Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to People. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Note: In most cases there is another, more specific category than this one.

If possible, please use one of these instead:

Note: The following pages are transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Note: the following pages are not transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fashion (e.g. models)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women
Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography/Deletion for adult film actors and actresses

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary, it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|People|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to People.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

People

Glen Sanderson

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

Non notable politician. No sigcov found. (t · c) buidhe 01:20, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and United Kingdom. (t · c) buidhe 01:20, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:18, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Increase Carpenter

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

Non-notable. No real claim to notability, most of the article not about subject. Almost all of the info on Carpenter comes from the first source, which is of dubious value. Brianyoumans (talk) 20:29, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 21:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anand Kumar (civil servant)

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

Biography with no actual claim to notability. The applicable notability guideline is WP:GNG/WP:BASIC, and I can't find any significant coverage of him in independent, reliable sources. The interview in the article is a primary source and again says nothing about him (it consists almost entirely of his own words). bonadea contributions talk 07:17, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. bonadea contributions talk 07:17, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete : Fails WP:BIO. The article is filled with promotional language & appears to be a self-promotional creation with trivial details. Chronos.Zx (talk) 08:49, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Delhi, and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

P. C. Solanki

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

No indication of significance. Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. Refs are mix of interviews and routine annoucements to with the cases. scope_creep^Talk 08:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - lots of mentions, but no in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:14, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and Rajasthan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep: Earlier PROD-nominations were based on failing to find sources, which the re-write shows is objectively untrue. The AfD is now proposed mainly on WP:BIO, WP:RS, and WP:SIGCOV, which again reflect lack of WP:BEFORE and an appeal to policy (without specific discussion) that I address below. For instance, for user Wcquidditch (talk page), who voted above and originally nom. for PROD, several issues regarding lack of due diligence in PROD/AfD have consistently been raised on their talk page that concern me.

WP:RS—This is trivially untrue. Subject of the article is literally the headline of independent and published news from several news organizations such as The Economics Times, Deccan Chronicle, and The Quint. No significant research is needed to create a profile of the topic from these articles and it's more than a passing mention (or routine announcement) as the subject was the primary advocate of mult-year high-profile trial (see: Asaram for defendents profile and stature). This also satisfies, in my opinion, reliable, independent, and sources criterion of WP:GNG.
WP:SIGCOV—Additional citations within the article, where the subject is not the main topic directly, but critical part of the story support significant coverage, such as the coverage in the Caravan magazine, The Print articles. These may include interviews but are not the basis of the subjects profile. Further, coverage spans several years (2013-2023) indicating WP:SUSTAINED.
WP:BIO—The impact of trial brought by the subject as lead counsel is highly notable (as stated above) and their portrayal in a notable bollywood film (Sirf Ek Bandaa Kaafi Hai). — Komodo (talk) 18:40, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vyomika Singh

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

just appearing in a media briefing is not enough to merit a wikipedia article — Awsib (talk) 16:55, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — Awsib (talk) 16:55, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Military, and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Too PROMO, simply speaking with the media isn't enough for notability... Most articles used for sourcing are either interviews or talking about the press conference. Appears to have had a routine military career otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 18:45, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. Page does not fly. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 23:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: This is the most hot topic right now. You can find dozens of many significant noteble coverage about Vyomika Singh on Google. Easily meet WP:GNG. atcar10:04, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Very important person related to one of the most discussed current affairs. Aniruddh 07:23, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stacey Gabriel (actress)

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

This article does not meet WP:GNG. There is no evidence of significant, independent coverage from reliable sources to establish a lasting impact in the field. Most references appear to be minor news snippets, social media, or self-published material, which do not qualify as substantial verification under Wikipedia's standards. Without additional, credible sources demonstrating notable achievements or career recognition. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 13:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Lists of people, Business, Philippines, and Spain. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 13:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your claims are demonstrably false. Reverse this unjustified nomination for deletion. You have claimed multiple falsehoods which are against the Community Guidelines of Wikipedia.

To clarify:

List of nationally and internationally distributed news organizations referenced in the article:

- The Inquirer.net

- The Philippine Star

- ABS-CBN News

- the Manila Bulletin

- Mega magazine

- Philstar.com

- PEP. Ph

All sources explicitly note Stacey Gabriel and her notable activities.

---

Meanwhile your claims of "self published" material being used is false. Note an example of it or kindly retract your false claim. If you cannot back up this claim, nor retract it, your submission will be flagged as an abuse of Wikipedia policy.

---

"Without additional, credible sources demonstrating notable achievements or career recognition"

Multiple independent sources outline dozens of TV series episodes Stacey participated in, as well as her participation and placing 1st Runner-Up in the 2024 Miss Universe Philippines competition are noted. This is in addition to her success in the national Binibining Pilipinas pageant.

Are these not notable?

---

"social media"

There are no social media references in this article.

---

Given no evidence to support this unjustified action, reverse this flagrantly unjustified and deceptive nomination for deletion. Mickfir (talk) 16:57, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Mickfir,

I want to clarify that the nomination was made in good faith, based on a review of the article’s current sourcing and in line with WP:GNG and WP:BIO some of the listed sources are reliable, and this Afd only for english version. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 17:05, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why include false claims that social media and self published material was used as references? There is not a single referenced source that was self published nor any reference to social media. This is a harmful oversight at best and deliberately deceptive at worst.

As for notability... I repeat, dozens of interdependently verified TV Episode performances and multiple national pageants including Miss Universe Philippines as 1st Runner-up. Mickfir (talk) 17:15, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let me check! WP:AFD is not only for deletion it's a basic procedure to determine whether an article is suitable for Wikipedia. Many contributors will review it and vote, so there's no need to panic just let the contributors decide.𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 17:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sukhwinder Panchhi

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

Clearly non notable. Doesn’t satisfy any notability criteria. Also i checked on google but found nothing. Afstromen (talk) 13:01, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Authors, Bands and musicians, Music, Asia, India, and Punjab. Afstromen (talk) 13:01, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dev Dhillon

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

He doesn’t have any reliable source to establish notability. Sources in the article are unreliable. Clearly non notable. Afstromen (talk) 12:59, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Authors, Bands and musicians, Music, Asia, India, and Punjab. Afstromen (talk) 12:59, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bipin Joshi

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

Meets WP:ONEEVENT, coverage is only related to his capture, does it inherently make the subject notable? GrabUp - Talk 08:22, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nepal. Shellwood (talk) 10:22, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bipin Joshi is currently a highly important and sensitive figure for Nepal. He was abducted by Hamas on October 7, 2023, and has now been held hostage in Gaza for over 580 days. He was the only Nepali citizen among those taken during the attack, which makes his case not just unique but also deeply significant at both national and international levels.

Even though he is a student, the entire nation of Nepal has been emotionally invested in his return. Since 2023, his case has been covered by over two dozen reliable national and international media outlets, including BBC, Al Jazeera, Republic World, Nepal Times, and many others.

This is not merely a personal incident — it is also a human rights and geopolitical issue. His story has also been featured prominently in Israeli media, which further highlights his global relevance.

While the current article contains several references, there are many more verifiable and reputable sources that can still be added. Therefore, we kindly request that the article not be deleted but given time and space for further improvement.

Anyone can search “Bipin Joshi Hamas” online and immediately see how widely covered and notable this individual is, especially in the context of Nepal–Israel relations and the events of October 7.

For all these reasons, please consider keeping this article. It provides more than just factual information — it reflects a story that continues to matter to thousands across borders.Rohanshresrha (talk) 11:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not sure he's any more notable than the other hostages... Could be a name in the list, but I don't see that this individual is more or less important than anyone else in the same situation. Some coverage, but it's either about the event or efforts to get the person back, showing the kidnapping is the notable event, not this person. Oaktree b (talk) 14:13, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your thoughts and perspective!
However, Bipin Joshi is not just one of many hostages held by Hamas — he is also known for his act of bravery on October 7, where he reportedly picked up and threw back a grenade that Hamas militants had thrown inside the shelter where he and 10 other Nepali students were hiding. His action potentially saved lives.
Regarding individual media coverage: there are multiple reputable Nepali news articles that focus entirely on Bipin Joshi himself, not just the larger incident.
It is also important to note that out of the 251 individuals taken hostage by Hamas on October 7, Bipin Joshi was the only Nepali citizen — someone who had no prior involvement in the war or any political connection to Hamas or Israel.
Because of this, his case has been raised repeatedly in Nepal's Parliament, and even by the Prime Minister. Major national media outlets in Nepal have been reporting on him consistently for over 580 days. I can absolutely add those references to the article if needed — many of them are still being collected and formatted.
Now, regarding why the article focuses on Bipin Joshi by name:
The reason is simple — across Nepal, thousands of people have been actively searching online to know who Bipin Joshi is, how he was captured by Hamas, and what his current status is. This article responds to that public interest and awareness.
Once again, I respectfully emphasize that Bipin Joshi is not just one among hundreds of hostages. He is a nationally recognized figure in Nepal, and his case continues to represent a significant humanitarian concern.
That’s why a dedicated article on him is appropriate and necessary on a platform like Wikipedia.
Many more individual news articles focusing solely on his story are still being added — this is just the beginning of the page.
Thank you.Rohanshresrha (talk) 17:00, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Reportedly picking up" a grenade isn't terribly notable either. We don't have an article that talks about that. Oaktree b (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't ping me, I have no ability to modify/close the discussion. I've said what I have to say about this. Oaktree b (talk) 22:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per nom and Oaktree, I don't see anything particularly different about him from any other hostages, and I don't see anything other than the one event about him. Would never have even heard of him if it weren't for the conflict. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 22:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gora Chakk Wala

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

Non notable singer. Found nothing reliable and significant for his notability. Afstromen (talk) 06:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Authors, Music, India, and Punjab. Afstromen (talk) 06:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khumar Gadimova

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

This article does not yet appear to be notable for English Wikipedia Insufficient Sources, and the topic may not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 02:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Lists of people, Music, and Popular culture. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 02:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khumar Gadimova is a well-known figure in Azerbaijani pop music and is widely recognized by the public in the country. Her artistic career has been covered by numerous reliable and independent sources such as APA, AzərTAc, Musavat, and Report. She has been active in the music industry since the 1990s, performing solo concerts, with her songs broadcast on national television and radio, and has participated in several state-level events.

