Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday

WP:AFD/Y

Purge page cache if page isn't updating.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< September 09	September 11 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Embassy of Ireland, Bern

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

Fails WP:ORG. 4 of the 5 sources provided are primary. LibStar (talk) 23:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Ireland, and Switzerland. LibStar (talk) 23:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Costa Rica–Libya relations

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

Prod removed, no reliable sourcing added. Mere existence of established relations between sovereign states is not notable, fails the WP:GNG. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 23:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Libya, and Costa Rica. Goldsztajn (talk) 23:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yael Danon

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

Article without notoriety, and very poor encyclopedic failure in musical coverage, it only stood out for participating in a talent show Alon9393 (talk) 23:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Israel, and Panama. Shellwood (talk) 23:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 10. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Israel's Got Talent. LibStar (talk) 23:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not much coverage at all, she released a song in 2022, then that seems to be it. [1] I'm not even sure that's a RS. But it's small. Lack of coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 00:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Iraq, Moscow

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

Fails WP:ORG. Article is based on 1 primary source. LibStar (talk) 23:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Iraq, and Russia. LibStar (talk) 23:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Urutau (3D Printable Firearm)

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

No evidence found of notability, no independent reliable sources about this. Being offered on some sites is not the same as having the necessary sourcing about the subject. Fram (talk) 16:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Technology, and Brazil. Fram (talk) 16:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is also worth noting that this subject has a significant amount of traction on social media websites like Twitter/X, Reddit, and even LinkedIn. This is difficult to directly cite due to its lack of centralization and login requirements. Still, I would like to think that this subject is notable given that it achieved its publishers' requirements for quality. That said, this subject is relatively new, and I am sure that, in time, more direct evidence of notability will become available. Any suggestions to rectify this in the meantime are appreciated. DreamWeav3r95 (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Merge with 3D printed firearm per WP:PRODUCT. Right now I lean heavier towards deletion as the only sources relevant to the actual gun itself are from what looks like the designer's own website- the other sources make no mention of the gun. Getting social media traction is not in and of itself a qualifier for notability. Archimedes157 (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We do have two interviews/podcast with the developer/designer

which are :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZLD4geWKA4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmZ8dkvOwyM

Also, it is notable that It is the first Bullpup submachine gun/PCC that anyone can make in the world and not based on the FGC-9.

This design is not based on any previous gun design

the only thing it has in common with the fgc-9 is its barrel

I lean toward keeping this page Superlincoln (talk) 14:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
independent reliable sources of the Urutau :

https://homemadeguns.wordpress.com/tag/urutau/

https://3dprintgeneral.com/portfolio/the-brazilian-jstark-ze-carioca-3dpgp-ep19/

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/yveilleuxlepage_about-an-hour-ago-the-files-for-the-urutau-activity-7231845456090165248-8Leu

https://ctrlpew.com/file-drop-the-urutau/ Superlincoln (talk) 15:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Urutau is mentioned in Armament Research Services (ARES) Research Report 8: Desktop Firearms Desktop Firearms:

Emergent Small Arms Craft Production Technologies 2023 update page 30-31

https://armamentresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/ARES-Research-Report-No-8-Desktop-Firearms-2023-Update-EARLY-ACCESS.pdf

I think this is enough independent reliable sources about the Urutau right? Superlincoln (talk) 15:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Printing Terror: An Empirical Overview of the Use of 3D-Printed Firearms by Right-Wing Extremists:

However, recent developments within the 3DPF community are concerning, as they seem to focus on further lowering the barriers to entry for producing 3DPF. Noteworthy developments include the ‘Nutty 9,’ an improved bolt design for the FGC-9 consisting of nothing more than four nuts and two bolts screwed into a printed connector piece, and the development of the Urutau—a soon-to-be-released hybrid pistol-caliber carbine—that is said to be significantly easier to build than the FGC-9.

[2]https://ctc.westpoint.edu/printing-terror-an-empirical-overview-of-the-use-of-3d-printed-firearms-by-right-wing-extremists/

Urutau was mentioned in the 3D-Printed Firearms and Terrorism: Trends and Analysis Pertinent to Far-Right Use

5 times

[3]https://www.jstor.org/stable/48778663?seq=2 Superlincoln (talk) 09:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into List of 3D printed weapons and parts and/or FGC-9. I do not think this meets the GNG yet, though it might be close. The mentions in the academic papers are insufficient to establish notability since they are only trivial, passing mentions with no detail. However, the ARES Research Report is an independent source with several paragraphs on the Urutau. A LinkedIn post by an Assistant Professor at the Royal Military College of Canada seems promising but he admits in the post to having lacking "expertise in that area" thus his post doesn't meet the expertise guideline for self-published sources. As for the blog posts, YouTube videos, and other primary sources, they (in my opinion) all fall well below the bar for verifiability. If another secondary source of the quality, independence and verifiability of the ARES Research Report can be found, I would change my vote. Richard Ye^talk 15:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there are three different suggested Merge target articles. Of course, content can be merged to multiple articles but we need a primary article in order to close this AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I'm not sure the new second amendment is what we're looking for as far a sourcing goes... This is about all the coverage there is [4], rest are un-RS. Seems like PROMO with most of the sourcing being primary. Oaktree b (talk) 00:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merging to "3d printed firearms" is probably the best place to send it to. Oaktree b (talk) 00:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coriantumr (son of Omer)

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

Not eligible for WP:PROD due to unresolved talk page discussion about notability; should be resolved. No independent, reliable sourcing to suggest a standalone page is necessary. Fails the WP:GNG. Goldsztajn (talk) 20:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Latter Day Saints, and United States of America. Goldsztajn (talk) 20:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Book of Ether: as a viable ATD. Star Mississippi 13:52, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. There’s only one source that does more than list or suggest how to pronounce this person’s name. That badly fails our foundation of significant coverage, and is borderline original research. Bearian (talk) 19:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prateek Raj

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

Apart from the obvious undisclosed paid editing by Pinknetwork123, a fairly new account with 20 edits, comes up with a 20000 bytes draft. It was quickly accepted by a reviewer who I believe did not properly evaluate it. At this point, the article was majorly based on primary sources. Interviews, commentaries, and his opinion pieces do not contribute towards GNG. I believe the rest are paid PR articles and there is no significant coverage of Prateek Raj in independent sources. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 04:43, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Economics, Social science, and India. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 04:43, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments.

1. Edits are not at all paid. Sorry if they appear to be. Have edited Wikipedia in the past, but usually do without logging in.

2. Subject’s recently published paper got significant media coverage (mentioned in references), which triggered me, an acquaintance, to create the article including all of his previous media coverages.

3. Subject gained salience on D&I issues since activism on hate speech and LGBT issues.

4. Has significant social media following.

5. Have used credible third party sources for all information, from websites and reputed media houses that pass Wiki’s credibility check

6. I defer judgement to editor consensus, thanks. Pinknetwork123 (talk) 09:19, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Jharkhand-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to draw everyone’s attention to Wikietiquette Article for Deletion, WP:AFDEQ, especially on the fourth point “Do not make unsourced negative comments about living people. These may be removed by any editor.” I would recommend editors to be unbalanced and take a constructive approach here, given that it concerns a living person.

First, the claim that the article has "obvious undisclosed paid editing" is not correct, as I have already explained before. Additionally, the assertion that he gives “interviews on paid promotional sources” is baseless. Which interviews specifically are paid? Those with The Times of India on hate speech, NDTV, Bloomberg, or discussions on caste and income in The Indian Express, The Hindu, The Telegraph, New Indian Express, or the op-eds on LGBT rights? Just a simple Google search shows that subject has several engagements. And his bio is openly available across academic space to help people create his profile.

It may be reasonable to debate the subject’s notability, it is inappropriate to dismiss their legitimate work as “paid” without evidence. I encourage editors to adhere to Wikietiquette WP:AFDEQ to remain impartial and decide constructively in this discussion. Thank you. Pinknetwork123 (talk) 16:54, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pinknetwork123: What unsourced negative comments do you think have been made here? jlwoodwa (talk) 18:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot @Jlwoodwa for your comment. The comments made here on 1. “obvious” undisclosed paid editing 2. “paid PR articles” and 3. interviews on “paid promotional” sources, make unsourced negative claims about the subject and his work, which affects their reputation in this public space. This is not in line with Wikietiquette policy.

The article cites several reputed and credible secondary sources from the Indian media specifically covering the subject and his work. After this discussion, I agree there are some primary sources which can be removed, and the article can be modified to Wiki standards. The article has been put twice by two different editors in the mainspace.

I understand that editors can put any article to AfD, but I agree with Wikietiquette that AfD should not become a place for making unsubstantiated claims about the work of a living person. I’d welcome a more measured tone when dealing with living persons. Thank you! Pinknetwork123 (talk) 09:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is very much a promotional article [5], so the statement stands. Others are items this person published under their own name, and are a primary source. No articles strictly about this individual. Oaktree b (talk) 01:07, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't commenting on the person named in the deletion, but the authors that wrote the paid pieces. Oaktree b (talk) 00:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, while a lot of the sources aren't at par with what I'd expect when looking for WP:BLPRS, I do believe there are atleast three reliable sources that satisfy the bar for notability:
- [6] is a article in The Hindu talks in detail about a paper the individual coauthored.
- [7] is another article in The Hindu that talks about a study he lead.
- [8] is another article in The Telegraph (India) that talks about research that he lead.
- [9] is another article in Indian Express that also talks about his research.

I think the fact that the findings in his research are being covered by newspapers of record and the fact that he holds the position of a assistant professor at IIM Bangalore would sufficiently qualify him to meet WP:NACADEMIC#7. Sohom (talk) 13:13, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I disagree. Many are passing mentions coming from a report released by the Indian Institute of Management. The Hindu article has no byline and the impact of the report is nowhere to be seen. The second Hindu article is authored by a freelance journalist and a study/ report done with 2 others. 3 has some interview bytes and 4 only mentions his name once.

The position of Assistant Professor at IIM Bangalore doesn't carry much weight when evaluating for WP:NACADEMIC. I believe the extensive coverage about the latest report is only because it is related to Karnataka's govt, which i beleive only makes it as routine coverage.

I fail to see Prateek Raj's reports creating substantial impact in terms of citations or otherwise. AFAICS, they fail to meet all eight criterias listed in WP:NACADEMIC. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:14, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeraxmoira To clear one thing up, I did not imply that the position "Assistant Professor at IIM Bangalore" carries much weight. What I implied was that given the fact that he is a professor, we should use the WP:NACADEMIC criteria to evaluate him instead of the more stringent WP:GNG criteria. Sohom (talk) 19:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot to both of you for your comments. The academic is known for 3 separate issues, reported in reputed and prominent media houses of India. I will highlight only media mentions that cover exclusively or prominently him.

1. for his recent paper on Dalit economy, where he has been interviewed in the Hindu, the Telegraph, the Indian Express, the New Indian Express, the Times of India. All these interviews are referenced in the article, like, https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/dalit-business-owners-experience-income-gap-of-16-when-compared-to-other-disadvantaged-groups-finds-study/article68505789.ece

2. for his work on hate speech. He has a full interview with The Times India https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/podcasts/the-times-of-india-podcast/how-hate-can-hurt-indias-economic-dreams/videoshow/102992737.cms. He also has a detailed interview with Indian Express and NDTV, and well as a full interview on history of media markets in Bloomberg.

