Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

4 July 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< July 03	July 05 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

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 procedural close‎. The last AfD was closed just a week ago. A merge is still pending and the article is tagged accordingly. Please be patient (or do the merge yourself). – Joe (talk) 09:05, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism of Stonehenge[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

I nominated a previous version of this page for deletion. The consensus decision was Merge to Just Stop Oil, which was not what I had originally proposed. The Just Stop Oil page does contain a brief summary of the relevant event, but I don't think a full merge has been carried out. Instead, this page has been expanded to cover other instances of vandalism. However, it's still got the infobox and the undue emphasis on the flash-in-the-pan event that prompted the article's creation. I believe this fails WP:COATRACK, and I still think the article should be deleted, possibly with a merger of the relevant bits into Stonehenge, not Just Stop Oil. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:57, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, History, Travel and tourism, Archaeology, and England. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:57, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

List of Women's Premier League (cricket) captains[edit]

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

Unnecessary WP:CFORK, and violates WP:NOTDATABASE as almost the entire content of the article is just a copy of the ESPNCricinfo source [1]. Just because the men's IPL has this article (which I also don't necessarily agree with), that doesn't mean this article meets WP:NLIST, as I don't see significant coverage about these captains grouped together in news sources (i.e. not just copies of the table). Joseph2302 (talk) 08:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Lists of people, Cricket, Lists, and India. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emmanuel Mogenet[edit]

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

Was likely created by WP:COI subject. Unclear notability from WP:BIO. Brief mention of subject in RS doesn't pass WP:GNG. Morbidthoughts (talk) 08:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Internet, Software, and France. Morbidthoughts (talk) 08:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kosmic Free Music Foundation[edit]

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

I was only able to find mentions and brief descriptions (<100 words) of the subject in reliable sources (such as by searching "filetype:pdf "Kosmic Free Music Foundation" " on Google). The article doesn't link to anything that would establish notability. toweli (talk) 08:00, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Visual arts, Organizations, Computing, Internet, Websites, and United States of America. toweli (talk) 08:00, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cruisers Rock Combo[edit]

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

Doesn't appear to meet WP:NBAND / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 15:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 16:05, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:02, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cliff Chenfeld[edit]

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

Clearly unnotable. All but one of the sources are about his record company or Kidz Bop. The sole source documenting him is an interview. OhHaiMark (talk) 14:14, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Law, United States of America, and Ohio. OhHaiMark (talk) 14:14, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Barbarian Group[edit]

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

This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Advertising, and Companies. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:34, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:41, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Al-Jumah[edit]

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

I couldn't find out if this person, a Saudi author is notable as per WP:GNG. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 08:43, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Law, Travel and tourism, and Saudi Arabia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Helms[edit]

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

Fails WP:MUSICIAN. No sources to speak of. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:52, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmer Haider (actor)[edit]

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

Recreation of salted title, Ahmer Haider, which has been salted since 2019 due to repeated recreation. Subject does not seem to pass WP:GNG nor WP:NACTOR. CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't find reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject to justify WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. Additionally, he was not a lead character in any of the listed films. GrabUp - Talk 08:09, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Birbhum Pharmacy School[edit]

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

It fails WP:SCH, no reliable source has been cited Pinakpani (talk) 05:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and West Bengal. CptViraj (talk) 05:43, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pradum (actor)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NACTOR.

Declined drafts: Draft:Pradum Shukla (actor), Draft:Pradum Shukla KH-1 (talk) 04:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. KH-1 (talk) 04:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too Lost (company)[edit]

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

Unclear if there's enough independent coverage for WP:NCORP. Previous AfD speedied for copyvio Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Too Lost, also deleted under G12. KH-1 (talk) 04:27, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. KH-1 (talk) 04:27, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Technology, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Deans Trophy season[edit]

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

Apparently non notable school rugby competition involving only six schools. Mccapra (talk) 03:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Rugby union and Fiji. Mccapra (talk) 03:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KNEE-LD[edit]

