Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

9 November 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< November 08	November 10 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Rafael de Orleans e Bragança

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

All three sources in the article are passing mentions in relation to his father. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. DrKay (talk) 17:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Brazil. DrKay (talk) 17:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Previous deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rafael of Orléans-Braganza. DrKay (talk) 18:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger Team (TV series)

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 17:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Law, and United States of America. DonaldD23 talk to me 17:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it clearly fails GNG and lacks notability. — Mister Banker (talk) 18:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arshin Mehta

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

Previously deleted and salted. Sources:

IMDB. Really?
Interview hence not independent
What makes this a reliable and independent source? I'm not seeing evidence of either.
A collection of advertisements is not a reliable source.
Another interview
IMBb again
Sole mention of the subject is "The movie stars Arshin Mehta."
Sole mention of the subject is one sentence and a cast list.
Sole mention of the subject is one sentence attributed to her and her presence in a list.
Not significant coverage for various reasons.
Another interview
No mention of the subject other than in the title.

So the sourcing just isn't there. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, India, and Maharashtra. DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nom, the sources don't come even close to satisfying WP:GNG, and BEFORE finds nothing better. There is also nothing to suggest this person would meet WP:NACTOR, either. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kayraktepe Dam

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

Seems to be doubt about whether this will actually be built https://www.silifkegazetesi.net/2024/10/03/devletin-bosa-giden-milyonlari-ve-yatirimlari-ne-olacak/

At the moment I don’t think it is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 16:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Hartley (British writer)

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

This article has zero independent sources that provide any nontrivial content about the article subject. Most of it is just blog posts he made or articles he wrote. The rest discusses that he was elected to local government as a district councilor. The BBC covered one of his opponents. Here's the only text the BBC wrote about the article subject: Mr Humphries is contending the Droitwich Central ward against John Hartley of the Conservative Party and Chas Murray of the Liberal Democrats.

I have looked, but cannot find better sourcing.

This article topic does not meet either WP:GNG, WP:NAUTHOR, or WP:NPOLITICIAN and should be deleted. MrOllie (talk) 16:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. MrOllie (talk) 16:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fraser Thomson

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

Radio presenter article. Subject has done typical radio presenter things - presented shows on various stations, but not enough to satisfy WP:CREATIVE. No significant coverage found on a search to satisfy WP:GNG. Article has been in this poor state since 2007(!). Flip Format (talk) 16:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Radio, United Kingdom, and Scotland. Flip Format (talk) 16:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Milan the Leather Boy

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

The article has 13 references, but the issue with them is that many of them aren't reliable sources and/or don't provide significant coverage. I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. I can find mentions, like less than 30 words about a Milan release in an issue of Cash Box ([1], page 26, bottom right corner). toweli (talk) 16:15, 9 November 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 New York. toweli (talk) 16:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asociación Civil

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

Article of unclear utility. As written, it consists of a single sentence stating that the title is just the Spanish-language translation of another term that we have a much longer article about, so it's essentially functioning as a dictionary definition. Since I don't speak Spanish, I suppose it might be possible that there's some nuance missing here -- is an "asociación civil" a particular kind of non-profit organization that does a very particular thing, while other non-profit organizations might also exist that aren't asociacións civil, so that there's a distinction not being properly communicated here? -- but if that's the case then the article would need to explain and contextualize and reliably source that distinction, and if asociación civil really is just a straight synonym for all non-profit organizations then we just don't need this to be a separate article at all.
In actual practice, all this really does in its current form is attract spam-like attempts to use it as a directory listing of the Wikipedia articles about (or offsite weblinks of) individual organizations, which is not what Wikipedia is for and has been stripped.
I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with more knowledge of hispanophone cultures than I've got can expand the article with content showing that there's a substantive distinction in meaning between "asociación civil" and "non-profit organization", but we don't need it at all if it's really just a straight-up dicdef of a straight-up translation. Bearcat (talk) 16:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 16:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aksu Dam

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

I cannot find enough recent sources to show it notable. There are other rivers with the same name. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Engineering, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vikalp Singh

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

I was unable to find any WP:SIGCOV sources and am unsure how this page was kept. I asked the reviewer for clarification but received no response, so I am taking it to AfD. The sources are poor, providing only passing mentions, and I found no significant coverage after further searches. The subject fails to meet WP:GNG. GrabUp - Talk 14:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GrabUp - Talk 14:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Madhya Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:23, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor sources with only passing mention. Fails WP:NBIO. Page reads as promotion for the subject. No significant achievement can be found that can be considered worthy of notice to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 15:35, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. The roles and achievements mentioned lack sufficient depth and are backed by unreliable sources, making them inadequate for a standalone Wikipedia article.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 15:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WWE Women's United States Championship

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

This is a new article about an upcoming, unscheduled event just announced last night (no cite for the announcement). There's inadequate sourcing to support this article, and it's entirely WP:TOOSOON for article creation, based on my reasonable BEFORE. It's already the target of ip speculators and page protection has been requested. I'd be okay with draftification. BusterD (talk) 14:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Wrestling. BusterD (talk) 14:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This article is about a real women's title that was introduced on WWE SmackDown! last night by the WWE SmackDown! General Manager Nick Aldis.
And next week on WWE Raw the company will introduce a Women's Intercontinental Championship. More than likely. 2600:1004:B0B1:937E:0:3:134D:3F01 (talk) 14:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)— 2600:1004:B0B1:937E:0:3:134D:3F01 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Keep - This is a real championship which was announced on WWE TV, a source could be wwe.com HydraXIX (talk) 15:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)— HydraXIX (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Keep - subject championship (NOT an event) already has coverage in Vice[2] and Bleacher Report (purely uncontroversial claims),[3] establishing notability per WP:GNG. Speculative content in violation of WP:CRYSTAL can be removed through normal editing. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 16:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This was literaly announced on WWE TV and yes, is real, this article will develop on time --Miki1234568 (talk) 17:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to WWE, agree with the nominator. This is a perfect example WP:BREAKING and WP:NOTNEWS. It also lacks notability for a separate article since that is not WP:INHERITED. — Mister Banker (talk) 17:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This championship has been announced and has been covered by, as well as the page's current sources, various other news sources that just haven't yet been added. Obi-WanKenobi-2005 (talk) 17:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rahul Gupta (film director)

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

A director whose films are not notable, thus failing to meet the WP:NDIRECTOR criterion, and the sources are likely NEWSORGINDIA. For example, this Mid-Day article is a sponsored piece, as it appears under the 'brand-media' section and is published by BrandMedia. Other sources are ANI press releases, which are neither independent nor WP:SIGCOV and may also be sponsored. Consequently, the subject currently fails to meet GNG. GrabUp - Talk 14:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. GrabUp - Talk 14:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: When considering the sources used in the article, the Mid Day article is paid. The Latestly article also appears promotional, as it lacks a genuine author. Similarly, the APN News article doesn't have a credible author. As for the ThePrint article, it was sourced from ANI. While ThePrint is generally regarded as reliable, this particular article is also paid. Therefore, I will align with the nominator’s position on this matter. Baqi:) (talk) 16:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I have removed some sources considered to be generally unreliable per WP:ICTFSOURCES, as well as the justwatch citation which isn't a source at all. What remains is advertorials and press releases. --bonadea contributions talk 17:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at this source and this source – they are not only advertorials but blatantly based on the same text, probably a PR or else a paid placement of some kind. --bonadea contributions talk 17:23, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mohadevpur Sarba Mongala (Pilot) High School

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

Tagged for notability by Abishe shortly after it was created. The creator removed the tag and continued to expand it, but never added a source. The external link is to an indiscriminate self-published website that does not help establish notability. My own searches didn't find sources to satisfy WP:NSCHOOL. Could potentially redirect to Mohadevpur Upazila, where it is mentioned in a list of 26 secondary schools. Worldbruce (talk) 14:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. Worldbruce (talk) 14:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Franciszek Błażyca

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

Being a victim of the Katyn massacre is not enough for a standalone article. Wikipedia is WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Poland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Georges-Claude_Guilbert