3. for his advocacy of LGBT rights. His October 2023 OpEd in the Indian Express merits him a notable place in LGBT Academics category, which is underpopulated, and needs more biographies https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/sc-marriage-equality-judgment-8992557/.

Thanks to this review process, which is helpful as it helps identify what is noteworthy about the subject. The constructive way forward may be to trim the article with only the most noteworthy information. Pinknetwork123 (talk) 16:32, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The sources on the page are quite poor with some written by the subject himself and some others with passing mention and interviews on paid promotional sources. Some sources are also unreliable. The subject has not had a significant noteworthy impact through his profession and outside the profession nationally or internationally to warrant a page on. Page also reads as resume. RangersRus (talk) 12:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, hoping for some more opinions here. But, Pinknetwork123 know that interviews don't help establish notability. Their content can be used to verify article content but having the subject talk about themself and their work doesn't help demonstrate that the subject themself is notable (as Wikipedia judges notability).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:36, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Liz! Your input helped me assess the sources better. With AfC and AfD processes, the article has significantly improved with mostly credible secondary sources that meet WP:NACADEMIC#7 in my view (thanks for highlighting Sohom!). I focused on Wikipedia:BLPRS-compliant sources that aren't based on press releases, particularly relevant in the Indian context (Wikipedia:NEWSORGINDIA). Here are a few: The Telegraph, The Hindu, and Indian Express highlight the author’s work on caste; Economic Times and Mint cover his work on regional inequality. The one-to-one Times of India interview is as a notable hate speech activist, and his October 2023 Indian Express Op-Ed, though a primary source, is relevant for his role as an LGBT academic from Global South (an underrepresented group on Wikipedia, here). Pinknetwork123 (talk) 18:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Does not seem to pass academic notability with very few publications. Wonderful that they advocate for change, but just not enough non-puffy coverage to keep the article. Oaktree b (talk) 01:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Assistant professors are invariably not notable and this one is no exception. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:01, 1 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

The article has undergone a lot of revision since it was nominated. Here is the source assessment for the current version with 23 sources.
- Direct independent coverage from secondary sources for criteria WP:NACADEMIC#7 (reliable) 11 sources: 1 (Hindu), 2, 21, 22 (Indian Express), 6 (NDTV), 7, 20 (Times of India), 10, 11 (Telegraph India), 12 (New Indian Express), 23 (Bloomberg)
- Significant mention in independent coverage from secondary sources (reliable) 3 sources: 3 (Economic Times), 4 (The Mint), 20 (Outlook)
- Direct coverage from secondary sources but could be press release. (partially reliable) 2 sources: 13 (Times of India), 18 (Hindu)
- Primary sources (less reliable) 7 sources: 5 (Op-Ed by author - Indian Express), 8, 16 (Profile, Report - Chicago Booth), 9 (Paper by author - PLOS One), 14 (News - IIMB), 15 (News - King’s College), 17 (Report - US Congress)Pinknetwork123 (talk) 09:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As noted above, criterium 7 of WP:NACADEMIC is clearly met with extensive and diverse media coverage in more than one occurrences. Meeting one of the criteria is enough for academic notability.

JamesKH76 (talk) 14:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like you to mention the extensive and diverse media coverage that Prateek Raj has received for his substantial impact outside academia, apart from the promotional, Op-ed, routine coverage of reports presented to governments and interview sources. To be precise, please highlight his substantial impact . Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I'm on the fence, but reading through the references I would say WP:NACADEMIC is probably satisfied (also per Sohom). There are a sufficient number of independent, reliable sources providing coverage, albeit some not spectacularly robust. GhostOfNoMeme 21:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I should also like to add that the nominator's obvious undisclosed paid editing aspersion seems a tad unnecessary and hardly in keeping with assuming good faith of our fellow editors. It hardly sets the stage for a productive discussion (not that AfDs are exactly known for their convivial atmosphere...). GhostOfNoMeme 21:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think passing academic notability is a rather generous interpretation of the sources; they mention him but aren't about him. A few mentions isn't quite what we need to prove academic notability Oaktree b (talk) 00:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, maybe I am being too generous. I'll look back over the references when I have the time and consider amending my vote or just striking it. GhostOfNoMeme 02:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Han–Xiongnu War (215 BC–200 BC)

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

Fail to see how this is notable, can't find any WP:RS on this "Han–Xiongnu War (215 BC–200 BC)". The creator of this article basically copied the stuff they were reverted (and blocked) for at Battle of Baideng here. They've misused tons of citations here [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18], and recently engaged in copyvio in another article [19], which may also be the case here. Most of the citations left are unverifiable (which is very convenient, I can't look for further violations) and doesn't strike me as WP:RS. HistoryofIran (talk) 21:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is also likely sock/meat puppetry involved here per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hunnic Enjoyer. Two brand new users have attempted to remove the AFD template so far. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, and China. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Victory Sports Network

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

The article is devoid of citations indicating notability, and a cursory search suggests that this cannot be improved upon. It is WP:N CapnPhantasm (talk) 21:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Sports, American football, Baseball, Basketball, Football, Softball, Volleyball, Wrestling, Websites, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just posting some sources I found. [20][21] Not enough yet though. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 04:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To go with the two sources that WikiOriginal-9 posted above I've found, [22], [23], Midwest sports net via YouTube, [24], some doc? not sure what it is, primary source? Is this blog the owner of the network? release notice I really could post loads of sources, a lot seem to be from colleges news sources for the network. I am unclear what to make of the lot of them. @GiantSnowman: I really am unsure, but there are a lot of hits on google, and I've just posted maybe a small selection. I used the search term Victory Sports Network -wikipedia -victorysportsnetwork.com At the moment my flag would be no consensus I can't tell whether it's a keep or delete from what I've seen. Govvy (talk) 07:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see enough there, sorry. Giant Snowman 18:53, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to go with keep but I don't dispute that the article sourcing needs improvement. I disagree that it is "devoid of citations" as the nominator states. Lacking? Yes. Devoid? No.--Paul McDonald (talk)
Delete: Of the sources in the article, they are either press releases or non-RS. Of the sources provided in the discussion, the first is a brief announcement which doesn't provide WP:SIGCOV, the second is about the unrelated network Victory Sports One, and the rest are in a similar vain as they are either about unrelated services with the same name or aren't reliable WP:SIGCOV. A search for better sources didn't reveal much more, and as such the WP:GNG is not met here. Let'srun (talk) 16:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question @Let'srun: Did I get some wires crossed and pick on sources for a different company? Govvy (talk) 19:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe so, at least for some of the sources you linked to. The first couple of sources you linked to is about a new team owned streaming service for the Dallas Stars which the article itself notes is "newly formed", and to my knowledge has nothing to do with this network, which was formed in 2002 and covers NAIA athletics. I think the rest of those sources are about this company but they are either primary sources/interviews or non-RS. Let'srun (talk) 20:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Pavlovich

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

WP:BLP of a musician and artist, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing either WP:NMUSIC or WP:NARTIST.
The attempted notability claim as a musician is that he was formerly lead singer of a band, but band members are not "inherently" notable enough for their own standalone articles as separate topics from their bands just because they exist, and have to show WP:GNG-worthy coverage that focuses specifically on them (as opposed to just glancingly namechecking them in coverage of the band) -- however, the only music-related footnote here is a "10 best death metal singers" listicle in an unreliable source, which is not sufficient to claim passage of NMUSIC by itself.
And the attempted notability claim as a visual artist is that he's had local art shows in the region where he lives, referenced to one short blurb and a glancing namecheck of his existence in an article about somebody else, which is not sufficient to get him over the notability bar for visual artists either.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have a lot more and better coverage in reliable sources than this. Bearcat (talk) 22:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 22:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Florida, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Assück. I never would have imagined that I’d write that sentence, but it makes sense to me. Bearian (talk) 19:19, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, is there more support for a Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merging as suggested seems fine. Oaktree b (talk) 00:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drumnamether

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

Fails to meet GNG specifically the "Significant coverage" section. IntentionallyDense (talk) 22:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. IntentionallyDense (talk) 22:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I did mean to include that I read over WP:GEOLAND but wasn't sure if this place was legally recognized. Either way it seems to fail both GNG and SNG. IntentionallyDense (talk) 22:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Mullaghbrack. As noted, there doesn't appear to be anything especially notable about (and no significant coverage of) this small townland. The only sources I can find are the same directory-style entries (confirming existence and location) we have in the article. I can't even find any population information (to confirm whether the townland is sufficiently populated or otherwise contains notable structures) to warrant a stand-alone article. Per WP:GEOLAND, this small townland can be covered "in the more general article on the legally recognized populated place or administrative subdivision that contains it" (the civil parish of Mullaghbrack being the next level "up"). With a redirect. Guliolopez (talk) 10:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are townlands inherently notable as being legally recognized? If not it could be merged with its parish. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:GEOLAND "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low." and "Populated places without legal recognition are considered on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the GNG." hence why I included that I couldnt tell if it's legally recognized as there would be more of an argument to keep if it was legally recognized. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drumnamether, like many other townlands, deserves acknowledgment in accordance with WP:GEOLAND; if it were to be overlooked, one might wonder why townlands are not absent from Wikipedia altogether. Sharkzy (talk) 19:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sharkzy Do you mind indicating which part of WP:GEOLAND mentions townlands? IntentionallyDense (talk) 13:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Crouch, Swale asks if townlands have legal recognition or inherent notability. And Sharkzy implies that, if we have articles on other townlands, then this one also "deserves acknowledgement". In terms of legal recognition, while their names are recorded (by the Placenames Commission) and populations of townlands in the Republic of Ireland are recorded (by the CSO), townlands do not have "legal recognition" for any material purpose (planning, elections, administration, etc). In either Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland. (Note that this townland is in Northern Ireland, and so there is not even sufficient sources to even establish its population as a "census tract".) So, no, in terms of inherent notability, townlands are not "automatically" notable. And are taken on a case-by-case basis. With redirect being a common outcome. With deletion also agreed as appropriate. In terms of the suggestion that "one might wonder why townlands are not absent from Wikipedia altogether", this reads like an WP:OSE argument. There are over 61,000 townlands in Ireland. Not all are inherently notable. Many form part of cities and towns and other settlements and do not need to be covered in separate titles. Others may have some independent notability (perhaps because they contain a material population, archaeological sites, protected areas, geographic features, share their name with the town/village/parish/island they occupy, or were the site of other historical events that have been the subject of significant/material coverage). However, many of Ireland's 61,000 townlands span barely a field or two. With many containing no buildings, no population, no archaeological remains, no geographic features (other than grass/trees/rocks) and, as a result, have not been the subject of sufficient coverage to establish notability. And for which no content (other than a dicdef/sub-stub entry that confirms that the place exists on a map and has a name) can be written. In short: Just because we have articles on some townlands, doesn't mean we should have articles on all of them. Or, conversely, just because this townland isn't sufficiently notable for a stand-alone article, doesn't mean that "townlands [should be] absent from Wikipedia altogether". (The same goes for people, books, companies, streets, buildings, TV shows, etc, etc. Very few things are automatically notable. But, just because one is [or isn't] doesn't mean that all are [or aren't].....). This one isn't... Guliolopez (talk) 10:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the additional information this is really helpful! IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as I don't see a consensus here. There was mention of a Merge, so I'd like to see if there is support for that option and what the target article would be.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Detentions following the September 11 attacks