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

Subject lacks the needed WP:SIGCOV from reliable sources to meet the WP:GNG. A WP:BEFORE search only came up with FCC licenses. Let'srun (talk) 03:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Washington. Let'srun (talk) 03:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Last Chancers[edit]

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

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There are multiple reviews from reliable sources, including the Guardian, the Sunday Times and the Evening Standard. What is the problem? Toughpigs (talk) 05:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As Toughpigs points out, the article already includes several reviews from reliable sources, including well-known British newspapers. The nominator should considering withdrawing this AfD. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:46, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Potton, Ed (2004-12-18). "Something to bray about - Our pick of the festive TV". The Times. Archived from the original on 2024-07-03. Retrieved 2024-07-03.
  The article notes: "The Last Chancers began as a Comedy Lab sketch, directed by Stephen Merchant of The Office and starring Buxton and Steve John Shepherd of This Life. Channel 4 later commissioned it as a two-parter, "obviously with Stephen no longer on board because he was too busy winning awards". The result is more mainstream than his previous stuff, but the pop cultural digs are still sharp. The wry observations on in-band politics and musical tribalism, in particular, make you wonder whether Buxton, like his co-writer MacMurray, has a murky past on the gigging circuit."
2. Smith, Rupert (2004-12-23). "Rock bottom". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 2024-07-03. Retrieved 2024-07-03.
  The review notes: "A new comedy drama about the ups and downs of life in a rock band rings all the right bells, largely because it raises hopes that we might be in for a 21st-century Rock Follies. The Last Chancers (Channel 4, first shown on E4) was not that longed-for event, but it was an agreeable hour that wasn't short of laughs or insight. Writers Tony MacMurray and Adam Buxton have clearly done their time in the lower depths of the music business ..."
3. Ridgway, Imogen (2004-12-22). "Last chance saloon for pub rock hopefuls". Evening Standard. Archived from the original on 2024-07-03. Retrieved 2024-07-03.
  The review notes: "The ineptitude and staggering self-belief of Buxton's Johnny is bound to draw comparisons with David Brent, but there's also something a little Alan Partridge-y about his desire for fame. The characters of his fellow male band members, alas, have not been developed as much. However, the two female leads, guitarist Liv (Valerie Edmond) and gobby Aussie Kirby (Emma Pierson) are played with confidence and add an extra dimension to what might have been a bloke-centric drama."
4. Dugdale, John (2004-12-12). "The Last Chancers - Pick of the day". The Sunday Times. Archived from the original on 2024-07-03. Retrieved 2024-07-03.
  The review notes: "Underused on TV since The Crow Road, Edmond is a welcome signing; but the comedy's problem is its hero, who suffers as many humiliations as Brent and Alan Partridge but lacks their compelling and richly imagined awfulness."
5. Sutcliffe, Thomas (2004-12-23). "Last night's television: Yes, I'm beginning to see the light - Light Fantastic BBC4 The Last Chancers C4". The Independent. Archived from the original on 2024-07-03. Retrieved 2024-07-03.
  The review notes: "The Last Chancers looks a bit like a six-part sitcom that has suffered a rear-end shunt and ended up as a two-part comedy drama. The tone was certainly more sitcom than drama, since Adam Buxton plays the part of Johnny - a white-bread wannabe rocker - with the same slightly arch, sketch-like performance he used on The Adam and Joe Show. Looking at my notes, I can't find a single line that would withstand quotation in cold print as an example of something funny, but that doesn't do any kind of justice to what was a rather engaging comedy."
6. Starkey, Gabrielle (2004-12-11). "The Last Chancers - Multichannel Choice". The Times. Archived from the original on 2024-07-03. Retrieved 2024-07-03.
  The review notes: "There are a lot of influences in here, most notably The Office and Spinal Tap, but it's well observed and written and (all too rare in comedy nowadays) funny. In particular, the characters are all well-defined and instantly recognisable without being total cliches."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow The Last Chancers to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 07:59, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KTLD-CD[edit]

