Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

7 May 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

2204355

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

Limited sources available (Mediate, Time, Salon.com, Daily Mail based on my searching) and only coverage for about a week - no sustained coverage. Don't think it meets GNG. Upjav (talk) 15:19, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sports Kyoushitsu

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

Fails WP:GNG. Other language wiki page has no sources that support notability. DonaldD23 talk to me 15:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, and Japan. DonaldD23 talk to me 15:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Radi Ibrahim Nuhu

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

Advertorialized WP:BLP of a writer, not properly sourced as passing WP:AUTHOR. As always, writers are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to pass certain specific defined inclusion criteria supported by reliable source coverage about them and their work -- that is, you don't make a writer notable enough for Wikipedia by referencing his books to Amazon or Barnes & Noble as proof that they exist, you make a writer notable enough for Wikipedia by referencing his books to media coverage about them (analytical reviews by professional literary critics, journalist-written news articles about him, verification of winning notable literary awards, etc.) as proof that they garnered independent third-party attention.
But this is referenced entirely to either online bookstores or the subject's own self-published social networking presence, with not a whit of WP:GNG-building reliable source coverage shown at all.
It also warrants note that this has already been move-warred over: it started out in draftspace, then got moved into mainspace by its own creator without an WP:AFC review, then got redraftspaced by an experienced editor on the grounds of being inadequate, before being moved back into mainspace by its creator a second time without significant improvement or review.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Tanzania. Bearcat (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: PROMO. No book reviews that I can find, sourcing now is primary and bookstore websites. Very promotional in tone with flowery text used. Nothing we can use to show notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Expressions of dominance

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

Fails WP:NOTESSAY. LR.127 (talk) 11:56, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions. LR.127 (talk) 11:56, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning delete This is a college paper, complete with introductory arguments and multiple levels of "conclusions". It seems to have been worked over by quite a few people since 2017 and still is a stone-cold essay. Not the type of thing we should be hosting. (Also the mixed referencing style sucks, but that's beside the point.) --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:23, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Morning Glory School and College

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

does not pass WP:SIGCOV and WP:Three thus it should be deleted unless new in-depth sources are added that establish both WP:SIGCOV and WP:Three. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 14:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Bangladesh. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 14:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

High School Republican National Federation

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

Subject does not appear to be notable as a standalone article. Coverage is limited to either interviews with individuals connected to the subject (e.g their chairperson) or passing mentions about the subject, and there doesn't seem to be any reliable, secondary coverage about the subject to warrant a article. Article edit history also shows a potential WP:COI. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 13:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United States of America. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 13:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
I am currently an officer and would like to provide an update. This organization is still active, as we recently held elections and elected full leadership for the next school year. Additionally, we have a valid website listed and are still campaigning for Republican candidates on all levels. CTRU441 (talk) 13:55, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Secondary championships in All Elite Wrestling

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

Mostly fancraft content with the relevant parts already at List of current champions in All Elite Wrestling and rest of the championship articles. BinaryBrainBug (talk) 12:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Wrestling. BinaryBrainBug (talk) 12:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BADFORK. Another similar article needs to be reviewed too: Secondary championships in WWE --Mann Mann (talk) 13:27, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seniorly.com

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

An article about a company, twice moved to draft by other editors but then returned to mainspace by the article creator. The given sources are start-up coverage about the firm's aspirations and announcement-based coverage which falls under WP:CORPTRIV. Searches find more pieces by the company co-founder (e.g. [1]) and alumni profiles ([2]) but there does not appear to be sufficient coverage about the company to demonstrate that it has attained notability. AllyD (talk) 12:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and California. AllyD (talk) 12:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pineapple emoji

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

I don't see any Sigcov per BEFORE, only the ref #6 source and the weak source like Bustle, thus failing notability. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 12:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Internet, and Software. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 12:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Could perhaps be a brief mention in an emoji article, but most of what i find is trivia [3] or random mentions online. I don't see enough for a full article. Oaktree b (talk) 13:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How about the ref #6, isn't it a full article? 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 13:25, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: and what is there (including ref 6) can be incorporated into other articles, eg ref 6 is more about the symbolism of pineapples and could be added to the article on pineapple. --hroest 13:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amit Berwal

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

Fails WP:BIO. A search for sources largely turned up passing mentions which only note his position as the bodyguard unit commandant, without providing any WP:SIGCOV about him. At most we have this Indian Express piece on the unit in which Berwal provides details on the unit - but again, no sigcov about the person himself. Java Hurricane 11:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, India, and Delhi. Java Hurricane 11:57, 7 May 2025 (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.

I'm just going to speedy draftify this. Decent chance it comes back to AFD but very obviously an incomplete start that should go through AFC if/when ready. (non-admin closure) Reywas92^Talk 13:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AAPA and Black Power

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

Redundant with Asian American Political Alliance and Black power movement. Gjs238 (talk) 11:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's a UCSB Wiki Ed project, possibly an unfinished one. Userfy and see if they put together something that can be merged into a relevant article. hinnk (talk) 11:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 12:02, 7 May 2025 (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.

Raina railway station

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

Can't find anything about this railway station in Pakistan. I did find an article about a railway station that happens to be called "Raina", but it is located in West Bengal (India), not Pakistan.

And I'm not entirely sure if that article is even reliable.

(Edit: another article about the Indian railway station, still nothing for the Pakistan one though) ApexParagon (talk) 01:06, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 01:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:00, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can't find anything to satisfy WP:V. Jumpytoo Talk 05:58, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The archived Pakistan Railways site at https://web.archive.org/web/20140224124331/http://pakrail.com/ has a list of stations in alphabetical order, and when you scroll down to Raina, you see "Raina (Closed)". Google Maps shows a town or village named Raina in Pakistan. There is no Raina, Pakistan article, but perhaps there is in the Urdu Wikipedia. I don't see a railway line there, though. Perhaps there was a railway line and station there once. Perhaps there is more than one way to transliterate the Urdu name. LeapTorchGear (talk) 09:35, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 10:27, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Night Stream

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

Does not have significant independent coverage per WP:NF BOVINEBOY2008 09:38, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:54, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Is there any community consensus that short films cannot be redirected to list articles? According to a discussion at WP:FILM, films can redirect to list articles - are there any list articles that would be appropriate here? I'm not sure if films without articles (let alone short films) can be added to articles like List of American films of 2013 - however at the same time there does not seem to be any requirements on the page as far as inclusion goes. So with that in mind, this could probably be added and redirected to List of American films of 2013. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:09, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to Nightstream. Non-notable self-promo. hinnk (talk) 09:57, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 10:25, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James Nunn (artist)

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

Nunn appears to be a successful professional in his field of illustration, but after a fair bit of looking I can't turn up much proper, independent sigcov. None of his three illustrated books pass a strict WP:NBOOK, though the Corbyn Colouring Book got a good number of brief mentions. I found a non-independent interview, but no proper profiles. I don't see WP:NCREATIVE or WP:GNG here. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 04:17, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources are too thin for a pass at notability... He's not listed in the Getty ULAN [4], this was the only hit on the name [5], but it's an unrelated child. I don't see enough reviews/substantial reviews to pass AUTHOR. Oaktree b (talk) 12:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I found - and have added into the article - a couple of sources with more WP:SIGCOV - road.cc (review of the Tour de France book) and BuzzFeed (review of the Jeremy Corbyn colouring book), both of which mention his creation of the Eats, Shoots & Leaves book cover. Taking those into account, and some of the existing sources, I'd say that there's a reasonable argument for notability now. Were the article to be kept, there is probably some copyediting to be done and trimming of less stellar or redundant sources, e.g. Daily Mail, Worldcat; I didn't want to remove sources during AfD. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:06, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No Reliable sources for the infomraton presenting in the article. Source assessment table below. WP:TOOSOON. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I think the coverage of the Corbyn Colouring Book qualifies this article's subject under WP:SIGCOV. CompleteAnonymity (talk) 14:24, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The subject has illustrated many books and book covers. I have so far found 3 reviews of the YA book White Horse by Yan Ge, translated by Nicky Harman, illustrated by James Nunn, all of which mention the illustrations [6], [7], [8]. I will look for more reviews of books he illustrated. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:58, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 09:45, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have also found and added more sources, including more reviews of The Jeremy Corbyn Colouring Book and reviews of other books he illustrated. SunloungerFrog has now also found an award for another title. RebeccaGreen (talk) 22:56, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 10:24, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

J-P Conte

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

Entirely promotional and lacking WP:SUSTAINED notability backed up by WP:RS Amigao (talk) 01:25, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to work on it with you and make sure it's impartial...guy has some...interesting coverage and I think in the public interest. Lmk I want to get into editing and this looks cool. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-17/genstar-s-conte-to-back-takeover-of-lyon-football-team https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12610833/Genstar-chairman-Jean-Pierre-Conte-sues-interior-designer-ex-girlfriend-Hillary-Thomas-defamation-claimed-attacked-Aspen-home-2022.html Socialio86 (talk) 01:55, 29 April 2025 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 07:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#J-P Conte - MediaKyle (talk) 02:18, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Socialio86 has been blocked as a sockpuppet. PhilKnight (talk) 03:53, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And more keep popping up. smh. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:06, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This article was accepted at AfC by a reputable editor in 2020. What has changed with regard to the subject's notability, in that time? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:20, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great questions as Theroadislong is a reputable editor so pinging them here. I still have no opinion on notability as I have been slowly throwing out the unreliable sources and WP:REFBOMB trying to narrow down the significant coverage. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:36, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At WP:AFC we are minded to accept drafts if there is more than a 50% chance of them surviving an WP:AFD that is all. Theroadislong (talk) 20:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would say if we take this into consideration he may just make it. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:43, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I currently see sources like this, this and this that may as well contribute to notability. The sources in the article mostly do not contribute to notability standards. I will reconsider later if evidence lead to the subject not meeting notability standards. ToadetteEdit (talk) 15:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I removed quite a few sources but I am done until the AfD plays out. I found a lot of FAKEREFs and user-generated references (likely paid for based on the COIN thread). The Pionline source is churnalism from the Bloomberg article and CEO World is unreliable (user generated so would be similar to WP:FORBESCON. However, I did find some better sources I will list below. Compiling them now. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per the sources that @ToadetteEdit and @CNMall41 shared, the subject does appear to pass the notability test. The article needs cleanup, though. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 17:16, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source Assessment - After removing most of the REFBOMB on the page and doing a quick BEFORE, here is what we are left with:

1. Sources related to an assault. A lot of churnalism but here are the most reliable - Fortune, Bloomberg, Aspen Daily News (this source would be one for WP:BALANCE should anyone find the incident inclusion worthy).