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Georges-Claude Guilbert (2nd nomination)

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

does not fit criteria for academic relevance and possibility of self promotion Paul John Dedalus (talk) 13:30, 9 November 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 November 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:52, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and France. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:58, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tran Kim Chung

AfDs for this article:

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

The article is about the chairperson of a non-notable company. It was previously soft-deleted but later recreated by a single-purpose account. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 13:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Vietnam. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 13:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of senior members of the Privy Council (United Kingdom)

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

Unlike the Father of the House, there is no such designation as a senior privy counsellor, or a senior member of the Privy Council, as denied by the Lord President in 2009. This article appears to be a list of longest serving privy counsellors, so I would not say the content is utterly original research (it can be verified with a list of all privy counsellors), but there is still no good reason to create such a list. The article is linked from succession boxes of articles contained in the list, of which I would say we should remove those as well. ネイ (talk) 13:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saoud Al-Nuaimi

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

Had only a very brief career and no evidence of WP:SPORTBASIC. Best that I can find in Arabic is FilGoal, which is just a database source. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Qatar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:23, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, only 308 playing minutes confirmed by Soccerway. Geschichte (talk) 17:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed Awaji

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

Deleted before. No indication of meeting WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Created by notorious sockpuppet user and block evader. Geschichte (talk) 12:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Saudi Arabia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:40, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 14:56, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously deleted at AFD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Walker (Brothers & Sisters)

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

Article has been tagged as uncited since 2013. The entire article contains WP:JUSTPLOT. Nothing found via WP:BEFORE. (Oinkers42) (talk) 13:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. (Oinkers42) (talk) 13:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ekaterina Ovcharenko

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

Fails notability and significant coverage criteria. Tennis player who has never won a main draw title, never played in a Grand Slam tournament main draw, never been ranked in the top 250 in the world and no significant coverage of her is included in the sparse references. Shrug02 (talk) 12:53, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Tennis, and Russia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - In tennis, the criterion is that a player must have competed in the main draw of one of the top professional tournaments (WTA Tour tournaments (WTA Finals, WTA 1000, WTA 250 or WTA 250 events)) and have won at least one championship. Winning a WTA Challenger level tournament or any of the ITF W50, W75, or W100 tournaments starting in 2023 ($50,000+ between 2008 and 2022, $25,000+ between 1978 and 2007) or any WTA 125K tournament. This rule applies to both singles and doubles players. Player!!! The player She won Open Andrézieux-Bouthéon 42 ITF W75 Tournaments. As a result, this player meets the criteria.User:Vecihi91 12:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you know all this then why don't you add the content and citations to prove it? Even if what you say is the case (and I have no reason to say it isn't), then at the moment the article still lacks significant coverage references. Shrug02 (talk) 10:44, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails to meet WP:SIGCOV. SlowPokesB (talk) 16:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SlowpokesB (talk) 16:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Benison (talk) 13:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Solomon Etefa

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

I tried draftifying the article, but it was moved back. I tried a WP:BEFORE search, but it failed. The sources in the article aren't quite formatted correctly. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 12:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Ethiopia. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 12:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is correct there is no problem with the citation or reference keep it up Pit09 (talk) 12:53, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify: until such a time as the references are properly formatted, inline, and are references to actual sources not just the name of a newspaper. -- D'n'B-t -- 13:56, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. All that matters is whether the topic is notable, and he clearly is. Senior general and meets WP:GNG. Terrible article, but AfD is not cleanup. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:06, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Necrothesp I recognize that AfD is not cleanup, however WP:DRAFTIFY and peoples persistence in moving "their" article back into mainspace prevented me from unilaterally draftifying again. There really does need to be a space for discussing articles that technically shouldn't be unilaterally draftified per WP:DRAFTIFY but perhaps they ought to be draftified, anyways...but there isn't. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Benison (talk) 13:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Altani

AfDs for this article:

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

In a previous AfD, a clear consensus emerged that this biography did not meet WP:BIO1E, and it was merged to Tolui.

The author of the recreated article claims that this woman is identical to another woman of a similar name. This is pure original research. They claim that this source "confirms Eltina or Aylt'ana was Altani", when in reality it does no such thing: is a chapter about transliterations of names.

I suggest that the original merge be restored. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, History, and Mongolia. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Francise confirmed they were one and same person Ortaq (talk) 14:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ortaq: Could you perhaps quote the relevant part of the source? Or indicate the page number(s)? TompaDompa (talk) 03:50, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TompaDompa, Ortaq is free to correct me, but I believe they mean pages 410–411. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:36, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I figured, but I don't see how it supports their position. The source states (if you'll excuse my poor attempts at representing the characters used in the text correctly) that Grigor calls the wife of Čormaqan "Ayltʻana Xatʻun," but Kirakos calls her "Eltina Xatʻun" (Tiflis edition, p. 269, 1. 6 from the bottom). and In the Secret History (§ 214) the name of the wife of Boro𝛾ul appears seven times (YCPS 9.13b2 and 4; 14a5; 14b3; 15a2 and 4; 16a1). Each time it is transcribed [...] Al ta ni (= Altani).. It's all a bit technical of course, but this does not look to me like stating that the two are the same person—even if the source may be saying that these are two variations (or just transcriptions?) of the same name? TompaDompa (talk) 14:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, hence their argument is entirely flawed. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:14, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Well, I don't have any particular opinions on the merits of having a stand-alone article in this specific case beside that, but on the assumption that the last AfD got it right and given that nothing obvious has changed since (unless there's something I'm missing, the only thing that was new was the assertion that these two people were one and the same?), I suppose the "merge" outcome should stand—and since the content was presumably already merged that would amount to a (reinstate) redirect from me. TompaDompa (talk) 18:18, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Benison (talk) 13:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Smoluća

AfDs for this article:

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

This siege, its relief and the evacuation of the population is covered in a short paragraph in the comprehensive two-volume US history of these wars, Balkan Battlegrounds. It doesn't include much of what is in the current paragraph headed Order of battle, and when summarised would amount to a few sentences at best. A Google Books search adds very little in terms of possible reliable sources, none of which constitute significant coverage. I could trim it down to just what the source does say, but the editor responsible has done this before, and therefore this is a classic WP:TNT candidate. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:12, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:12, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that this was a minor action in the overall fighting for the Posavina region from March 1992 to January 1993, and might be mentioned in a larger article on those operations. But it is definitely not notable on its own. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, i can add sources to this article if you let me. It will take a little bit of time because i am finding sources for another article Wynnsanity (talk) 09:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion you are not right. This is a sige and if we have siege of žepa and another smaller cities we should have for this also. Its not the minor action because a lot of civis were saved and both sides took heavy casulties. There are also not so much books about this war in english because nobody cares to be honest about balkans. I agree that is bad if we have only 1 english and 10 serb sources on english wiki but the other articles for other side also have just some tabloid blogs and they are not deleted or even marked as "bad sources", is it a coincidence? I would not say so

