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

Marty Baylor Bibliography

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

Disputed draftification. WP:DRAFTOBJECT prevents unilateral return to Draft.. Fails WP:BIO / WP:GG. Is an essay. Is absolutely not a bibliography, though that is the least of its troubles. Odd random use of the subjunctive. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 18:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Women, and Education. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 18:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Please note that this is a student WikiEd project which has escaped into mainspace when it most assuredly shoudl not be there. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 18:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Colorado, Maryland, Ohio, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:10, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I can't find anything independent, the sources given are just to.. university websites? I can't see how this passes WP:GNG, and after two draftifications this isn't any closer. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 19:12, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I would also like to see if the Instructor/student/Ian have any thoughts on what to do with this.
Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 19:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notified: User talk:Ian (Wiki Ed) § Courtesy notice about AfD. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 19:33, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am finding some hits under specifically Martha Baylor as far as her work goes - the nickname doesn't seem to be what she uses in her papers and whatnot. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, apologies for the confusion. I a new user on Wikipedia and am doing a project for a class. Our project is to create a new Wikipedia page for unknown physicists. Therefore, this would explain the sources being from college websites as there is very limited information on this person. In my research I have found that she prefers the name Marty. I am trying to work on it still and would greatly appreciate if this would not be deleted. The initial critiques I received were rather general such as "not following guidelines" which I thought meant my heading and other technical stuff. I would also argue this does not follow essay format but rather simply explains her life in great detail. Pistolpete543 (talk) 20:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pistolpete543 Your option is to suggest that this be returned to Draft rather than be deleted. Your instructor is aware of the issue, and has, presumably, a plan to solve it, which you need to discuss with them. The challenge that you face is that you have twice, moved this to Mainspace. It is not suitable for Mainspace at this stage, and is very unlikely to remain.
At present I believe we should interpret your comment as to keep the article. However, the comment is a plea and has no weight in policy based arguments. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 20:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, me moving it to the mainspace twice was an incorrect and a mistake on my part. I am currently working on making edits to the article. I was just confused on your suggestions from the original comment. Pistolpete543 (talk) 20:52, 6 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]

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 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]

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]

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, 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 fine more but I am due to do other things. Anyway, plenty to satisfy me.
Karl Twist (talk) 11:20, 6 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]

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]

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 [1] 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]

I. H. Sangam Dev

AfDs for this article:

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

Undersourced, promotional, personal biography, all references are first party. This article detracts from the overall quality of Wikipedia. JustMakeTheAccount (talk) 00:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and Karnataka. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fifteen years of this sticking around; definitely not much of an article, but props to whoever got this BLP to stick around that long unchanged (and its simplicity could be a lesson to a lot of these editors who throw obvious paid WP:RESUME articles that are regulars here). Nathannah • 📮 00:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The nominator, immediately after starting this nomination, also attempted to intitate a PROD with the rationaleThis article has had a deletion consensus for over 15 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/I._H._Sangam_Dev. I procedurally declined the PROD; not only is it not allowed to have both processes going simultaneously, but any articlepreviously discussed at AfD — and this is not the first article at this title — is also ineligible for PROD. (I have no opinion on the article itself at this time.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete, wouldn't an article with consensus this old fall under G6? It should've been deleted 15 years ago. -Samoht27 (talk) 17:52, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decided to go and nominate for CSD under this criteria. -Samoht27 (talk) 19:32, 6 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" [2], and described here [3]. 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]

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]

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]

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]

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]
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]

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 [4] 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]

Mathew Beard

AfDs for this article:

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

In this entry's third AfD nomination, the intuitive votes would appear to be Keep or Delete, rather than Merge/redirect. The first nomination in December 2007 — WP:Articles for deletion/Mathew Beard, with three votes — resulted in deletion. It was recreated in 2012 and nominated — WP:Articles for deletion/Mathew Beard (2nd nomination) — in November 2018. There were three Delete votes, one Delete/redirect vote and three Merge/redirect votes, resulting in Mathew Beard redirecting to either List of American supercentenarians#100 oldest known Americans or List of the verified oldest people#100 verified oldest men (currently redirecting to the latter). However, his name does not appear on either list, nor anywhere else in English Wikipedia, thus making the Mathew Beard redirect that appears among similarly-named men on the Mat Beard disambiguation page completely unhelpful. If the Mathew Beard page is deleted, Talk:Mathew Beard, which has a number of postings as well as links to the two deletion discussions should be probably deleted as well. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 01:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Florida, Missouri, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:19, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per previous nominations. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:26, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the nom there is no notability as he wasn't even the oldest living person https://longeviquest.com/2023/03/mathew-beard-status-reclassification/ Scooby453w (talk) 03:15, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete along with any redirects that point to this guy. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:27, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm a little confused though thus article had alreahd been deleted years ago only for the nominater to engage in an edit war by removing the re direct only to nominate the page for afd. What is the point? Scooby453w (talk) 14:37, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Mathew Beard entry was not actually deleted but merely unhelpfully redirected, with the article itself still fully accessible via its history. As for the purported "edit war", this simple edit, which only served to append the AfD template, was mistakenly assumed to represent aggressive editing. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 22:25, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But then you could've just nominated the re direct for deletion then? Scooby453w (talk) 22:53, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Upon entering the link Mathew Beard via its history, users are able to determine that it is not a standalone redirect that could be handled at WP:RfD, but a still-existing, albeit redirected, article, with an active Talk:Mathew Beard, that needed to be treated as an article, via submission to WP:AfD. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 23:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JT Pettigrew

