, but does not demonstrate any notability whatsoever. Dan • ✉ 12:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete because the majority of coverage is comprised of trivial mentions. If it were kept, it would require a sharp reduction in content because it reads as WP:ADS - it is largely self-promo content. However, the lack of specific coverage and the inclusion in "who-to-watch" lists and whatnot does not comprise notability. CapnPhantasm (talk) 15:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep the sources are mainly about routine investment rounds, but not all of them. Some Hebrew sources, as well as a few U.S. ones, offer sufficient and independent coverage. The company passes ORG notability threshold ג'ימיהחיה (talk) 11:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Which sources specifically? Also, the *content* has to be in-depth and Independent, it isn't just the fact that the publisher is independent of the company. HighKing++ 13:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per reliable coverage in many sources - both books, Israel tech media and industry focused news sites. --Mind-blowing blow (talk) 07:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Can you give an example? The only non-trivial reference in the article appears to be that of the The New Stack article; the rest of the references are completely trivial funding drivel. A Google News search likewise finds no relevant reliable sources. Dan • ✉ 00:30, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as meeting NCORP. All deletes claim that the article is imperfect: this is true however AFDISNOTCLEANUP. So weak arguments for deletion. gidonb (talk) 22:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete/move to draft space, the article was almost certainly created by the company itself and is almost entirely based on poor quality sources. I've removed the most egregious claims/sources and what remains is "a list of acquisitions and funding rounds" as stated by the nominator. While a stub article could probably be created from reliable sources, it does not seem fair to allow a "$1 billion dollar" company's marketing department to create work for volunteers. The article should be created via the WP:AFC process instead of allowing a COI article to be created directly in mainspace without repercussions. Brandon (talk) 14:20, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Per nom, clearly fails WP:GNG, WP:NCORP Youknow? (talk) 06:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 23:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete None of the sources meets GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability. HighKing++ 13:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Lil Tony (Georgia rapper) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Could not find sources to establish either this or WP:ANYBIO. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Georgia (U.S. state). Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 23:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Pitchfork and HIp Hop News are RS, we also have decent coverage in [10]. Not much coverage, but that's three sources and more than most articles we see in AfD Oaktree b (talk) 14:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Oaktree b Pitchfork and HipHop News are definitely reliable sources, but they do not provide the relevant significant coverage that we're looking out for. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- The Hip Hop Canada link I added above adds context, with the three, I think we have musical notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- I respect your stand, by the way :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- The Hip Hop Canada link I added above adds context, with the three, I think we have musical notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Oaktree b Pitchfork and HipHop News are definitely reliable sources, but they do not provide the relevant significant coverage that we're looking out for. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 23:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Christoph Bernhard Künzle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Per https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Strangers_Eyes, creator is globally blocked as "Spam-only account: probable coordinated undisclosed paid editing." Snowman304|talk 19:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Snowman304|talk 19:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Please see amended article with references and citations ChrisK5566 (talk) 17:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Finance, and Switzerland. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I've tried .ch websites only in a search, and can only find what are brief biographical profiles on company websites. Nothing to suggest notability. Oaktree b (talk) 21:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- I have made significant edits and improvements to this page, adding citations and sources for notability. ChrisK5566 (talk) 17:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- This Wikipedia article appears to have been created by a dubious source. I have added significant factual corrections and citations to improve this article. ChrisK5566 (talk) 17:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- I have significantly edited this article for accuracy; I am the subject of this article ChrisK5566 (talk) 17:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 22:54, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Oaktree b. Nothing in terms of WP:SIGCOV. The only person advocating to keep the article is the subject himself, who likely paid for the article to be created in the first place given the author was blocked for UPE. Best, GPL93 (talk) 21:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sonali Phogat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBLP. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 15:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Politicians, Women, Television, and Haryana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Significant coverage in reliable sources, including BBC and The Hindu, and bylined articles in other media, indicating her notability as social media personality, politician, or related to her death. She meets the requirements, in my opinion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Goa. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Hi M S Hassan. Thanks for reviewing this article. However Wikipedia platform is created with principles and articles of public interest which has notability and I feel this article has. Request you to withdraw this notice.Thanks.Gardenkur (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
@Mushy Yank.Thanks Mushy Yank for his opinion.Gardenkur (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – news coverage appears to be only connected to her death. As tragic as that event was, WP:BLPCRIME as well as WP:BLP1E applies. --bonadea contributions talk 11:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 22:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Legends League Cricket (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Recreation of a deleted article following this AfD. Apparently because the wording and WP:REFBOMBS are different, it cannot be a G4 speedy... Non-notable, just as it was a month and a bit ago, with WP:REFBOMBS and no establishment of WP:GNG. Just because retired players are taking part, doesn't mean notability is inherited. Coverage within the refbombs is routine. AA (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Cricket. AA (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep As I previously commented that the page should not be deleted because this is known cricket league. And In this all are international cricket players. And this is the main page of league not season page and also old league. I think it should be not be deleted because a lot of news references are available.
- PQR01 (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- You didn't actually contribute at the last AFD (at least not as this logged in user). But WP:NOTINHERITED applies- just because notable people compete, that doesn't make this event notable. If you didn't like that it was deleted, WP:Deletion review would have been the proper process, not re-creating the article and thus forcing another AFD. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- PQR01 (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Oman, Qatar, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and salt as per my rationale at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legends League Cricket. Nothing has changed in the 1 month since the last AFD, and re-creating an article after a clear AFD consensus like this is just disruptive. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- There is a sockpuppet investigation here, as I am sure many, if not all, of these accounts are linked. AA (talk) 20:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I think the league is quite notable as it's the most watched league in India after IPL as per BARC with reference to the news. Also the league was started back in 2022 and from then, a total of 4 seasons have happened and the 5th season is about to start from 20th September. The league is approved by Oman & Qatar cricket associations & several state associations in India. Taplow45 (talk) 08:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- So that's a lot of personal opinion... where's the WP:GNG, WP:OFFCRIC, WP:EVENT pass? AA (talk) 10:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Among other things, let's see how that sock investigation goes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 22:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thelonious Bernard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article fails WP:NACTOR and WP:ANYBIO. He’s only appeared in one film. Although he was nominated for a Young Artist Award only once; #1 of ANYBIO states that “The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times” The Film Creator (talk) 22:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. The Film Creator (talk) 22:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Please don't delete the page for Thelonious Bernard. "A Little Romance" was so important to me when I was a 15-year-old and saw it in 1979. I'm sure a lot of us girls had a crush on this actor when we saw him perform with Diane Lane. He is an important part of American history. Really. Thank you. 2601:602:867F:8690:5BA2:7670:D9FE:1C75 (talk) 23:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to A Little Romance: Fails both NACTOR and GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 12:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Consulate-General of China, Chongjin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Consulates are rarely notable. I'm certainly not seeing how this one is, with lines such as "The consulate expressed "deep condolences" after Kim Jong-il's death in 2011". Fails WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 13:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, China, and North Korea. AusLondonder (talk) 13:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete agree that consulates are rarely notable. Fails WP:ORG and GNG. LibStar (talk) 01:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of diplomatic missions in North Korea#Consulates general, where the subject is already mentioned, per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. The subject does not meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline.
A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard (talk) 08:19, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No one so far argues to keep the article. Whether to delete or redirect, though, could use more input. Why keep the history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 22:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Responding to the relist comment, it is useful to keep the history per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion so that non-admins have access to the content and the sources. This gives non-admins the option to reuse the content and sources to expand and source other articles like List of diplomatic missions in North Korea#Consulates general. This gives non-admins the option to undo the redirect if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future (and reuse some of the previous content) without having to ask an admin to undelete the article. The page history does not contain WP:BLP violations or copyright violations so there is no harm to retaining the redirect. Cunard (talk) 10:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- It seems to me very unlikely sources will be "found in the future" about this consulate. There's also very little useful content or sources to retain behind the redirect. AusLondonder (talk) 12:16, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Greedflation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I know Shrinkflation exists, but not every neologism needs its own page, many times pages such as this require much more substantial coverage to show the term is lasting and not simply a product of WP:Recent as well. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - this is a distinct concept and one that is widely discussed in politics around the world and needs its own page to reflect that discussion. Also, the article when this notice was posted had 48 references - how many references does an article need to show that it is notable?Update: Keep and move to: Sellers' inflation - this is a more encyclopedic/academic synonym.