All the best Wynnsanity (talk) 09:23, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All you need is significant coverage in reliable sources. They don't have to be in English. telegraf.rs isn't a reliable source, neither are blogs, fora, local town news portals with no real editorial oversight, or fanboi websites. Most of the articles being created about the Balkan wars of the 90s at the moment are incredibly poorly sourced. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:12, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree that telegraph is not good source. Can you give me a day or two to find better? I think that they are very badly sources because people from that area dont write or talk about it much, its "taboo". Thanks Wynnsanity (talk) 10:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peacemaker, i will undo your text edit today if its okay for you because it will be a lot easier for me to work on this article if i have first version not this one, i will also add content and relevant sources to it right after. I hope you understand and dont mind. Best Wynnsanity (talk) 12:31, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No need, I was caught up with other things and neglected this article. As peace maker said, it does not need its own article since this was a part of a wider Bosnian TO campaign in Lukavac. I might also add that when I first made this article, I was very inexperienced and didn’t know anything about copyright. Orhov (talk) 14:50, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i made changes and fixed the problem that peacemaker suggested, if you are the editor its up to you, best Wynnsanity (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the article should be retained if more is added, like a prelude or aftermath, that is if it is backed up by reliable material. If not, then that is fine with me. Orhov (talk) 17:33, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to include that, thanks Wynnsanity (talk) 19:56, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:15, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The citations that have been added, like "Fooian & Foo 2002, p. XXX" are not verifiable as they don't provide the title of the book, or publisher etc. No-one can look at it and then check if it is reliable and accurately reflects what is is supposed to be supporting. Unless the full citations are added, we cannot be assured that significant coverage exists in reliable sources, and therefore the article should be deleted. Also, the removal of the material about the Serbs evacuating and withdrawing due to ARBiH pressure and the town being occupied by them is directly relevant to the subject, and deletion of it could be considered censorship to only indicate one side's version of the engagement. I strongly suggest you re-instate it. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but this is totally absurd. First of all, in Bosnia people are all Bosnians(muslim, orthodox and catholic) and you cant look at them "black and white" like you do and in every article saying "Bosnians never did anything", "Bosnian atrocities i dont think so" etc. When we few people(editors) who are benevolently editing wikipedia will be deprived of your non-existent criteria where you always want more and more and more and then delete our works and add stars to your main page for contributions, cringe. This is not "one side" POV because here in the article they only explain what happend during the siege and shelling wich is fair and totally honest and you cant as wiki admin look to this topic like that one side never did anything bad and want a milion sources to be "assured", thats not serious. And when one neutral editor "Fanboi" as you called him posted yesterday all that you have asked for(siege, civis..) you have ofcourse ignored and continued with your agenda. Article was in bad shape until we make it be a lot better with our good faith edits, i personally have a big collection about this topics and this is not Naoleonic War to have thousand best sources. I will undo my edits because i dont know how to add and you will have another sources from other editors wich are also not your taste but every article with "Sanjak NEWS, BLOGSPOT" is okay and "reliable" to you because one side is always the victim and we are all "Fanboi", says who? Bill Clinton? Pretty sad to be honest. Wynnsanity (talk) 15:38, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

what are you on about exactly? I have never done anything of the sort. I have rarely edited articles about the Yugoslav Wars of the 90s because I was there for some of it, but the sudden flurry of poorly sourced articles about obscure events drew my attention. Have you even read the reliable source policy? The verifiability policy? These are fundamental to what we do, as is WP:NPOV. All en WP expects is for these many newly created articles on the Yugoslav Wars to be notable in their own right and reliably sourced. If that is too much for you, then perhaps en WP is not for you. If you tell me what the titles are of the books you provided short citations (authors and year of publication, but nothing else) for, I can check them for reliability and that they actually support what you say they do. If they are reliable and do what you say, then perhaps the article will meet WP:N. I know it can be frustrating when other editors question your work, but that is what we do here. It isn't a blog or forum. In any case, take a chill pill, good grief... Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did a Google search for Borojević and it quickly identified him as a self-published author of aviation books (in the main), and results also indicate he served in the JNA then VRS during the Bosnian War and continued to serve in the VRS afterwards. So, for starters, he's not a historian; secondly, he's self-published; and he's closely affiliated with the VRS given he served in the VRS and the VRS were involved in this engagement. The perception (if not actuality) of a conflict of interest and a likely axe to grind is pretty obvious. I cannot see how his book can be considered reliable, and it certainly can't be used to demonstrate the notability of an article. I will now remove the citations to Borojević from the article. If you believe the book is reliable, feel free to ask for a community opinion at WP:RSN. I have also posted this to Wynnsanity's talk page. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:39, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You tell me to take pills to calm down, knowing that I'm right in everything I said, but it doesn't matter, I'm used to it here. This is isnt blogforum but is also not your forum to whatever you want. I apologize because I did not write in English how to get to the book, so it turned out that I was manipulating, which is not the case. I think the editor wrote according to that book, I didn't know it was self-proclaimed because it seemed official to me Wynnsanity (talk) 09:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let’s be really clear here. Nothing I am saying is MY “policy”. Everything I have observed reflects English Wikipedia policy. Now we have more “references” without a title or publisher. What are the titles of the books please? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 20:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that is impossible to talk with you. You can sell that story to someone else, not me. I don't want to waste my time on insignificant things when anyone with a wrong woldview of can destroy my hard and good work. I'm done with this so delete and do whatever you want. goodbye 2A00:10:990A:F501:40F6:9E0D:C07D:A148 (talk) 23:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Benison (talk) 13:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for this kind of contentious and contested topic I’d expect sources of the highest quality. Failing that I don’t think we should take anything on trust. There’s too much POV-driven Balkan rubbish on this site anyway. Mccapra (talk) 15:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Qara-Hamid (1510)

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

Fail to see how this is notable. The only two remaining citations are poorly cited (and not verifiable) and seem to be based on translation of a primary source? This was moved to draft twice because of its poor quality [4] [5] but then quickly moved back with no explanation by two brand new users [6] [7], one of them being the creator of this article. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The second citation appears to be from this article, so Azerbaijani-speaking editors could be of help. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That isn’t the source referred to. The pdf you linked to doesn’t have pages 500 or 501 as in the reference, and in any case doesn’t mention Qara Hamid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mccapra (talk • contribs)

Delete as I can’t find any sources in any language for this alleged battle. Mccapra (talk) 15:16, 9 November 2024 (UTC)8[reply]
Delete likely fabricated sources. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mangilal Arya

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

I searced web and I didn’t find any single source for this article, fails WP:GNG. This article is also tagged since 2012 but not yet nominated. I m surprised how did this page survived a long. TheSlumPanda (talk) 11:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, India, and Rajasthan. TheSlumPanda (talk) 11:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No sources on the page. Can not find anything on the subject. Fails WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 13:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ebohon of Ova

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

Fails WP:GNG. The article was declined at Afc but finds it's way back to the main space. Ibjaja055 (talk) 15:43, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Africa. Shellwood (talk) 16:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 10:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stirling City Choir

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

A purely PROMOTIONal piece for a community group that has gained no INDEPENDENT coverage in the past 167 years. -- D'n'B-t -- 11:33, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. -- D'n'B-t -- 11:33, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. -- D'n'B-t -- 14:07, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 10:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon Dynasty

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

I don't see how WP:NCORP is met given the sources in the article, and I wasn't able to find sources that would be enough to establish notability either. toweli (talk) 11:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Companies, United States of America, and California. toweli (talk) 11:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 10:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Riyasat Parjamandal

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

Unable to find enough sources to show that this topic meets WP:NORG. Redirection would have been a good ATD, but the only article that mentions this party is Ghagga, a town, which seems inappropriate as a target. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, India, and Punjab. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the article name has a typo, it should be "Riyasat Prajamandal", "Riyasat Prajamandal" or "Riasti Praja Mandal". Notable political movement, see [8], [9], [10], [11] --Soman (talk) 10:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I believe the article is notable and the article just needs some corrections. It’s better to improve the article rather than delete it. Since Soman has provided references above, I think it's justified for the article to remain on Wikipedia. Baqi:) (talk) 17:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amrish Tyagi

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

Being related to a notable person does not establish notability on Wikipedia. The subject clearly fails to meet both WP:NPOL and WP:GNG guidelines. Baqi:) (talk) 10:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Baqi:) (talk) 10:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm only seeing WP:ROUTINE coverage. Ratekreel (talk) 10:58, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor sources with just passing mention. I can not find any substantial and significant achievement worthy of notice by the subject to warrant a page on. Fails WP:NPOL. RangersRus (talk) 13:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kanja Odland

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

Conatins no independent sourcing, and what I could find was a Dagens Nyheter interview, which is mostly about her school of Buddhism and contains scant info in Odland herself, and participation in a Sveriges Radio show on meditation practices in Sweden. Insufficient in-depth and independent coverage. Draken Bowser (talk) 09:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Buddhism, and Sweden. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:17, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edited article to include independent sourcing. Article meets criteria for inclusion of a biographical person based on:

- Coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other and independent of the subject (Dagens Nyheter, Sveriges Radio).