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

Subject does not have the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. This one technically survived AfD last year in a bundled nomination but that was more about other stations which were included there than this one specifically. Could be redirected either to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp. or List of Three Angels Broadcasting Network affiliates. Let'srun (talk) 02:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and California. Let'srun (talk) 02:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.: Like with far too many other HC2/Innovate stations, it's been nothing but national services and no significant coverage (nor the real prospect of any) in the station's 25-30 year history. (The various secular channels that HC2/Innovate has added since taking over from 3ABN ownership are enough to tip me in that direction for the all-that's-needed-here {{R to list entry}}.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:33, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:33, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cloud Constellation[edit]

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

Fails to establish notability under WP:NCORP. References almost exclusively covers planned partnerships with more notable companies. Brandon (talk) 02:36, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Companies, and Spaceflight. Brandon (talk) 02:36, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haziq Mu'iz[edit]

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

No notability for this footballer who played 24 minutes in the Malaysian league. Sources are databases or transfer statements. Geschichte (talk) 02:08, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Malaysia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hamizul Izaidi[edit]

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

No notability for this footballer who played 61 minutes in the Malaysian league. Sources are databases or transfer statements. Geschichte (talk) 02:09, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Malaysia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heartland Museum of Military Vehicles[edit]

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

Fails WP:NORG; written like an advertisement. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:17, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries, Military, Transportation, and Nebraska. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:17, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if this does somehow survive deletion I am able to get some photos for the article. I haven't looked much into the Museum itself so I can't currently comment on it's notability. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{blaze__wolf} 04:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This is not written like an advertisement, instead it needs improvement, not deletion. I'm appalled to see this nomiated for deletion. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 06:03, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note - I spent a little bit of time tonight cleaning up, updating references, adding a new reference to a 2016 article in Recoil (magazine). We need some help from a wordsmith to expand the text. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 06:33, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep, I've found some sourcing. Cleanup is possible, not a reason to delete. This is nowhere near TNT level. Star Mississippi 14:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This page need to be rewritten to not be like an advertisement, but there are some articles online about the museum that make it notable. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 17:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Apart from being written like an advertisement (WP:NORG), this entry fails WP:GNG. Its only sources are its own website. AstridMitch (talk) 03:58, 19 June 2024