2. Bloomberg (about the investment in the Lyon Football Team) - Not too in-depth on him but provides context of his investment activities.

Unfortunately, I do not find anything else that would be considered significant coverage. So, if he is notable for the assault accusation, then its a clear Keep. If not, the bio fails WP:GNG. I also see that the campaign noted in COIN still continues so there are a lot of sources out there which are masquerading as reliable when in fact they are paid for or user-generated content (or both).--CNMall41 (talk) 17:57, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above comments and upon a simple specific search, articles that can be found are [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] and some more with passable mentions. Some might be there in the article too and they do show WP:N and WP:GNG. HilssaMansen19 (talk) 02:07, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HilssaMansen19:, welcome back to Wikipedia. I am wondering if you looked at these sources or just pasted what came up in a Google Search. The reason I ask is because the assault accusation were addressed in the above sources assessment already and some you posted include churnalism of the topic. Are you saying he is notable for the assault accusation? You also posted this which has NOTHING to do with him (in fact, it came up in Google Search because his name appears in the sidebar for a different article on that site) and this (not only is this a press release, but it is a regurgitation of a press release and clearly marked as such). Never has a press release been used to establish notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:32, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks man, no, I read the articles first and if they have relation to the subject with any passable mention including their work, profile or any related thing, I copy paste. Honestly, I might have missed one or two because there were many and copy tab only allows 5 in my keyboard, some are deleted when I realise it's over five and thus, I paste them in notes first. Thank you for pointing that one out. As for the other one, it mentioned subject's current posts and relation with other institutions, that's why I considered it a passable mention where it can be used to verify subject's posts/relations HilssaMansen19 (talk) 09:32, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I apologize but I do not understand your response. The analysis of the sources you presented is not correct as at least one is a press release, one is a dead link, etc. Can you go back through them and either point out the ones that are considered significant coverage or re-visit your vote based on an actual WP:BEFORE?--CNMall41 (talk) 17:38, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Minimal WP:SIGCOV that doesn't involve a WP:BLPCRIME violation . Majority of his sources currently on his page appear to be profiles hosted by his company's sites or are related to Philanthropy . Unless we're debating the notability as a philanthropist, I think he needs more SIGCOV related to his career activities without mention to an allegation of assault & his countersuit of defamation . If convicted of assault, this would change things . In addition to this, I don't see his Wiki page being more than a CV unless better press appears.. That all being said he's just not notable and the page that is here sucks for wiki .--BigManBiggerFrog (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus either way yet – User:CNMall41, have you decided which side you land on?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 09:36, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging @Pigsonthewing – now that the AfC reviewer has replied, would you like to suggest an outcome? Toadspike [Talk] 09:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Sources used now are either primary or only mentions. I can find mentions of a "crime" [20], [21] that doesn't seem to meet criminal notability either. I don't see enough for an article here. Oaktree b (talk) 13:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - @Toadspike: thanks for the ping as I forgot all about this. I find it strange to even consider notability based on an assault accusation. If you take that away, there is very little coverage. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Currie

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

Fails WP:BAND and WP:GNG in that his notability is related primarily to membership in T Rex. References cited mention him only in passing and primarily in that connection. Should be a redirect to the band article, and lacks sufficient notability to warrant a standalone article. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 12:13, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Shellwood (talk) 14:38, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Per nom the sources in the article only cover currie in regards to his membership in the band or when its about his connection to Marc Bolan Scooby453w (talk) 15:30, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to T. Rex (band). This article may have been created because other non-Bolan members of T. Rex also have their own articles, but the others have more activities of note outside the band. Currie was a longtime member during the band's most massive success, but I must agree with the nominator and previous voter on how he has little outside of the band with which to build an encyclopedic article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:51, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Untrue to say that the sources are mere mentions in passing - although all four are from Bolan/T.Rex books, they nonetheless substantially record Currie's background and career prior to joining the band. They are not quick one liners by any means. They are adequate (if similar in content to each other) and there are other examples like them e.g. The Official Marc Bolan Story by George Tremlett. (Futura 1975) or Marc Bolan:The Legendary Years by John & Shan Bramley (Gryphon 1997) Romomusicfan (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source one is one sentence about currie having died due to tragic circumstances source 2 is a book about marc bolan and while it says it also covers the bios of other members currie isnt listed as one of them source 3 is nother book about bolan where currie has a minor mention in it (and isnt even listed in the synopsis while other members are) to sum it all about he quite literally is not mentioned in any source that's not about the band or bolan Scooby453w (talk) 13:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And sources 4&5? Or the above proposed 6&7?
Granted Sources 2-5 (potentially 2-7 if Tremlett and Bramleys are added on) are all from texts about T.Rex or Bolan but they nonetheless are each of them a substantial passage (from a paragraph to a half page) detailing Currie's background and pre-Bolan career.Romomusicfan (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i might change my vote but Ill admit im still on the fence a little though Scooby453w (talk) 18:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:32, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I arrived from the T rex and interesting to find this 2A00:23C8:EA12:6601:7440:9D09:8B46:CF19 (talk) 21:24, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect is fine. Bearian (talk) 20:54, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Could we please get an analysis of Romomusicfan's sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 09:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Scooby453w, @Doomsdayer520, @Glane23, do you find Romomusicfan's argument or sources persuasive? @Bearian, I mean no offense, but I can't tell from your !vote if you actually looked at the sources here – could you please clarify why you think a redirect is fine? Toadspike [Talk] 09:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok by me. No offense taken. Bearian (talk) 10:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not persuaded that a separate article is warranted per WP:BAND. I'm still in favour of a redirect absent a biographical profile such as a book focused solely on Currie's work apart from and with T Rex, as everything published that mentions him springs primarily from and about his work with T Rex. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 12:20, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will stick with my vote to redirect. It is true that the cited books have some additional info on Currie's early life, but that info is not particularly notable in its own right and there is not enough significant coverage of his non-T.Rex acitivites. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Neiszner

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

Article about a hockey player, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for hockey players. The leagues he played in, the American Hockey League and the ECHL, are specifically listed in WP:NHOCKEY as conferring notability only if the player "Achieved preeminent honors (all-time top-10 career scorer, first-team all-star)" -- but there's no claim being made here that he ever achieved any such thing in either league, and he hasn't been shown to pass WP:GNG either as the article is referenced entirely to content self-published by the teams he has played or worked for rather than any evidence of independent coverage in third-party media sources.
The article has, additionally, spent 18 full months with WP:BLP-violating nonsense like "He is currently an ambulance driver in Alberta. He once smiled, but really didn't like it. Chris also had the pleasure of providing the Rebels staff with water in their mouths." in it until I found and poleaxed it just now, which isn't a deletion rationale in and of itself but does speak to how many responsible editors have actually seen the article.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable without much more and better sourcing for it than this. Bearcat (talk) 06:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 06:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:36, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:36, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:37, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Whenever I see an AfD on a article on an obscure hockey player such as this, I tend to flicker my gaze to the top of the screen to see if Dolovis -- an editor eventually community-banned from new article creation, and responsible for creating thousands of articles on NN subjects, often in direct defiance of notability guidelines -- was the perp. Bingo! In any event, there's never been any iteration of NHOCKEY under which this player, whose career was multiple rungs below top flight, has been considered presumptively notable. Ravenswing 12:30, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Red Deer Advocate gave extensive SIGCOV of him, e.g. 1 2 3 4 5 6. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:03, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Versions of the above links that will open through Wikipedia Library: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- Also this story from the Las Vegas Review-Journal. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:28, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are four significant article about him provided above. 1 4 5 6. Best wishes. Flibirigit (talk) 12:27, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Local coverage in the home market of the team he played for isn't sufficient in and of itself to give a minor-league hockey player a GNG-based exemption from WP:NHOCKEY. We'd have to see nationalizing coverage, not just the Red Deer Advocate alone. Bearcat (talk) 15:20, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