- Notability based on contribution to the enduring historical record in the field of Zen buddhism. Allllllice (talk) 14:25, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article is a bit short, but includes links to articles about Buddhism (eg Philip Kapleau which mentions Odland under the lineage section) and some acceptable references. I'm sure there are other sources that could be included. I recommend that the article is retained. Manbooferie (talk) 17:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:58, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Antunovic

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

Article has been tagged for notability since 2012. This lawyer has participated in a couple of notable trials, but that does not make the subject himself notable per se. Muzilon (talk) 09:23, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and New Zealand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete No significant coverage. My own searches yield nothing other than discussions of his involvement in cases and some interviews. Barring something extraordinary about his representation he doesn't inherit notability from the cases. Oblivy (talk) 11:51, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 11:02, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep as I had a dig around and found some solid coverage. In 1999, he was the subject of a profile piece in the Evening Post titled "The Defense", related to his defence of Scott Watson.^[1] He also received some coverage when he criticised the courts for remaining open to jury trials during covid.^[2]^[3] I also found an example of himself—rather than his client—making headlines for his comments made in court.^[4] There are articles about his work where his involvement is not merely a trivial mention, for example in this article he makes extensive comments about a breach of name suppression orders.^[5] In another article from 2011 he comments on the role of the legal aid system as an expert, and is described as a "senior criminal lawyer [...] well-known for his work on high-profile murder cases".^[6] David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 22:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I applaud the effort seeking out sources which might support a keep, but this falls under what I described above with him getting discussed for his involvement in cases. The 1999 article is one piece of significant coverage. The Covid protest stuff is slightly less clear but I see it as him generating coverage about a single event. Based on this, particularly the 1999 article, I'm not inclined to change my vote but perhaps I'm at weak delete (if there is such a thing). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oblivy (talk • contribs) 14:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Murdoch, Wendy (5 June 1999), "The Defense", The Evening Post – via Proquest
^ Nightingale, Melissa (2020-03-17), "Coronavirus: Lawyer criticises courts for continuing jury trials", NZ Herald, retrieved 2024-11-03
^ "Did This Lawyer's Coronavirus Concerns Lead To The Jury Trial Suspension", LawFuel, 2020-03-18, archived from the original on 2023-10-01, retrieved 2024-11-03
^ "Judge ticks off Watson lawyer over opening address", NZ Herald, 2000-06-30, retrieved 2024-11-03
^ "Defence lawyer calls suppression breach 'outrageous'", Otago Daily Times Online News, 2010-05-25, retrieved 2024-11-03
^ Morri, Deborah (2021-06-18), "Public defenders or private: battle lines", The Dominion Post, retrieved 2024-11-03 – via Pressreader

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:58, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haryana Gana Parishad

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

Unable to find enough sources to show that this meets WP:NORG. PROD was contested. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, India, and Haryana. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, political party that had representation in the national parliament of India. Not impossible to source, and as per the number of references it is worth noting that there isn't a lot of 1999 material from Indian press online but WP:NEXIST more sources will exist offline in Indian national news media. --Soman (talk) 09:55, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The last sentence of WP:NEXIST is "However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface". This article has been tagged as having no sources since December 2009. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:59, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're misreading NEXIST. Here is a party in national parliament, so it is reasonable to assume that there would exist offline sources available in addition to the available online sources. And lack of sourcing is not a deletion criteria in itself (apart from BLP articles). --Soman (talk) 10:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rajiv Ranjan Prasad

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

This clearly fails WP:NPOL, as the subject has not won any elections to prominent positions like MP, MLA, or MLC. Additionally, it does not meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines (WP:GNG). Holding a position as Chief National Spokesperson of a party does not satisfy Wikipedia's general guidelines for notability. Baqi:) (talk) 09:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, India, and Bihar. Baqi:) (talk) 09:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No notable coverage on the subject. Per nom fails WP:NPOL. The subject does not seem to warrant a page because of no significant, interesting, or unusual enough coverage to deserve attention or to be recorded as Politician. RangersRus (talk) 15:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Youn Young-seong

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played 7 minutes in the K-League and 215 minutes in the J2 league. The Japanese Wikipedia has mostly primary sources, though it has the one sports.khan.co.kr article, which looks like fluff to me. It has words like "grow rapidly" and "absorbing the detailed and fast-paced soccer unique to South America like a sponge" when the reality is he never played a single competitive match in South America. Geschichte (talk) 09:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and South Korea. Shellwood (talk) 10:25, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdulrahman Mohamed (footballer, born 2002)

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

Lacks sources to meet WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Only played 14 matches in the Qatari league. Article looks very similar to those created by sockpuppet abuser Mhsohaib (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Geschichte (talk) 09:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Qatar. Shellwood (talk) 10:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malcolm Davies (darts player)

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

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 09:31, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Wales. Shellwood (talk) 10:25, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kari Saukkonen

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

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 09:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Finland. Shellwood (talk) 10:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Darts-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Cosnett

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

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 09:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Shellwood (talk) 10:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Having won the British Open and being the first player to have been paid by the UK government to play darts, Cosnett has coverage of its time - Sunday Mercury, Black Country Evening Mail for same, Herald Express for same - for this matter, there's a heap of other regional papers who cover him for being the only player at the time paid by the government for his sporting career. Further coverage of him "rounding off his year in style" in the Black Country Evening Mail by winning the British Open, the national darting competition at the time. There's also the Black Country Evening Mail covering him switching careers to enter the pub business (which isn't quite about his sporting achievements, but it'd be weird for a regional newspaper to cover some non-notable bloke applying for a pub license...). I don't have access to the BNA but there's also a story in the Wolverhampton Express and Star entitled "Darts star John off to seek fame", and in the same publication for him not paying his taxes - again, not really about his achievements, but it's hard to think some random unnotable would get the same coverage, let alone labelled a "darts ace". I'm seeing well enough coverage from his heyday to merit keeping the article. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 17:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reuben Mourad

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

Marked for notability concerns since 2013. I do not believe he meets WP:JOURNALIST. Article contains a number of uncited claims that I was not able to verify. LibStar (talk) 09:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Journalism, Television, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 09:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Dipluridae species

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

This is effectively a WP:REDUNDANTFORK that duplicates information in Dipluridae and its various genus pages. Keeping it doubles the amount of work to keep the wiki up to date, and doesn't add anything. There is a list of genera in Dipluridae, and a list of species within each genus (e.g. Linothele). The lists are not so long as to unbalance the articles and justify having their own page. Each genus in Dipluridae has its own article, so there's no longer a case to list species by family due to an absence of genus articles, as I understand was the rationale for this system. There is some precedence for deleting this based on the List of Salticidae Species deletion. Mediocre.marsupial (talk) 09:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Lists. Shellwood (talk) 10:23, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support In the early days of creating spider articles, there may have been a rationale for having lists of species by family, rather than including them in genus articles, but this is no longer the case. As the nominator rightly says, listing species by family and then again by genus creates redundancy, adds nothing, and makes maintenance more difficult, frequently leading to inconsistencies. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:25, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Such list articles make updating the taxonomy more difficult and sometimes they get overlooked leading to inconsistencies. The list are useful when there there are few genus articles and the list unbalances the family article, but this isn't the case here. A list might be suitable if it includes other information (habitat, conservation, web type, etc) but again that's not the case here. When here are large numbers of species, lists at the genus level seems more appropriate. — Jts1882 | talk 11:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The family article has a linked list of recent genera, each of which has a species list; and for the fossil genera (where we don't have separate genus articles) it does list the species, which are few. This article adds nothing beyond these components, and thus seems surplus to requirements. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:37, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archana Patnaik