The article is based on verifiable and independent sources, and the subject clearly meets the notability criteria due to her impact on Azerbaijani culture and public recognition. For these reasons, I oppose the deletion of the article and recommend that it be kept.Farrux Dadasbayli (talk) 10:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prescott Currier

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

He was a World War II cryptography lieutenant, but I see no substantiation for the unsourced claim that he "played a major role in the Cryptanalysis of the Enigma". There are passing mentions, which fail to satisfy WP:GNG. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:59, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Maine, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Russell J. Nelson

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

Subject is not notable. Of the three sources, honorstates.org is user generated, There were others is an unpublished primary source memoir, and the Morton source does not contain SIGCOV. A WP:BEFORE search does not reveal any additional sources of note. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 22:00, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Philippines, and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Raza Aizad

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

Fails WP:NBIO. All sources I found had no significant coverage. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 23:36, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Pakistan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:15, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Passes WP:SOLDIER. He's a two star general. 𝗭𝗲𝗽𝗵𝘆𝗿 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 03:43, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He has the 2nd highest award of pakistan Hilal-i-Imtiaz. Recipient of Sword of Honour (Pakistan). 𝗭𝗲𝗽𝗵𝘆𝗿 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 03:44, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unless I'm missing something, WP:SOLDIER has been deprecated. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 19:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum of the previous military biography articles which were deleted, it was done based on WP:SOLDIER regardless it has been deprecated, such as Vijayant Thapar (officer). 𝗭𝗲𝗽𝗵𝘆𝗿 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 19:46, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also check WP:ANYBIO. He fulfills the condition, as he has the 2nd highest award. 𝗭𝗲𝗽𝗵𝘆𝗿 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 19:50, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANYBIO footnote 8 saysa person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books in that field, by historians, and I couldn't find any evidence of this in Aizad. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 21:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANYBIO footnote 8 is not applicable for a serving military general.

ANYBIO's first point says The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times — which is applicable for him as he has Hilal-e-Imtiaz awarded by the President. 𝗭𝗲𝗽𝗵𝘆𝗿 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 04:04, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Meets WP:SOLDIER: two-star general, recipient of the Hilal-i-Imtiaz (Military) and Sword of Honour. These are clear indicators of notability per military-specific guidelines. Lack of media coverage doesn’t override presumed notability under WP:SOLDIER. Taeyab (talk) 10:53, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of media coverage doesn’t override presumed notability under WP:SOLDIER That is just straight up not true. NSOLDIER is a part of WP:MILNG, which is an essay. Essays never override notability guidelines; they are simply pieces ofadvice or opinions of one or more editors (from WP:ESSAY), and as such have little-to-no community oversight. AFAIK, MILNG was never marked as a notability guideline; it has always been an essay. Also, usually, the wording I've seen in notability essays has been that subjects are "almost certainly", "likely to be", "safe to say that they are", etc. presumed notable. It's very possible that this is one of the exceptions. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 19:35, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – as per Taeyab and Zephyr. He's definitely notable as a Pakistan Army Major General, although the article can be improved, especially with Urdu-language sources. Al-Waqīmī (talk) 12:09, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article is much improved now. Has 3 reliable newspaper references. He was awarded the 2nd highest award of Pakistan for his services by the President of Pakistan in 2024...Ngrewal1 (talk) 22:37, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Pringle (British Army officer)

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

The article as it stands does not demonstrate that this individual was notable. It lacks reliable sources. This article fails WP:GNG. Aneirinn (talk) 20:39, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 20:58, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Lived, got married and died, I'm not seeing notability for this person. The house is a listed building, could perhaps be a brief mention there, but there is no article for the residence. There was a physician with the same name, born about 100 yrs earlier, that comes up in sources. Nothing for this fellow. Oaktree b (talk) 21:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:24, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sharif Mohamed

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

This article barely meets WP:GNG it only has 1-2 reliable sources, which isn't enough to prove the subject's importance. The topic doesn't seem to have played any major role, and many of the links are dead. Without more reliable, third-party coverage, this article may not belong on Wikipedia. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Lists of people, News media, Politics, and Maldives. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete fails WP:NPOL. --hroest 18:17, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Anthony Chaffee

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

This article only has two sources that might good for notability, but that doesn't automatically make the subject notable for Wikipedia and writing tone sounds like advertising, so there might be a conflict of interest. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 17:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Lists of people, and Rugby league. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 17:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete not notable, and has somewhat fringe views anyway. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 19:30, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The Guardian is the only RS in the article. No notability. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 02:31, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no SIGCOV apart from partial coverage in the Guardian piece. --hroest 02:38, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph M. Cammarata

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

WP:ONEEVENT, from what I can find, he has not done anything more notable than be the lawyer for Rudy Giuliani Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:47, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 16:07, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pammi Baweja

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

No coverage in reliable publications. Afstromen (talk) 08:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Asia, and India. Afstromen (talk) 08:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Article clearly fails WP:NBASIC. Chronos.Zx (talk) 15:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can not find any substantial coverage that could meet WP:GNG. Rajeev Gaur123 (talk) 10:20, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Narinder Batth

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

His work might seem notable, but the lack of coverage in reliable sources indicates that he is not notable Afstromen (talk) 08:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Music, Asia, India, and Punjab. Afstromen (talk) 08:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment; did you look for punjabi language sources? AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I searched on Google in Punjabi, but the results did not satisfy the notability criteria.
Afstromen (talk) 04:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

R. Arun Kumar

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

Unable to find any significant coverage that can satisfy WP:NPOL. The references are about his appointment as a member of a political party. I would be more happy if you provide any in-depth coverage. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:06, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, India, and Odisha. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:06, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; does not meet WP:NPOL or WP:GNG; with the exception of this source, all sources in the article are about the new members of the party being elected, so indepth sources cannot be guaranteed. Nothing other than the sources in the article showed up on Google. ToadetteEdit (7M articles) 07:02, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or Draftify : This article has more citations than many biography articles in Wikipedia. There are atleast three sources having significant coverage on the subject. (https://www.deshabhimani.com/deshabhimani-english-/cpim-24th-party-congress-54751/new-members-to-cpim-polit-bureau-98849) (https://www.deccanchronicle.com/southern-states/telangana/cpm-elects-arun-kumar-to-politburo-1871349) (https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1AD2Cs3QrY/) More sources can be added with time. So deletion is not the curation option. The article can be draftified if most editors think that this article needs improvement.
XYZ 250706 (talk) 09:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have found three articles written by the subject on NewsClick. (https://www.newsclick.in/author/r-arun-kumar) I think these can be added as his political views. XYZ 250706 (talk) 09:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Besides I found some of his speeches in social media like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram (all from verified page). Some days ago I also found him criticising education system in Andhra Pradesh under Chandrababu Naidu in a Telugu source. XYZ 250706 (talk) 07:35, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Without resorting to WP:OTHERSTUFF, I think it's worth noting the amount of blue-links at Template:Democratic_State_Chairs, even though state party chairs are generally less important that national leadership of national parties in India. There are only six national parties now in India and one of them Bahujan Samaj Party will soon lose the status as per ECI rules. So CPI(M), the political party of the subject, is one of the six (five after ECI official announcement) national parties in India. XYZ 250706 (talk) 07:41, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Heschmeyer

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

No evidence of meeting WP:GNG. The only example of third-party coverage is this 2020 interview in a Catholic magazine. JTtheOG (talk) 20:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Kansas. JTtheOG (talk) 20:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There are also a handful of, often brief, book reviews, but it doesn't look hopeful[1][2][3] Jahaza (talk) 21:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 02:44, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jima Francis

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

This South Sudanese journalist does not appear to be notable under WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. Sources in the article (or found in BEFORE search) are all his own writing ([4]) or sources affiliated with him and thus not independent ([5], [6], [7], [8]). Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:25, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and Sudan. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:25, 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]
Delete It is too early to create an article about him. Agletarang (talk) 18:22, 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. [9], [10] 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. [11],[12], [13].