coverage isn't sufficient ... [for a] GNG-based exemption from WP:NHOCKEY – ?? NHOCKEY is an inclusionary criterion, not an exlusionary one (and a broken one at that -- if you meet NHOCKEY, you may be notable if you pass GNG; if you do not meet NHOCKEY, you may be notable if you pass GNG). The only thing that matters is whether he meets GNG, and national coverage is not necessary for that. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:25, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's no such thing as a distinction between "inclusionary" and "exclusionary" SNGs. GNG does not just count up the number of media hits and keep anybody who's surpassed an arbitrary number, without considering the context in which the media hits exist — as I've said more than once, if GNG just concerned itself with the number of sources a person had, and didn't care about whether the context of what the person was getting covered for was actually of any broad or sustained public interest or not, then we would have to keep an article about my mother's former neighbour who once got a blip of media coverage for finding a pig in her front yard. (Hell, if all GNG cared about was the number of media hits that could be found, and didn't measure for whether the context of what those hits existed for passed any notability criteria or not, then I would even be able to claim that I qualified for an article.) So media coverage doesn't just have to hit some arbitrary number of clippings, and also has to verify passage of one or more notability criteria. Bearcat (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sport-specific sub criteria is just leftover stuff from before WP:NSPORTS2022 that wasn't participation based (all of the participation criteria was removed). None of the individual sport guidelines have been updated with replacement criteria so we're pretty much just left with skeletonized guidelines that offer unhelpful advice like likely to be notable if they've been inducted into the hall of fame. There's isn't even any guidance currently on football, gridiron football, or baseball. In regards to NHOCKEY, the only NHL guidance mentions first-round draft picks, which is obviously too strict given all of the blue links at 2017 NHL entry draft (and there's never been an overabundance of hockey players anyway). ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:58, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. Right now, it looks like Wayne Gretzky fails NHOCKEY. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:24, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He does fail NHOCKEY. I suggest an AfD. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:34, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SIGCOV does not exclude local coverage, and makes no mention of national coverage. Flibirigit (talk) 15:57, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Local coverage isn't excluded from usability, and I never said it was. But local coverage is not necessarily enough to hand a person a GNG-based exemption from normal inclusion criteria all by itself — unelected candidates are not exempted from NPOL just because they can show a handful of local campaign coverage in the local media of the area where they were running without any evidence of broader significance, actors who don't otherwise pass NACTOR's achievement-based criteria are not exempted from them just because they can show a handful of "local aspiring actor gets first bit part in movie" coverage in their hometown media without any evidence of broader significance, high school and junior league athletes are not exempted from the inclusion criteria for their sport just because they can show a handful of hometown local coverage without any evidence of broader significance, local bands are not exempted from having to pass WP:NMUSIC just because they got a few hits of "local band plays local pub" in their local newspaper without any evidence of broader significance, and on and so forth.
If a person is properly established as passing an SNG on an actual inclusion criterion, then we genuinely don't care whether their sourcing is "local" or "national" — but if a person's coverage isn't establishing passage of any specific inclusion criteria, and instead you're trying to argue that they get over GNG purely on the number of media hits that exist in and of itself, then a local vs. national coverage test does come into play, because lots of people can show some evidence of local coverage in contexts that don't pass encyclopedic standards of permanent international significance. Bearcat (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLUDGEON and WP:WALLOFTEXT may apply here. Flibirigit (talk) 21:01, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the only coverage were a couple of articles from Neiszer's home town of Craik, Saskatchewan stating that he made it to a WHL team, I'd probably agree that he does not meet GNG. But he has much more extensive coverage from Red Deer, Alberta, which is not his home town (or even his home province) plus significant coverage from Las Vegas, Nevada, which is not even his home country. That's not to mention a lot of insignificant coverage in other newspapers in other ciites. So he actually has not only national coverage, but international coverage. Rlendog (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Red Deer Advocate is a perfectly acceptable source for demonstrating significant coverage for notability, which has no "national coverage" requirement, and the Las Vegas Review-Journal provides an additional source of significant coverage. Rlendog (talk) 17:18, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment while not really an international outlet, there are at least 6 articles from the Red Deer Advocate here which would count towards notability. However, my problem is that they do not seem to be very in-depth which makes me wonder whether there is enough material to write an interesting article that goes beyond the Hockey stats. --hroest 19:41, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete sources seem quite limited and I don't think it passes WP:BASIC. Ramos1990 (talk) 23:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG with multiple sources of SIGCOV listed above. NSPORT doesn't have any reasonable sport-specific guidance on stuff anymore since WP:NSPORTS2022 so this is all we have to go on. Just following the rules. Can't have it both ways. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 00:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer This is due for close or relist today, but I don't see any source review. Could we get a relist to do that properly. My first observation is that 6 of the 7 sources come from the same newspaper, and so these would only count as a single source for purposes of GNG. The links have ot been set up through the Wikipedia library so I will need to do a bit of work to review them, but that is at most one source. The other, the Las Vegas Review, is a report on their return, but is primarily an interview, so the biographical information is not independent, and is primary. I think this needs more work. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 06:47, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 09:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Source review - Thanks for the relist. I have now looked at the six sources above, and here is my assessment (in conjunction with my earlier comment about the Las Vegas Review source).
The following are all from the Red Deer Advocate, a local paper for Red Deer, Alberta, Canada. They are mostly from one staff correspondent. One is from an alternate staff correspondent. The page subject is only associated with the Red Deer Rebels. The Red Deer Advocate is owned by Black Press, but coverage of a player on the local team in a local paper is clearly WP:ROUTINE or of questionable independence. To be notable, the player must surely be noticeable beyond the local paper.

1 (Meacham, 2001) Looks like SIGCOV, and secondary. As above, questionable independence. ?
2 - Not SIGCOV. N
3 (Meacham, 2005) Looks like SIGCOV, and secondary. As above, questionable independence. Additionally information appears to be obtained via interview, and aspects of this are primary reporting. ?
4 (Meacham, 2010) Looks like SIGCOV, and secondary. As above, questionable independence. ?
5 (Rode, 2005) This appears to be a write up of an interview, so the biographical information is not independent. N
6 (Meacham, 2003) Looks like SIGCOV, and secondary. As above, questionable independence. ?

The six sources count together. While some are excluded, there is SIGCOV here in this local paper about the local team. But can they be used for notability? Certainly not on their own. They provide some useable biographical information, but they do not indicate notability. GNG requires multiple sources in any case. If we had national coverage at this level, we would keep, based on the coverage, but as things stand, if this is all we have, we are not yet at GNG. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Krishnampalli

AfDs for this article:

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

Does not meet Wikipedia:Notability. Could find no significant coverage or sources to establish notability and certainly not to class it as either populous or legally recognised under Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Coldupnorth (talk) 08:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Pakistani strikes in Kashmir

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

The article appears to be largely duplicative of the existing 2025 India–Pakistan strikes page. There is no need to maintain a separate article for what is essentially connected to the same incident. Chronos.Zx (talk) 08:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Pakistan, India, and Jammu and Kashmir. Chronos.Zx (talk) 08:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge already discussions have garnered consensus for merger here. I suggest you withdraw @Chronos.Zx >>> Extorc.talk 09:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What's there to merge exactly? Copying my comment from the merge discussion, "there has been no confirmation by any official or reliable sources that these strikes even occurred. Pakistan's claims haven't been verified by India or any external sources. Many sources reporting these claims cite initial reports by Reuters and the Hindu which have been retracted." This should simply be deleted. 9ninety (talk) 09:20, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Three planes just happened to crash at the same time as the claims were made? 81.26.246.123 (talk) 09:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/three-fighter-jets-crashed-indias-jammu-kashmir-local-govt-sources-say-2025-05-07/ 81.26.246.123 (talk) 09:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It has been debunked that the images are fake.
SubDas09 (talk) 09:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Extorc Not yet. I do see a consensus gradually forming, but it hasn’t been fully reached. I’ll wait for the final outcome of the discussion....no rush to withdraw for now. Chronos.Zx (talk) 09:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair >>> Extorc.talk 10:00, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are we running out of space on Wikipedia? 81.26.246.123 (talk) 09:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support: There is no need to confuse readers. These article portrays the same thing and this article particularly is the subset of 2025 India–Pakistan strikes page. Aviator Jr (talk) 10:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Merge/Deletion. Atleast until there is SUBSTANTIAL Pakistani strikes as to warrant a seperate article. 45.248.50.50 (talk) 10:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support as per above, just merge them. Tidjani Saleh (talk) 10:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Veritasphere (talk) 11:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I note the parallel discusiion about merging this articke into 2025 India–Pakistan strikes on that article's talk page, which as of this timestamp is snowing towards a consensus for merging. Java Hurricane 11:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Operation Sindoor 2025 2409:4085:2D8F:5433:8088:B9F6:A745:64AE (talk) 11:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural close. The Merge discussion was snowing so I closed it. With the article being merged now, this AFD looks moot. Soni (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing per this. Chronos.Zx (talk) 12:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blockchain LLC

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

While company made bold claims at the height of crypto hype and was covered as such, plans fell through. There is no significant coverage of the current focus (gaming reputation). -- Luk ^talk 08:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Companies, and Nevada. -- Luk ^talk 08:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Darling (Civil War nurse)

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

I could hardly find an independent reliable source confirming that she existed. The primary source for this article is the subject's own account of their service. Otherwise, does not seem to meet GNG. There is coverage in Hall 2006, but it is confined to one page; I can't see what it is. Either way it's not enough for a stand-alone page. Without secondary analysis of Darling, we can't build an article here. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:24, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Missouri. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:24, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep sorry but "I could not see the source" isnt really a good enough reason to delete, there seems to be at least one secondary source on her. --hroest 12:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but we would need multiple to establish notability, @Hannes Röst. Even if that book has sigcov, which is not clear, I found no other sources offering more. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I was able to access the Hall book — the extent of the coverage is the following text in the "Honor Roll of Civil War Service" on p.233:
DARLING, Mrs. Mary E. Became a regimental nurse in her husband's Missouri Home Guard unit that was mustered into U.S. service in December 1861. She traveled with the regiment and cared for soldiers in tents and field hospitals and in the division hospital near the Shiloh battleground.

I would not consider that SIGCOV. The citation for that entry in Hall 2006 is also the same primary source published in Darling 2002 that is cited in our article, so there's no indication of additional secondary sources there. I'll come back to this once I've done a proper search for other sources, but I agree that I don't see a GNG pass based on the current two sources. MCE89 (talk) 13:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joel Lobenthal

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

Non-notable art historian/author. WP:ROTM 'cultural' critic. No RS establish notability. Fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:AUTHOR. Cabrils (talk) 08:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable. Coldupnorth (talk) 09:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and New York. Shellwood (talk) 10:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't see evidence for notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 12:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. per nomination, none of the sources indicates notability. --hroest 15:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quinn Harrison-Jones

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

Non-notable New Zealand rugby player. Subject plays below provincial level. Fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:NSPORT. Cabrils (talk) 08:00, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and New Zealand. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ross Cheever

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

Hi there. I came across this article via Special:Random and am quite alarmed by the fact it has (almost) no references. At first, I presumed it was just because of poor referencing and a classic case of deletion is not cleanup, but after scouring the internet I cannot find any significant coverage of him anywhere; all sources are either about his brother Eddie Cheever (who is reasonably notable), or are just entries in various racing driver sites (which is what the two refs are). I accidentally proposed deletion rather than sending to AfD so I'll fix that in a second. Kind regards, JacobTheRox (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC) JacobTheRox (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. JacobTheRox (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 10:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Finding online SIGCOV of late 80s/early 90s drivers is often very difficult – this article needs more references – but as a multi race winner and title contender in Japanese F3000 (the pinnacle of single-seater racing in Asia, quite lucrative at the time) Ross' own notability shouldn't be in question. MSport1005 (talk) 10:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Per MSport1005's rationale. Finding web articles pre-early 2000s about motorsport, especially Japanese F3000 is really hard but to say that all sources are either entries or about his brother Eddie is a complete lie. [22], [23] are just two examples of sources I found, but I'd also argue that a 2-time grand prix winner and a Japanese F3 champion shouldn't even be nominated for deletion. [24],[25], [26].