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

Being appointed as the Chief Electoral Officer of an Indian state's Election Commission, whose role is to oversee local elections, does not make her inherently notable. I tried to search for SIGCOV but found only reports about the appointment, and even these don't provide in-depth coverage. The subject fails to meet GNG. GrabUp - Talk 09:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Tamil Nadu. GrabUp - Talk 09:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak Keep~~ Comment: ~~The subject meets the criteria for WP:BIO and WP:POLITICIAN~~ however, the subjects appointment as Chief Electoral Officer was only made today (November 9). Reliable sources may still be in the process of being published, given the significance of this position in government, although some have already been made available. Additionally, the subject is not new to politics, being an established figure in Indian national politics. That said, the article may be considered WP:TOOSOON as well and could be moved to draft status for further development.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 15:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Striking the keep vote with a comment now.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 16:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mims Mentor: Could you elaborate on how the subject meets WP:POLITICIAN and NBIO? GrabUp - Talk 15:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, the subject being an Indian Administrative Service officer newly appointed as Chief Electoral Officer for the Government of Tamil Nadu, falls under the category of WP:NSUBPOL whose members can be accorded presumed notability. — MimsMENTOR ^talk 15:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mims Mentor: Indian Administrative Service officers are not politicians. WP:NPOL is just for judges and elected politicians. You misunderstood NPOL. Read what is listed in WP:NSUBPOL regarding India: It says, “Members of the Legislative Assemblies and Councils of the States and Union Territories are presumed notable. Members of the Autonomous District Councils may or may not have presumed notability.” There is no way an appointed Chief Electoral Officer is included under NPOL. GrabUp - Talk 15:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, thank you. While I'm not opposed to deletion (as mentioned, drafting the article could still be relevant), there might still be potential for significant coverage, as the subject was only recently appointed to the role. This could soon meet the general notability guidelines. — MimsMENTOR ^talk 16:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If so, then this article can be recreated. I am also not opposed to draftification, if consensus decides it. GrabUp - Talk 16:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Davy Richardson

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

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 08:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:13, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 22:33, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Significant coverage here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:56, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Ottawa stabbing

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

The subject of the article is a minor crime incident which falls under WP:BREAKING and WP:ROUTINE coverage. It also fails WP:LASTING impact. — Mister Banker (talk) 07:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Mister Banker (talk) 07:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The coverage here is absolutely not WP:ROUTINE. Please read the examples at WP:ROUTINE for comparison. Breaking is a concern, as is depth and duration of coverage. There's not enough here to build an article that isn't bad which is my biggest concern.

This did get several months of coverage so not all the sources are breaking, but IDK if it's enough. It was created too early to see if it will turn out notable, but if it turns out notable I would support recreating it in the future. Familicides tend to be the least likely kind of mass attack to receive NEVENT qualifying coverage so that is a strike against it. Merge into List of mass stabbing incidents (2020–present), probably. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Worst mass killing in the city's history. Definitely notable.-- Earl Andrew - talk 13:31, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So what? What's next? Are we going to have an article on WP for worst mass killing incident in each of the Canada's cities? There's nothing encyclopedic about the article. This is simply WP:GEOBIAS. — Mister Banker (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nate Douglas

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

WP:BLP of an unelected candidate, not adequately demonstrated as passing the conditions for the permanent notability of unelected candidates. As always, the notability bar at WP:NPOL is holding a notable office, not just running for one, while unelected candidates get articles only if either (a) they can demonstrate that they already had preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten them an article anyway, or (b) they can demonstrate a credible reason why their candidacy should be seen as a special case of significantly greater and more enduring notability than most other people's candidacies.
But this demonstrates neither of those things, and is effectively just the usual campaign brochure referenced to the usual smattering of run of the mill campaign coverage that every candidate in every district can always show, which is not enough to render his unsuccessful election campaign more notable than other unsuccessful election campaigns all by itself. Bearcat (talk) 07:25, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Florida. Bearcat (talk) 07:25, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haryana Republican Party

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

Unable to find enough sources to show that this meets WP:NORG. PROD was contested. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, India, and Haryana. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Political party represented in state legislature. By no means impossible to source, and WP:NEXIST applies here as it is not very easily to find regional news from India from 2003 online. --Soman (talk) 09:51, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Balkees Jarrah

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

BLP of a human rights lawyer sourced mainly to statements she has made, comments she has offered and interviews she has recorded. Lacks independent in-depth coverage. Mccapra (talk) 05:08, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Law, and Syria. Mccapra (talk) 05:08, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I respectfully disagree. This individual has received significant independent coverage, in my view. Firecat93 (talk) 15:03, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - these is literally zero coverage in reliable sources about her. Comments from the peanut gallery and advocacy outside of a courtroom are not significant coverage of a BLP. Passing mentions aren’t either. Bearian (talk) 09:47, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gbolabo Awelewa

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

Non-notable cyber security person whose notability is anchored on his scant analysis of cyber security reports written by different groups and organizations. All are passing mentions in routine media coverage Ednabrenze (talk) 06:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as they fail WP:BIO. All the references in the article are either an interview with no editorial changes beyond questions/answers (and thus can't count towards notability per WP:PRIMARY), and none of them are actually about him - they're all about a cybersecurity thing, and then he's interviewed. I can't find anything beyond this besides LinkedIn, Instagram pages etc. which are all UGI. Molecular Pilot 07:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources are sponsored articles (such as this) or just passing mentions. No independent in-depth coverage to establish notability. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 07:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails ANYBIO or GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:35, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tararam

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

Mostly unreferenced topic, with unclear notability. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Hebrew Wikipedia article has 27 references. Left guide (talk) 05:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Israel. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Challenger Limited

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Sources do not meet WP:SIRS. Multiple issues tagged for years with no significant improvement. Was already deleted before by WP:PROD. Yet article came back without sufficient justification. Imcdc Contact 03:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, and Egypt. Imcdc Contact 03:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Club of Budapest

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

No proof of notability per WP:ORG PtQa (talk) 03:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Philosophy, Organizations, Politics, and Hungary. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Live Phish Volume 17

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

I am nominating the last four numbered Live Phish volumes (17, 18, 19, 20) and Live Phish 07.29.03 as they all appear to fail WP:NALBUMS due to lack of news sources talking about them, charting, or anything significant. 16 and earlier at least all charted on the Billboard 200 and received AllMusic reviews, but I haven't looked through them in detail. I came across these after noticing the article for 19 was recently recreated, with its only source being a piece on the Young Folks website about the Live Phish series written by a Phish fan/journalist, so thought it best to seek consensus on the similar articles' deletion. There just isn't any substantial coverage of these four volumes out there. The additional volumes are:

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Robert Watson

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

Hello - recommending this article for deletion for the following reasons.

Seems like a promotional page by a very ocassional contributor to some industry news, with plenty of links to his own website (cited as a source) and references to prominent or notable collaberators who are all not listed on wikipedia.

Suspicious edits by 81.175.147.23 who appears to only be active on this page (this IP address is based in the same town as Mr Watson) as well as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/DorianRichard1985 which also appears to be the subject, and created this article. There have been no meaningful edits except by these two contributors, who both appear to be Mr Watson.