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Could be notable, but sourcing is primary in the article. I can only find various travel blogs or listings for them [2], without much coverage at all. Oaktree b (talk) 14:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per reasonable coverage in books and news sources. gidonb (talk) 20:55, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Disagreement here among editors on the quality of the sourcing in the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I was going to close this as No consensus until I looked at the article and saw that only one source wasn't from the official website. Where are all of these independent sources editors arguing to Keep this article are referring to?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I added some references. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Yes, it would be great if this article gets expanded, but meanwhile it passes content and sourcing, as is. Good starter article. — Maile (talk) 03:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Byrne, Susan, ed. (2003). Off the Beaten Path: A Travel Guide to More Than 1,000 Scenic and Interesting Places Still Uncrowded and Inviting. Pleasantville, New York: Reader's Digest. p. 207. ISBN 0-7621-0424-4. Retrieved 2024-07-04 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "Conceived in 1986 by four friends with a shared passion for historic military vehicles and who thrilled at driving their own vintage models in parades this museum has developed into a place to honor America's other veterans of the battlefront. It boasts a collection of more than 60 meticulously restored fighting machines, ready to roll at a moment's notice. Most vehicles have been acquired within a 150-mile radius of the museum. When tractors were in short supply in the 1940s and early 1950s, local farmers often relied on retired warriors rugged jeeps, trucks, and half-tracks to work their land. The Heartland's dedicated staff has rescued many from rust and oblivion, returning them to mint condition."
2. Garrison, Gretchen M. (2017). Detour Nebraska: Historic Destinations & Natural Wonders. Charleston, South Carolina: The History Press. p. 101. ISBN 978-1-62585-881-8. Retrieved 2024-07-04 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "Ever wondered what sitting in a tank would be like? This central Nebraska location encourages exploration of all vehicles on display. Besides tanks, helicopters, halftracks and even ambulances are on display. Jeeps from every branch of service are lined up. From World War II to present day, about one hundred restored vehicles are ready for action. Most are still operational. Military engines are also housed here."
3. Hammel, Paul (2007-06-14). "Museum shows how military goes rolling along" (pages 1 and 2). Omaha World-Herald. Archived from the original (pages 1 and 2) on 2024-07-04. Retrieved 2024-07-04 – via Newspapers.com.
  The article notes: " Such moments and memories are hallmarks of the Heartland Museum of Military Vehicles, a volunteer-run, admission-free facility off Interstate 80 at the Lexington exit. It displays military memorabilia, including more than 70 restored Jeeps, tanks and helicopters, to honor those who built and used the "Arsenal of Democracy." ... Lauby, 60, is among the three farmers and an attorney three of whom are Vietnam veterans who founded the museum in 1988. ... Most of the vehicles were found within a 150-mile radius of Lexington, but several were purchased through military surplus sales or donated by veterans. Over-the-road truckers and local railroads have donated services to haul the hulking machines. ... One of the museum's six Huey helicopters was shot down five times in Vietnam; another was a medical ambulance during Operation Desert Storm."
4. Duggan, Joe (1999-09-26). "Vehicles of history: Lexington farm boys establish museum". Lincoln Journal Star. Archived from the original on 2024-07-04. Retrieved 2024-07-04 – via Newspapers.com.
  The article notes: "At the Heartland Museum of Military Vehicles, they've got Nebraska's largest private collection of military jeeps, ambulances, armored personnel carriers and Burma trucks. On the northeast corner of the Interstate 80 Lexington interchange, they've got about 60 restored military vehicles representing every armed conflict from World War I to Operation Desert Storm. ... What Nielsen referred to as a group of naive farm boys and ranchers incorporated as a nonprofit group, took out bank loans, raised money and built the first building on the site. They opened in 1993, but only in good weather. They put the word out that if the flag was up on the pole, the museum was open."
5. Ward, Malena (2005-04-30). "Lex museum depicts memorable Vietnam moment" (pages 1 and 2). Kearney Hub. Archived from the original (pages 1 and 2) on 2024-07-04. Retrieved 2024-07-04 – via Newspapers.com.
  The article notes: "The Heartland Museum of Military Vehicles was founded by Vietnam veterans, but it doesn't limit itself to that era. The museum is dedicated to the restoration and preservation of historical military equipment of all types. It is at the northeast corner of the intersection of Highway 283 and the Lexington Interstate 80 interchange at exit 237."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Heartland Museum of Military Vehicles to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 08:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Singara Chennai[edit]

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

No reliable reviews or other sources other than a single production source. A search in Sify ([3]), Chennai Online ([4]), and BizHat ([5]) proves futile. Please find the Kalki and Cine South reviews or redirect to Chennai as all online sources prove to be a description for the city. A WP:BEFORE found a fleeting mention here (சிங்கார சென்னை). DareshMohan (talk) 03:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Chennai: Per nom. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:27, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect to Kalabhavan_Mani#Tamil_films. Poor sources with no significant coverage and reliable critic reviews. RangersRus (talk) 13:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I, the nominator, withdraw, my nomination in light of 3 new production sources. Thanks @Srivin:. DareshMohan (talk) 14:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus and two different redirect target articles suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not opposed to keep if sources covering production are judged sufficient; if redirected, Kalabhavan_Mani#Tamil_films is imv a much better target. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:17, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2021 Ravanusa explosion[edit]

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

Just a news story. All sources are news sources and it did not have any major societal ramifications to meet WP:NEVENT. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Italy. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There is further coverage on the Italian article, but if that's enough to pass NEVENT, I'm not sure. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:01, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I genuinely don't remember what I was looking at here, did my brain make up sources? Doesn't pass nevent. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:28, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep there is coverage in international sources as well CNN NBC Al Jazeera. The fact that plenty of national sources Rai Ansa also reported on the following trial shows the depth and duration of coverage needed to fulfill WP:NEVENT. @PARAKANYAA: I would like to hear why you think the coverage is not sufficient to pass NEVENT. Broc (talk) 19:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vii[edit]