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

Keep: Many hits in Gnewspapers, this one [14][ talks about him. Was mentioned in an accident, coverage in Brazil [15], [16]. Mentioned in a retrospective here [17], 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]
Keep – Per sources presented above. Svartner (talk) 14:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sufficient coverage has been found to meet at least SPORTBASIC and it can be very reasonably assumed that more exists due to his achievements. JTtheOG (talk) 18:58, 9 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]
Delete — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Reads like a CV/Resume, promotional article and totally non-notable person. Sources are only self-published. Fails WP:NBASIC, WP:RS, and WP:NPOV. VortexPhantom🔥 (talk) 08:38, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:PROMO. If this wasn't at AfD it may well qualify for G11 speedy deletion, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Milton Ellenby

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

Not enough sources to pass WP:GNG. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Surprising amount of coverage of bridge in newspapers, [18], [19], [20], [21]. Seems to have been active in the 1950s and was still being talked about in newspaper columns in the 1990s. Oaktree b (talk) 00:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Adil Hussain Shah

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

The article fails WP:Notability requirements, especially WP:1E and WP:BLP1E. Article subect was not consequential to the attack, and there is almost no extended relevance or notability of the subject. It is unlikely that the subject will receive continued significant coverage that could have potentially fulfilled the notability requirements. Perevious PROD discussion is here. Celjski Grad (talk) 08:17, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, India, and Jammu and Kashmir. Shellwood (talk) 10:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: failed WP:Notability. Not notable for a wikipedia article just because 'he try to defend shooting and got killed in a terror attack'.

雄奇 (talk) 13:05, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: only notable for his death. We dont even know his birth date 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 09:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As mentioned by User:Kautilya3 on Talk:2025 Pahalgam attack "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. People should be named only if they are notable individuals (outside the event)". Therefore, there is no justification for a separate Wikipedia page for SAH Shah, as he was not notable outside the event, and even his role in the event is not notable. I can agree to mention his name on event article (2025 Pahalgam attack) but not a separate wiki page. Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 11:22, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alinur Velidedeoğlu

AfDs for this article:

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

It was deleted a year ago, and not much has changed since then. There’s been the same routine coverage of events, interviews, and mentions. Since he’s an advertising executive, some routine media coverage is to be expected, but direct, in‑depth, quality coverage is still lacking. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 09:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Turkey, and Michigan. Shellwood (talk) 10:15, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Businesspeople, Politics, and Advertising. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Notability is easily satisfied through both the GNG and the SNG about creative artists. The sources are not routine coverage. His advertising work is covered in depth in two academic papers. He was in charge of Turkey's second largest and oldest political party's advertising campaign. The nominator did an AfC review for this article but did not mention at all any concern about "notability" in their review comments, all their concern was about the non-encyclopedic style and NPOV violations. What is the reason for this inconsistency? If there is a notability concern, they should have mentioned in their AfC review. The subject is also the producer of various notable productions, which received coverage in sources like The Hollywood Reporter, which is considered a reliable source. The second deletion discussion was poorly attended, with non-policy-based !votes. RE: "not much has changed since then", please compare the two versions. Also, please see @Fram's comment in the first deletion discussion. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 14:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This article was declined by Article for Creation on May 3 for being too promotional in tone. Article was then moved to main space by the creator with the commentThe article waited too long in the AfC queue, and I disagree with the feedback it received. Feel free to nominate it for deletion if there are any concerns. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:27, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note, but not exactly... I'm not the article's creator. It was created in 2007, and I wasn't active on Wikipedia at the time, and I have no connection to the user who created it. The AfC reviewer and the nominator of this AfD are the same user, and for some reason, they believe not much has changed between this version of the article and this earlier version. Also, they didn't say it was promotional; they said the style violates the Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policy. I wasn't sure whether that meant it was too promotional or too defamatory, as there are paragraphs that could be interpreted either way, and all based on reliable sources. Note that the sources that I used are not tabloids, but mainstream Turkish newspapers, columnists, commentators and academic papers. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The two versions that need to be compared are the one declined at AFC 12:03, 3 May 2025 edit and the draft moved to main space 20:07, 3 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alinur_Velidedeo%C4%9Flu&diff=1288613775&oldid=1288553988 You are correct that the article was declined asnot written in a formal, neutral encyclopedic tone. I misspoke in my previous post when I stated the article was declined as being too promotional in tone. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination statement of this AfD incorrectly states that not much has changed since the prior nomination, that's the reason I asked those two versions to be compared. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment I declined the speedy deletion, because the current article is substantially different from the one deleted, which consisted of only two of the current paragraphs. The opinion of a AfC reviewer does not constitute a deletion discussion, there is no need to have any improvement after that. No opinion on the notability, but given that it is harder to assert notability for people outside the english language world (and english references) and the efforts of TheJoyfulTentmaker in improving it, I suggest, that it is draftified/userfied if not kept - Nabla (talk) 11:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As I clarified in the 2nd nomination. I do not think that the sources is adequate for passing GNG.--Kadı Message 10:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sophie Rimheden

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

This article was formerly completely unreferenced but I was able to find one ref and add it. However, I think it still does not pass GNG. Aside from the article I found, there does not appear to be any significant coverage of her anywhere. Other news sources are passing mentions in articles about other musicians and the only Google Book results appear to be listings in a directory of musicians. Pinguinn 🐧 10:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Sweden. Pinguinn 🐧 10:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nomination. The EBSCO database and ProQuest also doesn't yield any results. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 10:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per below sources. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 08:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP, I have found some stuff in Google News. I have not much time left to do translations.

* Norra Skåne, 19 juni 2008 - Skånska Sophie Rimheden får del av miljonbidrag
* Gaffa, 11.04.2012 - Efter en lång väntan släpper nu electrodrottningen sitt femte album. By Sofia Anderson
* GP, 29 May, 2012 - Sophie Rimheden | Haj
* Sydsvenskan, 1 juni 2012 - Rimheden fångar mörkt Skåne By Emma Thörnkvist
* Kristianstadsbladet, 3 januari 2006 - Sophie Rimheden spelar på hemmaplan
* Release Music Magazine - SOPHIE RIMHEDEN MISS ALBUM SVEDJEBRUK RELEASE: AUGUST 30, 2004 REVIEW: SEPTEMBER 6, 2004
* Release Music Magazine, - SOPHIE RIMHEDEN TRAVELLER ALBUM NONS RELEASE: APRIL16, 2008 REVIEW: JUNE 10, 2008

I can find more but I am due to do other things. Anyway, plenty to satisfy me.
Karl Twist (talk) 11:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, the page just needs referencing. She's very popular and well-known in Scandanavia. Here's the problem, a lot of the usable and good references are not in English. There's a great potential to make a very good page about her. It will take time though. Some Wikipedia folks from Sweden would be a big help. Thanks Karl Twist (talk) 08:00, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per sources by Karl Twist, there is clearly enough to pass the threshold for notability. --AlexandraAVX (talk) 11:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In addition to what Karl Twist posted above, I find plenty of reviews and articles in a Swedish media archive, a sustained interest over time. I've added a couple of them to the article so far. /Julle (talk) 16:58, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the multiple reliable sources identified in this discussion and the ones added to the article that together show a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michalis Rokas

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

it lacks significant coverage from independent, reliable sources, failing to establish notability per Wikipedia guidelines. The content is minimal and promotional in nature, offering little encyclopedic value. Xrimonciam (talk) 08:27, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Xrimonciam (talk) 08:27, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Greece. Shellwood (talk) 10:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Michalis Rokas meets Wikipedia’s WP:NBIO and WP:NPOL criteria. He is a senior career diplomat within the European External Action Service, having held multiple head-of-mission roles representing the EU in Malaysia, New Zealand (as Chargé d’Affaires), and currently in North Macedonia. His appointments were publicly announced by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, indicating high-level political relevance. He has been regularly cited in independent and reliable media sources across Europe and Asia (e.g. Bernama, Free Malaysia Today, MIA, European Newsroom), and his role has direct bearing on EU enlargement and trade negotiations (e.g. EU–Malaysia FTA). Furthermore, the article is well-sourced with references from EEAS and major news outlets. The subject is notable as a top-ranking EU official shaping external relations. InfoWanderer (talk) 12:39, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete trivial, not deepening, nothing notable. Α diplomat just doing his job. Lord Mountbutter (talk) 19:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the nomination and your assessment were based on a very early draft of the article, created just hours before substantial improvements were made. Since then, the article has been significantly expanded with independent, reliable sources and verifiable content. I would appreciate it if you could revisit the current version before drawing a final conclusion.InfoWanderer (talk) InfoWanderer (talk) 01:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nurul Islam Bulbul

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

Fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:NPOLITICIAN. No significant coverage found in reliable, independent sources.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 07:07, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bangladesh. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 07:07, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom Somajyoti ✉ 08:26, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anzhelika Bielova

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

it does not demonstrate notability through independent, reliable sources, offering only trivial or self-published coverage. It also reads like a promotional biography and lacks the depth, neutrality, and verifiability required by Wikipedia standards. Oia-pop (talk) 05:48, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Oia-pop (talk) 05:48, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Ukraine. Shellwood (talk) 10:25, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment given that only 1 minute passed between your previous AFD and this one, did you do any check WP:BEFORE? MarioGom (talk) 19:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the significance of the persona is confirmed by independent sources. There is a suspicion that the nominator is a sock of an experienced editor, given the number of edits and indiscriminate nominations for deletion by me alone. Greenhalle (talk) 14:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moein Jalali

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

Fails WP:ARCHITECT. Can't find any sources giving him significant coverage. The main claim I see is winning the 2A Continental Architectural Awards, though as far as I can tell, it was second place. Unfortunately I was unable search in Persian, so if sources are found, please ping me. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 02:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Architecture. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 02:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Iran. Shellwood (talk) 10:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete the awards [22] may indicate notability since he / his team seems to have come in first but these awards only exist since 2016 so I doubt that they are relevant for WP:ARCHITECT. Also he is listed as one of multiple people on a design team for the award, so overall I dont think winning a non-notable award as part of a team can count towards notability. Also, the page reads like a CV and needs some WP:TNT. --hroest 13:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Awards and recognition
Moein Jalali has received individual recognition in international architecture awards:
2A Continental Architectural Awards
- 2016 - Won for Parsin Dental Clinic
- 2018 - Won for Palemos Villa 2
Organizer listings confirm these were individual awards, not team achievements. Alexandar Ivanov88 (talk) 10:21, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the 2A Asia Architectural Awards' significance:

The 2016 edition where Moein Jalali won for Parsin Dental Clinic featured a distinguished jury panel including:

Françoise Fromonot, Nasrin Seraji, Wolfgang Tschapeller, Murat Tabanlıoğlu, Hiromi Hosoya

Also the 2016 edition where Moein Jalali won for Parsin Dental Clinic featured a distinguished jury panel including:

Carme Pinós, Yoko Okuyama, Willy Müller, Ali Basbous.