Road Atlanta Turn 5 (Talk) 11:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Many hits in Gnewspapers, this one [27][ talks about him. Was mentioned in an accident, coverage in Brazil [28], [29]. Mentioned in a retrospective here [30], showing lasting notabilty. Oaktree b (talk) 13:11, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Competed in some of the highest levels of racing -Drdisque (talk) 15:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arjun Ambati

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

fails WP:NACTOR. Theroadislong (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, India, and Andhra Pradesh. Theroadislong (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the article should be kept as Arjun Ambati is a notable figure in the Telugu film industry. He has a significant filmography, with key roles in well-known projects, and his work has been covered by various media outlets. Additionally, he has a Google Knowledge Panel, which is an indicator of recognition and notability in the public domain.

I am working on adding more reliable sources, including interviews and articles from established media, to strengthen the article. His contributions to the industry further demonstrate his standing and relevance.

Thank you for considering my input. Kanthrajmys (talk) 08:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Google knowledge panel does not mean anything in terms of notability at Wikipedia. --bonadea contributions talk 08:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – there is no coverage at all of him in independent sources, much less any significant coverage. --bonadea contributions talk 08:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback and for reviewing the article. I would like to gently highlight that Arjun Ambati has been covered by independent and reliable sources such as The Times of India, Eenadu, Sakshi, and Andhra Jyothy. His work in Telugu television and cinema has also been featured on platforms like Gemini TV and Telugu Filmnagar. While I understand that a Google Knowledge Panel alone doesn't establish notability, it does suggest public interest and recognition. I’m continuing to improve the article by adding more reliable sources.
Thanks again for your time and consideration. Kanthrajmys (talk) 08:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arnaud Honoré

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

Can't find WP:GNG-passing coverage. Doesn't seem to have played in any top league in France, made four appearances in Cypriot First Division so look maybe more into Cypriot sources if I missed something. Notable to say I made this article myself. Paul Vaurie (talk) 07:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Paul Vaurie (talk) 07:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:11, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of foreign football players in Cypriot First Division#France, where his name is mentioned, or Delete per nomination if no significant coverage is found. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:36, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2024 West Portal, San Francisco car accident

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

No evidence of lasting notability, a sad event but all too common. Fram (talk) 07:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, and California. Fram (talk) 07:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Extensive search for this event yielded no notability about the subjects or the events beyond local coverage. Likely meets WP:NOTNEWS and with no further development, perhaps unsuitable for mainspace. Komodo (talk) 08:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Swiss Democracy (Czech Republic)

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

Contested PROD due to having incoming links. However, there is no evidence that the topic of this page meets notability guidelines such as WP:ORG. C 679 06:56, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Czech Republic. C 679 06:56, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Minor party, fails WP:GNG. Jdcooper (talk) 14:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shirley Dubinsky

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

Seems like a fairly clear WP:BIO1E, I could hardly find any information on her. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and United States of America. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete: As mentioned by nominator, there's not much to note about the individual other than her defection with little post-return coverage. Even "The Defector Study" contains little information. Looking at the template on the page about defectors, it appears that this criteria may apply to other pages too, for example, Harold M. Koch, contributing to my weak assessment that perhaps the series or list of defections (even if one time event) may meet notability threshold in some context. Komodo (talk) 08:25, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete per nom, also the source provided for this article jfk-assassination.net does not seem very reputable. --hroest 12:42, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article is based on her supposed FBI file and the mention in the study that merely reiterates information from that file. I cannot find any other sources on her, other than mere mentions in lists of defectors. Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources, and no real claim to notability. There is no useful redirect target as an alternative. Schazjmd (talk) 12:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Baer

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

Non-notable businessperson that fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Mekomo (talk) 06:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Pennsylvania. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KCAY

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

Rarely would I AfD such a recently created article, but this article should be a textbook case for editors returning to the radio stations field that haven't been around it in five or so years.

Once upon a time, the mere fact that a station had a broadcast license was enough in the eyes of observers to guarantee notability. As recently as 2019 or so, new-on-air stations like KCAY would have been eligible for an article as soon as they began broadcasting or sometimes before that. It is true that, historically, licensed radio stations often generated coverage significant to translate into notability, a correlation that was much stronger in the early years of this encyclopedia and held for many U.S. stations that originated their own programming at some point. But that has broken once and for all:

In the wake of the 2021 RfC on media notability, the general notability guideline (GNG) became the yardstick for measuring the notability of broadcast stations. Not all of them have been able to measure up.
Significant coverage of radio has substantially decreased in the last 10 to 15 years. The reasons for this are the decline in local print journalism and the continued decline (in relative value) of radio as a mass medium and of local media covering the local media. New stations in this period, such as KCAY (which began broadcasting within the last two weeks), struggle to gain sufficient coverage to pass the GNG. It is worth noting that in the context of "significant coverage", routine announcements and FCC documentation (such as are currently referenced on the page, which was part of how it returned to article space) do not count. Even some RadioInsight articles do not qualify for purposes of ascertaining notability.
- Not relevant to the instant case, but some countries have less reliable sourcing to work with, which unfortunately leads to this being even worse a factor in countries like the Philippines, where I have had to plead with editors to bring better sources to the table.

We have had a revolution in our field that existence is not notability. If I go to the area near St. George, Utah, I could listen to KCAY on my radio. That does not, however, mean it is notable and worthy of a standalone article. A redirect to List of radio stations in Utah is merited, but nothing more. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 06:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Utah. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 06:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of radio stations in Utah I share Sammi's concerns throughout this article; we've long known that for Utah media, and especially the St. George market, there is absolutely no way this station is designed to forever serve that community (their original COL was Caliente, Nevada before the bump to Enterprise, Utah to get into St. George; Nevada is known for very absurd COL moves, including what is now WJLP in New York originating in Ely); they're going to do all they can to force themselves into Salt Lake City, and certainly not with this generic oldies format, and this is just transmitter move no. 1 in a long process to get it near the Great Salt Lake. Right now this is a station you can listen to, nothing more than that, with no established history or even an air staff.

The thing that sticks out to me most though is the creator of the article, Matevian (talk · contribs), had only three edits last decade, and has suddenly returned to create this article, along with WYAB, an article they exhibit ownership over, including the promotion of one of their host's congressional campaigns (and with all of their images uploaded including station logos, as 'own work', possibly including their own picture), so there is definitely a WP:COI in play here, along with possible paid editing. They also continue to push Radio Locator links into their articles, which have long been depreciated. I suspect the IP that has done most of the editing on WYAB is also Matevian, though that cannot be confirmed outside a checkuser and I wouldn't ask for that for an AfD involving a completely different article. So those concerns more than outweigh the issue that this station is non-notable, but also involves a personal conflict of interest due to Matevian's very obvious lack of editing activity outside a few articles they have selected on their own. Nathannah • 📮 14:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To confirm, the LMS system does show someone as KCAY's representative, based at WYAB's studio in Flora, MS, with a WYAB contact address, and a partial match to the above user name (per WP:OUTING no other details will be disclosed here). Nathannah • 📮 15:00, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Syrian regions

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

Although these do not automatically merit deletion, the article contains huge chunks of unsourced content and info not supported by the cited reference, which I will get to the details later. More importantly, the major problem with this article is that the concept is a WP:SYNTH. As far as I can see, none of the sources mention or delineate this specific "region". "Northern Syrian regions" is not a phrase precedented in reliable sources that specifically refers to these areas of Turkey. "Northern Syria", even within the context of Ottoman history, refers to a far broader region that contains much of modern Syria or Ottoman Syria, including Aleppo. I initially thought at best, this article could be moved to "Turkish Syria", which is mostly found in over a century-old sources but still also refers to Aleppo: [31] The idea I get from this article is that it describes the areas that would be under the Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon according to the Treaty of Sèvres, which did not come into full effect. If this were the case, that would be a content fork, too. Now, returning to WP:VERIFY issues, the list of failed verifications is long, but here are a couple of examples: Nowhere does a traveler mention in 1910 here Mardin Province is (or would be) ...% Arab in 1927 or in any year. Nowhere in Morality Tales: Law and Gender in the Ottoman Court of Aintab does Leslie P. Peirce mention the 1927, or say 1550, composition of the city of Aintab. Cited references include WP:SELFPUBLISHED maps such as this which ironically also fails verification. As of this revision, about 15-18 paragraphs do not include a single reference, not that the references necessarily support the content. Overall, assuming this weren't a content fork, it would have to be moved to a verifiable name that at least was utilized by 2-3 sources. Then, a complete cleanup would have to be done, and each bit would have to be verified with the cited reference. The insurmountable amount of issues crosses the region of WP:TNT, which is only assuming there is a way to solve the issues of WP:N, WP:REDUNDANTFORK, and WP:SYNTH. Aintabli (talk) 05:01, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Syria and Turkey. Aintabli (talk) 05:01, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. There is no coherent underlying subject and too many problems to fix and redistribute the content. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 06:56, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to move it to the draftspace where I can learn more on wikipedia's style and fix it? DaSeashell (talk) 14:55, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It has been longer than 7 months since this article's creation. Per WP:DRAFTNO and previous RFC, articles older than 3 months should not be draftified without clear consensus. It is highly unlikely this entry would be improved after draftification, because the issue is not just the lack of references, but the concept itself is a synthesis of numerous sources and is not something that is covered in-depth and described clearly by any of the sources here or elsewhere on the Internet. You are welcome to experiment through your sandbox, in this case, for your prospective well-sourced additions with reliable sources to other articles. On the other hand, this entry is simply untenable. Wikipedia is not some blog site, where you can coin and synthesize new terms and info. Aintabli (talk) 16:59, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 05:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abhijit Guha (anthropologist)

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

The article is filled with Self published links, Nothing to establish notability. Fails WP:BASIC. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, India, and West Bengal. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep then Protect - I consider that the subject meets WP:NAUTHOR criterion 3:The person has created ... a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews - in the Selected publications section, the references are to reviews of his books. It is certainly true that the article is frequently subject to less well sourced additions from IP editors - who probably have a conflict of interest - which are reverted from time to time. I won't revert them during this AfD (and some of the additions may merit a place in Selected publications) but will once it's finished. If the article is kept, I suggest that it be placed under extended confirmed protection to help prevent these kind of additions from happening. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 07:57, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your suggestion. 2405:201:900A:D036:A091:6C59:207C:BB20 (talk) 16:15, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is obvious because this is a biographical article.But these links can be verified whether they are genuine or not. See for example this biographical article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kewal_Krishan_(forensic_anthropologist)#cite_note-4

What's wrong in it? The point is whether the papers are genuine or not. 2405:201:900A:D036:A091:6C59:207C:BB20 (talk) 16:13, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the comments from the other editor, if you have not seen it already.