The article also has incorporated some of the feedback given here including shifting away from listing examples to two new sections:
1) 'Mechanisms' which outlines the drivers of sellers' inflation according to this theory (information assymetry and monopoly power)
2) 'Proposed remedies' that quickly summarizes the tools proposed to address inflation under this theory (e.g. windfall profit taxes and price caps). Superb Owl (talk) 02:56, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Politics, and Economics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:46, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but severely trim down. The cited sources are reliable and significant, but we don't need so many of them. The article is basically a definition followed by a laundry list of every conceivable example. The concept can be adequately described in a couple of paragraphs. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 02:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- 100% agree on there being too many examples - have been working to trim, summarize and organize the more reliable sources to incorporate your feedback but any tips on which remaining examples are excessive would be helpful Superb Owl (talk) 06:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merge with Price gouging. SPECIFICO talk 02:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Much of this content came from price gouging but was rejected for being broader than price gouging which is a legal threshold in many places, whereas greedflation is a spectrum of legal and illegal activity (depending on the place) Superb Owl (talk) 02:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Inflation is not illegal. SPECIFICO talk 02:48, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Exactly Superb Owl (talk) 04:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Inflation is not illegal. SPECIFICO talk 02:48, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Much of this content came from price gouging but was rejected for being broader than price gouging which is a legal threshold in many places, whereas greedflation is a spectrum of legal and illegal activity (depending on the place) Superb Owl (talk) 02:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Merge with Price gouging. soibangla (talk) 03:12, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Merge with Price gouging. Shrinkflation is an example of price gouging and would naturally fit very well there. The Price Gouging article only mentions "Shrinkflation" in passing, currently... a merge would fix that. Marcus Markup (talk) 10:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- This article only mentions shrinkflation once in passing Superb Owl (talk) 07:03, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- I meant 'greedflation' of course. It gets hard sometimes, keeping all the neologisms straight. Marcus Markup (talk) 15:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Merge, I now think that a Merge !vote into Price gouging would also make sense, with the content greatly condensed too. I am ok with either a merge or a delete closing. Iljhgtn (talk) 12:32, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I would argue that Price Gouging is more accurately an example of Greedflation, rather than the other way around. A lot of these sorts of terms are also very contentiously defined on the internet, and there's a substantive lack of authoritative positions on it on Wikipedia or elsewhere. MasterOfGrey(MoG) (talk) 01:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: as seen in discussion so far, the relationship between greedflation/sellers' inflation and price gouging is not really clear to me; can't tell from scanning both articles. I'm not comfortable voting until it's clearer. I think it's possible that the articles can have sufficiently different scope to merit separate articles. seefooddiet (talk) 18:37, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm going to relist this once. While, numerically, more editors are arguing for a Merge, several editors believe that this subject is distinct from that of the merge target article (and one of those editors said so without offering a bolded "vote"). So, I think the difference of opinion is worth considering for a few more days.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:44, 1 September 2024 (UTC)- Different Merge, I am not certain that "Seller's inflation" and so called "Greedflation" are the same thing, but regardless, I am now thinking that the better merge might be on the Inflation article instead of Price gouging. Either way, I still believe that either merge (to Inflation or Price gouging) is an improvement over keeping this hyper-recent neologism as its own article. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- A sub-section on Inflation would be best. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Different Merge, I am not certain that "Seller's inflation" and so called "Greedflation" are the same thing, but regardless, I am now thinking that the better merge might be on the Inflation article instead of Price gouging. Either way, I still believe that either merge (to Inflation or Price gouging) is an improvement over keeping this hyper-recent neologism as its own article. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as it is a relatively modern coined term and was a candidate for Word of the Year by Collins Dictionary in 2023. The sourcing is good for the page to remain. --美しい歌 (talk) 10:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merge. The Price gouging page seems like a better place for this content, at least some of it. Doctorstrange617 (talk) 16:45, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep - 1) Having trouble seeing where the current version would fit in either the price gouging or the inflation articles. 2) The topic seems very notable and is not the same as price gouging (which is just one way to cause sellers' inflation) (update: did not know commenting twice was not allowed)Superb Owl (talk) 06:54, 6 September 2024 (UTC)- Comment, @Superb Owl was the creator of the original "Greedflation" page, and has already cast a !vote in the earlier listing. My understanding is that one does not get to !vote again after a closing admin relists a AfD discussion. I would respectfully ask @Superb Owl to do a
strikethroughof this latest comment. - Also, just to clarify, since I did comment above again after the relisting as a Different Merge, but that was new information, not more of the same. Also, I am still perfectly satisfied with a Merge into Price gouging if that is the most well-defined consensus as demonstrated above. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Your second comment was what confused me and did not know that is how relisting comments worked - thanks for letting me know. Superb Owl (talk) 15:35, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment, @Superb Owl was the creator of the original "Greedflation" page, and has already cast a !vote in the earlier listing. My understanding is that one does not get to !vote again after a closing admin relists a AfD discussion. I would respectfully ask @Superb Owl to do a
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 22:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)- Keep. While I see the concept as often overused, it still exists as a concept distinct from price gouging (which is a short-term response to an emergency). It's closer to profiteering. Jerdle (talk) 00:31, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Jim Bray (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NACTOR because he’s only appeared in one film. The Film Creator (talk) 22:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. The Film Creator (talk) 22:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Television, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – not at all relevant or useful, low quality article. Alon9393 (talk) 16:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Mohamed Tharwat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Egyptian actor of dubious notability. Sole provided reference does not cover subject in depth, nothing better found in English, but better references may be available in Arabic. Possibly eligible for a G5 speedy because author has been blocked as a suspected sockpuppet, but taking to AfD on the off chance that evidence of notability can be found. --Finngall talk 22:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Egypt. --Finngall talk 22:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Theatre. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep the subject appears to pass WP:ENT because he “has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.” On the other hand sourcing isn’t great. There are a couple of other Mohamed Tharwats (not actors) and some of the sources about this one are chatty interviews but I found 1, 2 and 3 after a non-intensive search. Mccapra (talk) 08:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Bedri Shala (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Biography of a local commander of doubtful notability based on a single source. Mccapra (talk) 21:39, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Kosovo, and Yugoslavia. Mccapra (talk) 21:39, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Stanley Hundred (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
One source (a historical marker database); contested merge. The location (a 1626 parish or planation) doesn't reach WP:GNG. See also discussion at User talk:Jacobsatterfield#I have sent you a note about a page you started. Klbrain (talk) 21:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment:Hi, please note I was in the middle of updating the article when it was nominated for deletion. It is a significantly more fully developed piece than when nominated.
jacobsatterfield (talk) 22:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The article has developed further (great!), but the references and discussion relate to a much broader topic. None of the new references have Stanley Hundred as their primary subject. Mulberry Island might be reasonable focus for an article with the existing content. So, I therefore that a merge to a broader topic, like Mulberry Island, would be better. Klbrain (talk) 22:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'd indeed support a subsection in Mulberry Island article if the consensus is that Stanley Hundred doesn't stand by itself. It would be much more precise/applicable than the previous attempted Warwick Shire merge. For geographic reference, Stanley Hundred would be about 1300 acres out of around 8000 that comprise the entirety of Mulberry Island. For temporal reference, it's about 150 years out of 400 years of recorded history in that area. The Mulberry Island article itself could be significantly expanded with content by a willing editor, there's much more colonial history that isn't given much attention currently, not to mention the overlap with the modern usage as Fort_Eustis aka Joint Base Langley-Eustis. Contra-wise, a large and sprawling Mulberry Island article could get difficult to follow. Might suggest looking for other examples of historical places of similar size to see what works well.
- Do note that the cited Richie/Colonial Williamsburg source has over ten pages dedicated specifically to Stanley Hundred, and the place has it's own historical marker separate from Mulberry Island. But I'm ultimately ambivalent to how the taxonomy of WP pages should be structured, I leave that to the editing pros.
- Jacobsatterfield (talk) 23:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Geography. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment:Also as a point of reference for other reviewers/commentors, see the Flowerdew Hundred Plantation article, which is Yeardley's other plantation contemporary to this one. As that other historical location is not currently on an active military base, it is a bit more visited and well known/documented than this one. As such, another viable option would be to merge all of this under their founder George Yeardley, but again it boils down to personal preferences for one huge article or several smaller ones, perhaps the Article size guidance is helpful here? Guidance/priority/experience/wise words from a senior editor on WP preference to organizing articles by geography, time-period, or biographical association would be useful, as there's no clear taxonomic preference to the overall corpus.
Jacobsatterfield (talk) 15:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- List of college football coaches with 30 seasons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There doesn't appear to be the needed WP:SIGCOV covering this particular grouping to meet the WP:NLIST. Let'srun (talk) 20:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, American football, and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 20:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. Unlike the other coaching lists recently nominated (e.g., coaches with zero wins, most ties, etc.), the topic of longest-serving head coaches does have some sources on topic. E.g., Longest-serving college football coaches. Cbl62 (talk) 23:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- List of college football coaches with 100 losses (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not finding the needed WP:SIGCOV from reliable secondary sources covering this grouping to meet the WP:LISTN. The best I could find is [[11]]. Let'srun (talk) 20:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Sports, American football, and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 20:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Side comment that the title might be better as something like "List of college football career wins leaders". Unless it's deemed some magic number in sources, cutoff criteria should rarely be in titles. Per WP:LISTNAME:
—Bagumba (talk) 04:36, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Many lists are not intended to contain every possible member, but this does not need to be explained in the title itself ... the detailed criteria for inclusion should be described in the lead, and a reasonably concise title should be chosen for the list.
- Scimitar (comics) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Next to no reliable sources discuss this character. Per my BEFORE, I found no hits in Books or Scholar and very little in News hits, and those hits had very few sources from reliable sources that actively discussed this character, and not enough to actively prove notability. There is not enough SIGCOV for this character to pass the GNG and have enough for an article. I'd suggest an AtD redirect/merge to his entry at List of Marvel Comics characters: S. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 19:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 19:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Extremely minor character that has essentially no significant coverage in reliable sources. Not only is the character completely non-notable by Wikipedia standards, he is not even a particularly notable character within the comics themselves, never making more than a relatively small handful of appearances. Searches are bringing up nothing but the most briefest of mentions of the character - it really says something when even the official Marvel site dismisses him as one of many "lesser villains". Not every character that ever appeared in the comics needs to be covered on the overstuffed Character List articles, and this is an example of one that does not have enough notability to even be included on them. Rorshacma (talk) 20:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Rorshacma. Doesn't have enough sources. I'm open to an WP:ATD, but I also agree that we don't want to bloat every character list with a WP:DIRECTORY of every minor character that has ever appeared in comics. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merge to List of Marvel Comics characters: S per nominator's suggestion. BOZ (talk) 04:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to List of Marvel Comics characters: S to preserve the information. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 15:41, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Emma Alam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No significant coverage from multiple reliable source about this subject. The award the article claimed she won, the source ain’t reliable to be verified. But still doesn’t meet GNG. Gabriel (……?) 18:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sportspeople. Gabriel (……?) 18:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Still too early to have an article, not relevant at the moment. Alon9393 (talk) 20:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was speedy keep per WP:SKCRIT#6: currently on the Main Page. Also noting that I cleaned up this nomination as it was originally malformed. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Burnt toast theory (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Like it was mentioned on the talk page for the article, burnt toast theory is just the butterfly effect mixed with positive thinking. It's also not very notable, since it's really just comes from a single TikTok that went semi-viral. It might have a place as a subsection on the butterfly effect page, but I don't think it deserves a page by itself. Feed Me Your Skin (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- I think I am posting this in the correct place, sorry if not. This "theory" or whatever you want to call it is logically bogus. Yes, burning your toast could prevent you from being in a serious car accident on the way to work by delaying you. BUT, it is JUST AS LIKELY that the burnt toast delays you INTO a serious car accident and away from an otherwise safe trip to work. So there is NO advantage to burning your toast. Assuming of course that the probability of having a serious car accident is independent of your departure time. And this would be true if the delay was just a few minutes, because rush hour traffic is equally dangerous throughout rush hour. And if the "theory" comes from a single tiktok posting, that is also pretty indicative. There is a lot of garbage on the net, and tiktok in particular. One person's single post on tiktok is an extremely poor indicator of good logic or intelligence, especially given the above argument.