Moein Jalali has been selected as a jury member for several prestigious international architecture awards, reflecting his standing in the architectural community:

Jury appointments

Inspireli Awards (2024) - Considered the world's largest student architecture competition
FRAME Awards (June 2024) - International interior design awards

Selection for such judging panels typically requires:

Recognized professional achievements
Specialized expertise
International perspective

Alexandar Ivanov88 (talk) 10:09, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandar Ivanov88 (talk) 10:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

Delete - Per nom. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. 2A Magazine looks minor. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:00, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ingemar Lindh

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

Orphaned article with little amount of sources available regardless of medium to demonstrate enough notability to pass WP:GNG. Was deleted via PROD in the past only to be recreated by a single-purpose account. MimirIsSmart (talk) 12:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre and Sweden. MimirIsSmart (talk) 12:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:43, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Called the "father of collective improvisation in the dramatic arts" [23], and described here [24]. Is also indexed in the VIAF as having publications in Sweden I'd imagine there are more in the native language. Oaktree b (talk) 14:18, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There's a Swedish scholarly source here, as well as the sources found by Oaktree b. With this I think he meets WP:GNG. --AlexandraAVX (talk) 11:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per above. Also, if anyone got access there's an article in Svenska Dagbladet from 10 July 1997 which seems interesting, one in Göteborgs-Posten 5 July 1997 and potentially one in Arbetet (Västsvenska editionen) 7 February 1970, to mention a few, but I can only see some snippets from home. /Julle (talk) 12:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There seem to be better sources in this discussion than there is on the page. Might be a good idea to integrate some of these sources and content onto the page. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 21:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paula Kruger

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

Fails WP:JOURNALIST. Pizza on Pineapple ^{(Let's eat🍕)} 05:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and News media. Pizza on Pineapple ^{(Let's eat🍕)} 05:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Radio, Television, Internet, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:03, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there - I'm curious to know on what grounds you think this page is worthy of deletion - this is someone who has decades of relevant experience ARealWorm (talk) 06:34, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I'm curious to know why you don't think this person is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia- they have decades worth of relevant experience and engagement in the Australian industry and are now head of the Media Diversity Australia ARealWorm (talk) 06:33, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

not meeting notability due to a lack of independent sourcing Oaktree b (talk) 14:25, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Source 5 is the only independent sourcing about this person. I don't find any other articles that could be used for sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 14:25, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. I think it's close. I agree that source 5 is the best source, and it's an article largely focused on the subject that was published in one of Australia's newspapers of record. But source 4 is also independent, significant coverage in a very reputable newspaper. I think you could easily make the case that those two sources are sufficient to meet WP:GNG. But both are very similar routine staffing announcements (one says she is joining ABC Radio Canberra, the other says she is now leaving), and feature a very high volume of quotes. I could be persuaded otherwise, but I don't think I really see the necessary depth in those two sources to demonstrate notability. MCE89 (talk) 15:13, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments - however there are more sources there now - please review ARealWorm (talk) 02:22, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't look like any edits have been made to the article since I left my comment here. What additional sources are you referring to? MCE89 (talk) 02:28, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ma Siu Kwan

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

Sources for this article seem to refer back to this article (i.e. an aggregated google book) – might make more sense to merge to one of the team pages if doesn't seem worth a delete. Smallangryplanet (talk) 17:16, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Football, and Hong Kong. Smallangryplanet (talk) 17:16, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 17:26, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:32, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:42, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:29, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is one source to support this article and it is a dead link. This one is a no-brainer. This does not meet the WP:GNG and should be removed unless more RSes can be provided.
Delete, fails WP:GNG. GoldRomean (talk) 00:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ranald Leask

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

We're not Linkedin and I can't find sigcov. Jay Cubby 00:46, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Scotland. Jay Cubby 00:46, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Television. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 03:40, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:BEFORE search finds close to no sources on him, all just brief mentions from over a decade ago. Fails WP:GNG. jolielover♥talk 06:50, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 01:47, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I found nothing except sources where he was being cited as a spokesperson. Seems very unlikely to be notable. MCE89 (talk) 16:15, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Seems like Wikipedia shouldnt have a article on it as fails the criteria WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV. VortexPhantom🔥 (talk) 11:37, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lacks sufficient sources to be included. If more sources can be found that support notability, I am open to the possibility of changing my vote. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 18:27, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soun Takeda

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

Note tag placed. I think its non-notable. References are extremly poor, some promo. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. Man doing his job. scope_creep^Talk 09:19, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:31, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Please do a WP:JAPANBEFORE before nominating. JP wiki has such this source: Oricon, JP name seach yield this NHK, Mainichi Shimbun and many more on JP GNews. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:37, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bro even got a PBS source lol Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:39, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question for @Miminity - Could you please list below which are the three best citations that are: verifiable secondary reliable sources that provide in-depth significant coverage, and are fully-independent from the subject himself? Thanks in advance. Netherzone (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Netherzone: sorry for the late reply: It passes GNG, Despite the (1) PBS source being about a local event, it is still not a WP:MILL news, it is still has a significant coverage about who the author is. (2) This Sankei Sports review. (3) This Nihonbashi Keizai Article

Additionally:

(4) This Sports Hochi source. I exclude paywalled sources. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 15:18, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally I also found (3.5) this Journal by OpenEdition Journals , though in french might have a significant coverage about him Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 15:39, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Miminity, Thank you for getting back to me. We differ in our analyses of the sources. I’ve already expressed what I thought about the PBS source (so I won't repeat myself here); the Sankai Sports piece is in a sports publication rather than an art or art history publication – it’s PR for a show at a department store and seems to be a press release not in any way a serious art review of a show at a museum or notable gallery or national gallery. The is promo for a calligraphy performance event, not an art review of his work. The Sports Hochi has the same problem in that it is not a serious art reference in an art publication, it’s about his performance of calligraphy as a kind of sport performed in a store. It’s human interest story, content created for the sports public not serious art criticism or art history. He does not meet WP:SPORTCRIT nor WP:NARTIST at this time. Don’t get me wrong, he seems like a great guy and an interesting calligrapher. I just don’t think the sourcing is what is usually present for a notable artist. Maybe in a few more years but now it is WP:TOOSOON.

This citation is pretty good: Cipango is a peer reviewed publication. I’d count that towards GNG, but not the others. If you can find two more like this I might change my mind. Netherzone (talk) 22:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Miminity, and the subject seems to be a prolific author. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:57, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Authors. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:38, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This artist does not meet WP:NARTIST. His work has not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, or won significant critical attention, or been represented within the permanent collections of any notable galleries or museums. Winning a 2019 "Best Father Award" from Japan Men's Fashion Association (MFU) is not notable. The PBS reference noted above is a review of a local exhibition at the Porch Gallery Ojai. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:57, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added an image to the article. See RIKEN Advance Institute for Computational Science (AICS-RIKEN) photo gallery for more pictures. Thanks. Tortillovsky (talk) 03:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The subject of the article fails WP:NARTIST due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Many of the sources in the article seem to be PR or promotional puff pieces. What are needed are serious critical analysis of his work within an art historical framework. It doesn't matter that he's written a lot of books, if his books have not received critical attention he does not meet WP:NAUTHOR. WomanArtistUpdates rationale is very clear, as is their point that PBS is local coverage for a hyper-local event. Netherzone (talk) 01:15, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Prolific author. Popular calligraphy artist. In practical terms, his work can be seen on the K computer (article available in several languages); image found in Commons. Originally, the article "Soun Takeda" (jp: 武田双雲) was translated from Wikipedia in Japanese. Thanks Tortillovsky (talk) 03:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Get a commissioned work doesn't make you notable. scope_creep^Talk 04:11, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tortillovsky, being a "popular" or a "prolific" is not the same as notability; nor is being "seen" on the decommissioned K supercomputer. Just because an article exists on another language Wikipedia does not mean that they are notable per English Wikipedia criteria. Netherzone (talk) 22:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'll go through the references today. scope_creep^Talk 04:11, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Serretta Wilson

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

Lacks independent SIGCOV. I searched EBSCO database, archive.org, and Google News. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 09:04, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, United Kingdom, and United States of America. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 09:04, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:17, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:17, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I've searched several times, and I can't find any reliable sources to support notability. There may be sources offline, but unless they can be located, this article is not viable.--Mojo Hand (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Well, she has had quite a few roles, and some people might remember her as Sergeant Wilson's daughter in Dad's Army. PatGallacher (talk) 16:05, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I have found a couple more sources. PatGallacher (talk) 18:10, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this Gloucestershire Echo piece is substantial enough. I have added that and another source to the article. More sources do exist. BD2412 T 18:53, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Barry (New Zealand paediatrician)