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

Could easily be merged into Aftermath of the September 11 attacks if a new section is created. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 22:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and United States of America. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 22:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Terrorism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into PENTTBOM. According to the sources on the destination page, the arrests were made as a result of the PENTTBOM investigation, so it would make sense for this page to be merged as an additional section there. Longhornsg (talk) 03:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Detentions following the September 11 attacks seems to be a more understandable and encyclopedic article than the incomprehensible PENTTBOM imho. --The Cunctator (talk) The Cunctator (talk) 01:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Content is related to but distinct from PENTTBOM and is is of sufficient encyclopedic merit not to be merged into the mega-article Aftermath of the September 11 attacks, which acts as a survey page linking to other content. --The Cunctator (talk)
Keep per Cunctator Andre🚐 18:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there are arguments to Keep and two different Merge target articles have been proposed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UPEI Student Union

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

While UPEI is notable, the union does not inherit that notability. This serves as a promo piece. Wozal (talk) 14:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Canada. Wozal (talk) 14:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The union receives very regular coverage from the CBC:

And from, as far as I can tell, at least one other outlet:

https://www.saltwire.com/atlantic-canada/lifestyles/20-questions-with-upei-student-union-president-camille-mady-100895015/

So maybe it can still go in UPEI, but you can’t dismiss this out of hand. Mrfoogles (talk) 15:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 09:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - to the university. The secondary sources both on the article and listed here, are transactional in nature, rather than the detailed sources that are required to show notability. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 20:54, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for more opinions. So, is what being suggested by one editor a Merge to University of Prince Edward Island? It helps if you provide a link to the target article as there might be several articles that exist on the same overall subject.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Romania, Ottawa

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

Fails WP:ORG. Article based on primary sources. LibStar (talk) 23:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Romania, and Canada. LibStar (talk) 23:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Canada-Romania relations: Most embassies aren't notable by themselves but make a good addition to the two countries' relations. Hlsci (talk) 11:13, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Merge with Canada-Romania relations.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:58, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is nothing to demonstrate any particular notability about this building. I'd support a merge but the article Canada–Romania relations already says all that needs to be said: The Embassy of Romania in Ottawa was opened in 1970. and this article contains literally no additional information about the embassy that could even be merged (with the possible exception of the embassy's address; I don't honestly know whether pages on bilateral relations typically feature full addresses of respective embassies). GhostOfNoMeme 23:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gringo Loco

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

Lacks mainstream WP:RS, doesnt appear to meet WP:GNG. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 22:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 22:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Wrestling, and Illinois. Shellwood (talk) 23:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery of sovereign state flags

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

I have just now finished List of national flags of sovereign states, which contains far more information regarding each flag and provides several references on each entry. I do not see a reason for the gallery to continue existing since the flags list I have written contains the same information and then some. I therefore request this article become a redirect to the one I have made. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 22:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 22:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Nice work! I'm hesitant to get rid of a page with 49,000 views in the last month because I know many people really just want the gallery, but there's one at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Sovereign-state_flags that I've added to the new article, so I don't think this one is necessary. Reywas92^Talk 22:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as the probably least disruptive option, especially if Commons already has a similar such gallery that's now linked to in the main article. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Side comment/suggestion about the new list since we're here, although not directly relevant to this discussion. The new list is nice for sure, but even on my modestly small laptop screen, I have to scroll over to see the whole thing. The refs (whose column is unnecessary huge for me) could probably go after the name in the first column, and the description is probably a bit overkill, contributing to the formatting issues, and might be more appropriate as alt text for accessibility. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:26, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The current gallery format is simpler and I often use that page as a reference for editing other flags, eg separatism. Centralismo (talk) 03:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okjeo language

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

Okjeo (Okchŏ) was a polity described in the Dongyi section of the Chinese Records of the Three Kingdoms. They surely spoke some language, but not one word of it is recorded. The only information about the language is the statement in the above chapter that "the language is much the same as Goguryeo but with small differences here and there". That is not enough for an article, and is already included in the Puyŏ languages article, which is about four languages mentioned in that Chinese source.

All the references in the article are either paraphrases of that statement or are actually about the Goguryeo language, for which some (controversial) evidence does exist. Kanguole 22:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Although I cannot say if the article should be removed or kept due to my biases with my edits on the article, I just want to say that I don't believe deletion should be an option and at most, make it a redirect to the Puyŏ languages as you say the information is included in the article itself. Spino-Soar-Us (talk) 23:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Puyŏ languages. seefooddiet (talk) 00:58, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, History, and Korea. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:26, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ghirmai Ghebremariam

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

Article of low relevance considering it is the biography of a living person and a current politician Alon9393 (talk) 22:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 10. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Per WP:POLOUTCOMES, Ambassadors are not considered presumptively notable. The article has only one reference, and (WP:NEXIST!) I can't find any coverage in reliable sources focusing on the individual himself; only WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS that verify he was, indeed, an ambassador. No significant coverage of his involvement in any major diplomatic event, either, nor his involvement in crafting any important treaty or bilateral agreement — two criteria which WP:DIPLOMAT (merely an essay, I know!) says may suggest notability. A minor, non-notable figure who doesn't merit an article. GhostOfNoMeme 22:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Searches of Google Books and Google Scholar also yield nothing of value, either. Almost entirely just passing mentions in various years' issues of the Statesman's Yearbook which do nothing beyond confirm his role as ambassador, as in "Ambassador: Ghirmai Ghebremariam" in the list of diplomatic representatives under the entry for Eritrea. GhostOfNoMeme 22:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Africa. Shellwood (talk) 23:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United Kingdom, Canada, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete GhostOfNoMeme's searches demonstrate that WP:BIO is not met. Ambassadors are not inherently notable. LibStar (talk) 02:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Engschrift

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

Initially PRODed by me, for the following reason:

In addition to the existing relying on a single source and vagueness issues (likely due to translation), the information in the article could easily be included onto the existing articles – DIN 1451, Austria (typeface), Tern (typeface) and Road signs in Austria – with the provision of sources, weakening the article's basis.

Deletion was objected, a merged was proposed instead. However, it is not possible to redirect one article to 3 others. Created a topic at WikiProject Typography over 4 months ago with no response. The article has no notability on its own, and is poorly written/explained. EthanL13 | talk 22:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Transportation, and Austria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tomas Maricic

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

Article fails WP:GNG. One article is not enough. Simione001 (talk) 21:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 21:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 21:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 21:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. It's not a question of whether the article is currently good. It's about the notability of the subject. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What leads you to believe that the subject is notable? Simione001 (talk) 02:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't raised the notability of the subject. You only commented on the current state of the article. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was nominated because it fails GNG which stands for General Notability Guidelines. If your suggesting there are more sources please provide them as i wasn't able to find any. Simione001 (talk) 05:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adecco General Staffing, Australia

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

Company doesn't seem to meet WP:ORG. Article read like an advertisement before that material was deleted, but I did a before search, and didn't come up with much aside from company profiles on different sites; nothing in the way of actual new releases, press, etc. Seems like this should be deleted OR redirected/merged to The Adecco Group. If I'm missing anything, I'll gladly rescind. SPF121188 ^{(talk this way)} ^{(my edits)} 18:05, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Railway stations in Karaikudi

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

This might work better as a category instead of a page. Charlie (talk) 18:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation, Lists, and Tamil Nadu. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge to Karaikudi#Transport. Per WP:CLN lists and categories are complementary, and this list has much more information than a category could offer. The nominator gives no reason why they think a category might be better, and I can't think of any. The article could be improved, but that's not a reason to delete. Thryduulf (talk) 09:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rezaul Kabir

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

Fails to meet the Wikipedia's notability guidelines for Academicians WP:NACADEMICS. WP:NOTRESUME Charlie (talk) 18:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Finance, and Management. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article provides summary information to a large audience (i.e., students, academics, scholars, journalists, policy makers) who are interested in academic work on several business related subjects / topics. The content of the article is credible as it includes references to published / verifiable / reliable sources. RRLV (talk) 18:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete at this stage, notability is not established although he has a decent amount of citations over the course of his career so one could argue for criterium one https://scholar.google.nl/citations?user=c_EQTfoAAAAJ&hl=en

JamesKH76 (talk) 10:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Acceptable citations in a high cited field. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Don't see enough WP:RS PaulPachad (talk) 21:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kadambari Jethwani

AfDs for this article:

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

Just like previous AfD, no evidence support this individual's page meeting WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. Currently, sources cover this person only in the context of a single event which is a sexual harassment case which is still under investigation WP:BLP1E. WP:TOOSOON. Charlie (talk) 17:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Charlie (talk) 17:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Gujarat. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: has at least 3 significant roles in notable productions tient and meets WP:NACTOR -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In line with WP:BEFORE, I checked IMDb, and it appears that none were lead roles. However, if reliable sources indicate otherwise, it could meet the WP:HEYMANN. Charlie (talk) 04:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not lead roles, perhaps, but significant roles, not minor. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sources are poor and most are written from the perspective of subject herself. She is a very minor actress who has not made a significant achievement worthy of notice in her minor career. Fails WP:N and WP:NACTOR. RangersRus (talk) 13:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Essentially a bit-part actor. No indication of significance. Fails WP:NACTOR. scope_creep^Talk 06:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Has significant roles mentioned in filmography. meets WP:NACTOR clearly. Thewikizoomer (talk) 07:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLP1E isn't correct too. Thewikizoomer (talk) 07:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thewikizoomer At the moment, there are no reliable sources that mention her roles in the movies listed in the article. If you find any, you are welcome to update the page or share a source analysis at this AfD. Please avoid using interviews or self-quotations. Also, please include any other events or supportive information that would elevate her beyond the BLP1E criteria. Charlie (talk) 05:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Stand as per - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kadambari Jethwani (2nd nomination)#c-Thewikizoomer-20240909075000-CharlieMehta-20240903172200 Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:15, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 European Congress of Mathematics

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

Non-notable instance of an academic conference published from Articles for Creation by User:TakuyaMurata (hence not sending to Speedy or Prod. Suggested outcome is a delete, or merge to the parent article. Sadads (talk) 12:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Obviously, not every conference is notable but this one is fairly large so probably notable enough for Wikipedia. I get some other editors might feel differently. But I think we can at least agree European Congress of Mathematics is notable enough. Not sure whether my name is related to the question of the notability: if a concern is the conflict of interest, I am not involved in the conference. —- Taku (talk) 12:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why you wouldn't merge this to the parent article? Academic conferences of 2000 people are not exactly.... prominent or of lasting public interest unless they are connected to something notable (i.e. a public declaration, something like a newsworthy public event (i.e. a bombing) etc). Its far different than conferences that include large negotations or notable outcomes (thinking something like 2017 United Nations Climate Change Conference), Sadads (talk) 17:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I am not against the merger, although if the article were to be merged, it needs to be shortened greatly, obviously. As for the notability, I don’t think we should be discussing the significance, which is different. Because of the Internet, a conference such as this clearly has lost some of significance (since we can communicate much easily online today). The notability, on the other hand, should be determined by a relative position within mathematics. In terms of size, the conference is second only to International Congress of Mathematicians. We should draw a line somewhere and my view is that this conference would cross that line, since we can’t quite argue ICM is the only notable conference in mathematics, which seems too high a bar. —- Taku (talk) 19:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Mathematics, Europe, and Spain. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to European Congress of Mathematics. Information like the date the application deadline was announced or a tweet of pablum from a local politician is not encyclopedia material. XOR'easter (talk) 21:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. European Congress of Mathematics is clearly a suitable page, but I have no clue why the 2024 installment would warrant a page. Gumshoe2 (talk) 01:54, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kylian Portal