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

Contested WP:PROD by Sophisticatedevening - subject does not seem to be notable per WP:NATHLETE or WP:GNG. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Basketball, United States of America, and Illinois. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Just gonna paste my orginal PROD rationale since there were no changes (or edit summary) given after it was contested: Subject has never participated in any professional or collegiate sports, not enough WP:SIGCOV from independent sources to satisfy WP:NATHLETE or WP:GNG. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 01:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Coolcrab5000: Please don't draftify (or move to draftspace) this article while it is in AFD. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:18, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article of which this discussion relates appears to have been deleted? Anxioustoavoid (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think Maile66 just forgot to close. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 17:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pinging me. I have un-deleted it. I think my deletion was an error on my part. — Maile (talk) 17:54, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is WP:TOOSOON given he has not even started playing in the NCAA yet. No evidence he meets WP:GNG. --Mpen320 (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No indication of notability is present under WP:YOUNGATH. Let'srun (talk) 20:30, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unremarkable child basketball player. GNG fail. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 22:08, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per above. Svartner (talk) 12:19, 4 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]

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]

Raman Kumar

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

Lack of Wp:SIGCOV in secondary sources. Zuck28 (talk) 15:59, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, India, Maharashtra, and Punjab. Zuck28 (talk) 15:59, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Best I can find is this. And, that is more of him giving his opinion as opposed to a journalist writing about him. There is also a claim on the page that Tara (2013 film) is "considered one of the leading shows in Indian television history" except it has no Wikipedia page and I cannot find a source to support.--CNMall41 (talk) 16:52, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:41, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can not see any reliable source to meet subject's notability. Film's roles are also not big. Almandavi (talk) 05:28, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 13:03, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This person is not sufficiently notable. The RSes seem to be sparse and it fails WP:SIGCOV Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 16:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:SUSTAINED. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 16:41, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There's a basic verification problem here. Bearian (talk) 21:26, 6 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]
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]

Joshua Cheruiyot Kirui

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

I'd suggest deletion in its current state - article isn't written properly according to wikipedia policy, I just removed a ton of advertiser-like language from it, it isn't properly sourced at all. It needs a ton of work, if it meets notability guidelines at all. Romeowth (talk) 12:15, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Romeowth (talk) 12:15, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kenya-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:29, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete feels like a WP:BIO1E. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:58, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:45, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of notability; one event cannot help here. --NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 15:31, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. The legacy section is both unsourced and written in the passive voice, red flags that indicate his death sadly has not had any legacy. Bearian (talk) 21:34, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Mojica

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

WP:ROTM entrepreneur. No clearly reliable sources-- all are either non-substantive, from suspicious sources, and/or interviews. Promotional. Fails WP:ANYBIO. Cabrils (talk) 07:10, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 11:37, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep What do you mean unreliable? Philippine Entertainment Portal source #3, SunStar #6, Inquirer.net #10 is enough for WP:THREE.

source assesments:

1 - Facebook page of the person, seems like a WP:ABOUTSELF use.
2 - Reliable, PhilStar is one of the largest publication in the Philippines but WP:INTERVIEW
3 - per above, reliable own by GMA New Media, Inc. not an interview.
4 - reliable, owned by GMA Network. seems like a WP:INTERVIEW
5 - Reliable Owned by Esquire (magazine), seems like a WP:INTERVIEW
6 - Reliable, SunStar is one of the largest newspaper in the Philippines and per above.
7 - Reliable, Politiko (website), a news website owned by Prage Management Corporation, maybe a significant coverage but only talks about Ping Lacson
8 - Ditto
9 - again PEP per above
10 - Philippine Daily Inquirer - regards as a newspaper of records and per above.

Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 13:22, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per analysis by Miminity, with the caveat that the Facebook sourcing to the subject's alleged date of birth must be removed. Bearian (talk) 21:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arash Aminpour

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

Non-notable US attorney. No reliable sources, and would seem unlikely any exist. Clearly promotional. WP:NOT. Fails WP:GNG. WP:ANYBIO. Cabrils (talk) 06:50, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, 'nuff said. Newspapers.com has no results, never a good sign. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:28, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 11:34, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Florida, Georgia (U.S. state), Illinois, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:52, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: Lack of sufficient press coverage. Promotional tone. It should be speedy deleted, because of no sign of notability. Zuck28 (talk) 20:58, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The nomination speaks for itself, but I will also pitch in to say that at least half of the citations are not independent of the subject. --Mpen320 (talk)
Delete There seems to be no RSes that support notability here. If that changes, please let me know. If we allow for promotional sources to be included, there is no reason every attorney should not have their own promotional page on here. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 20:34, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Asaba Jumah (born 2005)

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

Contested PROD, only mentions anywhere are on blog sites, social media and a site called "Jetbits" (freeware maybe?) Fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 23:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Zero sourcing found, only another article in draft space and a wix site. Very non notable individual. Oaktree b (talk) 01:25, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Music, Video games, Computing, Internet, and Uganda. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:45, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: All the sources are not reliable and a WP:Before did not yield any positive results. The subject fails WP:GNG. Ibjaja055 (talk) 04:53, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No reasoning has been provided why the current sources are all unsuitable. NAUME GOU (talk) 11:45, 02 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No significant sources found to establish notability for subject. Fails WP:GNG Frank Ken (talk) 09:37, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please sir that article I think it is good of sourcs NAUME GOU (talk) 10:20, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete --Regards, KB~Abhiimanyu7 talk 14:14, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG no significant refrences to support topic. ⋆⁺ ཐི Wakabenga ཋྀ ⁺⋆ (talk) 19:25, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Lacks In-depth coverage for this person, not notable to be on Wikipedia. Non-independent sources like Bayelsaunitedfc.com.ng do not contribute to notability. No evidence of notable achievements or widespread recognition in reliable, independent sources. The article does not justify retention. Editz2341231 (talk) 23:00, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per the existing arguments for deletion, and since someone asked, because the existing citations are all self-published by the article's subject. Rubbish coverage. Yue🌙 07:49, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. TzarN64 (talk) 20:06, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Clearly fails notability. Given sources are primary. Rahmatula786 (talk) 11:20, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 12:33, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete some sources but not reliable sources for GNG. Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:14, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is undoubtedly failing notability.Almandavi (talk) 05:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability aside, this is unambiguously self promotion, given that article creator had posted the article subject's face (for some reason AI art) at his user page, proving him to be the same individual as the article's subject and making this article appropriate for deletion through WP:G11. MimirIsSmart (talk) 03:08, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails WP:GNG and has no reliable sourcing. MidnightMayhem 11:52, 6 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]

Wajdi al-Hajj Ali

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

Per WP:BIO1E, this figure has only received coverage due to one event which he didn't have a significant role in, and likely wouldn't have been deemed notable enough to warrant a separate article (which is reflected in the article's rather small size and detail). Asclepias tuberosa (talk) 00:02, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Syria. Asclepias tuberosa (talk) 00:02, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Although I am the creator, I am aware that it was only highlighted by conflicts. Farcazo (talk) 01:32, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This is a instance of WP:BLP1E, as nom said. There is no secondary coverage aside from this event about the subject, which means that there is no real reason to believe that this subject is notable enough to have their own separate article. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom

- RamiPat (talk) 00:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Spirituality. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:43, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This is a case of WP:BIO1E. Neither the person nor the event is notable. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 06:50, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HorlarofLagos

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

Subject utterly fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. There are insufficient sources to establish notability of any sort. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:26, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Photography, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:26, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 19:12, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT. Written by AI, or an overly enthusiastic fan or PR person, or all of the above. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Nigeria/Nigerian source‪s.‬ Bearian (talk) 08:18, 5 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 [5], 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 [6]. 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]

Muhammad Afzal Tariq

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

Disputed draftificaiton (as evident by the cut-paste move) but I believe this to be wholly the work of AI based not just on the erroneous formatting but the sourcing as well. The sources don't lead to real pages, just what an AI might believe a URL might look like. Authored by what appears to be the subject's son, who plays no small role in the biography. Draftification rules would allow the draftification given the obvious COI but there's no need here; the subject is not notable. Delete. Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Pakistan. Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:42, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete cannot find anything indicating notability, or really anything at all. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 21:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per mention above cannot find any references towards notability. Behappyyar (talk) 07:44, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Yes there appears to be undisclosed COI. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 23:46, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:RS, not memorial, and of course AI generated nonsense. Bearian (talk) 08:23, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luca Ariatti