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

Seems like a great person, but does not appear to satisfy notability criteria WP:BIO with multiple significant coverage from independent RS. I’m no expert on WP:NACADEMIC but I don’t think the 2 reasonably cited articles are enough. ~ BlueTurtles | talk 06:51, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Medicine, and New Zealand. ~ BlueTurtles | talk 06:51, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Point 1 of ANYBIO is receiving a significant honour. I'd say that his QSO meets that mark; there are only 226 recipients. If we're invoking WP:NACADEMIC (which seems reasonable) he satisfies point 3 as fellow of the RCP and RACP, and seems clearly more notable than the average professor. As for GNG, this [25] is one source; can anyone do better? CohenTheBohemian (talk) 16:02, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chandu Salimkumar

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

Non-notable actor. Fails WP:NACTOR. Ednabrenze (talk) 05:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. Ednabrenze (talk) 05:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:26, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:NACTOR. Only four films, the first of which is about himself. — Maile (talk) 13:28, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It's a non-notable actor, who only has Four Films Destinyokhiria (talk) 16:35, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NACTOR – ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 08:34, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. actor may not have an extensive body of work, but he played a prominent role in his debut film Manjummel Boys, as noted in a review Pinkvilla review. According to Mathrubhumi, he also had a main role in the film Painkili. I need to research more before I can say anything for sure.Chanel Dsouza (talk) 06:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this personality may have done notable work but lacks proper news sources to establish work. Improvement could be done on the page.Almandavi (talk) 07:18, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:NACTOR. Played notable characters in multiple noted films.

Afstromen (talk) 07:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pujniya Raseshwari Devi

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

Her only notable work is "involvement in the idol installation ceremonies" of some temples. Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources and fails wp:GNG / wp:ANYBIO. Zuck28 (talk) 19:15, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Religion, Hinduism, India, Chhattisgarh, and Odisha. Zuck28 (talk) 19:15, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Balvinder Singh Suri

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

No significant coverage in secondary reliable sources. Badly sourced. Possible COI. Zuck28 (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. Zuck28 (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: - it depends on whether you consider his role in Taarak Mehta Ka Ooltah Chashmah significant enough to make him pass WP:NACTOR or have significant coverage of the same. Bearian (talk) 21:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; noted roles in notable projects. I have attached three new news sources, and more are available on Google.

Afstromen (talk) 08:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Akash Singh Rajput

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

The subject fails WP:GNG due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Acting roles are minor—brief appearances in Toilet: Ek Prem Katha, Mirzapur, and Aashram and do not meet WP:NACTOR. The "world record" lacks notability, and relation to a politician is irrelevant. Most sources, like ANI press releases and Nai Dunia, are unreliable or do not mention the subject. The article also shows WP:COI issues and feels like WP:TOOSOON.

The article's credibility is further undermined by the page creator uploading an image with false copyright claims, which was deleted twice for violations despite being claimed as their own work. Zuck28 (talk) 15:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Politicians, Music, India, Madhya Pradesh, and Maharashtra. Zuck28 (talk) 15:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Page meets the both criteria.𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 16:35, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Subject's acting roles are minor and insignificant.
The claimed "world record" for a book is not a notable award, and being the son of a politician does not confer notability, as it is not inherited per Wikipedia standards.
The article relies heavily on unreliable or inadequate sources:
- Source #2 (ANI press release) is self-published.
- Source #3 (Nai Dunia) is non-reliable.
- Source #5 is a forum, not a credible source.
- Source #7 is non-reliable.
- Source #8 does not mention the subject.
- Source #9 is a duplicate.
- Source #10 and Source #11 do not mention the subject.
Most remaining sources fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA, which typically lack the depth required for significant coverage.
Zuck28 (talk) 18:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear, Significant sources are available.𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 02:02, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
S-Aura, Please mention those sources with SIGCOV and are reliable, with no WP:FRUIT and WP:PRIMARY. I can't find any. — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:01, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear @Benison,
The TOI [26], India TV [27] and The Tribune (India) [28] generally considered secondary sources because they analyze or report on events involving Akash Singh rather than being direct records from him or original documents. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 06:13, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
S-Aura, All of these are interviews and promotional stuff. Anything spoken in interviews are primary because the subject is the source. They aren't used here. TOI is not reliable for personal data and box office. (See WP:ICTFSOURCES). — Benison (Beni · talk) 07:18, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This page meet the criteria under both WP:GNG and the WP:NACTOR. The article is supported by many significant coverage.
Delete As per nominator, subject does not meet WP:GNG. Filmibeat, Naidunia, IndiaForums, OneIndia, MPBreaking are not reliable. Almandavi (talk) 05:27, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think you need to be more careful when editing Wikipedia. It’s unacceptable that you fail to recognize one of the top media portals like OneIndia. Your edits seem really suspicious to me. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 08:21, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OneIndia is listed as unreliable here per WP:ICTFSOURCES Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:30, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Understood! kindly review more listed sources, as there are many reliable available including TOI, NDTV, and The Print etc. Additionally, his father Govind Singh Rajput is also a Cabinet Minister. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:52, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@S-Aura Being someone's son doesn't makes the personality notable for wikipedia. Almandavi (talk) 07:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Almandavi, The context was different. I hope you will understand as you start editing. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 08:03, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Miminity for clearing it. @S-Aura Better to research and fix rather than pointing other editors. Almandavi (talk) 07:13, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Almandavi, Thanks for your advice! 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 08:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets WP:GNG, as multiple reliable sources have been found.Sync! (talk)
Delete: No SIGCOV whatsoever. Most of the references are totally unreliable per WP:ICTFSOURCES and passing mentions and minor roles aren't NACTOR or SIGCOV. — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly review again! 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 06:18, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
S-Aura, Stop bludgeoning discussions. — Benison (Beni · talk) 07:19, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dominik Kočik

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

Subject does not appear to be notable upon search. I've found two potential secondary sources (1 & 2) referenced in the current state of the article, but the first thing that struck out to me is that they do not seem to be WP:SIGCOV, so there is no real reason to presume that the subject is notable as of right now. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:06, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, and Slovakia. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:06, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Darts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:41, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - in addition to the two sources above, I'm able to find quite a bit of material in Slovak sources (1, 2, 3 4, 5, 6) indicating he's at least regionally notable in Slovakia for his darting abilities. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 08:09, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – He is a young athlete who just started his career. Can anyone analyze whether or not the sources found by Ser! count towards WP:GNG?⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:26, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify - There is nothing on the page that points towards GNG, but Ser! has added a number of new sources. [29] is an interview, so that is N per WP:IV. The others are all SIGCOV, but all focussing on him as a rising hope who is top of his youth class and even won a competition in the Netherlands. Now I don't know if we call darts players athletes, but I think WP:YOUNGATH applies in any case. He clearly made a stir in June 2022, after winning in the Netherlands, but these are youth tournaments, and the press interest in him is localised (although across Slovakia) and also occasioned, and thus primary news reporting. At this point I agree with the press reporting that he looks like a Slovak hopeful for great future success, but that is in the future. Draftify recognises that this may occur. However, there is a risk that the draft will be abandoned before the success occurs, which could be some time away. I would also be happy with a redirect to preserve page history. However, there is not much that is actually usable in the final article in what we have now (again, ther sourcing on the page as it is will not do). Failing agreement on a suitable redirect, I would see no problem with deletion. The article can be written if and when he achieves success in major tournaments and elicits significant secondary coverage. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:17, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Herbert Lindesay Watson Wemyss

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

Subject appears not to meet WP:BIO. The article text says only that he was a Scottish physician. I read through the first cited source [30], an obituary that gives a fairly complete picture of his life, and I don't see anything in there that would meet WP:BIO. —Bkell (talk) 13:32, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Scotland. Shellwood (talk) 13:58, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:21, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only pull up the obituary as well [31]. Published some papers, but this was before h-factors were a thing, so I don't think we can prove academic notability. Oaktree b (talk) 01:40, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: his work on polycythemia vera and remodelling of bone in chronic kidney disease is notable. He also has two obituaries: one in the Endinburgh Medial Journal and another in the British Medical Journal. Whispyhistory (talk) 18:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Obituaries in the BMJ and EMJ are enough with other the sources to show nobility. Also as a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. KylieTastic (talk) 22:09, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dabzee discography

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

Does not meet GNG and the one reference provided in the article does not cover the subject in depth https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/videos/entertainment/music/malayalam/thallumaala-song-manavaalan-thug/amp_videoshow/93500395.cms Uncle Bash007 (talk) 09:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Uncle Bash007 (talk) 09:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 1. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:09, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Lists, and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Should seem obvious, but just in case, if consensus is reached that this article shouldn't be kept, merge into Dabzee#Discography instead of deletion. it's lio! | talk | work 10:11, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:18, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Scott Robinson

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

Violates WP:BLP1E. Should be redirected to List of longest prison sentences. ––FormalDude (talk) 08:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and Oklahoma. Shellwood (talk) 09:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would very strongly oppose redirecting it there, that is not the kind of list we should be redirecting BLPs.