- I vote DELETION!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.gregory.retzlaff (talk • contribs) 18:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with the above. It doesn't seem very notable. It hasn't been covered in many major national publications either. I think the best course would be to put a mention of it in the butterfly effect page. Keeper of the Queen's Corgis (talk) 19:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- Paul Oluikpe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There is nothing notable about this man. Most of the source from the newspaper cited has nothing to do with him except ref 1. Naijaloaded and 9jaflaver has nothing to do with significant neither reliable as they were only just talking about his music and the rest source are just mere websites. And to the article creator “How did you come inform of the biography” knowing all this information without any source giving a clue of who the subject is? Gabriel (……?) 18:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Bands and musicians, Businesspeople, Arts, and Nigeria. Gabriel (……?) 18:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment : One more question to the article creator. Who is “Muradmomi12”, a user who posted a fake template on your talk page Here claiming to have accepted the article. Is that your second account?. Remember lying won’t save you. So you can just be honest and things be sort out properly per Wikipedia policy--Gabriel (……?) 18:39, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- I wish to state categorically that I have no affiliation with the subject whatsoever. Can you check my edit history and particularly, the articles I have written and contributed to here? They cut across different interests. I am mostly interested in seeing major subjects/articles from Africa feature on Wikipedia. I am not ashamed to have that interest, but apart from that, I have no conflicts of interest in writing about the subjects I choose. I am neither paid nor employed by any of the subjects I have written or contributed to.
- About @Muradmomi12 , you need to check his edit and contribution history to know he has been warned severally about vandalism. I had no need for his approval or acceptance of my article. I am an Autoconfirmed user and have the user rights to move articles directly to mainspace. So I have no need for his/her help. If you check his history, you would notice he has been banned or blocked from wikipedia. If you compare my edit history and @Maradmomi12, our interests do not align. i would urge you rather to also check his history with yours and see if there are similarities.
- On a final note, i sense that your nomination of this article for deletion was not in good faith. It appears this is vandalism and I hereby warn you to desist. Thank You. Cfaso2000 (talk) 20:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your opinion on my article. The notability of the subject is proven by many mainstream independent articles as follows:
- (1) A review in major Nigerian newspapers, of his books. Four major/independent sources reviewed his book, Swim or Sink: Policy dynamics in challenging environments. His biography was also cited by these newspapers (references 1, 4, 5, and 20).
- (2) His Novel, Dead on Arrival(2013) was also featured in 2013 by Linda Ikeji(ref 17)and Bella Naija (ref 18) and also referenced in ref 1, 4, 5 and 20.
- (3) He was recognized by the British Council in 2017 (ref 12, 13)
- (4) He won a major award here (ref 14)
- (5) He also won another major award here from Alliance for Financial Inclusion here (ref 11)
- (6) He is also a musician and has an extensive discography (ref 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27). i have only included these for brevity sake. I found so many other songs he has put out.
- (7) His financial inclusion work is also covered in major independent newspapers here (ref 7,8,9,10).
- I hope this helps you to situate and agree with his notability.
- Finally, please can you check the history of edits to give you an idea of where this article has evolved from?
- Thank you. Cfaso2000 (talk) 19:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
On a final note, i sense that your nomination of this article for deletion was not in good faith. It appears this is vandalism and I hereby warn you to desist. Thank You.
This clearly now shows you definitely don't know what Wikipedia policy is all about neither the good faith or vandalism. You joined wikipedia 9 months ago with less than 200 edits but thats by the way. You stated “Muradmomi12” is into a different interest of editing from yours and has been vandalising but I am still surprise how he found your talk page and to post a fake approve article template of your article, since you both are of different interest, but thats by the way since you already stated you don't know such editor. When I saw that it actually looked like a deceive to the public that one of your article was accepted. So I thought it might be from your handwork to deceive the community but it's fine. Meanwhile, that doesn't still change the fact why I nominated this article. It still doesn't meet the general notability guideline. His works are not notable and this is the only thing I can found about his subject novel which still has nothing to do with him Dead on arrival. Gabriel (……?) 21:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)- I urge you to do a check of my refutations to your nomination for deletion in points 1-7 above and go through piece by piece and make your conclusions. I address your points in this latest response as follows:
- (a) The fact that I joined Wikipedia 9 months ago and have only 200 edits is not relevant to the issue here;
- (b) I have no business with how @muradmomi12 found my talk page to post a fake "approve" article template. Wikipedia is a public place and anyone is entitled to roam the space and indulge in their interests, but that "indulgence" should be ethical, free of conflicts of interest, and not infringing on the rights or freedoms of other users to contribute to the stock of knowledge here.
- (c) Why does it look like a deception to the public that my article was accepted? because I am just only 9 months with less than 200 edits or what? Please check my edit history and other articles and subjects I have written about. Paul Oluikpe is not the first or only article or subject I have written about.
- (d) Your assertion "it still doesnt meet general notability guideline" has no proof, but merely an arbitrary/sweeping rationalization. Please can you be specific about the sources, and can you refute piece by piece no 1-7 points which i made above? Have you actually read the sources ? This can help.
- Thank you Cfaso2000 (talk) 21:37, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
(a) The fact that I joined Wikipedia 9 months ago and have only 200 edits is not relevant to the issue here;
If you had stick with the Article wizard for creation policy, your article of 2023 Philip Ikeazor won't have been nominated for an AFD by Star Mississippi. Meanwhile, I still stand by my reason and will allow other editors do their research. Have a nice day and no further response from me to you. Gabriel (……?) 21:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)- Thank you for proving that your nomination of this article for deletion was in bad faith. I rest my case. Cfaso2000 (talk) 05:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Source 2 is his words at WSBI’s Scale2Save event, and likely, a press release. Source 3 is same as above and wouldn't tell us that he "works on financial inclusion". Tech finance, source 4, lacks byline and editorial standard, hence the post appears like a sponsored post. The awards are minor ad unrecognisable per WP:ANYBIO except the one from the British Council. But their count still doesn't make this article meet WP:GNG. Almost all the sources linked to Dead on Arrival, his book, are paid publication and some unreliable including Linda Ikeji's blog. Ofcourse, Nigerian world News doesn't perceive editorial policy and list works are by admin or individual. In light of WP: NMUSICIAN, the article's segment "musical work" were citations from unreliable sources per WP:NGRS. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 16:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your view. Here are my responses to your post.
- (1) The phrase "likely a press release" stays in the realm of speculation, and not a certainty. We shouldn't make conclusions on that. The issue is, does it cover the subject significantly? and is it an independent source?
- (2)Sources 2, 3, 7,8,9,10 all state categorically that he works in financial inclusion and at the central bank. The sources are Thisday, Independent, Daily Trust, Business Day, TechCabal-all sources identified in the Wikipedia list of reliable sources from Nigeria (Wikipedia:WikiProject Nigeria/Nigerian sources
- (4) Sources 6, 11,12, and 13 reference the awards he won. These are credible sources (Loughborough University, British Council, The Alliance for Financial Inclusion and The Punch).
- (5)Sources 1,4,5 and 20 covered extensively his book Swim or Sink: Policy Dynamics in Challenging Environments. They also ran a biography on him and also mention where he works. These sources are Nigerian Guardian, The Tribune and This Day all listed here Wikipedia:WikiProject Nigeria/Nigerian sources
- (6) You said "Almost all the sources linked to Dead on Arrival, his book, are paid publication and some unreliable". This is inaccurate. Sources 1,4,5 and 20 mention the novel, Dead on Arrival plus Linda Ikeji's coverage and Bella Naija coverage and reviews.
- I do believe the article should not be deleted.
- Thank you Cfaso2000 (talk) 17:52, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Cfaso2000, do not Wikipedia:BLUDGEON the AFD process or you may attract yourself a block for a short period of time. Allow other editors to express their concerns and not you, pointing to sources and policies to every likely "delete" decision. Cheers! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 17:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I thought at first that he would pass WP:NAUTHOR with reviews of his book ([12], [13], [14]) in three sources rated generally reliable by WikiProject Nigeria, but in reading the sources, it seems two of them are based on one, or they are all based on an underlying WP:PRESSRELEASE. Look in particular at the final few paragraphs, which are in some cases nearly word-for-word identical. As a result, I do not believe these to be truly independent reviews and thus no pass of NAUTHOR. I also see no WP:SIGCOV to pass WP:GNG. As for the awards, they do not qualify under WP:ANYBIO. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Seljuk campaigns in the Aegean (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Turkish article has also been tagged uncited for a long time. I could not find any academic sources and the Turkish ones were unreliable such as https://eodev.com/gorev/19114676 However there are so many editors knowledgable about military history I am sure discussion here will be fruitful Chidgk1 (talk) 17:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Nonsense, unsourced, made-up, anachronistic term/concept. It's a fork, too. Aintabli (talk) 23:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- S.V. Hezarfen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Looks like a good organisation. But sources I found such as https://delta.tudelft.nl/en/article/first-delta-debate-tackles-religion-campus are not really enough to show it is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 17:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Netherlands, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete no sources at all. Xegma(talk) 17:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 20:18, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Revolutionary Communist Workers Movement of Turkey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Was deprodded last month by Soman who said there are plenty of sources - but they have not yet specified any. I found https://www.marxists.org/archive/altinoglu/2000/07/x01.htm but on its own that is not enough to show notability. There have probably been thousands of political parties in Turkish history. If this is notable why is there no Turkish article? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:23, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:23, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - TDKİH was a notable group during its period of existence. For sourcing, see for example Türkiye'de sol örgütler: bölüne bölüne büyümek (Hüseyin Aykol, Phoenix yayınevı, 2010, covering its processs from formation until merger into MLKP), Sosyalist devrim teorisi (NK Yayınları, 2005, on the ideological line of TDKIH and its polemics with TDKP), Derin sol: çatışmalar, cinayetler, infazlar, Vol. 1] (Hakkı Öznur, Bilgeoğuz, 2006, on unity process with TKIH), 50 Jahre Migration aus der Türkei nach Österreich (Hüseyin Simsek, LIT Verlag Münster, 2017, on process from split with KHK to foundation of MLKP), Cumhuriyetin 75 yılı, Vol. 3] (Yapı Kredi Kültür Sanat Yayıncılık, 1998, factoid on action at Istanbul Aksaray), briefly mentioned here, etc. Now, for an illegal underground faction that existed 1989-1994, two things need to be stressed - 1) for underground organizations that lived before WWW, the volume of online material isn't excessive. Presumably there was plenty of coverage on TDKIH actions in the contemporary Turkish press (like what is carried into the Cumhuriyet book), but it cannot be found easily online. It is possible that Albanian media covered the positions of the group as well. But there are stuff that we are unlikely to find anywhere, such as names of the leaders (as a secret, illegal group). 2) Most later accounts focus on TDKIH role as forerunner of MLKP, rather than a fully separate group. --Soman (talk) 18:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep There are (or were) a lot of these stub articles on different communist organisations world-wide. It would be an improvement if someone developed them, added sources, etc. The lack of information on these organisations online, is because of when the internet came into general use. It is not evidence of their lack of notability.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:28, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 20:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- List of presidents of Turkey by education (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Tagged uncited for a long time and could be covered in other articles such as Recep Tayyip Erdoğan university diploma controversy and List of presidents of Turkey Chidgk1 (talk) 17:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, Education, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Iopolis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Tagged unsourced for a long time and please see talk page. Perhaps a joke by a Battlestar Galactica fan? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete nothing on it. Xegma(talk) 17:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment found a source and corrected information on the page however I'm unsure if it's notable enough to deserve a wikipedia page Pothos144 (talk) 23:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete The source referenced in the article amounts to a single sentence in an encyclopedic reference of a different topic altogether. cyberdog958Talk 00:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- IAOIZ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Tagged uncited for a long time. All the cites in the Turkish article are primary sources. It would be much easier for a native speaker of Turkish to find good cites than for me. If this industrial park is as claimed in the article it presumably contains hundreds of well educated Turks who could easily cite the article in either or both languages. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Flora of Turkey, Apocynaceae (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Tagged uncited for years. I asked at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Plants#Should_these_uncited_articles_be_merged_or_deleted_or_cited_or_what? but no reply yet - any ideas? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Biology and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete -- family and geography are already covered by the article for Apocynaceae, no need to pull out a nation-specific list.