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

This article is minimally sourced, of little educational value [epitomises a 'stub', what with the entire article consisting of two short sentences], details an individual of generally low-notability and is primarily centred upon a single swimming event. As such, the article should either be significantly improved [current issues may be contextualised by the aforementioned lack of notability] or deleted. Perhaps this individual's name and/or likeness would be better represented by mention in the page created specifically for the 2024 Summer Olympics. SRob092 (talk) 20:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 10. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not enough WP:RS PaulPachad (talk) 21:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Plenty of RS [25], [26], [27]. Oaktree b (talk) 00:50, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A few more more [28], [29], [30]. Oaktree b (talk) 00:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes GNG per Oaktree and passes WP:NOLY as well as a Paralympic medalist. Also, although article content does not determine notability, I will be expanding this within the next week. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:56, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UP T20 League

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

Another mass-created minor league which fails WP:GNG and WP:OFFCRIC. Oh, and I better nominate it for deletion, despite the threat not too! AA (talk) 20:35, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and Uttar Pradesh. Shellwood (talk) 21:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:56, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously listed as WP:PROD, not eligible for soft deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 20:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ava Villapando

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

I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage of this youth footballer to meet WP:GNG or WP:SIGCOV. Draftification is an option. JTtheOG (talk) 20:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Canada. JTtheOG (talk) 20:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, far too soon for an article. A child who does sports. Geschichte (talk) 21:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Arundel

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

WP:BLP of a musician, not properly sourced as having a strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. As always, musicians are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on third-party reliable source coverage about them and their accomplishments in media -- but this is referenced entirely to unreliable sources that are not support for notability, such as Spotify streams and YouTube clips, with not even one hit of GNG-worthy coverage shown at all. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be referenced properly. Bearcat (talk) 19:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Scotland. Bearcat (talk) 19:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No WP:RS PaulPachad (talk) 21:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RadioactiveGiant

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

Fails WP:NCORP due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. The problem appears to be with WP:CORPDEPTH in particular, since there was only trivial coverage in virtually every source I found. The sources already in the article are IMDB or trivial announcements such as a business agreement or the opening of a studio. Tagged for notability since 2011. Fathoms Below (talk) 19:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Fathoms Below (talk) 19:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Dastak

AfDs for this article:

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

I have multiple reasons for proposing this article for deletion. Firstly, the page creator is blocked. Secondly, all the references provided are fabricated. The page creator has deceptively used the term 'National Dastak' in the title to mislead other editors. The article fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:WEB from any perspective." Youknow? (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Websites, and India. Youknow? (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The sources do exist, but they're all trivial mentions in lists or attributions - not the kind of discussion of the subject needed to show notability. Adam Sampson (talk) 20:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. This is not G5 eligible, as the creator was not a sock of a then-blocked editor: as such the creator's block is not relevant. And the basic facts provided in the article do check out, it's obviously not a hoax. Whether it's notable, I'm less certain: there is coverage, including articles focused on on this channel: [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], and a handful of others. There's not a lot of detail, hence "weak". Vanamonde93 (talk) 20:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jael-Marie Guy

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

I am not seeing anything close to WP:SIGCOV for this youth footballer. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Draftification is an option. JTtheOG (talk) 19:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, Philippines, and New York. JTtheOG (talk) 19:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Sources are from reilable independent newspapers. Medforlife (talk) 19:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like? C F A 💬 21:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, far too soon for an article. A child who does sports. Geschichte (talk) 21:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shelley Lenz

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

Non-notable political candidate – Muboshgu (talk) 19:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and North Dakota. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added more sources reporting on Lenz, both local and national. Atubofsilverware (talk) 20:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sources about the election, rather than the candidate. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Seet

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

I tagged this article about a musician with notability concerns in April. It is unreferenced. I have returned to it and carried out WP:BEFORE. The only secondary coverage I can find is a mention of his name in CMJ New Music Report 2003 here. I have not added this to the article as it is minimal. I don't think he meets WP:NMUSICIAN. There is no obvious redirect target. Tacyarg (talk) 19:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Canada. Tacyarg (talk) 19:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: there's a review of Thanks To Science, We've Got Love (page 6) by Nightshift (magazine), a review of Melatonin by Exclaim!, and an article by Now (newspaper). Jonathan Seet's website has a section for reviews of his music, although a lot of them are short and/or from non-reliable sources. It's also interesting that one of the reviews is by someone who goes by LMNOP, and that User:Mnlop is a single-purpose account for the Seet and Seet-related articles. toweli (talk) 19:29, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV nothing on it. Xegma(talk) 19:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Zero WP:RS and lack of WP:SIGCOV PaulPachad (talk) 21:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SurveySparrow

AfDs for this article:

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

I did a WP:BEFORE and did not find evidence that this company meets WP:NCORP. Mostly sponsored content/press releases/interviews. I'm not seeing any independent reliable sources with significant coverage. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 18:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Internet, and United States of America. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 18:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with Clovermoss, lack of WP:SIGCOV and the "Times of India" and "G2 Crowd" these newssites are doesn't count as reliable sources. Xegma(talk) 19:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with all of the above. Zero WP:RS PaulPachad (talk) 22:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They seems to be prominent player in the industry 2405:201:F00E:D018:F099:A5C2:E37C:40A3 (talk) 19:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:34, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ha Khel Sawalyancha

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

Cannot locate sources to show notability. There are a few mentions but nothing that amount to significant coverage. CNMall41 (talk) 18:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. CNMall41 (talk) 18:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abyss Rising

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

No reliable news coverage; should be redirected to Nightrage, which I did three months ago. Of the four sources on the article: one is a WP:USERG blog review (dead); the group's biography on their website (a WP:PRIMARY source); a metal music list site (a WP:PRIMARY source), and another WordPress blog review (also dead). Also didn't chart, so fails WP:NALBUMS all around. Ss112 18:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV. Xegma(talk) 19:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Derivart

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

Fails WP:ORG, only confirms the collective's existence Kolventra (talk) 17:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Arts. Kolventra (talk) 17:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No WP:RS PaulPachad (talk) 22:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Prisco

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

Does not meet WP:NBIO. Most of the sources are about the business and/or based on what he says. Other sources are not reliable, such as a blog and Respect My Region which as no evidence of editorial oversight, takes user submissions and is a promotional fluff piece. I am fine with redirecting it to Priscotty as an WP:ATD option. S0091 (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and New Mexico. S0091 (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michal Kolesár

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

No evidence this economist passes WP:GNG, WP:NBIO or WP:NACADEMIC. His h-index is 16, less than half of what would be expected for an average full professor in economics, so there's no pass on criterion 1 and no evidence of passing any other criteria. No WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources comes up for a WP:GNG pass either. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Economics and Slovakia. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - courtesy ping to Rosguill and Newklear007, who interacted in the contested PROD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nepalese cricket team in Canada in 2024

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

I am fairly sure that this series is not actually going to happen. It was included in Cricket Association of Nepal's annual calendar at the start of the year, but no dates were ever announced, other than "September". The Nepal team will be in Canada for an ODI tri-series (16–26 September) and then a T20I tri-nation series (28 September – 3 October), but there is still no mention of a bilateral series beforehand. Canada are warming up with matches against the MCC. Bs1jac (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket, Nepal, and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lulu Chow Wang

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

Promotional article that doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. AlexandraAVX (talk) 17:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and United States of America. AlexandraAVX (talk) 17:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: China, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Micromort (software)

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

While there is coverage, it seems to sufficient WP:DEPTH to justify an article (largely "we used this software"). Allan Nonymous (talk) 16:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Software. Allan Nonymous (talk) 16:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gabrielle Baker

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

Draftify until better sourcing is found. I am not seeing anything close to WP:SIGCOV here. Fails WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 16:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, Philippines, and New Jersey. JTtheOG (talk) 16:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Sources cited are reliable independent newspapers. Medforlife (talk) 18:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which sources address Baker in significant detail? Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.topdrawersoccer.com/club-player-profile/gabrielle-baker/pid-1030179 - This website includes several articles under her name

https://archive.md/w7rMK - More details about her varsity team

https://sports.tribune.net.ph/2024/04/01/filipinas-thrilled-to-face-koreans/ - An article when she was called up to senior national team

https://voi.id/en/sports/379103 - An article how she kept the goal well as they won the match 6-1 Medforlife (talk) 19:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are not WP:SIGCOV. If there are WP:RS that is primarily about her (and not her team), please add that in the article. Howard the Duck (talk) 22:58, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's primarily about her as she was named All-State First Team awardee and her contributions to her team Medforlife (talk) 03:21, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Four sentences about her high school career is far from the significant coverage required. The sources need to cover the subject directly and in detail. JTtheOG (talk) 04:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abbey Crunch

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

It's a biscuit. Cookie for our US readers. References are no use for WP:V, fails WP:GNG, WP:BEFORE reveals nothing useful 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and United Kingdom. Skynxnex (talk) 16:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Genocide of the Ingrian Finns

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

WP:POVFORK of Deportations of the Ingrian Finns. Both articles cover the very same topic. Mellk (talk) 16:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: Perhaps merging the two would be warranted, but I feel an article of this name has potential. Teaching in Finnish and Izhorian was also banned as the deportations were occurring, and the Forbidden Border Zone was established during that time as well. I'll admit I don't know much about the subject beyond that though. Arctic Circle System (talk) 16:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, Events, History, Military, Finland, and Russia. Skynxnex (talk) 16:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almohad conquest of Evora (1191)

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

Reason: This event never happened. Évora was captured by Portugal in 1165 and was never reconquered by the Muslims, see ^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6]^[7] All the sources I gave are reliable and modern. The user who created this article and a few other people have already debated with me regarding this issue on the talk page of this article and others, for example in the Siege of Silves (1191) and stopped answering my replies after failing to disprove my claims. I will be addressing the sources they provided for this page. The first two don't say anything about this event at all, they only refer to the Almohad campaign of 1191, with 0 mention of Évora. The third citation is simply stating what the chronicler "Ibn Abi Zar" wrote, which is a primary source, so if we follow WP:AGEMATTERS, it cannot be used. I don't really have an explanation for the fourth source, however it contradicts more modern sources, so once again we should resort to WP:AGEMATTERS. The fifth source is similar to the third one, it is simply stating what a chronicler wrote but this time it's a different one, someone by the name of "El Édris". The sixth source does not state anything about this event at all, seems to be a case of WP:OR. The seventh and last source is the exact same scenario as the fifth. It's simply stating what "El Édris" wrote, basically another case of WP:AGEMATTERS. Javext (talk) 16:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Christianity, Islam, and Portugal. Skynxnex (talk) 16:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article adds nothing that cannot be gleaned from its title. And that fact is disputed. Srnec (talk) 20:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: my own searching suggests that this may be an incident of a chronicler accidentally recasting the Reconquest date as a date when the city was taken by a Muslim army. Seeing no modern sources for this supposed Muslim capture of the city in 1165, I would definitely invoke AGEMATTERS as the nom does. ~ Pbritti (talk) 22:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment, just a minor correction, it wasn't in 1165, but rather in 1191. Keep up the good work. Javext (talk) 23:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to point out another thing since I forgot about it. Even in the primary sources they only state that Évora and other cities were captured, maybe a case of sloppy writing or something like that. They give no detail about its conquest so even if it did happen, its just not enough to create a page. Javext (talk) 23:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Barroca, Mário Jorge (2006). "Portugal". In Alan V. Murray (ed.). The Crusades: An Encyclopedia. pp. 979–984.
^ A history of portugal. CUP Archive. 1947-01-19. p. 103.
^ Grande enciclopédia portuguesa e brasileira: ilustrada com cêrca de 15.000 gravuras e 400 estampas a côres (in Portuguese). Editorial Enciclopédia. 1959.
^ Stanislawski, Dan (2014-11-11). The Individuality of Portugal: A Study in Historical-Political Geography. University of Texas Press. p. 175. ISBN 978-1-4773-0509-6.
^ Kaufmann, J. E.; Kaufmann, H. W. (2019-07-30). Castle to Fortress: Medieval to Post-Modern Fortifications in the Lands of the Former Roman Empire. Pen and Sword. ISBN 978-1-5267-3688-8.
^ Fiolhais, Carlos; Franco, José Eduardo; Paiva, José Pedro (2021-12-06). The Global History of Portugal: From Pre-History to the Modern World. Liverpool University Press. ISBN 978-1-80207-133-7.
^ Hyland, Paul (1996). Backwards Out of the Big World: A Voyage Into Portugal. HarperCollins. p. 171. ISBN 978-0-00-255556-2.