This is a promotional page with poor source links, some unverifiable, created to promote the career of an ocassional opinion columnist. Does not meet Wikipedias standard for notability, nor source quality — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ieusuiarnaut (talk • contribs) 10:12, 4 November 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 November 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Arts, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. No GS trace at all for "Michael Robert Watson", so either he publishes under a different name or his work has received no attention. The detailed education history without sources usually says the article was written by someone who is/knows the subject. Does anyone know if "ZerO books" is the same as Zero Books? Espresso Addict (talk) 15:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Godzilla: Monster of Monsters

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

Fails WP:NGAME and likely falls under WP:FANCRUFT. Summary-only description of the game, with only one reference, which is about the creepypasta, not the game itself. The rest of the article is completely unsourced and provides no evidence of WP:SIGCOV. Coverage on Google Books and Google Scholar is limited to WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs, most of which are about the creepypasta, which I would argue is more notable, though it probably still doesn't meet WP:GNG. Nothing at all on JSTOR. Should redirect to List of Godzilla games. Masskito (talk)

Similar issues to MoM, this time with no references at all, also fails NGAME, with nothing at all on Google Books, Google Scholar, or JSTOR. Proposing same redirect to List of Godzilla games. Masskito (talk)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:02, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Godzilla: Monster of Monsters - sizable reviews in fr:Player One (magazine): [12], Mean Machines: [13] (pages 84-86), Electronic Gaming Monthly: [14]. Enough for WP:GNG. Also smaller reviews in pt:VideoGame: [15], Nintendo Power: [16]. Redirect Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters to Godzilla: Monster of Monsters#Sequel - didn't find any reviews or significant coverage for this game. --Mika1h (talk) 12:34, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I found one review for Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters. [17],[18] Timur9008 (talk) 18:19, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the sources found by Mika1h. It's weak, but there's enough for this game to pass the notability bar. Godzilla 2 should likely be Merged with Monster of Monsters given their overlap, with any Reception for War of the Monsters covered there. If anything more for the sequel comes up, ping me and I'll change my vote, but for now I feel that Mika1h's assessment is entirely accurate to how I feel on the matter. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gladrags Manhunt and Megamodel Contest

AfDs for this article:

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

This event lacks in-depth, independent and significant coverage as confirmed by a search on Google News. Also, the award is given primarily for promotional purposes by entities involved in marketing which is one of the exclusionary criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (awards and medals). Charlie (talk) 17:33, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards and India. Charlie (talk) 17:33, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This overall doesn't meet WP:GNG Cyberpower7 (talk) 19:36, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep how a national contest could not be notable. It also sends winners as national representatives to Manhunt International, Miss Intercontinental from 1997 to 2003, Miss Tourism International. Also Covered in high-profile Indian media which added, kindly check. Jitujadab90 (talk) 19:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Beauty pageants. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:07, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not seeing any in-depth, independent and significant coverage on Google News. Could you kindly provide a detailed source analysis to support your vote to keep? Charlie (talk) 06:19, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: "Mannequin: Working Women in India's Glamour Industry" (Zubaan Books) by Manjima Bhattacharjya has 2 paragraphs on the Awards; note: the name varies a lot http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/52851463.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst and is very often shortened (without Contest or without other words; sometimes longer "Gladrags magazine’s Manhunt and Megamodel Contest"). I find more coverage about individual winners (a lot) than about the Awards per se. If this is not enough, it could be redirected to the magazine (I don't think deletion is necessary) Mushy Yank (talk) 23:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I forgot to mention: please read the first AfD, where sources had been presented, some that I found linked also in Google Books but I cannot access fully so cannot judge. (Consider this a weak keep then). Mushy Yank (talk) 23:31, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There is enough coverage in reliable sources as discussed in the previous deletion discussion. Although I am not able to find any recent coverage of the contest, that does not mean it was not notable before and User:Раціональне анархіст (PAX)'s comment in the previous AfD should also be considered. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Gladrags as the sources within the article lack an WP:INDEPTH coverage of the subject event. — Mister Banker (talk) 18:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anxiety (Inside Out)

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

This article recently sprung up, but not in a good way. I find Joy more notable to have an article, but Anxiety doesn't. She currently fails WP:GNG and doesn't have much to say. She is a fairly new character, i would suggest a redirect to either Inside Out (franchise) or Inside Out 2. Toby2023 (talk) 01:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because the sources already cited in the article establish notability, especially Berlatsky, Noah (2024-06-14). "Opinion: Why Anxiety from 'Inside Out 2' is such a relatable character to me". CNN.
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Film, Comics and animation, and Disney. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Inside Out 2. The article does not have enough content to warrant a new page. Just because sources exist does not mean this page is needed. Esolo5002 (talk) 08:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to either of the two articles mentioned by the nominator. It lacks notability as some of the references are sort of a review of the movie instead of a special feature about the character. — Mister Banker (talk) 17:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melee (game terminology)

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

Appears to be pure WP:DICDEF, WP:SYNTH or original research. There is no significant coverage about the use of the term "melee" in games that passes notability standards, it appears. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Games. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning keep and expand/improve. The historical context provided already clearly goes beyond a dicdef, and it would be astonishing if there were not more sources for this concept, in light of the popularity of games using such a system. BD2412 T 15:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the reasoning of BD2412, and I suspect I could have said the same of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melee weapon if I had noticed that discussion. BOZ (talk) 16:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uşşaki

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

Tagged uncited for years but hard to find sources as apparently not the same as https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/U%C5%9F%C5%9Faki_Tarikat%C4%B1 The source on the Turkish article seems like it might be a wiki or somesuch so perhaps not reliable? Chidgk1 (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Islam, Iraq, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I see various books in English covering this significantly; also two reliable references on the corresponding article in French. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:04, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mushy Yank What books in English please? Chidgk1 (talk) 11:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added some to the page.

By the way, you have currently opened 27 Afds regarding Turkey-related articles. It is an extremely (and in my view exceedingly) high number for one nominator, especially concerning one topic, and it happens to be very challenging for interested users to find sources and even !vote. I understand you take to Afds pages that are unsourced but, precisely, it takes a lot of time to find sources. At the very least, I am inviting you to kindly slow down your nominations; personally, I would even suggest that you stop further nominations until the present ones are closed. Thank you very much. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uzbekistan-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:16, 18 October 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) 14:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep plenty of Turkish sources found but as Mushy Yank says above it’s quite a task to plough through Turkish books online to update the article. Mccapra (talk) 16:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 19:41, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ilan Lukatch

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

BLP of a journalist that seems to me to lack support from in depth coverage in independent sources. Appears borderline so bringing here for consensus. Mccapra (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Israel. Mccapra (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:50, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are 10 independent sources in the Hebrew article, which, together, seem sufficient to establish notability. Whizkin (talk) 11:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but the ten sources in Hebrew are absolutely dire:

1. Is a piece by him, not independent coverage of him

2. Is a passing mention of him in a band he played in in 1988

3. Doesn’t mention him

4. Passing mention in a brief listing

5. Passing mention

6. Doesn’t mention him

7. Doesn’t mention him

8. Interview with him (his first interview ever)

9. Decent, if rather brief, third party source

10. No longer accessible but looks decent.

That’s not enough to build a stand alone bio article on and it does look like the original creator of the Hebrew article was desperately scraping around for any mention they could find. Mccapra (talk) 13:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that those sources are sub-optimal. Whizkin (talk) 18:21, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. OR biography of a professional at work. The Hebrew article is refbombed. Our article is shorter, so there are less references, yet what we have is equally a mixed bag. gidonb (talk) 03:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of oldest fathers

AfDs for this article:

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

Potentially WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:NOTNEWS, and persistent WP:BLP violation, same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of youngest birth mothers. Absolutiva (talk) 14:08, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:19, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, and also WP:NLIST. Procyon117 (talk) 17:27, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Separate !votes for the two articles:
- About Pregnancy over age 50: Merge what can be saved in Advanced maternal age, then delete. The issue of advanced age pregnancy is notable and cases of late pregnancy, if medically or otherwise notable, can be briefly discussed, but 50 is an arbitrary threshold and the list is cruft. --cyclopia ^speak! 10:48, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- About List of oldest fathers: Weak keep, after much cleanup, but I'd prefer a corresponding Advanced paternal age article instead (currently it is a redirect to Paternal age effect).--cyclopia ^speak! 10:48, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Tails Wx 20:32, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Fully referenced therefore meets GNG. I understand the preference for "advanced paternal age" but that is already long and doesn't really need this list. It should point to this article, however, in its See Also. Lamona (talk) 16:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still fails listing non-notable people with references, therefore it violates WP:BLPNAME or WP:BLPLIST. Absolutiva (talk) 04:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it clearly passes the blpname test - these are named in reliable sources, there is no (AFAIK) attempt to hide the names in those sources. If any do not pass the blpname test they can be removed. That would not invalidate the list. Lamona (talk) 15:30, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~So as depend on notability in my draft article. Absolutiva (talk) 15:39, 6 November 2024 (UTC)~~ Generally not needed for userspaces. Absolutiva (talk) 21:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, this article does not have the serious BLP violation problems as the draft in which you've tried to recreate the articles deleted here. --bonadea contributions talk 17:12, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~@Bonadea: There are some names of non-notable living women, it also affects BLP violation claims to Pregnancy over age 50 (including non-notable women). Absolutiva (talk) 21:39, 6 November 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]