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

Fails WP:GNG. No sources beyond profiles from databases and short mentions. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 13:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sportspeople. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 13:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 13:59, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - He played for Atalanta, Fiorentina, Lecce and Chievo in the Serie A and has over 150 appearances in his career [7] - There's some sources on the Italian wiki too. RossEvans19 (talk) 15:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just because he played many times does not make him notable. Also, 80% of the sources about him on the Italian wiki do not open for me for some reason, so i dont know what to say about them WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:11, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep Are you too lazy to look at his Italian wiki? it:Luca Ariatti, there are sources about. Govvy (talk) 20:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Italian wiki sources, but article needs improvement. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 21:39, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep per @RossEvans19, is a professional footballer who has played significantly in the Italian top flight. Yes, this is a poorly sourced article, but do a WP:BEFORE search. I guarantee that there are sources. Also -- clear pass of Wikipedia:GNG and WP:ATHLETE. This article definitely needs to be improved, but deletion is completely unwarranted. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 01:42, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per lack of WP:BEFORE. Notably, he was profiled in La Repubblica: "Giuseppe Calabrese, Ariatti, il normale incredibile dalla C agli stadi delle big, 9 November 2004, page 6". Also received a lot of coverage because of the recent Juventus scandal, eg. from Il Resto del Carlino [8]. Another example of significant coverage in reliable sources is this article from L'Arena, [9]. Cavarrone 11:18, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 13:53, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources above which show notability. Really poor nomination with no evidence of BEFORE. Giant Snowman 13:57, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Analysis of the references on Italian Wikipedia would be helpful. The admins can't speedy keep this AfD as other participants may still prefer deletion. Following WP:NSPORTS2022, notability should be judged by references provided. Number of career appearances are irrelevant. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:23, 3 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]

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]

Felipe Falanghe

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

Technically this was WP:BLARed by Pppery back in 2024 and reverted by the creator, so I'm here instead of BLARing again.

Fails WP:BIO, WP:GNG. Not independently notable of Kerbal Space Program, effectively no information not already at Kerbal Space Program#Pre-development. ~ A412 ^talk! 02:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and Brazil. ~ A412 ^talk! 02:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kerbal Space Program per WP:NPERSON being failed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect – Per above. Svartner (talk) 23:10, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kerbal Space Program. Yue🌙 07:48, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per @Yue. TzarN64 (talk) 20:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect WP:GNG does require independent notable sourcing from Kerbal Space Program. Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:53, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If your going to delete it, just make it a draft. Lertaheiko (talk) 00:55, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shakir Qureshi

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

This person lacks any sort of significant coverage in independent reliable sources to establish notability. Whpq (talk) 21:38, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Shellwood (talk) 21:59, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I also am not finding any independent sources for notability, I will say that there appear to be several other Shakir Qureshi's in the news for some not very nice things but I am not seeing anything about this guy. (opinion is open to change if sources are presented). Moritoriko (talk) 02:47, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I had CSD'ed the article, but the rationale wasn't right. There's no GNG met with any SIGCOV. Likely a promotional page mady by the subject themselves. — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:52, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Television, Internet, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:13, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Clearly non notable. Promotional content. Seems like WP:COI and WP:PAID.

Afstromen (talk) 08:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Promotional page with two sources that are unreliable, Twitter and Instagram. Fails WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 13:54, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This seems to be promotional and not notable at all. There are no RSes to support it and it looks like something you would find on his website bolstering himself. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 15:15, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Insufficient coverage by independent, reliable secondary sources to pass WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 03:59, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No significant coverage from independent reliable sources to establish notability. Frank Ken (talk) 09:11, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Promotional piece. WikiMentor01 (talk) 11:57, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No independent coverage found for this page. Also fails the WP:GNG. Sethi752 (talk) 15:17, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Page lacks sufficient independent, reliable sources to demonstrate notability. TheWikiholic (talk) 06:15, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 12:51, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nomination. Rahmatula786 (talk) 14:20, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we are not a social media platform. Bearian (talk) 21:21, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This article feels more like a self-promotion than an encyclopedic entry. Most of the sources cited are social media posts or press releases, which don't really meet Wikipedia's standards for reliable coverage. It seems like the subject is trying to boost their own profile rather than being recognized by third-party sources. Unclasp4940 (talk) 03:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ngazetungue Muheue

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

This person seems interesting, but I can't find any reliable sources discussing him in detail. There is a python post nominating him as dev of the week, but all I can find other than that, stuff he authored, and quotes is an interview (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRIAS1_L9UI&list=PLOrwX3hurKypv9eN3gv7eQ8wIsOhSwI0T&index=3). I think he does not meet the general notability guideline, so I'm nominating him. Mrfoogles (talk) 21:01, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That said, I haven't searched in anything other than English (due to inability), so I might be missing something. Mrfoogles (talk) 21:03, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Africa. Shellwood (talk) 21:23, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The sourcing doesn't support notability. It's mostly primary sources about the Python conference in Namibia, and a rewritten press release. I did a WP:BEFORE, and couldn't find anything else. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 21:49, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:14, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Field (Designer)