- LizardJr8 (talk) 21:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organisms and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:17, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Flora of Turkey, Fagaceae (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Tagged uncited for years. I asked at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Plants#Should_these_uncited_articles_be_merged_or_deleted_or_cited_or_what? but no reply yet - any ideas? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Biology and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organisms and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:17, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, frankly, and the same goes for the other two articles concerned. What with Flora of Turkey for the overview and Category:Flora of Turkey and its multifarious subdivions for details (including Category:Endemic flora of Turkey), this is quite superfluous - there is no benefit in an alphabetic listing that exactly mimics the category content. If retained, draftify as unacceptable for mainspace in current unsourced form. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:18, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- DYO Boya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I could only find one really good cite: https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/bir-boya-markasinin-dogus-oykusu-24664197 Chidgk1 (talk) 16:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 16:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete no sources at all. Xegma(talk) 17:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- All Progressive Youth Association (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Google scholar has no sources and neither does the Turkish article Chidgk1 (talk) 16:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Seems to fail WP:GNG, I was only able to find passing mentions in Bianet. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete no sources at all. Xegma(talk) 18:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - again, lack of references is not on its own a criteria for deletion. The article as it exist right now doesn't fully explain the nature of the group. TÜM-İGD is the youth wing of the TKP (1920) (ex Ürün Sosyalist Dergi , one of the main remnants of the old Communist Party of Turkey and as such, unrelated to the current Communist Party of Turkey). It's a nationwide movement, that is notable in its own right. I note material on 2012 May Day, 2010 YÖK action (the Bianet coverage mentioned above would have been for https://bianet.org/haber/students-take-the-streets-on-30th-anniversary-of-yok-133750 for 2011 protest presumably). Here coverage in Yeni Dünya, here coverage on 2006 protests in Hurriyet, Evrensel, Milliyet, Cumhuriyet, Yeni Safak, etc, etc. Most of coverage is coverage on various protests of the group over the past years. --Soman (talk) 18:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ilgar Ibrahimoglu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
An article with no encyclopedic value and for PR purposes only. Redivy (talk) 15:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Azerbaijan. Redivy (talk) 15:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Islam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Is this the same Ilgar Ibrahimoglu who was the subject of coverage about his detention in Azerbaijan? [15] [16] [17] This might contribute to notability. LizardJr8 (talk) 22:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was speedy delete. WP:A7 by User:Bbb23 (non-admin closure) Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Matthew Ho (rapper) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable rapper. The main source appears to be a private discussion between the creator of the article and the subject. Because of this it can't be proven that the claims in the article are true. Claims made by the subject about themselves will require independent sources to confirm them.
Even if the claims are true the release of one song, a mash-up of Happy Birthday to You" and the US national anthem, on an unspecified medium, does not make them notable at this time. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 15:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Hong Kong. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Soley because it is non-notable in english-speaking and caucasian circles does not suggest it is non-notable in Hong Kong and Asian circles. This is an act of cultural ignorance, there exists a lot of cantonese articles, physical media, and posters that reference Matthew Ho which are yet to be cited, though I do not expect a foreigner to be familiar with this individual. You should know Ho appears on Television Broadcasts (TVB) very frequently, and I hear about him everyday on Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK). Azn on wiki (talk) 16:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- What does being Caucasian have to do with it? Appearing on a poster isn't notable, nor is physical media. We need articles that talk about the individual, this doesn't appear notable. Oaktree b (talk) 16:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: ZERO coverage found, in any media. Unrelated businessman [18] thta hits on his name... Being "Unemployed" is not notable, I'm not sure why that's noted in the infobox. This is PROMO, pure and simple. Oaktree b (talk) 16:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: He was arrested in 2017, when he was 10? In San Francisco? and he plays the triangle? Is this supposed to be serious? Oaktree b (talk) 16:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I tagged it for A7, this is silly. Oaktree b (talk) 16:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per Oaktree b. The WP:PERP is obviously a different person with the same name. Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. If there are WP:Reliable sources in Cantonese media, then cite them, otherwise this looks like either a poor attempt at promotion or a hoax. Edit history of article creator suggests the latter. The entirely non-Caucasian Wikishovel (talk) 17:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Keep it up, don’t delete it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.173.122.2 (talk) 15:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- KEEP.Article on Mr. Harrell should be retained. He had and continues to have a major impact on a large community of people world-wide. His YouTube channel has over 1,000,000 subscribers that would, no doubt, search for more information about Mr. Harrell here on Wikipedia and, presumably, donate towards Wikipedia's ongoing concern. In an age of misinformation, disinformation and no information, Wikipedia often serves as the single source of information on any given subject or figure. Wikipedia needs to keep this article up and, people who know more about Mr. Harrell, especially his two self-defense incidents, should be encouraged to enlarge the pieces content. TrailPrime (talk) 18:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Paul Harrell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Satisfies WP:BIO1E, every single reliable source are documenting about his death; and the event isn't significant enough to have an entry for him. ToadetteEdit (talk) 15:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Firearms, Internet, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I've heard of his death, but all sourcing is about his death. There isn't any coverage, nor can I find any, from before this time. Doesn't appear to be a notable youtuber, before passing on, which does not make you notable. Oaktree b (talk) 17:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete agree with nominator and Oaktree b. Xegma(talk) 18:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep or Merge or Redirect. Relative newbie here. Found his name in a meme & associated discussion. Didn't recognize it, so searched here. I suspect that others are in similar situations. Also, MSN in https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/what-happened-to-paul... says "He currently has close to a million [YouTube] subscribers." How many makes a person notable? KVWS — Preceding undated comment added 04:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Embassy of India, Ljubljana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Previous attempt at redirect was opposed and previous PROD tag removed. No secondary sources. Promotional. Fails WP:GNG. Anything useful can be covered at India–Slovenia relations. AusLondonder (talk) 14:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, India, and Slovenia. AusLondonder (talk) 14:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete entirely based on primary sources. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:07, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:39, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Chocamine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Sources don't establish notability, can't find any that do. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 14:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Products. Shellwood (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- weak keep: [19], [20], it's got some coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 14:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- A self-published book and a mention in a directory? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 15:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Black and White (rap group) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article may not be notable. Made searches and only found unreliable sources. The ruwiki article has many sources, but most of them are also from unreliable outlets. Roughly any reliable source to establish notability. ToadetteEdit (talk) 14:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Russia. Shellwood (talk) 14:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- (Attempt two) @ToadetteEdit: I thank you for starting this. If I may ask for clarification, how do we determine which articles and sources are legitimate? I'm am TOTALLY not opposed to this being deleted if you think it's the right decision but I just need some clarification to avoid this in the future. I thank you very much. I love editing Wikipedia, so any help you can give me is really great. JohnDVandevert (talk) 04:31, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Omar Abdul-Aziz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Nothing notable in his early career. He is still a young player and has not appeared in any official matches. EpicAdventurer (talk) 14:18, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Egypt. EpicAdventurer (talk) 14:18, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 05:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:02, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:02, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 18:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- TikTok Dabloons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
In my opinion- this article survived its last deletion discussion based more on rule technicalities rather than TikTok dabloons genuinely warranting an article. The article is essentially just "A bunch of TikTok users made up and joked about a fictional currency based on a funny internet image of a cat for 1-2 months"- hardly different from a Know Your Meme article covering any other similar brief trend.
The thin argument that this article could be considered significant is carried by the fact that the NYT, Verge, Mashable and Guardian all happened to cover the Dabloons meme during its 15 minutes of fame. As time has passed, there has been no sustained coverage and this article remains a stub. I think a deletion discussion should be revived- at best merge it into list of Internet phenomena Uelly (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Coverage last time was fine. I don't see anything past 2022 [21]. The world has moved on, but it was notable a few years ago. Seems to be a fad that came and went. Oaktree b (talk) 15:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, seems to be a classic case of WP:NOTNEWS. Just because sources exist doesn't mean this a notable subject, looks like it would easily fail WP:10YT. There has been no notable coverage since 2022. Esolo5002 (talk) 18:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- List of pievi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The contents look like a disambiguation page, yet none of these entries would be known under the name "Pieve" alone, so no disambiguation is required.
The name suggests it's a list of pievi. However, pievi were very numerous, and this list would be woefully incomplete if this is the goal. I don't think it's feasible or necessary for Wikipedia to have a list of pievi.