Keep then Protect - I consider that the subject meets WP:NAUTHOR criterion 3: The person has created ... a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews - in the Selected publications section, the references are to reviews of his books. It is certainly true that the article is frequently subject to less well sourced additions from IP editors - who probably have a conflict of interest - which are reverted from time to time. I won't revert them during this AfD (and some of the additions may merit a place in Selected publications) but will once it's finished. If the article is kept, I suggest that it be placed under extended confirmed protection to help prevent these kind of additions from happening. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 07:57, 30 April 2025 (UTC) 2405:201:900A:D036:A091:6C59:207C:BB20 (talk) 16:25, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 05:45, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NAUTHOR criteria 3. Looking only at the books in the "selected publications" section, there are reviews of Land, Law, and the Left: The Saga of Disempowerment of the Peasantry in the Era of Globalization in the journal International Sociology [32] and in The Statesman [33]; reviews of Tarak Chandra Das: The Unsung Hero of Indian Anthropology in The Eastern Anthropologist and Anthropological Forum [34]; reviews of Nation-building in Indian Anthropology: Beyond the Colonial Encounter in South Asian Anthropologist, Antrocom Journal of Anthropology and Man in India [35]; and reviews of Encountering Land Grab: An Ethnographic Journey in Indian Anthropologist and the Journal of the Indian Anthropological Society (many of which are already cited in the article). MCE89 (talk) 13:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Funmilola Ogundana

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

I am unable to find much of any coverage for this Nigerian former sprinter, failing WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC. For what it's worth, it looks like she would've met the now-deprecated WP:NTRACK (probably the reason for its creation), albeit via a team relay race and not as an individual. IMO, it would be hard to scrape by even on WP:BASIC. JTtheOG (talk) 05:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Sport of athletics, and Nigeria. JTtheOG (talk) 05:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Perhaps she went by a nickname...? JTtheOG (talk) 05:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Funmi, perhaps. I would probably not have created this article today, although I do see something that's not in the article: she won a gold medal (again in the relay) at the 1998 African Championships in Athletics. Geschichte (talk) 10:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that's enough for a keep based on WP:ATHLETE, not voting yet. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 12:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bradley J. Franc

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

The references used don't establish notability, and WP:BEFORE turned up nothing better. JSFarman (talk) 05:24, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no claim to notability under something like WP:NPROF, WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NPOL. The best cite appears to be the Forbes article which quotes him but also relates to a personal matter about him and his son, but even if that's significant coverage of him (which I doubt) it's just one article. The rest are mostly profiles which shouldn't be counted as they tend to be self-provided.. Oblivy (talk) 06:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, Law, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Centro Sportivo Giacinto Facchetti

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

Without independent secondary sources or WP:SIGCOV, this Italian training ground fails WP:GNG. GTrang (talk) 04:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Italy. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tianjin Fourth Central Hospital

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

Similar to the case of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine First Affiliated Hospital, this hospital also appears to fail WP:GNG. GTrang (talk) 03:58, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Medicine, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine First Affiliated Hospital

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

While some sources exist (e.g. [36]), they are not independent secondary sources or otherwise not WP:SIGCOV, and this hospital then fails WP:GNG. GTrang (talk) 03:55, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is as known as The First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine.In the field of medical academia, research related to this hospital is widely available. Moreover, when searching in its native language, Chinese, even more information can be found. This hospital is a Class A tertiary hospital, the highest tier of public hospitals in China.[37][38][39] Amazingloong (talk) 05:22, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Medicine, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Jelaca

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

Non-notable hairstylist. Promotional page (including WP:PEACOCK and WP:NOT), by suspicious account, almost certainly paid, including suspicious image. The [one reference] that might be reliable still does not really include substantive commentary about the subject that establishes notability. Fails WP:ANYBIO. Cabrils (talk) 03:42, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Businesspeople, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flightline Flight 101

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

Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT. Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, none of the sources were secondary since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the event itself. The event does not have in-depth nor sustained continued coverage of the event itself with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated, which is made all the more evident as the Civil Aviation Accident and Incident Investigation Commission did not issue a single recommendation as a result of this accident (Recomendaciones sobre seguridad – page 23). WP:EVENTCRIT#4 states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this event lacks per the above. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:27, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Spain. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:27, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a WP:News article. Not a WP:CASESTUDY or otherwise subject to any secondary coverage that indicates long-term significance. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 22:21, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Fairchild Swearingen Metroliner § Accidents and incidents: This article lacks reliable WP:SECONDARY sources, and its WP:LASTING effects are also bare bones. EditorGirlAL07 (talk) 11:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 03:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Toon Blast

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

Doesn't seem like a notable video game. Despite apparently being a big success, it has only gotten trivial mentions in reliable sources, besides the Pocket Gamer article that feels like a press release. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:13, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:13, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: Pocket Gamer is a RS per Project Video Games here, so we have this [40] and [41]. Oaktree b (talk) 13:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GNG says that "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability." ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:50, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is also a RS, with a review [42], any of the sources listed here would be ok [43]. Common Sense media has also reviewed the game [44]. Another RS Oaktree b (talk) 14:27, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, that's a bit better. I still won't withdraw the nomination, as it only has 2 reviews. Usually the threshold is a few of them. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak~~ Keep per Oaktree I believe the sources makes this article barely survive deletion Scooby453w (talk)
There are sources posted on the talk page, WP:CSM and Gamezebo which is WP:VGRS.

That being said... the second line is copied from the Pocket Gamer source with minimal changes, and the Gameplay section is copied without attribution from Fandom. The article needs a complete rewrite. REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 14:59, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Critical Blast does not seem like a WP:RS. So yeah, that's 2 reviews from reliable sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:15, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Peak Games, its developer. One of those match-3 games that has heavy prime time/daytime television advertisements obscuring what the object of the game actually is to draw people in (it isn't blasting toons or having fun with them, it's grinding match-3 levels with some bare continuity involving toon characters). Nathannah • 📮 22:00, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- not in a developed state, but found these three sources: (https://www.criticalblast.com/articles/2021/07/31/toon-blast-honest-review, https://www.commonsensemedia.org/app-reviews/toon-blast, https://www.gamezebo.com/reviews/toon-blast-review-saving-parents-one-game-at-a-time/) when reviewing it, and I think it's notable. Mrfoogles (talk) 01:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, Critical Blast does not seem like a reliable website at all. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Common Sense and two Gamezebo articles should be enough for GNG. This isn't Call of Duty, we have critical discussion in two publications, instead of three. I don't think we need to be so hung up on the number of reviews. This is more than we find for other mobile games that pop up here. Oaktree b (talk) 15:15, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's discussed here in a French newspaper. [45] and this is listed as a RS at Project Video Games [46]. Oaktree b (talk) 15:16, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The additional sources provided by oaktree have convinced me im not longer having my vote as "weak" keep Scooby453w (talk) 15:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Reviews by Gamezebo and Common Sense, and the article by PocketGamer are enough for GNG. Additional sources that I found: Softonic review (not necessarily a reliable source per WP:VG/RS) and the game is mentioned several times in this academic book published by Springer Nature: [47] (not necessarily significant coverage). --Mika1h (talk) 16:42, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Peak Games. In my opinion, the coverage provided does not demonstrate standalone notability. Video game news is so niche and scarce that sometimes smaller outlets will cover any game so long as someone pays them. Two outlets reviewed the game, so what? This article's existence is basically a free advertisement for the company, for a game that doesn't have any unique mechanics or gameplay – another run-of-the-mill, free-to-play mobile game ripping off Candy Crush. Yue🌙 07:45, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 03:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos Gustavo Rosado Muñoz

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

Doesn't seem notable, very weak sourcing with only one source. SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 14:57, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Mexico. Shellwood (talk) 15:01, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Mathematics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:17, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I was able to verify that he received a licenciate in actuarial mathematics from UNAM in 1964 [48]. Searching Google Scholar did not find anything by the subject. But it did find [49], apparently a 2007 government notice to other government agencies and states informing them that they must not do business with him (or someone with the same name). I could not find anything in the article to explain this, but it seems like the sort of thing that should be reflected somehow in our article, with better sourcing. However, neither of these finds directly contributes to notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:51, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- On reflection, if it turns out that we cannot find sourcing for what this is about, it might be a reason to delete the article: there is information that is inadequately sourced for WP:BLP to allow us to mention, but for which not mentioning is problematic with respect to WP:N, and therefore deleting is the best resolution of this contradiction. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:05, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since he died in 2013, BLP would no longer apply. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:37, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Orphaned article without any source. Subject of the article is not notable. WP:NOT is not met. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itzcuauhtli11 (talk • contribs)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 03:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TVMSL

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

Article has remained unsourced for 15+ years, and I can't find any source that mentions or covers this project. Even the article on Alcatel does not mention this at all. If it exists and isn't a hoax, it's still clearly not notable (or verifiable) enough for an article.