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

Besides a single Engadget review (the "Wii vs. Vii First Shot" source), the sources appear to either be unreliable (such as GoNintendo) or trivial mentions such as minor announcements/mentions, making it fail WP:GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:35, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Technology. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:35, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG, no substantial coverage. The Banner talk 15:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Wii with further discussion of knockoff Wii consoles based on these sources: [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to VII as {{R from other capitalisation}}. Charcoal feather (talk) 01:15, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if it's redirected it will have to be moved to Vii (console) beforehand. A new redirect at this name can be created if necessary (though it's not actually necessary) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:16, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moving it to Vii (console) is a good idea. Dr. Precursor (talk) 23:36, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus. Article page moves can occur if an article is Kept but can not be carried out by a closer because it's an editing decision. If you want an article moved, first vote to Keep it then a move can be discussed. But right now, we also have arguments to Delete and Redirect so no consensus exists.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mira-Bhayander, Vasai-Virar Police[edit]

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

Rejected, contested draft. Moved back against advice of HD. There is no indication they meet N:ORG. A merger would be fine, but would likely need protected. Star Mississippi 00:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police, India, and Maharashtra. Star Mississippi 00:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify then salt the page until notability enough referenced. -Lemonaka 01:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor sources that talk about inauguration, appointments and organization structure and most of these sources are from the organization's own website. There is no significant indepth coverage in secondary independent sources. Per nom, page does not satisfy the notability guidelines for organizations. Fails WP:NORG. RangersRus (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Point to note that, out of 11 almost 6 references are from different news articles, and rest which is there referenced is the actual information, which is true and not for promotion by the website... Pls review again the page references & visit those references Pratik.S2005 (talk) 14:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the website is a government law enforcement website. Pratik.S2005 (talk) 14:31, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
6 sites are the police stations own website mbvv.mahapolice.gov.in and 1 another government source has nothing but a link to this police station site. So these are all unreliable and not secondary independent sources. 4 others news site have nothing significant that satisfies notability. It does not have any criteria to pass the notability guidelines for organizations. RangersRus (talk) 22:31, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, just to correct, it's an article for Police Commissionerate just like Mumbai Police & not a Police Station... Pratik.S2005 (talk) 13:35, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is requested to review the topic, it is well notable as per the guideline for notability by the Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pratik.S2005 (talk • contribs) 17:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:57, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eashvar Karthic[edit]

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

Main issue: the 2nd film of the director never released --> WP:TOOEARLY. This guy only directed one released film, not meeting Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Creative professionals since the film received mixed reviews. The notabliity guidleine states that the director creates a "well-known work or collective body of work". As of 2024, the work is not well known, it is a single film with mixed reviews, not a critically acclaimed film. I don't know if a writeup by an assistant professor at American College, Madurai holds any weightage but that info can be added to Penguin, the director's only released film. The deletion was caused by an undo of a redirect to Penguin. Long sources are mainly direct interviews about Penguin, not independent. Acting roles seem minor and not notable.

If anybody who directs one film, gets an article, doesn't this set a bad precedent. The film didn't win a National Award or any award for that matter.

This source [13] talks about six films including Penguin, all of this information pertaining to Penguin should be moved to the film article. This director can be notable after more of his works release. DareshMohan (talk) 22:36, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Shellwood (talk) 23:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: if you are wondering what the contents of source #7 is, it is here: [14] The story focuses on the pain and struggles suffered by the female lead. A pregnant woman remembers her child who went missing years ago. After the child’s missing, her husband started becoming toxic by saying she was the reason for the loss and separated ways from her. Later after years, a male character was shown who accepted her as she is and started living happily with her. No strong characterization or importance was given to both these male roles. They are just part of the screenplay.

That's just the plot of the film. How is it scholarly analysis? The assistant professor mentioned above [15] (page 100) is the only significant analysis but that is of the film and can be added to Penguin.