The descriptions refer to the present-day non-ecclesiastical administrative territorial entities named after these historic no-longer extant and non-notable ecclesiastical administrative territorial entities. A minority of the listed articles do describe the history of the related pievi, eg. Città della Pieve#History and Pieve di Cento#History. Daask (talk) 13:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Geography, and Italy. Daask (talk) 13:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment An option that I didn't consider in my proposal is a merge to Pieve in a new section "Toponyms", as I see has been done in some other language Wikipedias, eg br:Pieve#Lec'hioù. Daask (talk) 14:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merge to Pieve as suggested above by the nominator, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Anjum Sharma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:REFBOMB doesn't help matters and this draft doesn't meet WP:NACTOR. A recurring character in a film doesn't sometimes show notability. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Film, and India. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:24, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: at least 2 significant roles in notable productions so that deletion is not necessary in my opinion. Trimming of references is a cleanup issue. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- What roles? It is absolutely not close to meeting WP:NACTOR since there isn't any significant coverage about this person. If you really think trimming is the problem, then do it, because I see non notability and less clean up issue. We are arguing about meeting our general notability guidelines and how the content matches with the sources. Additionally, having two significant roles isn't the problem because it's less of WP:NACTOR, which is a
an essayguide to help us in knowing how possible can a person be notable. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 10:55, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- What roles? It is absolutely not close to meeting WP:NACTOR since there isn't any significant coverage about this person. If you really think trimming is the problem, then do it, because I see non notability and less clean up issue. We are arguing about meeting our general notability guidelines and how the content matches with the sources. Additionally, having two significant roles isn't the problem because it's less of WP:NACTOR, which is a
- It's not an essay it's a policy guideline as it states at top of the page, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, it is a guideline. As for
If you really think trimming is the problem, then do it
, that's asked so kindly, thank you, but I am not the one who sees an issue here. As for what the roles are, at least roles in the recurring cast in Mizapur and in the main cast of Sultan of Delhi. For the rest, the guideline is clear but I am not sure I understand what you say. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, it is a guideline. As for
- It's not an essay it's a policy guideline as it states at top of the page, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep notable person, yes it's need to cleanup references. Xegma(talk) 17:02, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Embassy of Moldova, Berlin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unreferenced article that merely is a list of ambassadors. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 12:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Germany, and Moldova. LibStar (talk) 12:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to some article about German-Moldovan relations, don't know which one, and salvage Andre🚐 18:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete nothing on it. Xegma(talk) 14:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. ✗plicit 23:28, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Tom Smail (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Articles for the New York Times makes no mention of the subject, most of the other sources are merely passing mentions. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Jamiebuba (talk) 13:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Music, and United Kingdom. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 13:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Removed New York Times article, added further sources to add to proof of WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV (The Times, BBC Radio 4) AscanioB (talk) 14:10, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- further mentions from Tatler and The Standard have been included. AscanioB (talk) 14:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:58, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I have not found enough info about him for a biographical article. He is named in articles about his works, and in some of those the main emphasis is on his wife's story. We need at least two sources that are about him, not simply naming him. Lamona (talk) 05:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- added his 2013 interview with Gramophone and parts of his biography from Universal Edition AscanioB (talk) 12:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:37, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The Gramophone is interview (primary) and the Universal Edition text is taken from his own website [22]; Tatler is a brief summary and photos, and the Standard is similarly a short mention. LizardJr8 (talk) 22:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- Bishop Wilkins College (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The subject doesn't appear to have significant coverage in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia. toweli (talk) 13:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Religion, Christianity, United Kingdom, England, and Wales. toweli (talk) 13:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV. Xegma(talk) 14:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete not only the lack of WP:SIGCOV and the fact that there is not a single source cited in the article, I found little to prove widespread, independent secondary coverage. GuardianH (talk) 19:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Lou Sticca (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I have nominated this article for deletion as it is clearly an article written to promote the subject, his business. It has been edited by the subject and people close to him as an advertisement which is strictly not allowed on Wikipedia. JimmethMM (talk) 13:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete need more significant coverages and also looks like an autobiography. Xegma(talk) 13:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Football, Italy, and Australia. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 14:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 18:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- 2022–23 Kapfenberger SV season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
season article for second tier austrian side. has not been updated since before the season started and is clearly unfit for mainspace. I find no evidence that such an article could pass WP:GNG but should others disagree, moving to draftspace may be more appropriate. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related pages as they are also not currently fit for mainspace and show no evidence of notability:
- 2022–23 Grazer AK season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- 2022–23 FC Blau-Weiß Linz season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- 2022–23 Floridsdorfer AC season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- 2022–23 FC Admira Wacker Mödling season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- 2022–23 FC Liefering season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 14:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Procedural close We've been through this before, different football clubs seasons can't be bundled and should not be bundled. You have to nominated them individually. Govvy (talk) 19:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all – The articles were formatted practically identically, are incomplete, have few sources and do not demonstrate WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 05:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom, although in future such bundling is not...ideal. GiantSnowman 18:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, they can be saved. Liefering's article, for example, is the season in which Red Bull Salzburg striker Karim Konaté rose to stardom. Isn't that worth covering?--EpicAdventurer (talk) 18:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- List of mayors of Barboursville, West Virginia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A mostly unsourced and thus unverifiable list of non-notable mayors of a "village". Fails WP:NLIST. AusLondonder (talk) 12:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, and West Virginia. AusLondonder (talk) 12:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: The list seems to be referenced by Ref 1 (HMdb.org), but still this appears to be a village of 4000 people with non-notable mayors. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: the nominator and second seem to be conflating the population of Barboursville with the notability of this list. The word "village" doesn't determine notability; populated places have generally been deemed notable, irrespective of their size. Additionally Barboursville is an incorporated municipality under the laws of West Virginia, and under West Virginia Code § 8-1-3 Barboursville has been a "class III city" since 1960, and would have been a "class IV town or village" before that. It was also the county seat from 1813 to 1888. As an incorporated municipality, a list of Barboursville's mayors is appropriate, and could be included in the article about Barboursville, without having to demonstrate their individual notability; here, the list has been split out into its own article, because it is fairly long, covering over two hundred years. As a separate issue, the city's own official publications are not independent, and therefore do not count toward establishing the significance, and thus notability of its individual mayors; but as official government publications they may be considered authoritative as to the names of the persons who held that position and at what points in time. I believe that better sources are available for most or all of the mayors, and will visit the library today to find out. P Aculeius (talk) 13:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I am not suggesting Barboursville itself is non-notable. I do on the other hand believe a list of all mayors of a relatively small locality is not notable. AusLondonder (talk) 14:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Recurring Saturday Night Live characters and sketches introduced 1976–77 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NLIST. There are about 40(!) more of these lists, one for each season, but I refuse to bundle them all herein. (One Verdict should rule them all, and in the darkness bind them.) List of recurring Saturday Night Live characters and sketches and Recurring Saturday Night Live characters and sketches (listed alphabetically) are quite sufficient. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The two "sufficient" pages you mention are mostly links to the pages you want to delete. 173.66.241.40 (talk) 12:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- So? What's your point? Clarityfiend (talk) 00:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merge to List of recurring Saturday Night Live characters and sketches. There is simply no need for so many pages. Esolo5002 (talk) 18:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merge I think these could be in a single large list or grouped by decade rather than as dozens of season-based pages. The concept is fine since there are a lot of notable sketches (and sketches/characters with enough coverage to warrant mention in a list but not a standalone article), but the ones that have only appeared twice or otherwise lack context should be trimmed. Reywas92Talk 22:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- ThorVG (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Google News yield no result, This article sounds like an WP:PROMO for this. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 10:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 10:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- I have a few technical pages in my watch list and noticed that the user who created that page has edited adjacent pages, adding links to ThorVG in the see also sections.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Skia_Graphics_Engine&diff=prev&oldid=1244522445
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cairo_(graphics)&diff=prev&oldid=1244521334 CoderThomasB (talk) 05:18, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Miminity@CoderThomasB Hello, thank you for reviewing. This is one of the free open-source graphics projects run by a non-profit organization, made possible entirely through dedicated contributions from people around the world. I believe their efforts are well-deserved, just want to clarify the development history. I only added it to Skia/Cairo pages because it is good to know by people because it is closely aligned with the projects from a technical perspective. If you think it seems inappropriate by wiki policy, please let me know removing it again.
- I'm having a hard time identifying the specific inappropriate points since I'm not fully enough familiar with wiki, I would appreciate it if you could point out the issues in the content. I just really hope to make it work. Thanks. Wuming421 (talk) 06:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- @CoderThomasB Just googled: https://www.reddit.com/r/opengl/comments/18g9hc7/svgopengl_library_for_embedded_gpu/ Wuming421 (talk) 06:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- reddit is not a reliable source see WP:REDDIT Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 06:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- @CoderThomasB Please have a see how relevant it is among the technicians.
- https://www.reddit.com/r/opengl/comments/18g9hc7/svgopengl_library_for_embedded_gpu/
- https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-drivers/x-org-drm/1369959-cairo-graphics-library-drops-opengl-support-after-a-decade-of-inactivity/page3
- https://github.com/blend2d/blend2d/issues/3
- https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxnextgen/comments/1cx5v00/the_end_of_an_era_gnu_dictatorship_no_more/ Wuming421 (talk) 06:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wuming421, you've already been told this but forums like reddit, discussion boards and social media are not reliable sources to establish notability or, really, any facts. Liz Read! Talk! 07:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, I removed the links from Cairo/Skia. Is there any other issue with the ThorVG addition? Wuming421 (talk) 07:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- To be honest, this is really the hardest part to understand, in addition a new page. Because In that same manner, I also couldn't find any reliable sources from Skia/Cairo pages and links in See Also sections. They really don't have any information about relationship each other in both pages. (though I know, they are fully related/comparative each others including thorvg, so makes sense to me.) Wuming421 (talk) 07:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wuming421, you've already been told this but forums like reddit, discussion boards and social media are not reliable sources to establish notability or, really, any facts. Liz Read! Talk! 07:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was speedy delete. PhilKnight (talk) 11:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Muhammad Usman Malik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NACTOR. Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Otherwise fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Is WP:ADMASQ. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 10:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Pakistan. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 10:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Muhammadusmann 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 10:28, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- I think this can be speedied, I will do so, if no-one objects. PhilKnight (talk) 10:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- @PhilKnight I woudl not have started this AfD had I seen the SPI previously. I suggest CSD and speedy close 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 10:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, I have speedied the article. I will close this AfD as soon as I figure out the templates. PhilKnight (talk) 11:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- Seventh Doctor comic stories (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The non-table part of the article is unsourced, and the data in the table exists in List of non-televised Seventh Doctor stories (though that needs sourcing too), so I think this article should be deleted (P.S. I more or less copied the data from this article to that article, and it seems that might have been against guidelines, edit-so I have reverted it already) DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 10:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Comics and animation. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 10:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Dmitry Budnik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:BLP1E that lacks WP:SIGCOV. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 08:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Russia. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 08:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Kaalam Raasina Kathalu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NFILM. The film was moved to draft but recreated by another IP (likely the same person -- since it ia low budget film, WP:COI?)
The reason it was moved to draft is that all sources relate to Akash Puri releasing the film's trailer. This article shouldn't exist because the entire article is banking on the effect of Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Film#Marketing.
This source shows Akash Puri being given flowers beforing watching the film's trailer on a laptop [23]. How is any of this notable?
Regarding Bru Times, the source is obviously unreliable and a compilation of many sources. Although you may think it is a review, it says Upon its release, "Kaalam Raasina Kathalu" received critical acclaim for its storytelling, direction, and performances. Critics praised the film for its nuanced portrayal of complex human emotions and the depth of its characters.