Update: Sources found in DVB-SH#Project_organization. However, most of these sources are primary sources from Alcatel's website, and this still doesn't seem notable enough for its own article. ApexParagon (talk) 15:16, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 03:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Society for Cultural Interaction in East Asia

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

Non-notable academic society. Lacks RSs and seems unlikely any would exist. Cabrils (talk) 03:23, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, Social science, and Asia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Caroline Boudreaux

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

I've nominated this individual's nonprofit organization for AfD as well, however I think that the subject of this article itself is not notable either. I've searched the subject up - and it seems that a majority of the sources available are interviews (primary sources) or instances of WP:BLP1E (for their work with the Miracle Foundation, the nonprofit they started). WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Women, and United States of America. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:52, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:GNG: 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4. Other profiles that I'm not as sure about: [50], [51]. These all offer significant coverage in reliable sources. A career is not one event. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:16, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All of the sources tell the same "origin story" so we are lacking enough beyond that to for this to be about her. I understand why NOM is calling this blp1e, although I don't think that's quite correct. It's as if the article for Zuckerberg only had sources that talked about the invention of FB in his college dorm, and nothing after that. The potentially significant UBS source fails - the link is to a general page and I find nothing under her name. Lamona (talk) 03:02, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with WP:BLP1E, and it seems that Caroline Boudreaux meets WP:NBASIC. What guideline are you referring to when you say the sources tell the same origin story? Hmr (talk) 04:38, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NBASIC asks for "multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other" ... I read that as saying that if they all have the same content, they are not intellectually independent. Also, none that I can find give much basic biographical information, nor information that covers the years that follow the founding of the organization (except two talks that aren't usable sources). I don't see that there is enough info for a stand-alone article. It may be possible to cover her in the article on the organization, if it meets basic. Lamona (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as sources provided by Eddie891 give WP:SIGCOV of the subject in reliable sources from different years (2007, 2015-16). They provide biographical details about the subject as well as information of the founding of the Miracle Foundation as well as details of how she advocates for orphans internationally. Nnev66 (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nominator and Lamona. DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 23:11, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:03, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Lamona as all the sources tell the same origin story but little else. That happened in 2000, so there should have been other coverage over the past 25 years. This source shouldn't even be in the article now, as it is mislabeled (it is written by subject, not by someone else) and it is a Forbes contributor site which is not considered WP:RS. All but one of the sources listed by Eddie891 are profiles which are insufficient to establish WP:GNG.--FeralOink (talk) 13:19, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you elaborate how profiles ‘are insufficient to establish GNG’? Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:13, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Eddie891, in my opinion those profiles are puff pieces and hardly good examples of in-depth journalism. Drmies (talk) 15:13, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- While I agree the coverage of the subject is from a human interest vantage and there are flourishes in the language (i.e. not Woodward and Bernstein journalism), I don't see why these articles are "puff pieces" that don't count towards WP:BASIC. Also, where does it say in Wikipedia policy that coverage in city newspapers where the subject lives doesn't count towards notability? There is quite a bit of information in these articles about the subject herself as well as her organization that evolves over time. There is also coverage that lists the subject's awards in Dataquest, 2019 and Decclan Chronicle, 2018, which include the UBS Global Visionary award and United Nations Humanitarian Award which the subject received in 2017. PS. I removed the Forbes ref from the article as it didn't add anything. Nnev66 (talk) 19:49, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I agree with the gist of what Nnev is saying here- these clearly profiles in well-regarded, prominent newspapers over a range of years (exactly what we look for when establishing notability), and from them it would totally be possible to write a substantive article (if not the longest OOT). not too much else matters. I don't think it fair to dismiss them out of hand as puffery, even if they aren't the best possible. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:47, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To illustrate what I (above) called "the same story" I ran 3 of the online, textual articles through a plagiarism program. I'm not saying there was plagiarism going on, but such a program detects when the exact same sentence or paragraph is found in multiple sources online. The three came out as 37%, 41% and 48% "alike" with rather large chunks being identical. I assume that we need at least 2 sources with mostly unique content, and I'm not seeing that. I also note that someone has added a youtube video of a ted talk to the article. This is not an independent source. I will move it to the "external links" area. (Giving a TEDx talk is not itself notable - TEDx is described as "TEDx events, which are "essentially, do-it-yourself TED conferences"). I also think that we would get closer to reliability if we can find listing for the awards. I will research that. Lamona (talk) 05:03, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing you didn't run through the Austin American-Statesman references from 2007 and 2010 as linked from newspapers.com. These differ more significantly from the CS Monitor, People, and other references from around 2015. Also, I had looked for links to the UBS Global Visionary and United Nations web sites for direct confirmation of awards but their web sites unfortunately don't seem to keep an archive of past awardees. Nnev66 (talk) 15:37, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In that case one should consider winnowing down the ones that read like copies and getting the majority of the article from the ones that appear to have more journalistic merit. Lamona (talk) 20:52, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My concern with the Austin American-Statesman articles is that Austin, Texas is her hometown and is or was her residence. Coverage, 18 years ago, in her hometown newspaper, doesn't help much for establishing WP:GNG.--FeralOink (talk) 00:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The UN does have a humanitarian award, but Boudreaux is not listed on the UN news site where others are listed. Of course, the UN web site could be lacking - the online entries may not cover the year she was awarded. I searched on her last name. For the "Hope award" - this one is tricky because the only award with that name addresses cancer research. I found the Robert F. Kennedy Ripple of Hope Award but again I don't find her listed. So the awards remain a mystery. Perhaps others will have better results. Lamona (talk) 20:50, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - ~~I am leaning towards K*eep for this person~~, however redirecting or merging it into Miracle Foundation would be an excellent alternative to deletion. I understand that that article has also been nominated for deletion, however it seems quite clear it's notable per GNG and NCORP per these fully independent, secondary reliable sources found in Newspapers.com (access required) that provide significant coverage over a period of years (over ten years of coverage!): [52], [53], [54], [55], [56], [57], [58], and more. I've added my !vote to the other article, waiting for now on !voting here. ~~BTW, WP:BLP1E does not seem to apply here because there is sustained coverage of both Ms. Boudreaux and the foundation for many years.~~ I'd like to hear other editor's thoughts on redirecting/merging if the article on the foundation is kept. Netherzone (talk) 16:44, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would be fine to merge if kept, since the foundation is the only notable thing she has done. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. Her bio and her role should fit nicely into the article on the organization. That said, if the organization is not found to be notable, it would be difficult to find the founder notable if there aren't other projects she was responsible for.
Lamona (talk) 20:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Miracle Foundation is the only organization or project for which she is known.--FeralOink (talk) 00:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I noted on the Miracle Foundation AfD that I'm OK with merging the founder into the foundation article. Actually, I've shifted to thinking that would make the most sense - originally my first choice was to keep both articles. I've summarized the best Miracle Foundation sources in reply to Lamona's comment about WP:WHYN and WP:SUSTAINED in that AfD. Nnev66 (talk) 17:24, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and merge content to Miracle Foundation, as the sourcing is not really so much about her, but about her role in the Miracle Foundation, which, as stated above by other editors, is the only notable thing she has done. Netherzone (talk) 22:28, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment First, I agree with what Drmies said about these particular profiles not being examples of journalism; they are lightweight human interest stories. Next, I noticed (and removed) another source in the article, see talk page section. Author-published book from defunct CreateSpace ("they would publish anything" per Wiki), no page number(s) given. Also, be aware that the Miracle Foundation article is not in good shape. It needs a lot of editing due to really bad writing (sentence fragments, etc.) and was tagged accordingly in the past. And it was mostly written by a COI editor.--FeralOink (talk) 00:06, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:48, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Båntjern

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

This is an article about a mountain lake in Norway -- fails notability guidelines, by virtue of being a random lake in Norway. There are 300,000 lakes in Norway. Besides that, most of the article fails WP:NOTPROMO, and WP:NOTGUIDE; it talks about the amenities of the lake, like hikes, grills, and a nearby campsite. Serious NPOV issues, doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Needless to say no WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:40, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Norway. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:40, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: it's not a "mountain lake" at all, it's located on the city outskirts and used as a hiking spot/campgrounds. "Needless to say" doesn't seem to hold water (!), why would that be needless to say? Where did you do your WP:BEFORE that is not Google? Geschichte (talk) 07:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Needless to say was poor semantics, I apologize. I did my WP:BEFORE on JSTOR, Gbooks, GScholar, and norwegian google. I said it was a "mountain lake" because the article classifies it as a "tarn," which is a mountain lake. There some things, like "woah guys this lake exists," but imo it still fails under WP:NOTGUIDE-- I could be wrong, and if so, please let me know w/sources etc. This article is also an orphaned article. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 13:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:47, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Austral Launch Vehicle

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

Alright -- this article does have some reliable sources, including TheConversation. The issues here are this: this is an orphaned article, and this vehicle is a concept without WP:SIGCOV. See: it doesn't exist in its final form/ yet. As it doesn't really exist yet, WP:TOOSOON, also seems a bit like it violates WP:NOTPROMO. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:28, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Science, Technology, Spaceflight, and Australia. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:28, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as I said in the afd for Marie-Rose Tessier I can't take your argument seriously when you admit you think the sources are reliable in your original rationale also just because it is not complete doesnt mean it isn't ready for an article especially since as you have already admitted there are sources that cover it and how can it be promotional if the sources are reliable? Scooby453w (talk)

WP:RS is not the end all be all. Just because something has been covered in a reliable source once does not mean that it is Wikipedia worthy; we also have WP:SIGCOV, meaning that articles need to have significant coverage. That pairs with coverage in reliable sources; this article has one reference to TheConversation; no sigcov in reliable sources. Next, there is WP:SUSTAINED. The coverage needs to be continuing and sustained; the last coverage of this subject was about a decade ago, and there hasn't been anything of note since. Fails that. All in all, clear deletion, unless a Wikipedian can find more recent coverage in reliable sources.AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 22:02, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not temporary jusf because it hasn't been in a source in a decade doesnt mean it should be deleted the 3 sources span multiple months its not like its something that shows up once on the morning news Scooby453w (talk) 22:23, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is one reliable source from TEN years ago, in TheConversation. Not enough reliable, independent sources. Finally, it doesn't appear that this project has made any noises for almost ten years, and the final product likely doesn't exist. If you find any more sources, please let me know. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:53, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that we could do a Merge with Australian Space Agency. The total content makes for about one paragraph or so, but it is still of note. Hal Nordmann (talk) 10:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: The sources on ALV I’ve come across, including Springer papers by researchers from the University of Queensland and Heliaq Advanced Engineering [59], [60], are reliable but not independent, so they don’t satisfy WP:GNG. That said, they confirm ALV’s role in Australia’s aerospace research history. A merge into Australian Space Agency would retain this material in a more appropriate context, per WP:PRESERVE. HerBauhaus (talk) 12:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more support for merge as ATD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:47, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:GNG and falls foul of WP:CRYSTAL:Wikipedia is not a collection of product announcements. As AnonymousScholar49 notes, this is a project that appears to have been on the backburner for about a decade, having received no independent SIGCOV in that entire period.