Bouheida

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

I couldn't find sources to add verifying this information. Boleyn (talk) 10:58, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Is this Bouhdida? Geschichte (talk) 13:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Bouhdida Geschichte (talk) 20:18, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Covet Fashion

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

lacks significant coverage from reliable sources, failing to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Loewstisch (talk) 13:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Loewstisch (talk) 13:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete VICE is major significant coverage, and I found additional SIGCOV here in this physical book, but Venture Beat seems more like an interview/primary source. I am not seeing GNG being passed here. If others discover more, I am willing to change my opinion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I was able to find this article from Fortune, but it requires a subscription to read so I'm unable to assess if it's significant coverage or not. I also found another interview from Venture Beat and short coverage from Bleeding Cool about a New York Fashion Week update - I don't think these really demonstrate notability but they may be useful for a 'development' section if article is kept. Waxworker (talk) 02:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep the coverage in Fortune appears to be an article solely on the topic. The Vice article is clearly above the WP:N bar. The Bleeding Cool one is probably above the bar for "significant". That's 2 or 3 sources, all of which are solely focused on the topic. The other sources have decent information, but appear to be press releases or otherwise primary. Hobit (talk) 14:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Symes

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

BLP of a subject who does not seem to me to be notable, full of details of whom he worked with and various non notable films. The article creator put it up for speedy deletion a while ago but this was declined - I’m not clear why. Perhaps there are sources out there I haven’t come across. Mccapra (talk) 15:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United States of America. Mccapra (talk) 15:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BookBrowse

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

No WP:SIGCOV of this book review site; references are mostly mentions; awards don't appear to be particularly notable either. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:27, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Companies, and Websites. Skynxnex (talk) 16:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep BookBrowse has been around a long time and well known in the book world. It is often cited by other reliable sources, such as The Cambridge History of Postmodern Literature[37], The New York Times[38][39], and dozens of volumes of Contemporary Authors[40]. It was singled out in Public Libraries (journal)[41], The Public Librarian's Guide to the Internet[42], the Chicago Tribune[43], The Bookseller[44], Publishers Weekly ("Book Site Gives Online Buying That Old Store Feel". 6 January 1999); In 1998 was featured by Yahoo! as its Incredibly Useful Site of the Day. It would be nice to have a lengthy article dedicated solely about the site, but these are often hard to find for many topics. The question for trivial coverage is if there is enough material to write an article with, and that has been done. -- GreenC 22:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per GreenC. I also found a decent amount of Newspapers.com coverage, without going too in depth here are some of the sources I found [45] [46] [47] [48]. Also some coverage in these books [49]. Probably more if I looked harder, there's definitely more sigcov in the sea of mentions but I think this is enough for me to vote keep PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicola Palazzo

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

Doesn't appear to pass WP:NACADEMIC or WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 15:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Language, History, Geography, and Italy. Skynxnex (talk) 16:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lack of significant coverages need more sources. Xegma(talk) 17:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Burnt toast theory

AfDs for this article:

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

Unremarkable non-notable ephemeral Tik-Tok dreck. Perhaps worth a sentence elsewhere…maybe a slang dictionary. Qwirkle (talk) 15:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep... regretfully. It has multiple sources with WP:SIGCOV extending across months of coverage. Not seeing a policy based rationale for deleting this. Unfortunately social media trends often create articles of this type.4meter4 (talk) 15:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: I was intending to nominate it to AfD, saw it was already done. WP:10YT and WP:NOPAGE apply here. Significant coverage, specially in short news articles about a flash-in-pan phenomenon doesn't necessarily mean that a subject must have a page. It can be better covered in a sentence in any of the many articles on very similar cultural concepts, already listed in the "see also" section or at the top. regards, TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 15:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Popular culture, Behavioural science, Engineering, and Internet. Skynxnex (talk) 16:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I have doubts about the topic's notability. It really looks to me like there was just one TikTok post that managed to inspire several copycat pop psychology articles on various websites for a couple of months. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 17:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you make a case that all of these articles are from content farms, you are essentially just reaffirming the subject's notability. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So would the article in The Indian Express negate my whole argument? Clarinetguy097 (talk) 17:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Combined with Glamour, HuffPost, Grazia, and a local station, yes. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ivo Lapenna

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

Entirely unreferenced article. External links are to non-independent material. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. 4meter4 (talk) 14:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Language, Law, Denmark, and Italy. Skynxnex (talk) 16:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no sources at all fails WP:BASIC and WP:GNG. Xegma(talk) 17:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

eo:Ivo Lapenna is unsurprisingly much longer, and sources could be imported from there. —Tamfang (talk) 21:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: have fixed up the layout and referencing issues, and article has been expanded with some basic additional sources and information found through Wikipedia Library. A fair chunk of information is missing compared to the eo:Ivo Lapenna and agree with other user that could be translated and imported in. AlphaLemur (talk) 04:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dominik Ťapaj

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

Ťapaj has only played nine matches for MFK Ružomberok which last a total of 900 minutes so far. A source that looks the closest to significant coverage is Futbol Portal, but I'm not sure how reliable it is. Considering that almost no Slovak clubs are well-known outside their homeland, I don't see this article as a potential draft. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ZWCAD

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

This software page does not comply with WP:PRODUCT. It has only routine not sustained coverage in reliable independent secondary sources. Old-AgedKid (talk) 12:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Software, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Xu, Shiqi 徐诗琪 (2020-05-28). Lin, Teng 林腾 (ed.). "【独家】租来的技术却称自主产权？中望软件的核心技术之谜" [Exclusive: Rented Technology Claimed as Proprietary? The Mystery Behind ZWSOFT's Core Technology]. Jiemian News (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-09-06. Retrieved 2024-09-06.
  The article notes from Google Translate: "Based on the prospectus, Jiemian News conducted an in-depth investigation and found that ZWCAD is actually a product developed based on a third-party kernel, and the so-called "completely independent property rights" is out of the question. The reason is that ZWCAD is not only a member of these international technology agreements mentioned in the prospectus, but its core technology comes from these two international organizations called ODA and ITC. ... Therefore, ZWCAD's software can be said to be based on the core of the ODA organization and an improved product of the IntelliCAD platform software of the ITC organization. ... In 2014, Autodesk, the parent company that developed the AutoCAD software, sued ZWCAD in the Netherlands and the United States, claiming that "AutoCAD source code was stolen and improperly used in the development of ZWCAD+.""
2. van der Velden, Ruud (2014-12-23). "Dutch judge orders disclosure of source code in China". Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice. Vol. 10, no. 2. pp. 83–85. doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpu227.
  The article notes from Google Translate: "In 2002, the Chinese company ZWSoft started to bring CAD programs on the market under the name ZWCAD. ZWSoft continued to develop the ZWCAD program and brought several different versions on the market over the years. In 2012, ZWSoft brought a new CAD program on the market, ZWCAD+. When introducing this program, ZWSoft indicated that ZWCADþ would be fundamentally different from ZWCAD and that it would have developed it ‘from the ground up’. ZWCAD+ could be purchased in the Netherlands through ZWSoft’s website. Autodesk took the view that ZWCAD+ was not developed ‘from the ground up’, but instead was based on the source code of Autodesk’s AutoCAD 2008 program, and that ZWSoft infringed Autodesk’s copyrights and violated its trade secrets. ... Autodesk initiated preliminary relief proceedings before the Provisions Judge of the District Court of The Hague claiming inter alia an injunction and an order for a copy of the source code of ZWCAD+ to be provided to a custodian in the Netherlands."
3. Sava, Alexandra (2018-12-13). "ZWCAD Viewer". Softpedia. Archived from the original on 2024-09-06. Retrieved 2024-09-06.
  The review notes: "ZWCAD Viewer is an application designed to help you open and analyze or make measurements on plot drawings that you have created using various CAD software solutions. The program comes with a fresh and intuitive interface, so it is unlikely that you can have any issues loading or previewing the plots. While you can preview 2D and 3D models, the application is compatible with only a few file formats, namely DWG, DWF and DWT from versions R12 to 2013. ... In the eventuality that you are looking for a straightforward and intuitive utility that enables you to open most CAD-generated drawings and examine them minutely, then perhaps ZWCAD Viewer might come in handy."
4. Sava, Alexandra (2023-08-03). "ZWCAD". Softpedia. Archived from the original on 2024-09-06. Retrieved 2024-09-06.
  The review notes: "To sum it up, ZWCAD+ is a comprehensive software solution for your architectural needs and it can provide you with a large variety of tools. You should be aware that due to its nature, this program packs several technical functions that can be difficult to understand if you do not meet certain CAD skill requirements."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow ZWCAD 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) 10:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The sources given are not significant coverage, rather, they all sound like promotional or passing coverage. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 13:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Jiemian News is a source critical of ZWCAD that says, "Based on the prospectus, Jiemian News conducted an in-depth investigation and found that ZWCAD is actually a product developed based on a third-party kernel, and the so-called "completely independent property rights" is out of the question." The Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice article discusses Autodesk's claim in a lawsuit that ZWCAD+ was based on Autodesk's source code. These sources provide significant coverage critical of ZWCAD. Softpedia provides several detailed reviews of the product that meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Product reviews. Cunard (talk) 19:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cunard. The sources presented don't seem promotional or passing from my look at them. The copyright dispute as well is interesting. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Puput Novel

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

Lack of notability Sxg169 (talk) 12:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Indonesia. Shellwood (talk) 13:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OCW Women's Championship

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

No notable pro wrestling title. Just an independent title with a few references, not proving notability. The main promotion hasn't an article. HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International Practice Management Association

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

Refs fail WP:SIRS and so fails WP:NORG. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. UtherSRG (talk) 11:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Washington, D.C.. Shellwood (talk) 13:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ghost Rider (Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.)