If you want to know wheter Bru Times is reliable read another review like [24], ("has been praised", etc.) prove it is unreliable. DareshMohan (talk) 07:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 8. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 08:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:23, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of Telugu films of 2024 -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:28, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Johann Nepomuk von Lobkovicz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The 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)
- 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)
- Comments: It’s unclear if he had an actual career, or any secular political power. If either of these questions are answered yes, then he’s notable. If both are answered in the negative, then he fails WP:POL. Bearian (talk) 02:07, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Strong keep - He was the imperial-royal chamberlain , a court office that qualifies under WP:NPOL as a senior court official and the chief secretary of the royal household. Moreover, he also meets WP:ANYBIO criteria as he has an entry in a country's standard national biographical dictionary, the Austrian Biographical Encyclopedia (Österreichisches Biographisches Lexikon 1815–1950). I've expanded the article. Thank you. 223.204.71.128 (talk) 13:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- cswiki says that it was a service function in the imperial rooms, and from the 1620s it was an honorary office. This cannot be called a political function. The second argument looks better, but I prefer to let others judge. FromCzech (talk) 13:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- @FromCzech, Yes I agree, not like Korean inner court system; it may be an honorary office, but it can be notable. Thank you so much for agreeing with me on the second argument. Cheer 223.204.71.128 (talk) 13:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- In Southeast Asia's absolute monarchy systems, the head of the royal household was historically a minister of the interior. In Thailand and Myanmar, the head of the royal chamber is referred to as the "Hmanan Atwin-wun" (minister of the royal chamber) in Myanmar and the "Chief of the Royal Household Bureau" (หัวหน้าองค์การพระราชพิธี) in Thailand. These positions have the right to attend the royal parliament (Hluttaw). This is why I believe the role of imperial chamberlain in Western contexts may be similar to that of a minister, and positions held by ministers are often automatically considered notable on Wikipedia under WP:NPOL. Thanks. 223.204.71.128 (talk) 13:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- @FromCzech, Yes I agree, not like Korean inner court system; it may be an honorary office, but it can be notable. Thank you so much for agreeing with me on the second argument. Cheer 223.204.71.128 (talk) 13:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- cswiki says that it was a service function in the imperial rooms, and from the 1620s it was an honorary office. This cannot be called a political function. The second argument looks better, but I prefer to let others judge. FromCzech (talk) 13:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Indeed, meets WP:ANYBIO with an entry in a national dictionary of biography. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:13, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Agreed that no notability are found for this person and that being in a noble family does not make him notable. Priscilladfb16 (talk) 06:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note to admin: This account is newly created and appears to be used solely for the purpose of deleting articles via AfD as a weapon. Regardless of whether the subject is clearly notable, the editor ignored all comments and points from other editors and consistently voted for 'auto delete' (see his vote history). This behavior harms Wikipedia's pillars and notable topics. What is the community value for these AfDs? Thanks. 223.204.71.128 (talk) 09:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- 223.204.71.128, if you are talking about Priscilladfb16, they have been commenting in a lot of AFDs recently but they have been editing since June. You will need to provide evidence/diffs of something nefarious going on and not just casting aspersions. Also, in the English-speaking world, Priscilla is a women's name so the "his" should probably be a "her". Liz Read! Talk! 01:18, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note to admin: This account is newly created and appears to be used solely for the purpose of deleting articles via AfD as a weapon. Regardless of whether the subject is clearly notable, the editor ignored all comments and points from other editors and consistently voted for 'auto delete' (see his vote history). This behavior harms Wikipedia's pillars and notable topics. What is the community value for these AfDs? Thanks. 223.204.71.128 (talk) 09:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Keep Due to gift after noble action got immensely rich (see other language wiki for the story which is related)[[25]] (German ref). Plus WP:ANYBIO. --Axisstroke (talk) 07:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Assessment of available source material would be helpful for determining actual notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)- @Seraphimblade The above discussion is very clear, with one delete vote and three strong keep votes from experienced editors. Does it really need to be relisted? What are your concerns? 223.206.45.210 (talk) 20:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep passes WP:ANYBIO with an entry in the Austrian Dictionary of National Biography. Mccapra (talk) 10:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Bùi Đình Dĩnh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Have been unable to locate significant coverage in secondary sources, despite looking through several articles in Vietnamese. Appears to fail WP:BASIC. AusLondonder (talk) 08:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bilateral relations, Vietnam, and Russia. AusLondonder (talk) 08:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete nothing on it. Xegma(talk) 13:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Fails WP:BIO. I found a source like this but it's a 1 line mention. LibStar (talk) 00:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Etienne Uzac (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:SIGCOV. Routine coverage of court visits. No other coverage. Fails WP:BIO. scope_creepTalk 09:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and France. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Crime, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:04, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Finvasia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
An article about a finance company. Previous instances were soft-deleted at AfD (January 2022) and deleted at AfD in April 2024; this instance was created by a new editor, rejected at AfC in July, then moved into main space by the article creator. The present article content lists acquisitions and licenses which fall under WP:ORGTRIV; the most substantial references are the interview pieces in Times Now and Cyprus Business News, but these are presenting a company-aspirational view. I don't see sufficient coverage to demonstrate attained notability. AllyD (talk) 08:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Punjab. AllyD (talk) 08:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Concurring with nom, and also with the previous instances of soft-deletions at AfD. Although future notability might be possible from what seems to be emerging scandals about tech breaks coming to light. GuardianH (talk) 19:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Amir Eid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Doesn't appear to meet WP:NMUSICBIO and WP:NACTOR. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Music, and Egypt. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. There are some articles about him. One at Billboard, 01/9/2024 - From The Rolling Stones to ‘RIVO’: Amir Eid on the Intersection Between Acting and Music - By Mayya Al Ogail, and then there's Cairo Scene, Jul 18, 2024 - Cairokee Lead Singer Amir Eid Releases First Chapter of Solo EP ‘Roxi’ and Ahram Online , Saturday 3 Aug 2024 - Cairokee Amir Eid debut solo EP Roxi featured in Times Square billboard to mention a few. I'm satisfied it meets the requirements. in saying that, the page needs a whole lot of work. I can see why it attracted a deletion nomination. It seems it was hastily put together. If people put work into it, it will turn out to be a worthwhile article. Karl Twist (talk) 12:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- The first source you cited, from Billboard, appears to be an interview. The second is from n unreliable source, Cairo Scene, and it's a music release announcement, which we often count as PR. Source 3 is good. All I can see in the article is about the band, and if possible, should be merged and redirected to the band's article Cairokee. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 04:53, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Shaykh Ashabul Yamin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Clearly, the case of WP:BLP1E involves sources that are based on a single event, his death. If significant sources from before his death can be found, then the article can be kept. GrabUp - Talk 06:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bangladesh and Biography. GrabUp - Talk 06:37, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete non-notable person. Xegma(talk) 13:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Franco Spitale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:BLP1E for only being known for winning a poker contest, which is the only content in this article. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗
06:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Argentina. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Non-notable person, lacking WP:SIGCOV outside specialist poker websites. Also tagging other articles/unlikely redirects created by the same user, for the same reason. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 17:39, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The article should now be less confusing and also with more logical highlight on the fact that the tournament in itself should render notability as it's the second largest tourny at the World Series of Poker. Maybe it could be recreated with the tournament as the main article with the winner (Spitale) being just a subsection. PsychoticIncall (talk) 14:34, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- I suggest the latter, especially considering WP:BLP1E, so probably merging.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗
15:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- I suggest the latter, especially considering WP:BLP1E, so probably merging.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus, if this article is Merged, what would the target article be?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:24, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - I don't think a side-tournament at a WSOP is notable enough for its own article, either. Maybe a sub-section of the WSOP article could cover that, with Spitale getting a mention. I strongly suggest PsychoticIncall read our WP:NOTABILITY guidelines, especially WP:NPEOPLE and WP:NEVENT. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 10:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV need more sources. Xegma(talk) 13:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. The widespread, secondary independent coverage required by policy isn't there, as evidenced by the lack of WP:SIGCOV. GuardianH (talk) 19:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete not notable. Alon9393 (talk) 20:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Justin R. Begnaud (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Nominating for deletion as a BEFORE check does not show any significant coverage of the article subject. I am also unable to locate within any of the references used in the article, Evidence of significant coverage. Most of the article is entirely unsourced and appears to constitute original research. There is no secondary coverage available to substantiate many of the claims made. The article would have to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopaedic and I do not believe there is sufficient sourcing out there to do so. This means deletion is I believe the most appropriate option available. It is possible that some of the works this man has been a producer for our notable however notability is not inherited and he would still need to meet the criteria set out at WP:NPRODUCER, which he does not. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sinduria (caste) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article is copied from Chitraguptavanshi Kayastha and it has been mixed with two castes i.e. Bania and Kayastha. Both are different castes. Kayastha are considered higher and forward and they are unrelated to Bania. Moreover, the article is an orphan as well as completely uncited! TheProEditor11 (talk) 04:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. TheProEditor11 (talk) 04:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete nothing on it. Xegma(talk) 13:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - per nom (except that I cannot see that it is a direct copy from Chitraguptavanshi Kayastha). LizardJr8 (talk) 22:24, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Trapped: Haitian Nights (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I PROD'd this article but it was de-PROD'd with a note to bring it to AFD so that's what I'm doing. When I did a search for sources, I just found IMDb and streaming services, along with the Wikipedia article. It looks like a direct-to-video production so I'm doubtful that there are any reviews or articles on reception of the film. There is not even a plot summary here. But I'm sure if reviews are out there, someone will bring them to this discussion. It just looks like a B-level (or Z-level) movie. Liz Read! Talk! 04:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Liz Read! Talk! 04:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Coverage in a recent edition of The Black Guy Dies First: Black Horror Cinema from Fodder to Oscar p. 160-161; a redirect to the director should be considered anyway.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Haiti-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- I've added a few things for verification and a link to the book. I'd rather keep this, although coverage is sparse, one source is very significant; and notable cast and director contribute to the notability of the film, which was not, apparently, a straight-to-video release. It's probably what can be called a B or a Z movie but I don't think that pages about such films are necessarily a bad idea. A redirect to its director is absolutely warranted in my view so that I am strongly opposed to the deletion of the page. Thanks.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: No sources, no claim to notability Kingsmasher678 (talk) 14:24, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- No sources????? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to the director, Jean-Claude La Marre. The TV Guide source is a database listing that doesn't go in depth, Historical dictionary of African American cinema only has passing mentions in entries for the crew, the Parle article makes a passing mention when talking about Kenya Moore opening a hair salon, and Culture Crypt appears to be a self-published review. I don't think we're close to meeting WP:GNG here. hinnk (talk) 23:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Velappaya Mahadevar temple (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
no RS found found based on a google search. Sohom (talk) 04:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Hinduism, and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I also found nothing. Relativity ⚡️ 19:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- I am still at a delete stance. Citation 1 is just a list of a whole bunch of temples. Citation 2 dedicates exactly seventeen words to the temple and just says its location. The legend of the temple is not going to help contribute to notability much. I don't know about citation four but it's a census which does not give me hope for the amount of SIGCOV it has. Citation 5 is just a list of temples, I have questions about the reliability of citations 6 and 7, and I don't know about citation 8. Relativity ⚡️ 02:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- retain this article because this article deals with the temple among the 108 Shiva Temples in India and as per Wikipedia guidelines it is enough for an article with three lines and subsequent wikipedians improve it. பொதுஉதவி (talk) 12:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Just added a few references and more info to the article. More seems to be available since there are published works containing this topic. The article now passes WP:GNG. Rasnaboy (talk) 19:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Noting that non of the sources added are considered RS. Most of them are listicals or travel guides that provide little to no reliable information. Sohom (talk) 20:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- draftify is the best option as, currently the article lacks historical context, reliable sources, and much more QueerEcofeminist🌈 16:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Considered in the WP:LOCAL, it has Reliable sources ~~ Spworld2 (talk) 11:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- WP:LOCAL is not a policy. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:05, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a difference of opinion on the quality of sources. They need to be reliable sources that provide SIGCOV, not passing mentions. Also, User:பொதுஉதவி, I'd like to now what "Wikipedia guidelines" you are referring to in your Keep opinion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: sorry but without any reliable sources available, this temple is not notable. The pleas for keep unfortunately do not relate to any of Wikipedia's standards. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 01:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Australia (Mango album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Seems to be original research, doesn't appear to meet GNG, couldn't find sources to bring it up to notability, from my searching. StewdioMACK (talk) 04:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. StewdioMACK (talk) 04:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete lack of significant coverages need to add more sources. Xegma(talk) 13:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 01:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- David Scott (video game developer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The sources provided are WP:PASSINGMENTION quick google search reveals no info about him entirely which make this article fails WP:NBIO Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 03:28, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Video games. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 03:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Looks like he is not like giving interviews. Vitaly Zdanevich (talk) 07:21, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: No claim to notability. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 14:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- Galactic Theme (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NALBUM. Sources are announcements of the album or unreliable. CNMall41 (talk) 19:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- The only source without byline in the article is the New Music Weekly and that's how the website is. I've added more refs by the way. 102.88.68.119 (talk) 11:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Refs added. Like Vanderwaal said, the sources are reliable. Also, the album has received multiple reviews from reliable publications per WP:NALBUM. 102.88.68.119 (talk) 11:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 02:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: The sources added make it pass WP:NALBUM Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 02:44, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: This needs a closer look hence my assessment.