I would be happy with a merge, but is Australian Space Agency really the best place? None of the sources I'm seeing even make mention of the ASA, and I don't see a neat place to fit information on this project into the article as it currently exists. Maybe reusable launch vehicle would be a better merge destination? Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 09:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2021 Sidhi bus accident

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

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability. Fails WP:EVENT. Looking for coverage beyond initial reports only turned up unrelated accidents. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 22:39, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Madhya Pradesh. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 22:39, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Agree with nom. Just routine news coverage - WP:NOTNEWS Asteramellus (talk) 00:05, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: ROTM news story, fails WP:NEVENT. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 22:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I find myself agreeing with the above considering the weak coverage. Try finding new articles if you want to reinforce your position, potentially in other languages. Bgrus22 (talk) 06:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I find it hard to accept that an accident killing 51+ people is not notable. It certainly would be without demur in Western Europe or North America, so I think WP:SYSTEMIC applies here. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:33, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for more input regarding SYSTEMIC.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding SYSTEMIC, see for instance Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2013. Sadly, attacks claiming lives are very common in this region, which is one of the reasons that most of them don't have their own articles. Geschichte (talk) 14:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Air Highnesses

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

Per WP:GNG and WP:NORG – From what I've been able to find, none of the sources passed WP:SIRS since none of them were secondary and did not contain any significant independent coverage of the airline itself and only contained more or less passing/trivial mentions of the airline. Examples: [61] [62] [63] Aviationwikiflight (talk) 17:01, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, Africa, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Europe, and Armenia. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 17:01, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:06, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of defunct airlines of Armenia, where I've just added an entry for the airline as it was not previously there. I'll note the article makes me raise an eyebrow as it says, and has a table stating, that the airline operated one Il-76 - but the article also has a photograph of an An-12 in the airline's markings. Hmmmm. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:06, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - a search conducted in Armenian revealed several sources demonstrating WP:N. The article can be expanded/improved. Archives908 (talk) 21:57, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Could you link those sources? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 23:27, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Bedridden

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

This was flagged since 2007, although the citations template was removed without improvement [64]. There is only one source on the page and that is just a reference to playing a song on a radio show. Searches show almost nothing. I found a reference to a saying attributed to them (wrongly), and some primary sourcing but I cannot find any independent reliable secondary sourced coverage of this non notable band. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:33, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:33, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The band has this good coverage and this article mentions a Rock 'n' Roll City: Adelaide Babylon, which promises to elaborate on The Bedridden, but I don't have access to the book to confirm. It feels like a weak delete, but it still needs another good sources to keep the article. LastJabberwocky (talk) 15:41, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article, although about band leader Baterz, mentions The Bedridden:

https://oa.anu.edu.au/obituary/ward-barnaby-charles-13976

It is Baterz' obituary, published in dB Magazine, an Adelaide based reputable street press (https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/catalog/2803467) 149.167.27.78 (talk) 01:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And another Baterz' obituary article from The Canberra Times mentions The Bedridden:

https://oa.anu.edu.au/obituary/ward-barnaby-charles-13976/text24895

Both these obituaries, although not the original copies from the original publications, have been collected by the Australian National University's Obituary Australia (https://oa.anu.edu.au) 149.167.27.78 (talk) 01:39, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An article from the Canberra Times about the Bedridden:

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/126976895?searchTerm=Baterz 149.167.27.78 (talk) 02:09, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An article from Australian publication (print and online) Beat about a Bedridden compilation:

https://beat.com.au/the-bedridden-gorilla-gorilla-gorilla/ 149.167.27.78 (talk) 02:39, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment With two obituaries (dB Magazine and The Canberra Times) and the Canberra Times and Beat articles, it looks like there's enough to keep something. Whether that's an article about The Bedridden, or an article about Baterz, I'm not sure. (Btw, I found several gig listings for "Baterz Bedridden".) There's also something in Overland in 2002, of which I can only see a snippet [65] - perhaps another obit? The book Rock 'n' roll city. Part two, Adelaide Babylon seems to be only in a few libraries in South Australia, so would need someone there to check it out. RebeccaGreen (talk) 05:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this. The book, Rock 'n' roll city, part two, Adelaide Babylon is not available in any library service I can access, but I notice that it is self published by the author, Eric Algra. Algra is a photographer, and so I would expect that this volume contains photography - an image of the band - but not SIGCOV. Neither would it be a WP:RS as it would be self published by someone who is not an established expert in the field of music. Any information it contained about the band would likely have come directly from them or their publishing material. So I think it is out on a number of counts. Obituaries are often not independent, but in any case they would support (or not) a page on Baterz. I don't see SIGCOV on the band in (Smith, 2002). There is a bit more in (Jones, 2002). The piece in the Canberra Times is primary. The piece in Beat is secondary though. It's all pretty marginal. Can we make a page from The Beat piece and the Jones obit? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:25, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Push from the Bush

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

Interesting topic but doesn’t appear to satisfy WP:GN or WP:NBOOK. ~ BlueTurtles | talk 11:21, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals and Australia. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:23, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I found this mention in a 1978 edition of The Canberra Times, but it's not quite SIGCOV in my view. I also found this mention in The Australian Library Journal and a few sentences about the journal in this issue of Labour History, but again neither are quite SIGCOV. I thought the discussion in this book looked promising, but like most of what I found, the relevant chapter turned out to be written by one of the journal's editors. It looks like The Push from the Bush was part of a larger project encompassing several journals and volumes called Australians: A Historical Library that was launched to mark the bicentennial, and that wider project is definitely notable, but we don't have an article about it that we could merge/redirect this to. I'll keep looking for additional sources, but at this point my !vote would be delete. MCE89 (talk) 14:57, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Great stuff finding those sources. ~ BlueTurtles | talk 06:57, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Registering a delete, unfortunately. I couldn't find any additional sources and haven't received a response to my question below. I can't find anything that could give a pass of WP:GNG and don't see a suitable extant merge/redirect target. MCE89 (talk) 17:01, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Social science. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A cursory look suggests that this subject is notable. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:40, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Any specific sources you found? I would be very happy if this article were kept, so please do share what you found in your search. More than willing to change to keep if there are sources I missed. MCE89 (talk) 22:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:03, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Killing of Ryan Hinton and Larry Henderson

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

Run of the mill news story, and I don't see anything on them from before that. This is a WP:NOTNEWS and WP:BLP1E problem, and fails WP:GNG as well. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 01:42, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, Police, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the person who created Killing of Ryan Hinton and Larry Henderson.

What's going to happen with this article is the exact same thing that happened with a different article that I created, and which was also nominated for deletion.

I recently created Rochester, Minnesota racial slur video, and it was nominated for deletion, for the same reason as this one. But soon afterward, a bunch of other people added a whole bunch of content, and the deletion nomination was withdrawn.

The exact same thing will happen with this article.

Give it a week. It if turns out that I'm wrong, then I'll admit that I was wrong, and I'll be OK with deleting it.

R5Y93mdf (talk) 05:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - Redirect with history to Cincinnati Police Department. --Jax 0677 (talk) 11:42, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy House

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

Alright -- the subject of this article fails WP:GNG, and notability for companies because of lack of WP:SIGCOV, and WP:SUSTAINED in WP:RS. There are lots of sources, but they are either WP:ROUTINE, very old announcements of the opening, or not independent. This article has serious NPOV issues to go along with that -- seems like advertising and promotion. This article doesn't belong on Wikipedia. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, United States of America, and Washington. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soft keep: The article is in desperate need for and update and rewrite, but I found a few local newspaper sources about the subject [66] [67] [68] [69] and a mention in Time Magazine [70]. These articles aren't very old and are independent. Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 01:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National Council on Compensation Insurance

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

There are no references at all to this insurance-related industry-funded company in Florida. FeralOink (talk) 01:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Business. FeralOink (talk) 01:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, United States of America, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:19, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this article needs to be improved and sourced (If I have time I will do those things later,) but this article has reliable sources and the subject is notable. After all, notability is based off of the existence of sources, not just the ones in the article. It's also a non-profit, not really a company. Here we go: [71][72][73][74][75][76] (Primary, non independent source), [77][78][79][80][81][82]. In essence, this is a data collection non profit for the insurance industry, and its relatively influential and important. Clearly passes the WP:GNG and the WP:NORG guidelines. In the future, please conduct an adequate WP:BEFORE check. --AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 03:22, 7 May 2025 (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 merge‎ to Mayoral elections in Norfolk, Virginia. Page author and nominator in agreement, uncontroversial close should not violate WP:NACD (non-admin closure) Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 02:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2020 Norfolk mayoral election

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

Local elections do not have presumed notability, and this is an essentially uncontested election that lacks significant coverage (because it was uncontested) Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 01:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Mayoral elections in Norfolk, Virginia - which would follow similar suit to Mayoral elections in Virginia Beach, Virginia. Since the 2006 election was the first mayoral election in Norfolk's history, one article combining all elections should achieve significant notability while including cited voting data for every election. Vataxevader (talk) 01:45, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vataxevader merge would definitely work if you create that page, and if any of the ones that already have pages would be notable as their own page they could be kept as such Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 01:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is, I do not know how to merge the existing pages into the new page without copying and pasting the content. I am not sure if an administrator can do this or if there is a merge tool I am not aware of Vataxevader (talk) 01:56, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vataxevader there is not a tool that I know of that can do this, but copy and pasting it would be completely fine. All you would have to do is make sure the sections line up Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 02:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoblyblob Will do, thank you for following your duties Vataxevader (talk) 02:03, 7 May 2025 (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.