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

I declined an WP:A7 tag on this article as there is a claim for working on the Vauxhall SRV, but although that appears in sources, there is only a minor trivial passing claim for it. The "(Designer)" disambiguator makes it an unsuitable redirect target per WP:ATD-R. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, ran a WP:BEFORE search nothing came out for this person. All that are there for him are social media and self published website postings. Patre23 (talk) 12:43, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:A7, no credible claim of significance. I (mistakenly) deleted this version as A7 a minute or so after Ritchie had declined deletion – it had taken me that short time to establish that the claim that he was "responsible" for the design of that car was not supported by the source cited, which stated clearly that the person responsible was someone called Wayne Cherry. There was no other claim of significance – credible or not – in the page then, and there is not now. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:29, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Zero sources. Svartner (talk) 13:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nothing here or from a cursory search makes this subject pass WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Looks like A7 doesn't apply here too. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:08, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nkiru Olumide-Ojo

AfDs for this article:

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

This source is unavailable [10]; this one is interview with press-release [11]; this is not reliable [12]; this source [13] has only person's comments, not coverage on them. And so on OatPancake (talk) 10:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. OatPancake (talk) 10:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Tried looking for book reviews, this one seems ok [14], second one is unsigned and reads like promo [15]. Rest of what's used in the article is either primary or not helpful. I've found two book reviews, but the second just doesn't seem reliable. Oaktree b (talk) 12:22, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, found only two sources out of the bunch cited in the article. But it's disappointing that those two sources are not enough to cross the borderline of WP:ANYBIO. Patre23 (talk) 13:08, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abhijit Guha (anthropologist)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Murtaza Hussain

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

Clearly fails WP:NATHLETE. Article created in 2007, no more WP:SIGCOV in 20 years that points to notability. Longhornsg (talk) 05:04, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Cricket, and Pakistan. Longhornsg (talk) 05:04, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to an appropriate list of players. Vestrian24Bio 11:27, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Vestrian24Bio, do you not think the sources added since the nomination demonstrate notability? We have a whole page dedicated to Hussain by the North-West Evening Mail (clearly SIGCOV). He represented Pakistan "A", so at some point was considered amongst the top 20 cricketers in Pakistan's most popular sport, and played for close to two decades. There will be sources in Urdu for someone who knows where/how to look. Jevansen (talk) 12:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SIGCOV - significant coverage which isn't just one whole newspaper page.

WP:NCRIC - "cricketers who have played at the highest domestic level or in the lower levels of international cricket", WP:OFFCRIC - only Pentangular Trophy in his time period in Pakistan. Vestrian24Bio 12:22, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jevansen: "at some point was considered amongst the top 20 cricketers in Pakistan's most popular sport" - any source for that claim?? Vestrian24Bio 12:23, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vestrian24Bio: The WP:OFFCRIC guideline you linked lists the Pentangular Trophy under tournaments that have "first-class cricket status that the Cricket WikiProject deems (players to be) notable enough to presume coverage". He played in this tournament during the 1990s.[16]. In addition, Hussain played for Surrey in Div 1 of the 2007 County Championship, undisputedly the highest level. The basis of the top 20 claim is maths ... Pakistan "A" being the second eleven ... so top 22 by definition (I rounded down). Jevansen (talk) 12:41, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jevansen: not much of this is on the article, other than the infobox and lead, there's literally nothing on the article.

And so, the last part of your statement is WP:SYNTH as you've agreed yourself... Vestrian24Bio 15:40, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't need to be in the article. It needs to be in the sources. We do mention he competed for Surrey (all their players satisfy WP:OFFCRIC) and this is backed by citations. I merely mentioned the "top 20" to highlight the likelihood of Urdu sources existing. This hasn't been inserted in the article, which is when WP:SYNTH would apply. Jevansen (talk) 00:33, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the full-page story found by Jevansen is clear SIGCOV. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:58, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Satisfies both WP:GNG and WP:NCRIC with sources added since nomination. Would welcome contribution of any Urdu speaker re further sourcing. Jevansen (talk) 00:33, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the fact that we're discussing whether a cricketer with over 250 major cricketing appearances - let alone in English county cricket - is notable is genuinely saddening. Bobo . 00:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed but sadly there seems to be a small element of editors who, rather than seeking to add to the knowledge provided in this online encyclopedia, are putting all their effort into trying to delete as much as they possibly can from it. They know all the acronyms as will as the miniature of rules and loopholes and commonsense has gone out the window. Shrug02 (talk) 13:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A rather odd nomination. More than enough coverage. Use some common sense, please. AA (talk) 23:10, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Bilili Bangura

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

This guy doesn't meet the notability requirements. Article is an orphan. He plays for a division four team in Sweden -- an amateur league -- Wikipedia doesn't cover amateur football per guidelines. Finally, one of the sources seems to be a blog, and the other two aren't reliable sources. Not WP:SUSTAINED, fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:RS, and has serious NPOV issues. Also not notable bc it's only of interest to local people. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:35, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Sports, Football, South Africa, and Sweden. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:35, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am a little confused by this one, is it a WP:HOAX ? Govvy (talk) 08:57, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think he is a real footballer, he appeared in National-football-teams. But I can't find source for most of the information in the article like "he joined his brother Abdul Bangura" and "one of the best midfielder for Härnösands FF" KhoaNguyen1 (talk) 10:50, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah -- per @KhoaNguyen1, it's not that he doesn't exist -- he just plays for a tier 4 swedish team (amateur level,) and doesn't have sigcov or reliable sources. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 13:15, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nominator, that footballer has only played 2 professional matches KhoaNguyen1 (talk) 10:57, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Too many red flags for me, doesn't seem to pass GNG for me either. Govvy (talk) 19:42, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 01:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 01:50, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I haven't been able to find many RSes that can be used to bolster his notability. If the assertion is true that he has only played 2 professional matches, I fail to see how this reaches the levels of notability required for an athlete. WP:TOOSOON likely applies here. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 15:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Roche