A 146 words articles from ThisDay does not constitute as in-depth coverage for me. Even though it has a byline, I have concerns that it is a paid job.
I have no opinion on whether London Daily News has on online presence after being defunct but the byline in this article clearly states that it was written by a “LDN Guest Post” aka contributor and is likely to have been written and submitted by the subject of the article.
This 193 words articles from Sheen Magazine credited the photo to Johnel. This is very, very likely to be a paid post.
This article on Teen Ink is clearly written by a contributor named Jon who’s profile there would remove any doubt of that being Johnel hence this fails WP:INDEPENDENT.
This articles reads like a press release to me and so fails INDEPENDENT. Further search shows that you can indeed submit a post to NMW for some few bucks (see here).
This compilation from Encomium reads just fine to me but cannot on itself establish notability as it is a marginally reliable source (according to WP:NGRS). Best, Reading Beans 16:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- So you're saying that the artist is a Journalist too? Maybe you should include that in the main article and back it up with a reliable source if you think so.
- Understandably, it's your opinion, but to assume and conclude that some of the sources are written by a notable artist himself and also disregard the sources that are obviously independent even when there is no indication in any of the sources that any payment was made nor it's an advertisement is just sad. This was submitted as a draft and accepted once with just one attempt because it's obviously notable. But it looks like until a 10,000-word written article from The New York Times or BBC is provided, then you might reconsider. 105.112.209.5 (talk) 20:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- You can sign up here if you wish to contribute to Teen Ink. This shows how posts are ranked in Teen Ink. Liz, I am not implying that he is a journalist, I am saying that he is writing and submitting to these outlets! I don’t think that this needs rocket science to achieve. To the IP, a 10,000-word written article from The New York Times or BBC would make me to reconsider. Best, Reading Beans 09:24, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like more consideration of the sources here since opinion is divided. I don't think a similarity in names is any evidence that an 18 year old musician has somehow become a journalist. Let's assess their value and not assume this is autobiographical writing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Daman and Diu Police (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Daman and Diu Police is now merged with Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu Police. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 02:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 8. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 02:48, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Interstate 75 Kentucky shooting (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No notability. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Elijah have you tagged the wrong article? I'm currently watching a live stream about this with 55K viewers and tons of news article now and to come. Regardless, let's wait for the situation to end first before determining notability. Kiwiz1338 (talk) 01:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed Bloxzge 025 (talk) 01:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- And now a video from Fox on YouTube has over 200,000 views. I'm sure more info will be released dude just give it a few days Bloxzge 025 (talk) 01:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Plus it's a mass shooting since as we know 4 are injured, why would we delete a mass shooting without all the info. Jjbomb (talk) 02:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- And now a video from Fox on YouTube has over 200,000 views. I'm sure more info will be released dude just give it a few days Bloxzge 025 (talk) 01:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- No. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 02:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed Bloxzge 025 (talk) 01:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- it's literately a loose shooter situation how is this not notable 2601:902:8000:96C0:10EB:E971:D89B:8A13 (talk) 05:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Incident still under investigation, and while deleting the article over no deaths or it being a "small incident" is somewhat reasonable, it's still on national news and currently under investigation on injuries, and the search of suspect; whether if he's alive or not. If the news start to die down, then probably yes delete. WikiinstA2001 (talk) 17:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep It's not even a day old, your deleting an article with information still coming out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloxzge 025 (talk • contribs)
- Keep Why would you want to delete a article about a mass shooting that injured 4, 2 days after a highschool shooting — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjbomb (talk • contribs)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 8. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 01:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy keep Literally just happened of course nothing is known yet --Chicken4War (talk) 02:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy keep per above, national news coverage, also just happened.Thief-River-Faller (talk) 02:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The shooting happened very recently, more information will come out. Koiramainen (talk) 02:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I believe this article was a bit premature. That said, this is currently making national news. ( A B C D E F) Will let others determine if it is notable enough or not. --Super Goku V (talk) 02:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The shooting only happened today and the article will be expanded in the future. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 02:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. Events are in a weird position where making them too early can be crystal balling, but nominating them for deletion too early is also crystal balling. However from my experience in this topic area this one seems relatively unusual in several regards, the type of things that garner long term coverage, so I would be willing to bet it is notable (wouldn't bet my life on it). In either case short of banning breaking news articles this will never be solved, and this article which may be notable is only a microcosm of the issue. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. No fatalities, just another routine shooting in the USA. WWGB (talk) 03:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Routine shooting, I don't see lasting coverage arising from this. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 03:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merge into Interstate 75 in Kentucky and Laurel County, Kentucky history section; redirect to the List of mass shootings in the United States in 2024 after merger; though it should be renamed 2024 Interstate 75 Kentucky shooting first, before merger and redirection. -- 64.229.88.34 (talk) 04:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete Only more notable than another shooting along an Interstate this week because of it happening so soon after a much higher-profile incident.Raskuly (talk) 04:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)- Delete. Mass shootings are common in the US every day. Articles here are created only for the major ones. Gianluigi02 (talk) 06:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Made news, has sigcov. We should have an article on it. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 14:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Is there anything notable about this incident other than the fact it happened after a high-profile active shooting incident and it was described as an "active-shooter" situation? If this had happened before that I doubt it would've received nearly as much coverage. Should shooting incidents in the United States have articles made about them simply because they followed a much more high profile incident even if nothing about them in particular is notable on their own?Raskuly (talk) 15:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)- The fact that there is a big manhunt and that it’s all over the national news. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 23:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Has made international news and ongoing search for perpetrator. Autarch (talk) 15:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Extremely extensive ongoing national coverage, including, e.g., in the New York Times
- https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/07/us/shooting-kentucky-highway.html
- Seems to be obviously a notable national story, surprised we are even having this discussion 2603:7081:1300:AB21:34A2:3CFB:3DAB:5482 (talk) 23:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy keep – it is a very notable especially for eastern Kentucky where this kind of stuff doesn’t happen. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 23:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Mass shootings are always at least regionally notable. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 23:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- I’ll add that it’s all over national outlets such as NewsNation. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 23:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Well yeah, every mass shooting is going to be notable. Does that mean that every single one needs an article, no! There have been several shootings in the counties round me, I've heard of every one, but they don't deserve articles. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 21:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I've also seen it here on Canadian news. Koiramainen (talk) 00:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- same. CTV news has an article Bloxzge 025 (talk) 00:36, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Even more evidence that it needs to be kept. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 01:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- same. CTV news has an article Bloxzge 025 (talk) 00:36, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I've also seen it here on Canadian news. Koiramainen (talk) 00:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or Merge: No casualities per above
- Mass shootings are always at least regionally notable. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 23:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- QalasQalas (talk) 01:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- There has also been shootings with no fatalities with Wikipedia articles, so no fatalities is a bad reason Bloxzge 025 (talk) 02:41, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. By definition, all sources writing about this incident are primary sources, since they date from the time of the event. Wait until authors have started publishing secondary sources, which discuss the event by reviewing the primary sources from a time well into the future. Nyttend (talk) 02:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I MIGHT (maybe might) be okay with merging this into a history of I-75 or Laurel County article. But news organizations all over the world are publishing articles about this. That to me sounds like secondary sources to me. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 03:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I’m no expert but CTV News (a Canadian television network) isn’t going to have reporters hundreds of miles away in Kentucky, which by the way isn’t even in Canada); so CTV definitely isn’t a primary source. Your primary sources are going to be number 1 the Laurel County Sheriffs Department; and number 2; local news media (eg. WYMT; WKYT; etc.); and maybe national sources within the United States. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 03:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- And if you don’t believe what I’m saying: go to https://www.ctvnews.ca and go on that website’s search bar and just search “Kentucky” onto it and you’ll see several stories relating to the shooting. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 03:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/suspect-in-i-75-shootings-eludes-law-enforcement-for-a-second-night-in-rural-kentucky-1.7029547 Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 03:36, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Plus; with the manhunt still underway, it is still to a certain extent considered a current event. Which means that information can change rapidly over short periods of time. While I am NOT a member of WP:CURRENTEVENTS; I do know their policy of requesting deletion discussions, and PROD tags, and speedy tags to not be started for a few hours (after creation) until more information comes. I do understand however that we are beyond that timeframe technically. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 03:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/suspect-in-i-75-shootings-eludes-law-enforcement-for-a-second-night-in-rural-kentucky-1.7029547 Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 03:36, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'd like to add United Kingdom sources reporting on the event also: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/sep/08/kentucky-police-say-multiple-people-shot-in-active-shooter-situation as well as RTE in Ireland: https://www.rte.ie/news/2024/0908/1468951-us-shooting-kentucky/ Thief-River-Faller (talk) 19:02, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- And if you don’t believe what I’m saying: go to https://www.ctvnews.ca and go on that website’s search bar and just search “Kentucky” onto it and you’ll see several stories relating to the shooting. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 03:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I’m no expert but CTV News (a Canadian television network) isn’t going to have reporters hundreds of miles away in Kentucky, which by the way isn’t even in Canada); so CTV definitely isn’t a primary source. Your primary sources are going to be number 1 the Laurel County Sheriffs Department; and number 2; local news media (eg. WYMT; WKYT; etc.); and maybe national sources within the United States. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 03:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I MIGHT (maybe might) be okay with merging this into a history of I-75 or Laurel County article. But news organizations all over the world are publishing articles about this. That to me sounds like secondary sources to me. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 03:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I was initially in favor of deletion, but due to how this has not been resolved due to the still ongoing manhunt, I believe I was being much too brisk in voting for deletion. It is uncommon for an active shooter to not be apprehended or found for so long, even though there is the possibility the perpetrator has been lying dead somewhere since day one. This multi-day manhunt and the subsequent international reporting on the issue has warranted an article. Raskuly (talk) 21:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Judicial supervision (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested BLAR. Should redirect to the appropriate entry in Glossary of French criminal law. All of the entries here come from terms in Wikipedia articles that aren't actually used in the sources/topics that they're describing. There are no title matches and I don't think the entries here meet WP:DABRELATED or MOS:DABENTRY.