Chérif Baba Aidara

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

Declined prod. Almost all the sources are databases/results lisings and not SIGCOV for meeting WP:SPORTSCRIT. This appears to be a dead link. LibStar (talk) 01:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Africa. LibStar (talk) 01:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Subject was notable enough to have been selected for two Olympics, and achieved the best ever global placing by a Mauritanian (population of 4.3 million people). There are large systemic barriers to access about African topics and people, and the most likely venues for coverage have all, without exception, not published their 1990s daily archives online for whatever reason. The notability of any article is always determined by the existence of sources, not their availability, and the issue with the recent mass deletion of hundreds of articles is that the amount of time it would take to hunt these sources has to be split among hundreds of articles.

Also, the Africathle source is not a dead link for me. Try Webarchive? --Habst (talk) 02:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. Africathle source is just a results listing and not SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. We need better sources than that. LibStar (talk) 02:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that better secondary sources are needed. --Habst (talk) 02:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fika Recordings

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

Of the sources in the article, the only kinda in-depth coverage is in WeGotTickets (a ticketing company?) and DrownedInSound (web-zine). There's an interview w/ the founder in BBC Music blog, but I'm not convinced any of these are strong enough reliable sources for a notability argument. All the others are just mentions of Fika in the context of an album that has been released etc. WP:BEFORE in newspapers.com, google news/books, pressreader didn't turn up any additional coverage beyond mentions. Considered ATD but I don't see a clear merge or redirect target as the founder doesn't appear to be notable and the record label is associated with multiple musical groups. Zzz plant (talk) 00:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and United Kingdom. Zzz plant (talk) 00:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:19, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'd say this clears the hurdle of WP:MUSIC's sense of one of the more important indie labels, and the Drowned in Sound and BBC coverage are solid starts on sourcing. Chubbles (talk) 13:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Negousse Mengistou

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

Subject does not appear to meet the WP:SPORTSCRIT due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. The article currently only has references to databases, and all I could find in secondary sources was a namedrop at [[83]]. Let'srun (talk) 00:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cycling, Olympics, and Ethiopia. Let'srun (talk) 00:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment; summoning @Habst, as this is their area of expertise. I can't immediately find any english coverage of this person, but then again the sources are most likely to be smaller Ethiopian newspapers from the 50s and 60s written in amharic. I will keep looking for sources. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 03:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We don't know that "smaller Ethiopian newspapers" covered cyclists. Not all sports get much coverage in every country at every time. Anyway, Wikipedia's current rules state that the coverage must be uncovered before creating articles, not after. Geschichte (talk) 14:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Formative epistemology

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

Possibly a hoax article or attempt at a misleading POV fork. The cited sources are almost all fake articles that have been renamed from "naturalized epistemology" to "formative epistemology". The non-fake articles do not mention formative epistemology and are in fact discussing naturalized epistemology. This is also the case for the bibliography. Performing a search for sources, I couldn't find anything suggesting this satisfies GNG. Shapeyness (talk) 00:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Shapeyness (talk) 00:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Agree this is a probable hoax. The Stanford Encyclopedia is currently not accessible. The revision history of only three edits to create the article. Possible paste job (User contributions for Carpeyourmom) from somewhere else. Seems pretty scant, considering the length of the article. Compare with the 2001 Featured Article Epistemology. — Maile (talk) 02:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Mizell

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

Non-notable WP:ROTM American pastor/businessman. Promotional page (WP:PEACOCK) that appears like an advertorial CV (WP:NOT). Fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:AUTHOR. Cabrils (talk) 00:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I would have PROD'ed this, utterly non-notable person. Reads like a CV/resume. I'm not sure this is appropriate for wikipedia. Oaktree b (talk) 00:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, and North Carolina. Shellwood (talk) 00:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:BASIC. This reads like a press release. Six of the seven sources appear to be his own publications. The seventh is from his church, so he likely wrote that also. — Maile (talk) 00:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 01:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable and reads like a promotional resume. Best, GPL93 (talk) 14:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Thurii

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

Found while browsing Wikipedia:Database reports/Forgotten articles. Cannot find any books or sources that mention this supposed battle that predate the creation of this article in 2007. The only "citations" this article has are incomplete citations which just say a book title and nothing else. No authors, no year of publishing, no ISBN, nothing. And the "source" titles are extremely vague, like "History of Rome" or "Antiquity".

(Note: I know there were actual battles between Tarantos and ancient Rome for control of the area, but I cannot find evidence that "Battle of Thurii" was one of those battles, or that there was any "naval battle" for the region.) ApexParagon (talk) 00:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Greece, and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 00:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The editor who created this stub seems to have been inactive on Wikipedia since 2013, but nothing on his/her talk page suggests that it was created as a hoax (I was looking for warnings of various sorts). Given that the part about Thurii is only a single sentence, while the rest concerns Rome's conflict with Tarentum, I wonder if perhaps the editor was confused about the sequence of events—perhaps including the dates. My first thought was to check the history of the cities in the Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, and see if it mentioned something similar to a battle at this time. Under "Tarentum", at p. 1097, if you scroll down the first column there's a description of Rome and Tarentum coming into conflict over Thurii, though this is supposed to have occurred in 302 BC, while the Tarentines didn't call in Pyrrhus until 281, when the Romans declared war on Tarentum.

This sounds like what the article creator had in mind, but unless the description is in error—which is possible, though it's hard to see "302" as a typo for "282" under "Tarentum"—the editor might have been confused by a less precise description such as the corresponding passage under "Thurii", top of the first column on p. 1193. I believe both are citing Appian's Samnite Wars, though additional sources are cited in "Tarentum" that might also shed light on this. I agree that the existing citations for this article are not very helpful, but thankfully knowing what sources describe the conflicts may help sort out whether there's enough here to salvage (at the very least, it can probably be merged under Thurii, Tarentum, and Pyrrhus, which would technically not be a deletion).

I expect Broughton can also be cited. I did not resort to PW, because wading through pages of densely-annotated German that I have to translate by retyping passages that I think are relevant on Google can be quite time-consuming! Not sure where else I would look besides the Greek and Roman authors cited in the DGRG, but perhaps someone else has some ideas on that. In any case, I think we can conclude that the article is not a hoax, but it might not be focused on its purported subject—Thurii—and might be better off mentioned in other articles than as a stand-alone one. P Aculeius (talk) 14:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

St. Mary's secondary school, Kitende

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

Non-notable school. Nothing to establish notability and would seem unlikely any RSs exist. fails WP:GNG. Cabrils (talk) 00:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Uganda. Shellwood (talk) 00:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete I see no indication that this passes WP:NSCHOOL, there are some articles about the schools sports results and a fire but not much on the school itself. --hroest 13:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Ali Al-Malky

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

Declined prod. No significant third party coverage. Olympians.sa appears to be a primary source of the Saudi OIympic federation, in any case it seems just to a database listing of athletes. Those wanting to keep must show evidence of indepth third party sourcing. LibStar (talk) 00:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Saudi Arabia. LibStar (talk) 00:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Finding sources for these types of athletes takes significant time and effort. I meant to only add the Arabic name I found as a note (which differs from Olympedia's Arabic name محمد علي المالكى), but I accidentally removed the PROD tag and then reverted my own edit. Then User:Liz re-removed the PROD tag in Special:Diff/1289174473, which I totally understand, but again I want to note that I de-prodded it in error.

The reason why I didn't want to de-PROD this right away was because I wanted to do a source search using both Arabic names which might take several days. I doubt we'll have time now that three other Olympian articles were nominated within minutes of this one (see 1 2 3), along with over 100 other recent PRODs that need to be dealt with. These mass-AfDs and PRODs have been controversial, because if you nominate articles with high enough frequency there are bound to be notable ones that fall through.

On the substance, the athlete was an Olympic Saudi Arabian sprinter that was likely covered in extant Saudi sources in the 1970s, but both those sources and coverage of the competitions he might have succeeded in, like the GCC Games, are not available to us easily. --Habst (talk) 01:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So now you're trying the line that this "has been controversial" to dissuade others, the village pump has been running for 2 months without an outcome. Plus still recycling the tired NEXIST argument that has been discounted in these athlete AfDs. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LibStar, I have a lot of respect for your contributions and I hope you can show me the same respect. I would never "try lines" because I never say something in AfDs that I don't believe. Yes, the village pump discussion has been running for months without an outcome, which is why it is controversial. WP:N (which includes NEXIST) isn't tired in the same way that WP:V doesn't get tired – they are core P&G used in creating an encyclopedia. When has it ever been discounted? --Habst (talk) 01:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not having an outcome doesn't mean it's controversial. LibStar (talk) 02:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but in this case the reason there is no outcome yet is because there have been hundreds of comments both for and against, which is why the topic is controversial. I'm not even trying to say that there is community consensus against it right now – just that it is controversial, and it presents a problem. --Habst (talk) 02:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not at all controversial compared to other users starting 50 AFDs on the same topic in one day, 50-100 concurrent prods, etc. And certainly it is still much less controversial than the creation of all the lousy articles. Geschichte (talk) 14:53, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Geschichte, I agree and appreciate your contributions. But neither of those other scenarios are currently happening, while this is a current issue. --Habst (talk) 14:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hybrid Designs PLC

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

Non-notable company. Coverage is routine and WP:ROTM. Fails WP:NCORP. Cabrils (talk) 00:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Ethiopia. Shellwood (talk) 00:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]