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

No indication of signifance, in-fact no references. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. Passing mentions. scope_creep^Talk 18:45, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Cryptocurrency, Law, and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Kyle Roche is the co-founder of Roche Freedman. This profile of him in The New York Times is clearly not a passing mention. Qualifies for a page under WP:BIO1E. Hmr (talk) 15:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Being the founder of a company doesn't make you notable and that is the only decent coverage on the dude. It is a WP:BLP and a single ref is insufficient. scope_creep^Talk 15:52, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To add to this, I was one of the first to write about the potential impact that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies could have on the legal system, with my work published in both The Wall Street Journal (“Why Bitcoin Is Booming,” WSJ, 2017) and the Indiana Law Journal (“Blockchain and the Constitution,” SSRN/Indiana LJ, 2017). This led to me being retained as lead counsel in the landmark lawsuit against Craig Wright (Wikipedia), which resulted in a $143 million verdict (Reuters, 2022). The case was one of the most high-profile in crypto litigation, as reported by The National Law Journal (Law.com, 2018). Kwroche1030 (talk) 01:27, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have a WP:COI, and have been transparent about your conflict of interest. You may have relevant info but I'm not sure if your opinion about deleting or not should count. I also think you're not following WP:COITALK. Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:09, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Law360 has a hard paywall - how biographically detailed is it? Cos if it's solid, then that plus NYT may just swing keeping it - David Gerard (talk) 21:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed quite a few hits on Law360, don't have a membership either. Found this Bloomberg profile, it's quite biographically detailed. Hmr (talk) 22:09, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Law360 has mentioned me in over 200 articles—many with substantive, not just passing, coverage. This should qualify as significant, independent coverage per Wikipedia’s guidelines. Happy to provide article examples if helpful. Kwroche1030 (talk) 01:15, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Will this recent profile in The Buffalo News [17] help with also keeping this page active? It's a pretty solid profile to also reference. User:Kwroche1030 19:56, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Agree with above comment but would not object to other views. This is not a slam dunk and his notability is marginal, although I lean on the side of keeping it. Go4thProsper (talk) 17:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The NYT piece is solid and the others in sum and the sourcing landscape as described here by the subject meet WP:GNG. This is not a clear WP:BLP1E as NYT describes events as far back as 2019. ~Kvng (talk) 20:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rodel Jayme

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

The person representing in this article gained attention only due to the Bikoy videos. I cannot find other significant events related to this person outside the Bikoy videos which will make him notable to have an article. The sources in this article do not deep dive into who the person is, only his involvement to the controversy. Outside the controversy section of the article, other sections detailing his background are unsourced (I cannot even find reliable sources to support those info). Centcom08 (talk) 06:52, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Centcom08 (talk) 06:52, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, and Internet. Skynxnex (talk) 14:02, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:15, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 14:11, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perry Mansfield

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

Article about a non-notable surgeon. Lacks WP:RS and WP:IS. Sources are mostly self-published. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:25, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:25, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine, Canada, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't think this is the same person [18]. Otherwise, the name hits on a variety of things in Google [19], but nothing about this particular individual. The sources now in the article are primary, and of no help in showing notability. Oaktree b (talk) 13:15, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article meets the requirements of both WP:GNG and WP:BIO, with substantial evidence of notability already present and meeting key elements of WP:PROF and WP:NACADEMIC guidelines. While the article is still developing, its current state should not be interpreted as a lack of merit but rather as a work in progress, consistent with Wikipedia’s collaborative model. Comparable biographies of physicians with similar credentials and sourcing have been retained, including those built around regional prominence and leadership roles. Per WP:BEFORE deletion is premature given the demonstrable notability and the potential for article improvement. Rather than remove the article, the appropriate course is editing and strengthening the references, not erasing the subject entirely. Additional third-party sourcing can and should be added, but the threshold of notability is already met. Wq4m820 (talk) 13:54, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Very easy call. Not notable and fails RS citations criteria. Go4thProsper (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 14:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Cade (scout)

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

no wp:sigcov, fails wp:gng ProtobowlAddict ^talk! 01:55, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America. ProtobowlAddict ^talk! 01:55, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete - I searched newspaper archive heavily for mentions of Jack Cade and John Cade. The play came up many times and should probably have its own page but I could not find any mention of this man. Czarking0 (talk) 15:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