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

Unnecessary incomplete disambiguation page (WP:INCDAB) of non-articles when IMO Ghost Rider (disambiguation) already takes care of all three entries. No incoming links. Redirecting it to the dab page as the (to me) obvious fix got reverted, so more discussion may be needed.

Entry #1: a redirect to a character list bullet point for a fictional character that had a non-speaking cameo appearance in the TV series
Entry #2: a redirect to a character list section for a one-season recurring character; it's debatable if this incarnation needs to be added to the dab page beyond the general character
Entry #3: a redirect to an episode list entry

– sgeureka ^t•c 11:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Disambiguations. – sgeureka ^t•c 11:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ghost Rider (disambiguation)#Television and redirect: Links there are already provided to the comics versions, which in turn have references to the Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. versions, but that disambiguation page does not include the direct links to the TV versions. I believe it would be beneficial to have those links as well. Daranios (talk) 12:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as a fork of the other disambiguation. We don't need two. Shooterwalker (talk) 14:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge contents to Ghost Rider (disambiguation) § Television where these direct links to the AoS versions would be most beneficial. Trailblazer101 (talk) 15:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated to the nom, they previously redirected while not merging any of the links. Merge all links. Gonnym (talk) 15:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Cameroon, Beijing

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

Unreferenced for over 9 years and fails WP:ORG. Text such as "Visa to non-Cameroonian citizen can also be applied for at the Embassy and the procedure would take a few days (up to a couple of weeks) All fees can be paid in RMB." does not add to notability. LibStar (talk) 10:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Cameroon, and China. LibStar (talk) 10:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Cameroon–China relations (with the history preserved under the redirect) 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) 11:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chen Qingquan

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

I don’t see any notability based on what I can see from the article. I’m not sure if the sources contribute to WP:GNG, as I cannot read Chinese. Thanks. Lordseriouspig 10:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lordseriouspig 10:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep as a recognized and accomplished expert in his field as shown, among other things, by these two article-length profiles of him:

Sing Tao Daily News [50]
Science Net [51]

Note that he's a HK Bauhinia Star recipient, a second-rank honour but indicative of his importance. Oblivy (talk) 12:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Transportation, China, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Hindi songs recorded by Asha Bhosle

AfDs for this article:

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

Monstrously huge and growing unmaintainable fancruft list where most of the tracks do not pass WP:NMUSIC. This is a piece for Schott's Miscellany. Still fails WP:NLIST. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This article has already survived two attempted AfDs easily, and neither of those had a single vote to delete. The nominator this time was also the nominator of the second AfD, and this latest nomination has no acknowledgement of any of the successful arguments made by "Keep" voters previously. The second AfD did have some discussion of how the article is tough to maintain due to the singer's enormously prolific career, and perhaps splitting into multiple articles (perhaps by decade) could be considered. Otherwise this nomination is merely an attempt to pretend that the idea didn't already fail twice. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

High Commission of Sierra Leone, London

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

Fails WP:ORG. Article merely confirms it exists. LibStar (talk) 10:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Sierra Leone, and United Kingdom. LibStar (talk) 10:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cambalache Interface Designer

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

No WP:SIGCOV sources given is a primary source Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 09:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some secondary sources Wiktorpyk (talk) 10:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chwarqurna SC

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

Google News Yield no result, the given sources are database. I suggest a merge with Kurdistan Premier League could be a possible thing. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 09:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We added more References kfa

Although the club was introduced in previous References Best Regards.ChwarqurnaSC (talk) 10:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chwarqurna SC(چوارقوڕنە) is a famous team in the Kurdistan Premier League . Amirfazlipour (talk) 04:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football, and Iraq. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joan Palmiter Bajorek

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

I have checked many references and find them to be a mixture of passing mentions and what Bajorek says. Otherwise this reads like a resumé. WP:ADMASQ and failed WP:BIO. The whole swathe of alleged references is WP:BOMBARD. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Women. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I agree that several of the sources in the article are primary and that others only make brief mentions of her but she is covered in a sufficient number of secondary sources to support notability. I am no expert in AI-related voice technology but some of the awards appear to be significant.--Ipigott (talk) 09:51, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Technology, Arizona, California, Oregon, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vincent Moon

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

Dubious notability, virtually no hits from RS in Google, seems to only exist to promote the article's subject Fastily 08:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Music, Photography, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Insufficent secondary RS. I'll be open to changing my mind if they can be produced, however. - Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 22:24, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This article has had a long history on the project and is an article that many editors have contributed to. I don't think it should be deleted without a fuller discussion. If that's the consensus, so be it but let's not delete this article as a Soft Deletion based on low participation. I think this is the first time I've relisted for this reason. I'd welcome a source review.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kay-Anlog, Calamba

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

Fails notability WP:GEOLAND, Barangays are not considered being notable. Please see here the similar deletion (which is converted the redirect), for more details. TentingZones1 (talk) 08:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Philippines. TentingZones1 (talk) 08:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduja Tech

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

Does not meet NCORP, no reliable sources; superficial and WP Trivial media coverage only J. P. Fridrich (talk) 07:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Engineering, Technology, Transportation, and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Panam (brand)

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

Current state of sourcing and WP Before doesn't help to establish notability per WP ORG or NCORP. Promotion only J. P. Fridrich (talk) 07:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and Mexico. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

S. J. Dahlstrom

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

Not notable writer, doesn't pass WP ANYbio and other guidelines. J. P. Fridrich (talk) 07:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Premiership of Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool

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

The article was created by a blocked sockpuppet Altonydean using ChatGPT or similar. The account behind the numerous sockpuppets has downloaded a lot of AI text (not acceptable on Wikipedia) and has become abusive when editors try to explain why it is not appropriate. In any case, the article of the Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool is not overly long and already has a spin off Liverpool Ministry. Southdevonian (talk) 07:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Conservatism, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Before the editor in one of their many sockpuppet accounts started using AI, they were blocked for WP:CV [52]. Large parts of this article are taken from websites, not cut-and-pasted but copied with minor changes of wording, that is, WP:CLOP. For just one example, the first four paragraphs of the Economic policy section is closely paraphrased from the website in reference 48. The rest of the section is closely paraphrased from two more websites. Sometimes a certain amount of close paraphrasing is permissible, but I think, even with attribution, this oversteps the line. Southdevonian (talk) 12:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Juliana

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

Bit part actor. Lots of social media driven puff piece, clickbait and paid placement article but fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 14:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, Medicine, and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:29, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes WP:ENT. Xegma(talk) 17:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Xegma: How does the subject pass WP:ENT exactly?

They have worked in multiple films and television shows. Xegma(talk) 04:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty Mary Sunshine

AfDs for this article:

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources, only mentions. None of the links in the article are reliable sources. toweli (talk) 10:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Washington. toweli (talk) 10:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV need more independent reliable sources. Xegma(talk) 17:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Penelope Brudenell, Countess of Cardigan

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

If there is any significant coverage of Lady Cardigan in reliable sources, I am not seeing it either in this article or in my Google Books search. All I see are genealogy compilations and that is indeed what the article amounts to for the most part. Surtsicna (talk) 19:03, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Royalty and nobility, United Kingdom, and England. Surtsicna (talk) 19:03, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I can't deny that we don't (or I don't) know much about the countess, but she was a Lady of the Bedchamber, for which we have a category. I feel we're a bit dismissive of female roles in society in past centuries, and that's one of the many reasons Wikipedia's gender balance is poor. Deb (talk) 07:57, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I sort of agree with Deb. She had a relatively notable role in court. I wish someone with more knowledge or expertise could step forward and improve the article a little bit. Keivan.f^Talk 11:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But all three of us know that which role she held (and only for a few months, if I may add) is not what determines encyclopedic notability. The criterion (WP:GNG) is whether she has received "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". So far I do not see evidence of significant coverage. I also think that having a biography with 95% of its content being who the subject's parents, husband, children, and brother-in-law were is not doing much at all for the state of women's biographies on Wikipedia. Surtsicna (talk) 13:20, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

-) You don't think that having all those children was an achievement? Deb (talk) 07:07, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you can cite a historian who considers it an achievement, please do. Surtsicna (talk) 12:38, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we can measure a woman's level of notability by the number of children she has given birth to. But if indeed it was a notable achievement then one can cite a source and include the relevant info! Keivan.f^Talk 21:40, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per @Deb Killuminator (talk) 15:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Killuminator, could you please explain how Deb has demonstrated that the article passes WP:GNG ("significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject")? Surtsicna (talk) 15:47, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The way the article itself is written does not make the subject look notable enough. As nominator explains, writing about the subject's parents, husband, children, and brother-in-law, etc., does not make her notable enough for a standalone encyclopedia article. The subject does not meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Prof.PMarini (talk) 04:29, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Trying to search on newspapers.com [53] but i can't access. 58.136.119.76 (talk) 18:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above, and because she was the central character of a notable painting, England: Richmond Hill, on the Prince Regent's Birthday. Women of her time and station had a lot of influence without any formal power. Bearian (talk) 03:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC) P.S. I added fascinating information about her family connections to the Charge of the Light Brigade and other famous descendants in British history. Bearian (talk) 03:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of that addresses WP:GNG concerns, i.e. the issue of her not receiving significant coverage in reliable sources. Her family connections and famous descendants mean nothing; see WP:INVALIDBIO. The only reason to have this article is if you, or someone, can prove that she has received significant coverage in reliable sources. Surtsicna (talk) 19:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm very conscious of the need to address the gender imbalance on Wikipedia, but it should be achieved by focusing on women scientists, doctors, engineers, activists and leaders. Not by keeping an article on someone who fails WP:NBIO that is virtually entirely describing a woman through the context of her husband, brothers, father and many children. Frankly, that's an insult to the goal of improving women's biographies on Wikipedia. This is a textbook case of WP:INVALIDBIO: "That person A has a relationship with well-known person B, such as being a spouse or child, is not a reason for a standalone article on A (unless significant coverage can be found on A); relationships do not confer notability." AusLondonder (talk) 17:26, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 04:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She was the Lady of the Bedchamber during her time, a notable and high-ranking social position in the palace. This role may be equivalent to the Sang-bok rank in the inner court of Joseon. The Sang-bok rank in Korea could pass WP:NPOL as it was one of the highest positions in the Joseon inner court. The Korean monarchy had two courts: the royal court (which functioned like a parliament) and the inner court (the court of the palace). The internal court, headed by the queen, wielded both political and judicial power. However, I'm unsure if the Lady of the Bedchamber had influence similar to that of the Sang-bok. Nonetheless, Lady of the Bedchamber served as like the queen's chief secretary, which could be considered notable, and she was also a subject of royal artwork. Therefore, I believe her role is significant enough to warrant inclusion. 223.204.71.128 (talk) 12:49, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And which sources discuss her in detail as a proof of how exalted her position was? Surtsicna (talk) 20:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The woman of the bedchamber is Her Majesty's right-hand woman and plays a key role in making decisions about social engagements. 223.204.71.128 (talk) 09:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not asking about the position. I am asking about the woman who is the subject of this article. You claim that the position she held was "a notable and high-ranking social position". Very well. She must be thoroughly discussed in the sources then. Where are these sources that discuss Penelope Brudenell, Countess of Cardigan, in great detail? Surtsicna (talk) 16:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Per above. She would almost certainly have more sources if historical sources wrote more about women, but the position is notable. Relinus (talk) 04:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist as there is currently no consensus. Since there is disagreement over sourcing, can we get a source assessment? And, although half of the editors here are arguing for a Keep would editors consider a Merge or Redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was redirect‎ to Ting Tsung Chao. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Albert Chao

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

Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 06:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Taiwan. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 07:49, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Massachusetts, New York, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ting Tsung Chao (with the history preserved under the redirect), where the subject is already mentioned, per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. Albert Chao (traditional Chinese: 趙元德; simplified Chinese: 赵元德) 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) 08:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Ting Tsung Chao as indicated by Cunard. I can't find any significant coverage, and the article doesn't have enough to satisfy WP:GNG. He's only a bit player at the redirect article but unless we need to make room for another Albert Chao this seems like the least-cost option. Oblivy (talk) 07:29, 10 September 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.