Just redirect to Penguin till Zebra (his second film) releases. DareshMohan (talk) 23:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: meets WP:DIRECTOR as director of Penguin (film), a notable creation that received coverage, which is what the guideline requires (the said coverage mentions him, see the page about the film). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:22, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Penguin (film): His only directorial credit. The second one has been unreleased for over a year, and doesn't have a Wiki article. Kailash29792 (talk) 00:50, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:Actor and WP:Director. AmericanY (talk) 06:55, 28 June 2024 (UTC)— AmericanY (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep: This seems like a bad-faith nomination and I believe you are upset about your friend, User:Monhiroe's autopatrolled rights being removed. You first edited this article on 8 October 2023, what changed your mind between then and 19 June, 2024, when you redirected it? Did it take eight months for you to judge its notability? On 19 June, you skimmed through all the articles I have ever created and made some changes on three of them [16][17][18]. Was it to check which ones you could nominate for deletion but couldn't find any, so you thought Eashvar Karthic was borderline because he had only one film and chose to redirect it? Is this how you get back at an editor who may have upset your friend?

The notice you have posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force is not neutral and did not follow WP:APPNOTE. Is your nomination rationale so weak that you are trying to discredit a source simultaneously?

Notability

The main issue you have mentioned in you nomination rationale is countered by WP:FILMMAKER#3 where it explicitly mentions significant or well-known work. It need not be a collective body of work.
I believe the film receiving mixed reviews has no weightage here as we are not debating for WP:FILMMAKER#4c
As of 2024, the work is not well known, it is a single film with mixed reviews, not a critically acclaimed film. - Adding to my previous comments above, the film has been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, which can be verified by checking Penguin (film).
Apart from the above, the film has been cited in journals for three completely different reasons: A film that discusses women-centric films, OTT during the COVID-19 pandemic and representation of the subaltern.
If you had taken the time to read through Source #7, you would have known that the PDF you have linked is another journal that has cited the original source #7's work. In the PDF you have linked, Penguin (film) was selected as one of the films out of all the other women-centric films that were released in 2020. The scholarly analysis is in the findings and conclusion section of the same PDF. The journal entry's objective is independent of the subject, so it's absurd to ask for an analysis about the film when the objective is different.
FWIW, here is another journal that extensively cites the subject's work.

There is significant coverage about the subject and their work. Penguin (film) has also received independent periodical articles, reviews and cited in multiple journals, thereby passing the WP:FILMMAKER criteria. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:02, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jeraxmoira, I completely agree with you on the notability of this director and, like you, I do indeed disagree with DareshMohan's interpretation of the guideline in the present case, but is your very aggressive opening statement absolutely necessary? I am inviting you to kindly strike it. I don't think it's appropriate here, nor helpful. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any bad-faith nomination will be called out. My statement is true and the diffs/timeline make it clear, so it will not be struck out. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:05, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Penguin (film): he has done only 1 film its better he done atleast 3 or 4 movies. Another film he directed was not released yet. WP:TOOEARLY. Monhiroe (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect to Penguin (film). Case of WP:TOOSOON with only 1 release under this director and has not garnered significant achievement to satisfy notability. RangersRus (talk) 13:03, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I agree with the analyses of Mushy Yank and Jeraxmoira wrt Penguin meeting GNG via sufficient reviews, thus Karthic automatically passing NCREATIVE#3 and therefore being automatically considered notable by the wording of NCREATIVE's header. I don't like it, but individual AFDs aren't a great place to overrule clear guidelines so I've started a discussion at NBIO Talk because NCREATIVE#3 is clearly a much lower standard (at the lower bound) from the other criteria. That also said, I also suspect that when Zebra is released that it will also receive more than sufficient reviews to pass NFILM[19][20], there will be no good single redirect target, and Karthic will pass my proposed modified NCREATIVE#3 anyway, so a WP:NOPAGE redirect would likely be short-lived. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 09:03, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]