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]

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]

Derek Johnson (conspiracy theorist)

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

Coverage is simple fact-check sources and routine coverage. No lasting notability that I can find Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 13:23, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, and United States of America. Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:07, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Conspiracy theories, and Alabama. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:31, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Searching is tough due to his common name, but a targeted search in conjunction with some of his theories reveals that he is only present in his own online manifestos and occasionally mentioned by similarly-inclined kooks. I suggest that he formulate a new theory on how he does not qualify for a Wikipedia article because the lamestream media conspired to never report on his theories because they can't handle the truth. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:42, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2020 United States presidential election#Campaign issues – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 12:37, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is only a viable ATD if he is mentioned at the target article, and he isn't. Just one of thousands who contributed to that tomfoolery, and even less notable than most. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 00:01, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Couldn't find any reliable sources. Not notable enough. Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:43, 6 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 [20] and this [21] 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 [22] 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 [23], here [24], here [25]. Oaktree b (talk) 21:31, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Comment: The Holocaust memorial "thing" is mentioned here [27], [28], 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 [29] 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 [30], [31], [32]. 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]

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]
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]

Kurt Mortensen

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

Fails WP:BLP. Multiple redlinks, relies on a single source. NikolaiVektovich (talk) 17:41, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and Literature. NikolaiVektovich (talk) 17:41, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ Keep you know its bad when the subject is "best known" for a book that isn't notable enough for its own page that combined with the lack of sources makes me have to vote delete UPDATE: i have changed my vote to keep as sources have now been presented Scooby453w (talk) 17:50, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California and Utah. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:45, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to lack of of WP:SIGCOV, it needs more sources covering him. LemonberryPie (talk) 19:25, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A page cannot rely on one source and expect to survive. If more sources can be found to support notability and bolster the article, that is a different conversation.Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 21:38, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While I am usually very suspicious of articles about this kind of business/self-help author, the reviews for his books are well past the threshold for WP:NAUTHOR. Reviews of Maximum Influence in the Journal of Consumer Marketing, the Roanoke Times, the Globe and Mail and the Miami Herald. Reviews of Persuasion IQ in Publishers Weekly (and [33] for the audiobook), the Agent's Sales Journal, Career Planning and Adult Development, AORN Journal and the Journal of School Public Relations. Reviews of The Laws of Charisma in Publishers Weekly, Life Insurance Selling and the Journal of School Public Relations. MCE89 (talk) 04:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These sources essentially encourage separate articles for his books, As PARAKANYAA said, his books are notable, although I disagree that business-type books are better served by an author page. Especially with the amount of sources about the books rather than the author, Kurt.
I'd encourage the creation of articles for their books, but continue with the deletion of this page as it isn't notable on its own despite WP:NAUTHOR, since the article fails WP:BLP more significantly than NAUTHOR. It doesn't seem to have been written responsibly. It relies on a source from a decade & a half ago and is a relatively unknown person, among other reasoning. NikolaiVektovich (talk) 11:47, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really know what you mean by "fails WP:BLP"? BLP isn't a notability guideline — the relevant notability guideline here is WP:NAUTHOR, which says that a person who has created aa significant or well-known work or collective body of work that has been the subject of multiple reviews is themselves notable, even if that person hasn't been the subject of secondary biographical coverage. It is very common for articles about authors to be based on reviews of their books. And I'm happy to add the above reviews to the article as sources whenever I get a chance. MCE89 (talk) 12:08, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I concede there. But the above points still stand, and until those sources are added & attributed properly and the article expanded (if those sources are secondary and verifiable, which may not be the case) I believe deletion is still viable. By "fails WP:BLP", I meant it did not meet the content policy for having high quality articles, as stated in its summary it is necessary to take "particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page" NikolaiVektovich (talk) 14:15, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So to clarify, you do agree that this person meets NAUTHOR and are arguing for deletion based on the following reasons at this point:
The article is poorly written.
The sources in AfD have not been placed in the article.
The article is of start/stub class length.
Offhand only one of those is a valid reason for deletion. Being a short article isn't in and of itself a reason for deletion. An article can be an eternal stub and still be considered worthy of an article - it only has to pass notability requirements. Now a very short article can sometimes be merged into another, if there is an appropriate parent article, but this isn't the case here. As far as the sourcing issue goes, sourcing does not have to be present in the article to establish notability. It should absolutely be added, yes, but the sourcing only has to exist and be of suitable quality and type to establish notability.
Now the quality argument can be used as an argument for deletion, but this is only meant to be used in very extreme cases, where the article has so many issues that it would be easier to just delete it all and start fresh. These issues are typically things like promotional content and copyright violation, as well as a history of sockpuppetry. This article does need editing, but I wouldn't say that it's so problematic that it needs to be wiped clean from Wikipedia. It just needs some pruning. I also don't see an issue with copyvio and the article doesn't seem to have any issues with sockpuppetry either.
I get where you're coming from with this, but this is one where the author meets notability guidelines and cleaning up the article isn't a hugely gargantuan task. He's probably always going to be a stub article since he's not overwhelmingly notable, but like I said above, being an eternal stub or start class article doesn't mean that something can't also be notable. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 20:40, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well thank you all for the insight, I'll have to rethink it the next time I mark something for deletion. Seeing that new sources have been attributed and the article largely improved to stub status, Seeing the consensus shift, I request for this discussion to close early as per WP:SNOW & Wikipedia:Deletion_process#SNOW, unless we include the vague delete votes that don't contribute to consensus significantly. NikolaiVektovich (talk) 16:44, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry i haven't changed my vote yet. I was engaging in other afd discussions Scooby453w (talk) 12:47, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per MCE89... that his books don't have articles yet does not mean they aren't notable. Business type books especially are better served by an author page. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:57, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly agree with that. Articles for those are often kind of undersourced (even if they pass NBOOK) and are particularly prone to puffery. Honestly, a lot of times authors in this realm of things tend to kind of write about the same topics, but from different angles, so sometimes all that is needed is a general overview of what the author writes about. I also think that having an author page often discourages people from writing the individual book pages (and same for series pages and individual entries). People are sometimes just looking to see if it's on here and when it's not, that's when we sometimes get people coming on to create articles - sometimes with good intent, sometimes to promote. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:08, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The author passes notability guidelines as his works have been covered in multiple, independent, and secondary reliable sources. He'll never be anyone super mainstream, but he's received enough attention to pass NAUTHOR. Also, as stated above I think that having a page for him would be best here, as opposed to ones for his books. We can have a general overview and cover it all well enough there, as opposed to 2-3 individual and lackluster (but still passing NBOOK) entries. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:10, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per ROTP and MCE, meets NAUTHOR Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:36, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 11:14, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY. I'm not a fan of these self-help types of books, but if the subject's books are reviewed in reliable sources, then he's probably notable. The article has been improved two ways: deletion of BLP violations and trivia, and by added sources. Bearian (talk) 21:53, 6 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 [34] 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]