- The articles on parole, probation, and judicial review do not contain the phrase "judicial supervision".
- The article Civil procedure in South Africa uses the term twice in the context of Jaftha v Schoeman and Standard Bank v Saunderson, neither of which use the phrase "judicial supervision".
- The phrase "judicial supervision of executive acts" links to Philip P. Barbour, a U.S. Supreme Court Justice in the 1800s. The article uses the phrase in an uncited paragraph: "he authored dissents in Kendall v. United States ex rel. Stokes (1838) and Holmes v. Jennison (1840). These two dissents sought to diminish federal authority by supporting Jacksonian political aspirations and opposing restrictions to state sovereignty. Kendall dealt with judicial supervision of executive acts" (emphasis added).
- Supreme Court of the Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic does state that "judicial supervision" was a function of the Court, but this is a start class article and there's no indication that that translation is referring to a proper legal term of art. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Disambiguations, South Africa, France, Lithuania, and United States of America. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, but this is a case for a WP:BCA, not a disambiguation page, as these are not ambiguous concepts coincidentally sharing a name. BD2412 T 02:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, The nomination for deletion is without merit. See see my arguments in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law#Judicial supervision. This person decided to escalate the issue without giving a chance to other people to weigh in. --Altenmann >talk 03:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Workers Vanguard Party of Kurdistan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 15:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Draftify It should not be in mainspace. Ben Azura (talk) 08:35, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:33, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep – Reliable sources exist. Dratifying an old article is a waste of time. Yue🌙 04:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- List of career achievements by Stephen Curry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
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)
- 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)
- In addition, the most pertient info is already found in the main article. Let'srun (talk) 13:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- 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)
- Comment Some relevant policies are WP:INDISCRIMINATE:
WP:NOTSTATS: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.
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)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.
- 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:
—Bagumba (talk) 15:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)Wikipedia articles usually rely on material from reliable secondary sources.
- Comment Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is a recent related AfD on a Hall of Famer who transcends basketball that was closed as "delete".—Bagumba (talk) 07:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment After reviewing the page again, I went on to delete large chunks of trivial content that lacked merit and/or were unsubstantiated. All StatMuse references and any inferable content from sites such as ClutchPoints and Basketball Reference (database-searched content) have also been removed to retain credibility and avoid the violation of WP:NOTSTATS. Furthermore, franchise and college-based records have been tabulated to enhance readability. It is fair to say that the current version is far sleeker and concrete with credible citations (with the exception of a handful of records which I am in the process of finding the right sources for). As the page's latest version also shows, Curry has an extensive list of notable records and milestones. Incorporating them in one page seems like a more organised and logical approach to me. In addition, it is common knowledge that Curry, like Bryant and James, is generally considered an all-time great with a significant impact on the sport. However, the achievements pages of the latter-two (Bryant's and James') have a wide range of unverified content, particularly Bryant's, that still stand without any corrections being made. The notion of whether Curry warrants a standalone records page may not seem like a "no-brainer", but its closure seems unjustified if each factor in this comment is considered in totality.—Beemer03 (talk) 14:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Keep Treating this on its individual merits and making no comparison with the Kareem Abdul-Jabbar discussion. On balance, this subject is a desirable and valid WP:SPINOFF; desirable because the corresponding section of the main Stephen Curry article is very long; and valid because I can find existing references which discuss his achievements and records in a standalone manner [26] [27]. Most comments above represent problems which can and should be solved by improvement, not deletion. Aspirex (talk) 21:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Mystic Mountain (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article about a film, not reliably sourced as passing WP:NFILM. As always, every film is not automatically entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because it exists, and instead films must show WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them in third-party reliable sources -- but this is referenced entirely to the filmmaker's own self-published content about it, and makes absolutely no notability claim (awards, etc.) above and beyond "film that exists". And even on a WP:BEFORE search, I mostly found more primary sources -- all I found for GNG-worthy reliable source coverage was two hits in the local media of the city where the director was living at the time, of the "local man tries to make film" and "local man screens film locally" varieties, which is not enough by itself in the absence of any wider attention. Bearcat (talk) 16:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Nepal, and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 16:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of Tibetan-language films: a list that needs expansion and update (it stops in 2007 and the entry should be added); other sources exist to allow verification. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. Xegma(talk) 14:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sweetness (upcoming film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:TOOSOON article about an as yet unreleased film, not reliably sourced as the subject of sufficient production coverage to be exempted from the main notability criteria for films at WP:NFILM.
There are just six footnotes here, of which two are the self-published Instagram posts of one of the producers, one is a press release self-published by a funding body, and one is a glancing namecheck of the film's existence in a "submitted article" (i.e. really just another press release) about the overall film and television industry in the region where this film was shot, none of which are support for notability.
That leaves just two hits that actually represent reliable and GNG-building coverage about this film, which is not enough coverage to exempt a film from the standard film notability criteria -- the special WP:NFF criteria require a lot of production coverage, not just one or two hits.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation in the future if and when this gets released and starts generating reviews by professional film critics, but two hits of production coverage is not enough to already justify an article now. Bearcat (talk) 15:41, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 15:41, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Draftify until release--and reviews--come in. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 16:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: or draftify;; opposed to deletion given existing coverage and notable cast (production, premise and cast are verifiable and this is a good start). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:25, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- It takes a lot more than just two hits of coverage to make a film notable this far in advance of release. Bearcat (talk) 16:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Anti-Subversion Software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No RS found that uses this specific terminology to describe this class of software. Sohom (talk) 14:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Computing. Sohom (talk) 14:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- To expand more on my rationale, I'm aware (and not doubting the fact) that cybersecurity software exists that does this exact thing. However, there is literally no RS that calls it "anti-subversion software". Sohom (talk) 14:59, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:27, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Malware#Antivirus_/_Anti-malware_software: unless a better target can be found. Owen× ☎ 21:47, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:24, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete per WP:G3 as it is an obvious hoax, and maybe redirect it to the antivirus page. SecretSpectre (talk) 09:48, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Doddodo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No references, seems to fail GNG Kingsmasher678 (talk) 01:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - not nearly enough in-depth refs from reliable, independent sources to meet WP:SIGCOV.Onel5969 TT me 01:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete unless someone adds sources: how has a BLP article survived since 2007 with no sources except the non-RS Discogs? PamD 08:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete nothing on it. Xegma(talk) 13:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- List of mayors of Warner Robins, Georgia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
List of mostly unnotable local politicians. Roasted (talk) 00:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, and Georgia (U.S. state). Roasted (talk) 00:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - "mostly unnotable local politicians" is not defined, because most of them are still red links. Please see WP:REDLINKS. I think if you look through "Category:Lists of mayors of places in Georgia (U.S. state)" you will find the same un-sourced situation on all of them. And for that matter, it seems to be a trend for most mayoral lists. These are the kinds of lists that are works in progress, and therefore should not be deleted. — Maile (talk) 01:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Redlinks "indicate that a page will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic because the subject is notable and verifiable" - few of those mayors seem notable, to be honest. AusLondonder (talk) 07:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- How do you arrive at "few of those mayors seem notable" just by looking at a red link name? — Maile (talk) 11:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's generally uncommon for mayors of smaller cities to be notable, per WP:NPOL which states that "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability." Mayors are frequently deleted at AfD. AusLondonder (talk) 12:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- How do you arrive at "few of those mayors seem notable" just by looking at a red link name? — Maile (talk) 11:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep invalid nom. (see Wikipedia:LISTCRITERIA) Djflem (talk) 06:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Completely unsourced list of non-notable local politicians. These lists are frequently deleted. AusLondonder (talk) 07:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Siren Song (Dove) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This fails WP:GNG as it entirely relies on 2 sources which is a primary source and I cannot find any RS sites talking about the opera Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 02:06, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre and England. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 02:07, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Byeon Seong-tae (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Doesn't meet WP:NACTOR. Appearing during a particular filming and as an alternate role doesn't always show notability, because sometimes, those type of actors aren't covered in multiple reliable sources. And that's the see here. Appearing also in music videos doesn't show either, hence this is a prompt lack of WP:SIGCOV. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 00:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Television, Entertainment, and South Korea. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 00:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 06:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV. Xegma(talk) 13:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:REALITYSINGER. cyberdog958Talk 23:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)