Duong Thanh Tung

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

Does not pass WP:GNG. He does not have a single start in a professional football competition and the sources used do not document his notability. Maybe speedy deletion per A7 is possible. FromCzech (talk) 05:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think for this player does pass WP:GNG with all the articles in Vietnam's big football journals about him. He recently signed a pro contract with a club in Vietnam's highest division, and is registred in the squad for the league. His pro debut will only be a matter of time. Lâm (talk) 10:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote, the sources used do not document his notability. Wiki is not a player database and a few possible starts for a professional club won't change anything about that. This player has not accomplished anything yet, and we are not predicting from a crystal ball whether he will ever accomplish anything. The page can be created in a few years, when he has dozens of starts, and it will be written about something other than his first pro contract. FromCzech (talk) 11:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Vietnam, and Czech Republic. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andrej Nguyen

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

Does not pass WP:GNG. He does not have a single start in a professional football competition and the sources used do not document his notability in any way. Maybe speedy deletion per A7 is possible. FromCzech (talk) 05:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 05:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – He's actually quite well-known in Vietnam, due to his call up to the Vietnam national under-23 football team. There are a lot of articles about him in Vietnamese, which I believe do pass the WP:GNG. But as you mentioned, he did not have a single game in a professional football competition, and also no appearance for Vietnam youth national teams. I see this article as WP:TOOSOON . I think a draft is the best solution. Lâm (talk) 06:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Like a single call-up to the U23 preliminary squad will make you famous in Vietnam? LOL. A draft is a reasonable option. FromCzech (talk) 06:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, his case is particular. He was one the first Vietnamese diaspora player playing abroad to get a call up to the national youth team. That explains why he got a lot of attention of the media Lâm (talk) 10:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2020 Fada N'Gourma shooting

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

WP:News article, I'm unable to find WP:SUSTAINED coverage Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Terrorism and Africa. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Events. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to either Jihadist insurgency in Burkina Faso#2020 or Fada N'gourma#History, the former of which seems to basically be "timeline of the Jihadist insurgency in Burkina Faso". I think the city is perhaps a better target, but a mention should probably be added to the other. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ngouboua attack

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

WP:News article, I'm unable to find WP:SUSTAINED coverage Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Terrorism and Africa. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Ngouboua. Or redirect, it's already mentioned. There are some extra sources that could be added there from this one. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pobé Mengao attack

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

WP:News article, I'm unable to find WP:SUSTAINED coverage Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Terrorism and Africa. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to either the place it occurred Pobe-Mengao Department in a history section or Jihadist insurgency in Burkina Faso#2019. The place is a better target imo but a mention should be added to the other PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolas Nguyen

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

Does not pass WP:GNG. No secondary sources, only databases. He played only one game (5 minutes) in professional football. FromCzech (talk) 05:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovakia. FromCzech (talk) 05:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no significant coverages. Xegma(talk) 17:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of intercity bus stops in South Dakota

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

Does not meet WP:NLIST. Also nominating the sister article List of intercity bus stops in North Dakota for the same reason. I found mostly maps of the stops themselves, though I fail to see how the bus stops in a list format provide notability. Conyo14 (talk) 05:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation, Lists, North Dakota, and South Dakota. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conyo14, this AFD is not formatted as a bundled nomination so the closure will only affect the South Dakota article. You can't just mention another article in your nomination statement and have it be included. Please read over the WP:AFD instructions for nominating multiple articles and re-format your nomination if you want it to also be considered. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only thing not completed correctly was the "la|related article 1". That has been rectified. Conyo14 (talk) 04:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Conyo14, you're good. By the way, I see hundreds of AFDs and I'd say 75% of bundled nominations from 1st time nominators are incorrect. It's not complicated once you know what to do but it seems to stump even experienced editors. Maybe we need to improve the instructions. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some closers might not even notice, so it's fair. Conyo14 (talk) 08:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the formatting isn't for the closer's benefit but the tool we rely heavily on, XFDcloser, needs this formatting to recognize what articles the AFD covers. It's invaluable to us but it is very inflexible. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both per WP:NOTCATALOG and nom. -1ctinus📝🗨 14:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandre Nunes

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

Subject fails GNG for not having significant coverage from independent, reliable sources where source talk about the subject in length and in dept for WP:V. Cassiopeia talk 03:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. Cassiopeia talk 03:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Geographical distribution of Slavic population

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

Multiple issues: WP:LISTCRUFT, WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, and insufficient sourcing. Incomplete presentation of statistics already duplicated in other articles. Florificapis (talk) 03:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Florificapis (talk) 03:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fletcher Myers

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

No significant coverage, all sources are databases or non-independent Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and Australia. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: Young player who has recently made his debut, likely more sources will be available in near future. Mn1548 (talk) 08:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What you are really arguing for here seems to be a draftification. We can't have articles that don't have significant coverage at the moment (WP:TOOSOON / WP:CRYSTAL). Geschichte (talk) 12:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Professional NRL player who debuted and scored points (conversions and tries), sources present and can be added, a lot of other similar articles of young NRL players have less sources (e.g. Jesse McLean) ChampsRT (Profile • Talk) 01:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I can't see the point in deleting now and then re-adding when we have the end of year reviews in a month. Doctorhawkes (talk) 03:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject simply fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant sources. No independent significant sources can be found in the article, per below assessment, and no significant sources have been presented here. Closing admin should note that Wikipedia isn't a WP:CRYSTALBALL so if other editors cannot find multiple significant sources covering the article, then it should be deleted. Alvaldi (talk) 17:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Though most of them are very aware of this, the closing admin should also note that the outcome of the AfD is not based on Keep/Delete headcount but the strength of the arguments. Keeping an article because the subject might be notable in the future is not policy based. For the article to be kept, the subject must be shown to have received multiple sources of significant coverage. So far, none have been shown to exist so it doesn't matter how many keep !votes there are based on possible notability in the future and the article should be deleted. Alvaldi (talk) 08:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table: prepared by User:Alvaldi
https://www.rugbyleagueproject.org/players/fletcher-myers/summary.html		?	List of stats	✘ No
https://www.rabbitohs.com.au/news/rabbitohs-sign-fletcher-myers-immediately-until-the-end-of-season-2025	Team website	?		✘ No
https://18thman.com/players/fletcher-myers/		?	List of stats	✘ No
https://www.nrl.com/players/nrl-premiership/south-sydney-rabbitohs/fletcher-myers	League website		List of stats	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'm supposed to be neutral here but I see hundreds of AFDs and we don't retain articles for subjects who might be notable at some future date. We judge by what sources are available today, at this moment and whether they can establish GNG. At best, if these sources don't exist, feel free to argue that the article should be draftified.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Donald MacMillan (rugby union)

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

No sources, and seems to have no real notability. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 02:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Known as "Ian" rather than Donald, which may assist your searches. Plenty of coverage on Trove and I've added some of them to the page. Got more results for the typo "Mc"Millan.[54] Jevansen (talk) 23:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vector TDx

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

Got reviews from IGN and PocketGamer, everything else is an unreliable source or trivial mention. Attempts to find significant coverage in magazines failed. Doesn't seem to pass the notability threshold for a new article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Could not find more sources about this game. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think this might get there. Small review from The Guardian [55]. My read of WP:SALON.COM is that it's borderline as a source. ~ A412 ^talk! 15:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's fairly small, so I won't immediately withdraw the nomination, though I do admit that it might push people to "weak keep". Now I essentially have no opinion about whether it should get deleted or not. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I dug through the web and found few more sources: Four more passing mentions on IGN, JayIsGames (twice), Four more passing mentions on Kotaku, and a few more articles on PocketGamer (1, 2, 3, 4). Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Black Fragility

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

This article covers a definition of a term used by one person, it does not appear to be a broader subject of academic discussion. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This term doesn't appear exclusive to Loury. McWhorter uses it (here, here), and Steele uses it in a very different context. Regardless, I'm not finding coverage of the concept itself, to the extent it exists, or evidence that it's a unified concept among the scholars who have deployed it. I also don't see an appropriate redirect to White fragility since the article does not currently use the term in discussing McWhorter's criticism of DiAngelo. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The term has been the subject of academic papers 1 2, at least one book written by a social scientist 3, and some articles like this one 4. Cortador (talk) 06:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Italy women's national under-18 softball team

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

Unable to find any coverage to meet the WP:NORG or WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 01:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Softball, and Italy. Let'srun (talk) 01:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flora Plumb

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

Fails WP:NACTOR with no major credits. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and United States of America. CptViraj (talk) 00:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: her career as theater actress and educator seems rather notable and her contributions to TV series/film might be seen as prolific. I haven’t searched for better sources so this is a weak keep. Would a redirect to the Personal life section in the article about her sister be an acceptable ATD? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre, Education, and California. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rebuttal. "Prolific"? Single TV episodes in about 20 shows and 6th billing in a film nobody's heard of denote a journeyperson actor. And being a high school teacher doesn't make her a notable educator. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:51, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"a film nobody's heard of".....Except the critic from the LAT, for example. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

La Joya Early College High School

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

This school has insufficient coverage to be notable. Fails WP:NSCHOOL, hence, fail WP:GNG. A possible ATD is La Joya Independent School District. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 00:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and merge to La Joya High School Same building, same personnel, just a different 'grade'. Nate • (chatter) 00:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Texas. CptViraj (talk) 00:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and Merge per MrSchimpf. Skynxnex (talk) 05:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kimeshan Naidoo

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

This somewhat promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Despite being a WP:REFBOMB, none of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV in secondary, independent, reliable sources. They are limited to WP:INTERVIEWS, WP:PRSOURCEs, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. His awards are the kind of "30 under 30" cruft not encompassed by the WP:ANYBIO award criterion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and South Africa. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay @Dclemens1971, fair enough - thank you for your thorough reasoning and looking into it.

I was the original writer who put the article together based on my research on the subject. I'm a new editor so I'm still learning the wikipedia requirements. I also added more sources after your initial deletion request, but this is a good lesson in what sources are valid for me.

I would suggest we turn the page back to a redirect like it originally was before I wrote the article. It was a redirect to the Unibuddy page. Informedpanda (talk) 21:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would accept restoration of the redirect as an outcome here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I restored it to a redirect but you reverted saying this discussion has to close.

So I will let you handle the process going forward as I'm not familiar with it. Informedpanda (talk) 13:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, once an AfD is open, it has to be closed by a non-involved editor. This will happen in less than a week and since both participants support redirect I expect that will be the outcome. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Markíza Dajto

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

I previously PRODded the article with the rationale being "Not notable - no in-depth independent coverage". It was deprodded by Mushy Yank with a note to look at the Slovak article. There indeed are some sources, but the only claims they make about this channel are:

that it became available on DVB-T (with some technical details), and
that Towercom resumed broadcasting it.