Article mainspace can only remove non-notable names from the list, if there is serious BLP claims. Absolutiva (talk) 21:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I finally abandoned by draft, let's proceed to deletion (same as above). Absolutiva (talk) 22:24, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for all the reasons listed above. And also because these "oldest" lists seem interesting enough to Wikipedians that there are several sourced similar lists like these. See Category:Lists of oldest people. Most of these lists have several hundred watchers. This particular list is pretty well done, and has 190 sources. — Maile (talk) 02:59, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, regard to the "non-notable people with references" comments. The notability of the refs is helpful: Time magazine, Guinness World Records, The Times of Israel, CNN, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, CBS News, Associated Press, etc. etc. These are good sources, and verifies the notabilities. — Maile (talk) 03:52, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maile66: Some list of people does not meet notability requirements for pregnancy over age 50. Also, Guinness World Records should not be used to establish notability per consensus. Absolutiva (talk) 11:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I tagged both of these articles does not meet notability guideline for stand-alone lists. Absolutiva (talk) 11:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mee Massa (TV series)

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

Another draft that was moved back into mainspace. It's not very well sourced, and a Google search turns up little to nothing (YouTube videos, etc.). I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 16:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Sri Lanka. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 16:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the interest of full disclosure and transparency, this nomination was made after a discussion with Afrowriter on my talk page. Here's a direct link to the discussion and here's a diff of the discussion that's happened as of the nomination. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Sirasa TV: the cast includes at least two rather notable actors and add one of the existing sources for verification (https://mirrorarts.lk/news/9458-2024-08-22-05-02-08 ; https://www.silumina.lk/2024/09/28/rasanduna/25979/මට-හිතාගන්න-බැහැ-බිමල්-නැ/ for example) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I usually avoid participating in Articles for Deletion (AfD) discussions, as I prefer to concentrate on creating and enhancing articles about notable subjects but i we go for Delete: Per nom as it lacks WP:SIGCOV there seems to be no review about the Series Afro 📢Talk! 01:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Is there any more support for a Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:33, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Şifa University

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

I can see from the sources on the Turkish article that it existed. Are universities automatically notable? I guess not as it has been tagged as possibly not notable for years. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:49, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Medicine, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:49, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:54, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - not automatically notable, but any public university is likely to be notable. This one, however, appears to be new, small and private. See [19]. As such, I would have thought it should pass WP:NORG to be notable. I have added it to the companies delsort. At this stage I have no view on whether it is notable or not. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:52, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify: I found some sources (which appear to be secondary) see 1, 2 and 3. The article needs some improvement in general, but I don't think it should be deleted. SirBrahms (talk) 09:31, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The page is 12 years old and has had no active editing. Draftify looks like backdoor deletion in this case. But the sources you have found are interesting. The first is a primary source: a Ph.D. thesis. Despite being a primary source, it could contain secondary information about the university, and provide something to write an article from, so I would not rule it out just for being apparently primary. The second source is a listing. That is not SIGCOV, definitely not at CORPDEPTH, and independence is questionable. The third source is the most important though. That tells us that the university was seized and closed down in 2016 following a failed military coup (it was an asset of those involved). The source is primary in that it is a news report, but presents a bit of a quandary. It shows that, on the one hand, the university no longer exists and only existed for six years. Based on that, it is unlikely this ever reached notability. On the other hand, the very event that caused it to close would appear to make something notable. I am leaning towards merge to somewhere, if there is a suitable target regarding the coup. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comments! It may be viable to merge it into Purges in Turkey following the 2016 Turkish coup attempt (especially considering it hasn't had any active editing in so long (a thing I regrettably forgot to check)). Regards, SirBrahms (talk) 17:40, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd move to merge if it made sense. How would that look though? There were 15 universities closed in the purge, and none are currently named. Should they be listed? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:10, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say yes. I'm imagining something like this:
University one, Place, Exact reason for closure (if applicable)

etc.

What do you think? Regards, SirBrahms (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we have the exact reason for each, sure. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:29, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Further to my above comment, according to this page Purges in Turkey following the 2016 Turkish coup attempt, this was one of 15 universities shut down in the purges following the coup. It seems undue to add this one to that page. Yet if it is not even notable for a mention there, it is not notable for a page. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:34, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:44, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marina Kazankova

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

WP:NACTOR significance is not shown.--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 20:50, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:59, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: One really significant role only but better-known as a freediver: https://www.deeperblue.com/marina-kazankova-attempts-a-4th-guinness-world-record/ https://www.sportalsub.net/en/guinness-apnea-carlos-coste-y-marina-kazankova/ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6584917/Freediving-duo-set-Guinness-World-Record-longest-underwater-dance.html https://tribune.com.pk/story/1888204/freediving-duo-set-world-record-longest-underwater-dance https://nofilmschool.com/2015/06/highly-suspect-4-minute-music-video-shot-one-take-under-water-red-epic-dragon-6k Mushy Yank (talk) 10:22, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Italy. Mushy Yank (talk) 10:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes NACTOR through roles in Alien Exorcism and The Time Guardians (Passes GNG through reviews here, here and here). May also pass GNG as there are sources here, here, here and here. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 11:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the multiple sources cited in the prior two replies. Not sure why this was relisted rather than just closed as keep. WilsonP NYC (talk) 01:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maryam Issaka Kriese

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

Article about an unelected political candidate, not properly sourced as meeting notability criteria for unelected political candidates. As always, candidates are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because their name happens to be on the ballot -- a person has to win election to an WP:NPOL-passing office to get an article on that basis, while unelected candidates must either (a) demonstrate that they had preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten them an article as it is, or (b) show credible reasons why they should be seen as a special case of much greater and more enduring significance than other candidates.
And no, the fact that a smattering of campaign coverage happens to exist is not, in and of itself, a WP:GNG-based exemption from NPOL -- every candidate in every election can always show some evidence of campaign coverage, so if that were how it worked then NPOL would just be completely meaningless and unenforceable.
But there's no strong claim to preexisting notability here, and no particular evidence that her candidacy would pass the ten year test in and of itself -- even the campaign coverage is entirely a two-day blip of "presidential candidate announces running mate", with no evidence of substantial or sustained coverage for any other reason shown at all.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation after election day if she wins the election, but she isn't "inherently" notable just for being a candidate. Bearcat (talk) 21:12, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Ghana. Bearcat (talk) 21:12, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Women. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:00, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:05, 1 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Comment. Possible redirect to Nana Kwame Bediako where subject is already mentioned. I wouldn't object to adding a few words to characterise Kriese there. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Radda Novikova

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

Russian film director. The importance of a serial (mostly) director is extremely questionable. The Russian Wikipedia article was deleted [20].--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 22:05, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This article should be kept because the director in question has a significant body of work, having directed multiple popular television sitcoms in Russia, a major media market. Furthermore, she has received international recognition, with awards that affirm her notability beyond national boundaries. There are plenty of references from major outlets, including Cosmopolitan and RIA Novosti. The fact that the Russian Wikipedia chose to delete the article does not diminish her achievements, as Wikipedia in different languages may have unique standards or biases—this is the English Wikipedia, which evaluates notability from an international perspective and should base its decision on the director's clear contributions to the industry and documented impact, not on the editorial decisions of other Wikipedias. It is also unfortunate to delete a page about a notable female director, as representation in media coverage is essential to recognizing the contributions of women in film and television, especially in an industry where they are historically underrepresented. Er nesto (talk) 22:39, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Russia. Shellwood (talk) 22:41, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: she does seem to meet the applicable guideline, WP:DIRECTOR with various seasons or the totality of notable TV series. Mushy Yank (talk) 10:11, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endri Shabani

AfDs for this article:

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

My nom concerns from the first AfD discussion still hold. This subject fails WP:NPOL and still fails WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. From cursory search, nothing useful was found too. Also fails WP:NACADEMIC as far as I am concerned. There are no credible claims of significant/importance here. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:51, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Albania. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:51, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:NACADEMIC and WP:GNG. I can't find anything notable about the topic on the article nor online, and most news articles about them are months to years apart. Deuxde (talk) 16:57, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:06, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Nisma Thurje as an alternative to deletion. The political party seems to be somewhat notable, but I'm not seeing much notability independent of that for Shabani. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 18:22, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete now Cyberpower7 (talk) 19:41, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. He has not held any role that would confer an automatic free pass over WP:NPOL, but the article is too dependent on primary sourcing, and not nearly enough on WP:GNG-worthy reliable sources, to claim that he would pass GNG in lieu of having to pass NPOL. Bearcat (talk) 20:53, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
pass WP:NPOL: Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage LefterDalaka (talk) 17:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are numerous reports in the Albanian media. euronews al shqiptarja Cna al Politico al telegrafi reporter al Τhere is no reliable Albanian journalistic website that does not host news and comments about him. He is certainly an important Albanian political figure whose article will be deleted only because there are no sources for him in English - LefterDalaka (talk) 17:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LefterDalaka, sources do not have to be in English. I looked through the sources provided in the article before !voting. I also looked through the ones you posted here, also. The Euronews and CNA do not appear to be independent of each other. All appear to be rather glancing coverage. I'm having trouble determining reliability of the publications, but I see some tabloid type concerns. What do you think the WP:THREE best sources for WP:SIGCOV are? Russ Woodroofe (talk) 14:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware that Euronews and Cna are somehow linked. Do you know something I don't know?😊 Actually I brought these sources to highlight one's encyclopedic nature by combining them all together and not just one. Let's say he is a person who is included in the Barometer, he appears on TV channels on various issues, he is now the chairman of a party, in general he is a completely recognizable and influential person in Albania. LefterDalaka (talk) 02:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Not seeing anything here that would meet WP:PROF. No publications appearing on GS at all? With a PhD in 2020 would seem likely to be a case of too early career on that front. No opinion on press coverage in Albanian. Would be happy with redirect/slim merge to Nisma Thurje if no other source of notability emerges. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:34, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was Withdrawn‎. per nominator request — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melanie Klaffner

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

Does not meet notability or significant coverage criterias. Shrug02 (talk) 22:26, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Tennis, and Austria. Shellwood (talk) 22:39, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn by nominator Additional references, albeit all from none English language sources, have been added and it seems, judging by other experiences, the bar is impossibly high to get a tennis article deleted so I withdraw my nomination. Shrug02 (talk) 01:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Subject has SIGCOV in reliable, independent sources. Jevansen (talk) 21:32, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In tennis, the criterion is that a player must have competed in the main draw of one of the top professional tournaments (WTA Tour tournaments (WTA Finals, WTA 1000, WTA 250 or WTA 250 events)) and have won at least one championship. Winning a WTA Challenger level tournament or any of the ITF W50, W75, or W100 tournaments starting in 2023 ($50,000+ between 2008 and 2022, $25,000+ between 1978 and 2007) or any WTA 125K tournament. This rule applies to both singles and doubles players. Player!!! As a result, this player meets the criteria.User:Vecihi91 12:06, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you know all this then why don't you add the content and citations to prove it? Even if what you say is the case (and I have no reason to say it isn't), then at the moment the article still lacks significant coverage references. Shrug02 (talk) 10:45, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:07, 9 November 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.

Thales, Indiana

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

Again with the citation saying, "this is not a settlement": in this case the 1910 county history says it was a post office, and judging from the "house in the middle of nowhere" site, I see no reason to disagree. Mangoe (talk) 21:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:02, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This place was known as "Hickory Grove" until 1895 [21]. It had a school [22], a post office, and general store [23]. I have been unable to find any source stating this was a populated place. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:36, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NPLACE which says that "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable". Per WP:NPLACE and WP:GNIS the GNIS reference doesn't count as legal recognition and as it's unincorporated I don't think there's any other recognition (open to being corrected here by someone more familiar with the US). Thus it falls back onto WP:GNG and I can't find anything to meet that - all references have passing references of this place, mainly being about Dubious Country, thus not meeting WP:SIGCOV Molecular Pilot 07:00, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Adding that I couldn't find anything much beyond the references in my own search! :) Molecular Pilot 07:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pocket FM (platform)

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

Fails WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Trivial coverage WP:ORGTRIV, promotional WP:PROMO. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:43, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:43, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'Commenthas a potential as over 100 mln downloads, and so on. WP NEXIST should be applied here before the final verdict. --NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 13:09, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Non-trivial coverage in Variety, Rest of World, and TechCrunch (meets RSP as being staff-written). Along with the sources in the article I think there's enough for WP:GNG. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The rest of world article counts, but the other two are routine coverage of raised capital, no? (WP:CORPTRIV) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I was not aware of the detail in WP:CORPTRIV. If nothing else can be found it should probably be deleted, then. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 01:02, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:TECHCRUNCH may not fully meet RSP standards, even if written by a staff writer. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 02:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the platform has demonstrated notability through its significant user base, international expansion, and coverage in reputable sources, establishing it as a notable player in the digital audio streaming industry --Moarnighar (talk) 11:12, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be considered notable on Wikipedia, it's not enough to be popular in terms of user base; there needs to be significant coverage from trustworthy and independent sources. If the coverage isn’t thorough or the sources aren't reliable, the platform's importance in the digital audio streaming industry might be exaggerated. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 02:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A source assessment table here might be of great use. Need to get to the bottom of if the sourcing is routine or not.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 19:39, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Source Assessment Table

Source	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://variety.com/2024/digital/news/pocket-fm-funding-audio-series-1235947135/		Trivial coverage on funding	? Unknown
https://restofworld.org/2024/elevenlabs-pocket-fm/			✔ Yes
https://techcrunch.com/2023/11/21/lightspeed-finalizing-leading-80m-plus-funding-in-pocket-fm/	Wikipedia:TECHCRUNCH	Trivial coverage on funding	✘ No
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/companies/pocket-fm-to-start-ip-licensing-of-its-content/article65523336.ece		Trivial coverage on service offerings	? Unknown
https://www.financialexpress.com/business/sme-pocket-fmaudio-streaming-service-storytelling-that-powers-binge-listening-2690554/		Trivial coverage on service offerings	? Unknown
https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/pocket-fm-to-invest-40-mn-to-expand-online-reading-library-11708408857053.html		Trivial coverage on funding	? Unknown
https://www.financialexpress.com/business/brandwagon-pocket-fms-india-arm-registers-647-revenue-growth-losses-contracts-by-56-in-fy-2023-3355318/		Trivial coverage on the amount of revenue	? Unknown
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}}.

TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:52, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Do editors agree with the source assessment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree with the source asssessment. Not every TechCrunch article is significant coverage but this one is. Combined with Variety this looks like a keep. And just as an additional point of reference $160MM in revenue is a lot, this is not a random just-launched startup that happened to get trade mentions. WilsonP NYC (talk) 01:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Murdoch, Wendy (5 June 1999), "The Defense", The Evening Post – via Proquest

[2] Nightingale, Melissa (2020-03-17), "Coronavirus: Lawyer criticises courts for continuing jury trials", NZ Herald, retrieved 2024-11-03

[3] "Did This Lawyer's Coronavirus Concerns Lead To The Jury Trial Suspension", LawFuel, 2020-03-18, archived from the original on 2023-10-01, retrieved 2024-11-03

[4] "Judge ticks off Watson lawyer over opening address", NZ Herald, 2000-06-30, retrieved 2024-11-03

[5] "Defence lawyer calls suppression breach 'outrageous'", Otago Daily Times Online News, 2010-05-25, retrieved 2024-11-03

[6] Morri, Deborah (2021-06-18), "Public defenders or private: battle lines", The Dominion Post, retrieved 2024-11-03 – via Pressreader

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]