If there is better sourcing getting the longest prison sentence of all time is notable enough that it IMO invalidates the second prong of BLP1E. So then WP:NCRIMINAL is also a consideration. The sourcing I can find is not great so honestly he probably just fails the WP:GNG. But he does have an extremely generic name so I may be missing stuff. But unless there is more sourcing I failed to find, delete (Not redirect). PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect or smerge is as appropriate as the sentence. Bearian (talk) 08:50, 5 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) 14:04, 8 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]

@SunloungerFrog, Let's talk about the references. Please provide significant coverage about the subject. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:18, 8 May 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]

Please come forward after log-in your account then provide your factual statement. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:11, 8 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]

All the above references provided by MCE89 are self published. We need in-depth coverage in reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. If you have such citations please provide, i would be more happy to withdrawn my nomination. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? They’re clearly not self-published. All of the sources I linked above are book reviews in peer-reviewed academic journals (and one in a newspaper). Which is exactly what is required to pass WP:NAUTHOR. Can you explain what you mean by these sources being self-published? MCE89 (talk) 07:15, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the above analysis. Andre🚐 03:07, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Bakhtar40, I'm not sure what you are trying to get at. To add to MCE89's comment, and to expand on my keep rationale, I do not think that the subject can be considered notable under WP:GNG, for which at least three decent sources are necessary, as you say. However, I do think that the subject can be considered notable under the subject-specific notability guidelines for authors, which saysSuch a person is notable if:... The person has created or played a major role in co-creating 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 this case, the four books in Selected publications are thesignificant...body of work, and the references against each are theindependent peridiodical articles or reviews; MCE89 has also provided some additional reviews. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 07:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Alan Levy

AfDs for this article:

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

No indication of significance. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 16:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, Internet, and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:02, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Illinois, New York, Oregon, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:47, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No RS that discuss this person are used for sourcing. Source 15 is a RS but doesn't mention this person. I don't see any either, some primary sourcing only. The was at AfD over a decade ago, and still no RS have turned up. I don't think this person is notable. Oaktree b (talk) 23:12, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. The current article is in need of a clean-up and better sourcing, but I think some alternatives to deletion per Wikipedia:ATD are appropriate and I think this nomination is premature. This profile in the Washingtonian demonstrates, at least to me, there is a chance that the subject can meet WP:GNG based on a 40-year legal career at a large public advocacy group that includes arguing in front of SCOTUS. A search on Google Scholar indicates he is published in legal journals at least more than a regular attorney. Google Scholar is the floor, not the ceiling based on his writing in the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform. In addition, he is mentioned in a number of books at the Internet Archive including books independent of him and Public Citizen. I would also recommend, should we not keep, to !redirect to Public Citizen where the guy has worked for over 40 years. The preface of "weak" is that I am in a space of quantity vs quality at this point with Internet Archive, JSTOR, etc. I am very open to the possibility he is not the subject in enough of these or that the work is not so atypical as to warrant an individual article as a non-attorney.--Mpen320 (talk) 23:25, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is not coverage. That short article are the real thing that mention him in any detail. There is no other WP:SECONDARY coverage that I can find that is specifically about him. And its nothing like enough. scope_creep^Talk 05:42, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I will go through the reference and look at them in detail in the next couple of days to see what is what. scope_creep^Talk 06:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I have seen a few articles about him from reliable sources that prove notability. One of them in my quick look was the Washingtonian February 3 article "Paul Levy, the Web Bully’s Worst Enemy", which also made me laugh out loud. Collectively regular coverage in Reason and New York Times, it satisfies me. He sounds like an interesting man. He's also got my interest too. Karl Twist (talk) 08:14, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep inclined to say that he is on this side of GNG. Andre🚐 03:09, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence free !voting there I see. scope_creep^Talk 16:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Lets look at the references:

Ref 1 [36] That is self-written profile. Not independent.
Ref 2 [37] Secondary source.
Ref 3 [38] Not about him. Its a passing mention.
Ref 4 [39] CV. Not independent.
Ref 5 Non-rs
Ref 6 [40] That is a spam and will need to be removed.
Ref 7 [41] Another passing mention.
Ref 8 [42] Passing mention.
Ref 9 [43] Passing mention.
Ref 10 [44] Not independent.
Ref 11 404
Ref 12 [45] The docket. Non-rs
Ref 13 [46] Not independent.
Ref 14 [47] A short quote from him. Not independent.

The first two blocks of references, 2 non-rs, 5 not-independent, 4 passing mentions, a 404, a spam link and 1 secondary source that reads like a puff piece. This is a WP:BLP. Its states in that policy Wikipedia must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources The sources are atrocious. They are crap. There is no other way to desribe them. scope_creep^Talk 16:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't the Justia RS? It is a primary source and I saw nothing on RSP about Justia being unreliable. Many of the sources corroborating this person's existence are court dockets. And what is wrong with Washingtonian being a secondary source? "Levy, an attorney with the Public Citizen Litigation Group who has represented union dissidents" in the Michigan Law Review articles on JSTOR, "Paul Alan Levy , an attor ney with the Public Citizen Litigation Group in Washington, D.C." on the ABA Journal, his book was cited by the NLRB... Andre🚐 06:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Court dockets don't prove notability. They are records of mandatory attendance and that all you can say about them. They don't confer notability and notability is not inhereted off them. There is nothing wrong with the Washingtonian source as a secondary ref. But it needs more than source to prove a person is notable. This is a WP:BLP. Not a article about some song. WP:THREE is standard here per established consensus (summer before last). 3 secondary sources will do it. scope_creep^Talk 08:27, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

His own work doesn't towards notability unless its been reviewed and published by external reviewers (not social media). So far I've not seen any evidence to contrary that any of his work is notable. scope_creep^Talk 08:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see the dockets (Justia) machine generated is non-rs generally. scope_creep^Talk 08:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Murray Banks

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

Non-notable subject with one RS, couldn't find others during BEFORE. Previous AfD led to article being deleted (in 2008) and I don't believe he passes GNG now. StartGrammarTime (talk) 14:27, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Psychology, New Jersey, and New York. StartGrammarTime (talk) 14:27, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete orphan, not really a biography, little in the way of google scholar Czarking0 (talk) 14:58, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Further to this coverage cited in the article, the subject appears to have many hits on the newspaperarchive. See, for example, Box Elder Journal, 1963, and Daily Texan, 1953, and Chester Times, 1954. ResonantDis_tortion 22:54, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:41, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bernd Sikora

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

Contested prod without improvement. Currently sourcing does not show they pass WP:GNG, and searches did not turn up with enough in-depth sourcing from independent, reliable sources to show they meet GNG. And they do not appear to meet WP:NSCHOLAR either. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:47, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Architecture, and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 16:11, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Authors. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning Keep - has a German-speaker done WP:BEFORE? Most/all sources will be in German. Johnbod (talk) 19:35, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looking at the history of this article, it appears to be a translation of the poorly sourced German article https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernd_Sikora. No sources there to help sustain the biographical information and claims made in the article. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:31, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I have revisited this article several times. I've made some edits, but am unable to find RS to show notability. Sikora designed an observation tower and a footbridge. The sourcing for this information is miriquidimedia.de (Miriquidi Media), which looks to be a site about Sikora that promotes his books, project and tours. I don't think it can be considered an independent source. The citation for the biographical information is a dead link. The listing for books have citations that don't link anywhere, just hyperlink for ISBN and hyperlink to the Wikipedia pages of the German region the book covers. I have not found anything on the internet to show notability. The fact that there might be something somewhere in German needs to survive WP:BURDEN --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:36, 1 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 20:55, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bahnus

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

Failed WP:GNG, WP:COMPOSER, and WP:BANDMEMBER with no significant coverage from WP:BEFORE other than passing mentions — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:47, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Korea, and South Korea. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:47, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I wonder if something here could be rescued by rewriting this into an article about the music group or the scandal itself? This Korean source, cited in the article, states that "the plagiarism suspicions surrounding singer Lee Hyo-ri's album, which had been causing a stir in the music industry for a month, have been partially confirmed to be true, causing a huge backlash. The expression 'the greatest plagiarism fraud case' is also appearing." This suggests that there are other sources out there - and also, that the article focus should be on the scandal, not the individual (who seems not very notable - we don't even have their birth date or pretty much anything about their life outside this scandal). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:53, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hubertus Prinz von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha

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

Article is primarily about his parents and grandfather and very little about Hubertus himself beyond genealogical information. I see no reason for notability independent of his ancestry. WP:NOTINHERITED WP:NOTGENEOLOGY D1551D3N7 (talk) 10:14, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Royalty and nobility, and Germany. D1551D3N7 (talk) 10:14, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom.

AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 13:16, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to Ernst Leopold Prinz von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha (his father). The contents of this entire article can be transferred to and summed up in the "Marriage and family" section of the other article I mentioned. Vida0007 (talk) 18:42, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect per User:Vida0007. Kakurokuna (talk) 20:56, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.The present prospective petitioner to be restored as Duke of Albany should have his own article and Wikipedia's genealogical content is not a drawback in any sense and there is no reason to thin it just because it's not marked for extension.72.80.84.163 (talk) 16:05, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a form WP:CRYSTALBALL argument you are making. The Duke of Albany title was ended in the Titles Deprivation Act 1917 a whole 44 years before Hubertus was born. You seem to think there's some inherit notability in being "in line" for a title that fundamentally no longer exists and your basis is that it could potentially be restored but there's no sources to support that. D1551D3N7 (talk) 17:36, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Royal Family article in Debrett's Peerage includes the deprived titles as "suspended" and tracks the heirs and we should do likewise...the law makes provision for heirs to petition to be restored. 72.80.84.163 (talk) 04:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Beeing a potential petitoner does not bring relevance. Beeing a petitoner would change that, but this is WP:CRYSTALBALL. Keeping track of who reliabable sources think could be a potential petioner is already covered in the article Duke of Albany, which is the appropriate place. --Theoreticalmawi (talk) 14:05, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The terms of the Act make clear who the one person at any time entitled to petition is but the deletion of this article might be seen as an excuse to omit mention of it from the Duke of Albany article.72.80.84.163 (talk) 15:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 17:30, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rhian Sugden

AfDs for this article:

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

Cannot find anything about this woman other than the expected nude pictures and tabloid "journalism" detailing incredibly minor events. Does not meet WP:BIO. Previously changed to a redirect for the exact same reason, and nothing has changed since to make her more notable. Nomination for deletion since I simply do not think she's even notable enough for the redirect. CoconutOctopus talk 14:43, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and England. CoconutOctopus talk 14:43, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: Hard to find non-tabloid coverage, this [48] and this [49] helps. The multitude of Daily Mail or Sun coverage shows public knowledge of who she is. should at least be enough for a stub article. Oaktree b (talk) 16:32, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, this one as well [50] Oaktree b (talk) 16:34, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep -- there is some decent coverage per @Oaktree b, but it only seems to be about a picture of her at a holocaust memorial, and a random scandal. Searching myself I can find many stories, but only about relatively minor details of her life, because she's a celebrity. She does seem to meet the general notability guideline of having coverage in multiple reliable sources, even if most of it is relatively pointless coverage of random details of her life. And she doesn't fall under "notable for only one event" because while 2 of the stories above not in tabloids are about the holocaust memorial incident, other articles are not about that. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:51, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, yes, she doesn't really need a WP article any more than she needs the random newspaper articles on tiny details of her life. But if Wikipedia is a repository of all human knowledge, some of it is going to be kind of pointless knowledge, I guess. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:52, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

She was on a TV show in the UK, that likely ads to the notability. Details here [51], here [52], here [53]. Oaktree b (talk) 21:31, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage in Ireland here [54]. Oaktree b (talk) 21:41, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The Holocaust memorial "thing" is mentioned here [55], [56], these certainly all about her, but the event gained enough traction to show scholarly notice. That's something. Oaktree b (talk) 21:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm leaning delete as the article appears to fail GNG since sources only cover that the subject exchanged questionable texts with a married man and took a selfie at a Holocaust memorial which doesn't seem like significant coverage. I found a few small articles in her hometown newspaper including [57] but I still think it fails WP:BASIC, unless notability is via WP:ENTERTAINER but I don't see a case for this in the sources. I'm wondering if these same sources had different content if I'd see things differently which is why I'm not officially !voting yet. Nnev66 (talk) 00:34, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Dug up a few more [58], [59], [60]. That should be more than enough. Oaktree b (talk) 15:48, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per additions here, Oaktree b. HilssaMansen19 (talk) 15:51, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
This was technically relisted several hours ago, but I'm noting this now as a procedural matter. Some comments above this line may actually have been added before the relist. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 17:32, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reuben Liversidge

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

No significant coverage found in reliable sources. Does not meet WP:BASIC, let alone WP:GNG. The TV show he was on, Round the Twist is notable, but his role in it for two seasons is not. Checked Google and ProQuest which yielded 4 hits (cast lists and passing mentions, plus "contributes a wicked March Hare and terrific Humpty Dumpty" in a 2009 review in The Age). Cielquiparle (talk) 05:46, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Australia. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:46, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Considered redirecting to Round the Twist but that article does not mention the actor or his role. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:31, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It does mention his role, Anthony, in Round the Twist#Characters#Other. That section doesn't name any actors, though - but maybe more characters and actors could be added to the Round the Twist#Casting table. RebeccaGreen (talk) 07:04, 2 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) 06:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:25, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No SIGCOV. Doesn't meet WP:NBIO. Couldn't find any RS about him other than his minor role. Primary sources only. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:52, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aaryn Gries

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

Only claim to notability is that she made bigoted comments on a reality TV show. WP:BLP1E and possibly other BLP concerns. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 03:58, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Television, and United States of America. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 03:58, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I created this a redirect to prevent it becoming an article back in 2013, with the edit summary, No article for you, racist. In spite of this, an article was created a couple of months later. Given that the controversy was in 2013, how does the nominator explain the 373,650 pageviews the article has received since July 1, 2015, which is as far back as the Pageviews Analysis tool goes? Abductive (reasoning) 04:20, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Popularity is not the same as notability: see WP:POPULARPAGE — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 07:22, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That essay uses deeply flawed examples and no reasoning whatsoever. Abductive (reasoning) 23:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Internet, Colorado, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep admittedly this is my first time seeing this argument so I don't know if my interpretation of it was correct but one of the criteria for it seems to be " if the subjects role in the event isn't documented" and judging by the sourcing that doesn't seem to be the case multiple sources cover the controversy and some of them are years after it which seems to be lasting coverage. That said I'm new to this standard so if my analysis is wrong I'll change my vote Scooby453w (talk)
Delete as this article per nom meets the WP:BLP1E definition. All of the coverage is about the subject's appearance on the reality show Big Brother and racist comments she made. All sources with WP:SIGCOV are within a narrow time period in 2013. Sources that mention the subject since that time are only in passing. I searched and cannot find any additional sources for the subject other than the ones for this one event. Note page views are not a measure of Wikipedia notability. Nnev66 (talk) 13:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree i believe the subject does not meet 2 of the requirements for Wikipedia:BLP1E first she is not "low profile" https://www.instagram.com/aaryn_williams?igsh=MXNkY3g0MThhMHAxYQ== as she has a big following on social media secondley I concede that the sources are all about the racism however I believe it qualifys as "a significant event where the subjects role is well documented" there are dozens of reliable sources covering the bb15 controversy which was a one of the most massive controversies in bb historh and it goes well into detail about her involvement in it Scooby453w (talk) 14:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia "low profile" means the subject doesn't have independent secondary coverage in reliable sources over time. Instagram followers don't count as high profile for Wikipedia notability although in a more general sense one could make a case for it. I see your point around a "significant event" and different people will see any event's significance differently, which is why the consensus process is used here. Nonetheless, the main basis for my !vote was lack of significant coverage other than in the summer of 2013. I recently stumbled across WP:Why is BFDI not on Wikipedia? which discusses why a very popular YouTube series with billions of views that doesn't have a Wikipedia article - you may find this helpful for understanding policy. Nnev66 (talk) 15:15, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note i will still keep my vote the same (as i view the racism controversy as a significant event) but i wont site social media as a notability thing again Scooby453w (talk) 15:17, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. I've spent about a year participating in AfD discussions and trying to figure out the policies. I'm glad you're here to weigh in and learn about them. Nnev66 (talk) 15:24, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Significant event" usually means major historical events. The example at BLP1E is the Attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan. I don't think being a controversial reality TV star is quite at that level. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 06:21, 2 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) 06:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I agree with nom that this is WP:BIO1E and the subject is not lastingly notable beyond the one not-notable event. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 06:49, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Big Brother 15 (American season). I agree that WP:BLP1E applies to this article. Significant portions of the "Pageantry and modeling career" and "Personal life" are sourced to Gries's LinkedIn (!) or Big Brother, which still comes up in those sections. A lot of the public reaction to the season has ended up in this article and should be merged into there. hinnk (talk) 10:34, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Selective merge and redirect. Clear BLP1E case, no lasting notability. Astaire (talk) 23:08, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Laugs

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

This article fails notabillity guidelines for musicians, and also violates WP:NOTMEMORIAL. It does not cite any sources and is very short. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 14:48, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Music, and Germany. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 14:48, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

support agree with reasoning Czarking0 (talk) 17:07, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I find it hard to believe he's not notable... Indexed in SIX national libraries, the VIAF. Gnewspapers brings up many hits, Gbooks has hits on his name from the 1930s to the present. The VIAF link has two biographical links in German. Oaktree b (talk) 23:07, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Album review here [61] Oaktree b (talk) 23:28, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the German wikipedia article has some book references that look reliable here, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:02, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think it is very likely that he is notable, but it is not going to be easy to find reviews of his concert performances or recordings (although Oaktree b has already found one on jstor). Some do come up on a Google Books search, eg Fanfare (14/1-2:263) and The Gramophone (52/613-618:536), but they have only snippet views, so can't be used as sources. Finding hard copies from that era would probably need access to a very large library. Apart from reviews, Discogs shows multiple albums released by the Musical Heritage Society and by a German label called Da Camera Magna. I realise that Discogs is not reliable, but it gives album names and label numbers which can be searched for elsewhere - and does suggest that he meets WP:MUSICBIO#5. I have added some sources to the article, and removed the unsourced tag. I'll see what else I can find. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:13, 1 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) 03:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need more than "comments" here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:22, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Reviewing comments and additional links presented here suggests that nom. criteria for deletion is not met. Can be tagged for additional sources and enhanced by translating from the German article. Komodo (talk) 06:45, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Godfrey

AfDs for this article:

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

Everything is related to his claims of once seeing a UFO. A standard WP:BEFORE fails to find any other point of notability. Fails WP:BLP1E. Chetsford (talk) 01:01, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, this should have been speedily deleted. For transparency and to avoid bookkeeping chaos, I'll defer to someone else to close this. Sorry. Chetsford (talk) 01:02, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Paranormal, Police, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:11, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Plenty of unused sources available to support notability, including [62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68]. It just needs a {{more citations needed}} template at top, per WP:ATD. I'd say it passes WP:BLP1E. 5Q5|^✉ 12:56, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is Sky History (the first linked source) the same as the History Channel? If so It might not be reliable, as explained at WP:RSPHISTORY. Bonus Person (talk) 13:44, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unclear how it passes BLP1E if every piece of the scattered coverage relates to his supposed abduction? Indeed, this was the point raised by User:Grim23 and User:LuckyLouie in the first AfD (which closed as delete and which this article seems to be a carbon copy recreation of). Chetsford (talk) 08:50, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:55, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per comments of 5Q5 Servite et contribuere (talk) 08:33, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WP:BLP1E applies. Everything is about that one event. Stifle (talk) 08:24, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 09:08, 9 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: [69], [70]. 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!): [71], [72], [73], [74], [75], [76], [77], 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]
All the discussion on the Miracle Foundation AfD and Lamona's nice table there point me back to supporting this page. I think the main issue is that Boudreaux and Miracle Foundation are intertwined in most of the references, but there are now seven references in the this article from independent reliable secondary sources (six if you only count Austin Statesman once), each of which contributes to the article that I've now updated. In total these provide significant coverage. While Boudreaux is only notable for the Miracle Foundation, it has evolved over time, as has the coverage of Boudreaux, thus I don't think this is a case of WP:BLP1E. Nnev66 (talk) 01:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete changing from R*direct does not meet notability criteria, and no viable target for a 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]

Matthew Baker (entertainer)

AfDs for this article:

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

Was nominated by Badbluebus back in February, and was closed as a soft delete, with only one other editor !voting for delete. No oppose votes. There simply is not enough in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources to show that they pass notability. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:53, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:45, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:21, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I see some room for improvement, maybe a few more better sources, so I am employing a weak version of WP:BASIC. Barr Theo (talk) 03:19, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:18, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Passes WP:GNG with WP:SIGCOV in the Seattle Times, Oklahoman, Idaho State Journal, and Daily State News. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Seattle article only briefly mentions him, the Olkahoman isn't much better. Idaho State is the only decent source. Last source talks with people after a state fair, saying how good he was. I'm not sure most of these help. Oaktree b (talk) 15:16, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Still a !delete, I don't see any new sources from the last month when this came up at AfD, that would change my mind. Oaktree b (talk) 15:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:31, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grant Michaels (songwriter)

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

Promotional tone, failed verifications, more citations needed... in the end, may not meet the notability standards. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 18:06, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, and Bands and musicians. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 18:06, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

Hi. Please note that Grant Michaels is listed as a writer on the Banners' song "Someone To You" on its entry, which chartered to no. 11 on Billboard's Adult Top 40 and Hot Rock & Alternative Songs charts and is credited in the Wikipedia entry for the song. He is also credited as a writer on Sia's "Dressed in Black" on her 1,000 Forms of Fear which charted to no. 1 the US Billboard 200. He is credited on the credits list in the entry. Among his other credits, he is again listed on the songs for Descendants 2 (Soundtrack). My understanding is that he meets the requirements of notability as a musical artist. I've also attempted to address the issue of promotional tone when it was returned to draft with a rewrite, but am open any help regarding addressing that issue.

JohnGuo1971 (talk) 10:45, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:43, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:55, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine Stokes

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NBIO and WP:SIGCOV. Most cited sources are not WP:INDEPENDENT, a fact overlooked in the 2019 deletion discussion. Sources establishing notability consist of two articles from the Deseret News (Stokes sat on their editorial board, and one of the articles is announcing that fact), two human-interest stories from the Salt Lake Tribune (at the time they were written, party to a Joint Operating Agreement with the Deseret News [[78]] and operating out of the same building), and two interview transcripts on Mormon-themed blogs (possibly independent, but hardly WP:RS or WP:SIGCOV). Jbt89 (talk) 06:16, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Latter Day Saints, and Utah. Jbt89 (talk) 06:16, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree to your bias assessment of independent sources. While it is true the Deseret News should not be considered independent for this subject, the Salt Lake Tribune is a separate legal entity and there are hundreds of articles on Wikipedia that maintain its independent status. "Mormon-themed blogs" are also not an exclusionary source just as "baseball-themed blogs" would not be exclusionary to create interviews independent of Major League Baseball. I agree completely in efforts to require independent sourcing, but for a pioneering woman of color this article meets the requirements--and has already been reviewed as such in the past. Fullrabb (talk) 14:28, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Medicine, Illinois, and Mississippi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:39, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

* Redirect to Deseret News. That is where Catherine M. Stokes redirects at present. Given that the original AfD did not note the lack of independence amongst the sources combined with the fact that a search of sources via the Chicago Public Library and at the State Archives revealed that contrary to one contributor's assertion, there is not in fact a substantial amount of content from her time in Illinois. The articles gave her the title of manager and assistant deputy director in the state's Office of Health Care Regulation. The lack of being listed in the Illinois Blue Book at any point makes me wonder if Deputy Director was her final title or if they rounded up in her editorial biography. There is a reason that Catherine M. Stokes redirects to the Deseret News. This should too.--Mpen320 (talk) 02:59, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am looking for sources and also for possible merge or redirect targets. There are several articles on African-Americans and the Mormon church - Black Mormons has a list of notable Black Mormons which includes several people whose articles are currently at AfD, so including them in that or another article in some way may be a useful ATD. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:59, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RebeccaGreen, did you find anything? -- asilvering (talk) 03:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have been working on other articles at AfD, I did find some coverage in digitised newspapers from several states (ie not just LDS-owned publications and not just where she lived) - I'll add it and see if she meets WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. RebeccaGreen (talk) 07:32, 5 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 08:36, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:05, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have added the sources and info I am able to access online (there are others, but I either don't have access or have reached my limit in those titles on Google Books). I believe that she at least meets WP:BASIC, with coverage in books published by Oxford University Press, University of Illinois Press, Brigham Young University Press, the Chicago Tribune and other newspapers and journals. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:52, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe the Chicago Tribune sources you cite constitute in-depth coverage of the subject (as I stated I looked). The few articles are far closer to the three blind mice (quotes in her capacity as a mid-level IDPH employee, reaction to local LDS event) than the IBM book per example provided in "significant coverage" in WP:GNG. The other sources do make a strong case. Please note those were not in the article at the time of my vote. --Mpen320 (talk) 14:31, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BASIC says "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability." The sources I found and added yesterday are not trivial, and although the secondary sources are not in-depth, they combine to meet WP:BASIC. RebeccaGreen (talk) 04:13, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per the sources found by Rebecca which turns this poor article into a passable one Scooby453w (talk) 12:49, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While I maintain my views on the Illinois sources and think her title needs to not be listed as Deputy Director, I think the sources found during this AfD get this over the hill to merit continued inclusion in Wikipedia.--Mpen320 (talk) 14:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed Ahmed (businessman)

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

the sources are dependent and only one has something similar to deep coverage, but the sources itself is not reliable and independent (this one Ethiopian birthday) other are WP:Trades and nothing similar to significant coverage OatPancake (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. OatPancake (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Ethiopia. Shellwood (talk) 13:57, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Individual is known for the success of Africa's largest airlines. According to Fana Broadcasting Corporate "The late Captain Mohammed Ahmed, a pioneering force in the aviation industry and a cherished leader of Ethiopian Airlines" [79]Magherbin (talk) 05:55, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability standards, lacking significant coverage from independent, reliable sources. If it relies on promotional content or self-published material, it would also fail to meet the site's neutrality and sourcing guidelines.--Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 08:05, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hka-34 Jyli: So does it contain promotional content or not? MarioGom (talk) 09:28, 3 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) 17:15, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Goldsztajn (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DeleteI cannot find multiple reliable significant coverage to meet ANY BIO. One so-so source is not enough. --NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 09:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One last attempt to get more participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 17:47, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Appears to be quite clearly notable based on the sources already cited in the article. Even putting the others aside, the fact that an African CEO received coverage in the Washington Post and the New York Times during the 1980s strongly indicates notability (both are about the company, but in my view also contain SIGCOV of Ahmed's role in its rise as CEO). This BBC report doesn't provide SIGCOV of him, but it does refer to him asthe renowned Ethiopian CEO (known for challenging the Dergue officials in defence of the independence of the management of the airline), which also strongly suggests to me that he is notable. He also has mentions in several books that I can't fully access, including these ones. And there's this obituary written by a university faculty member and this one by a staff writer. I think it's more than enough to pass WP:GNG. MCE89 (talk) 16:03, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per sources presented by MCE89. Svartner (talk) 16:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Broad coverage of his time as CEO of Ethiopian Airlines in many reliable sources, and also multiple with significant coverage per MCE89. jocelyn's dance ^talk 19:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per MCE89 Andre🚐 03:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This person seems to have sufficient sources from RSes such as from the New York Times, The Washington Post, and others. He definitely seems to have done notable things worthy of inclusion on here. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 14:39, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strictly Ballroom (band) (3rd nomination)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People

People

People proposed deletions