These two claims hardly constitute significant coverage, therefore I am renominating this article for deletion, this time at AfD. Janhrach (talk) 10:15, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Slovakia. Janhrach (talk) 10:15, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a WP:SPLITLIST of Markiza, a major Slovak network.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is not a list. It is an ordinary article about the channel – it is list-like because of its low quality. The article on Markíza also shouldn't be list-like; it even carries the "not a directory" improvement template. Janhrach (talk) 15:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SPLITLIST is not only about stricto sensu list articles, but anyway, yes, the article is a list. It has an introduction but it is very much in the list format, as yourself admit. As for the rest, feel free to discuss it on the article TP. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see why would this article count as SPLITLIST. The article Markíza is about a different, sister, channel; not about the company (at least primarily).

Also, quoting from WP:NLIST: "Notability guidelines also apply to the creation of stand-alone lists and tables." Janhrach (talk) 06:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Markíza as ATD. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 10:41, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basem Al-Shayeb

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

I believe that the above article is a blatant example of self-promotion, and does not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements for articles about people. The article heavily references the accolades and accomplishments of this person, seemingly for no other reason than to make them sound impressive, but their listed accomplishments and scientific contributions, though interesting on their own merits, are frankly not very noteworthy against the backdrop of the molecular biology field. They obtained a PhD from UC Berkeley, got their dissertation work published in some high-profile journals, and co-founded a startup- so what? This is not a singular accomplishment; this person did not discover anything that significantly advanced the field, and to the extent that they did, they did not do so alone. There are many other individuals like them out there for which we do not - and should not - have articles.

Furthermore, the article shows every sign of having been written by either the subject themself or someone close to them, with the intent of misrepresenting their accomplishments for self-aggrandizing purposes; to wit:

1. The article as originally written named the subject as the founder of the listed company; they were a co-founder.

2. The article as originally written stated that the subject "led the discovery of" the various listed topics; they were co-first author on two of the papers and a first author on one, and moreover all of this work was evidently done during their PhD, meaning that their graduate advisor technically "led" the work in question.

3. Following my attempts to correct these misstatements, at least two single-purpose accounts were created which proceeded to revert these changes and call into question my motives in editing. I have little doubt one or both of these accounts belongs to the subject of the article.

I am aware that my actions here may be interpreted as implying some ulterior motive, but I assure you I have none: I simply do not look favorably upon people who abuse Wikipedia for self-aggrandizement and self-promotion, especially (as in this case) while being verifiably dishonest, and I am acting accordingly. Xardwen (talk) 00:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 10. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Science, Technology, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I respectfully disagree. Wiki analytics indicate that the page has been visited 7130 times, with 13 average visits per day this year. There is significant coverage in reliable third-party sources that are independent of the subject. This suggests some noteworthiness, even if you personally think it undeserved. A quick search also yields further attributions that are not present in the article, including references in two 2024 books: Superconvergence How the Genetics, Biotech, and AI Revolutions Will Transform Our Lives, Work, and World By Jamie Metzl, and The Nobel Prizes 2020 By Karl Grandin.

It appears that the original edits that you mentioned, Xardwen, had deleted relevant news sources. They also included unsourced information, a copyrighted photo and a LinkedIn profile which are all against WP and the edits were addressed by seasoned wikipedians accordingly. It is inappropriate to insert unsourced personal opinions or skepticisms into an article. Your statements also seem to repeatedly violate both WP:AFG Assume Good Faith and WP:PA No Personal Attacks principles with potentially libelous phrases against a public figure?

Considering your edit warring and your statement of being in the same field and in the same city as the subject, can you explain what precisely is your role or personal and financial relation to the subject for COI purposes? You mentioned strong opinions on biographies, but you have not edited any other biography apart this one. In fact, aside pages on erectile dysfunction, this is the top page you have edited. I have no tie to this topic but I hold strongly that Wikipedia is an open-source encyclopedia, not a weapon to undermine persons, nor to push a particular view or to serve a personal vendetta. Pantrail (talk) 23:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your semantic first author comment, you are enforcing a biased personal opinion in contradiction with referenced sources, which state a leading role. A first author in biological sciences is typically the person who led the work on a day-to-day basis and is considered to have made the most substantial contributions to the overall research. In cases of co-first authorship, all co-first authors are considered to have "led" the work. Your edit was inaccurate because you removed this detail in your stated effort to undermine the subject Pantrail (talk) 00:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saheb Bhattacharya

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

No significant coverages. Xegma(talk) 17:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and West Bengal. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR, with multiple significant roles in notable productions. The article needs cleanup. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it fulfils WP:NACTOR, but the page should be enriched by more sources. Pinakpani (talk) 07:05, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blaxploitation (music genre)

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

Procedural nomination per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 2#Blaxploitation (music genre). C F A 💬 00:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Music. C F A 💬 00:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: it is simply a notable specific genre,, as sources, some available online, show (a one-click GNews search gives at least 4 reliable sources covering the topic). If this should be redirected, better redirect it to the film genre. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Blaxploitation. There is no music genre of blaxploitation; there's only the film genre which relied heavily on funk music. Everything here should be represented as a sentence or two within the Funk page, and a large section within the Blaxploitation page, describing how the music chosen for blaxploitation films contributed to the ghetto chic aesthetic, and how that aesthetic in turn contributed to hip hop culture. Binksternet (talk) 12:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Blaxploitation as it doesn't seem to be notable separately. —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 17:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Blaxploitation. There does appear to be some usage of it, but with little applicable depth. The soundtracks and scores of blaxploitation are of high important quality, the unique aspects of the music or its function as a genre seperate from funk or R&B and jazz other genres is not clearly stated in the article. If it can be, it can be fleshed out and we can see about it having a unique article that can stand on its own outside the films. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thinklab Group Limited

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

The subject does not meet WP:NCORP notability criteria required of business organisations. It is also a case of WP:TOOSOON because established in 2017, the company only received media attention that seem to be sponsored by the company after it won a minor road construction contract from a county government. All of the references used in the page are published within a month spanning July and August 2024. That might be an effort just to have a Wikipedia page Seminita (talk) 16:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, and Nigeria. Seminita (talk) 16:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Multiple reliable source from independent secondary reliable sources with significant coverage. [56],[57],[58],[59],[60]and [61] are enough to pass WP:NCORP

DXdy FX (talk) 07:34, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The news platforms where these articles are published are reliable sources but the articles themselves are not reliable because they are media campaign orchestrated by the company. It categorically fails [[WP:NCORP]] because all 13 references in the article are on just two topics of discussion and all have same thought flow indicating that the company planted all of them as media statements. All the reference are published between June and August and this article was immediately created. All these here [62][63][64][65][66][67][68] are on the minor road contract the company is handling. These references here [69][70][71][72] are all on single topic of the company pledging to implement the country's new minimum wage.

This article also has the problem of [[WP:TOOSOON]]. Established since 2017, it did not have a single record of project execution and media coverage until June 2024 when it suddenly woke up and acquired tons of media coverage. This company has to demonstrate visibility in the media for a reasonable period of time to show that its notability is not one-off. Seminita (talk) 09:20, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I see press release here. There are no in-depth coverage in reliable sources that are independent. Seminita’s assessment is apt. Best, Reading Beans 10:14, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: coverage seems to be mostly about one project. Otherwise, I don't see notability. —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 16:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

T-Bag (Prison Break)

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

Fails WP:GNG not very much WP:SIGCOV mainly just routine episode coverage Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

High Commission of Togo, London

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

Fails WP:ORG. 1 of the 2 sources is its own website, the other is the UK foreign ministry. LibStar (talk) 00:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Africa, and United Kingdom. LibStar (talk) 00:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy redirect to List of diplomatic missions in London#Embassies and High Commissions in London per the outcome of literally every other prod and AfD about embassies and high commissions in London that has been closed after redirection was suggested, and a trout for the nominator for wasting community time by continuing to AfD plausible search terms with a very clear target. Thryduulf (talk) 09:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some people suggest other targets like bilateral relations articles. There is no such thing as "speedy redirect". Never heard that in my 17 years on WP. I would have prodded this but one editor complained they need to go to AfD. LibStar (talk) 09:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing you say will discourage me from nominating embassy articles for deletion. LibStar (talk) 10:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds WP:POINTY. Thryduulf (talk) 10:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's hardly a response to my reasons for nominating for deletion. Do you acknowledge there are in fact more than 1 possible target if redirected. Do you acknowledge that "speedy keep" is only used by you and not a community accepted start for a vote? LibStar (talk) 10:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe the biggest time wasters are those who created these embassy articles as stubs and questionable notability. At least one of these editors is now permanently banned. LibStar (talk) 11:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We're discussing what should happen with one article out of 6+ million articles on the project. We typically have 70-100 AFD nomination proposals every day. Let's all be CIVIL and not get personal here. We want participation in each AFD in order to come to the clearest understanding of consensus and disputes between editors tends to drive away editors unless they want to join in on the dispute and those are the editors who we don't want here. The focus is the article, not the discussion participants. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:56, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fahad Younes

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 00:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Qatar-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not enough need more significant coverages. Xegma(talk) 18:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdelrahman Moustafa

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 00:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Qatar-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The player has 100+ games in pro level and is fully capped in the international level. He was also part of the 2019 AFC Asian Cup winning squad, which is a very valid reason to maintain the article. It would be easy to ỉmprove this article. Lâm (talk) 06:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Jong-min (footballer, born 1947)

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete also lack of WP:SIGCOV. Xegma(talk) 17:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - played at the Olympics and managed the national team, clearly notable - needs improving, not deleting. Giant Snowman 20:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Jong-man (footballer, born 1972)

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 00:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete also lack of WP:SIGCOV. Xegma(talk) 17:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Jong-man (footballer, born 1960s)

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 00:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete also lack of WP:SIGCOV. Xegma(talk) 17:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 1980 AFC Asian Cup squads#North Korea as possible search term. Giant Snowman 20:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Barroca, Mário Jorge (2006). "Portugal". In Alan V. Murray (ed.). The Crusades: An Encyclopedia. pp. 979–984.

[2] A history of portugal. CUP Archive. 1947-01-19. p. 103.

[3] Grande enciclopédia portuguesa e brasileira: ilustrada com cêrca de 15.000 gravuras e 400 estampas a côres (in Portuguese). Editorial Enciclopédia. 1959.

[4] Stanislawski, Dan (2014-11-11). The Individuality of Portugal: A Study in Historical-Political Geography. University of Texas Press. p. 175. ISBN 978-1-4773-0509-6.

[5] Kaufmann, J. E.; Kaufmann, H. W. (2019-07-30). Castle to Fortress: Medieval to Post-Modern Fortifications in the Lands of the Former Roman Empire. Pen and Sword. ISBN 978-1-5267-3688-8.

[6] Fiolhais, Carlos; Franco, José Eduardo; Paiva, José Pedro (2021-12-06). The Global History of Portugal: From Pre-History to the Modern World. Liverpool University Press. ISBN 978-1-80207-133-7.

[7] Hyland, Paul (1996). Backwards Out of the Big World: A Voyage Into Portugal. HarperCollins. p. 171. ISBN 978-0-00-255556-2.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]