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 [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41]. 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]

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: [42], [43]. 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!): [44], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], and more. I've added my !vote to the other article, waiting for now on !voting here. ~~BTW, WP:BLP1E does not seem to apply here because there is sustained coverage of both Ms. Boudreaux and the foundation for many years.~~ I'd like to hear other editor's thoughts on redirecting/merging if the article on the foundation is kept. Netherzone (talk) 16:44, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would be fine to merge if kept, since the foundation is the only notable thing she has done. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. Her bio and her role should fit nicely into the article on the organization. That said, if the organization is not found to be notable, it would be difficult to find the founder notable if there aren't other projects she was responsible for.
Lamona (talk) 20:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Miracle Foundation is the only organization or project for which she is known.--FeralOink (talk) 00:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I noted on the Miracle Foundation AfD that I'm OK with merging the founder into the foundation article. Actually, I've shifted to thinking that would make the most sense - originally my first choice was to keep both articles. I've summarized the best Miracle Foundation sources in reply to Lamona's comment about WP:WHYN and WP:SUSTAINED in that AfD. Nnev66 (talk) 17:24, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and merge content to Miracle Foundation, as the sourcing is not really so much about her, but about her role in the Miracle Foundation, which, as stated above by other editors, is the only notable thing she has done. Netherzone (talk) 22:28, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment First, I agree with what Drmies said about these particular profiles not being examples of journalism; they are lightweight human interest stories. Next, I noticed (and removed) another source in the article, see talk page section. Author-published book from defunct CreateSpace ("they would publish anything" per Wiki), no page number(s) given. Also, be aware that the Miracle Foundation article is not in good shape. It needs a lot of editing due to really bad writing (sentence fragments, etc.) and was tagged accordingly in the past. And it was mostly written by a COI editor.--FeralOink (talk) 00:06, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 [[51]] 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]

Aleksandar Gruber

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

Footballer that fails WP:GNG, no sources beyond profiles and stats from databases. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 17:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sportspeople. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 17:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: NOTSTATS Fails WP:NSPORTS. The notability criteria is more than a pseudo biography and not a resume. -- Otr500 (talk) 18:08, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Serbia, and Yugoslavia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep This guy played for fair sized clubs including Lech Poznań and a lot of football at that, he played at the top of his game and played European games. Playing football is not a NOTSTATS issue. I don't know how much media coverage he had in the countries he played for at the time, but I am betting on newspapers here. WP:OFFLINESOURCES. Yes there does seem to be coverage issue, but the internet at this time, is not at the same level on the region, it was still being built up in Serbia at that time. It doesn't help the fact he played during a time of strong geo-political issues in the region. So that might negate searches. I am going to assume good faith here for my weak keep. Govvy (talk) 10:58, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with @Govvy Боки 💬 📝 06:14, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 11:32, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:35, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Even though he played in smaller centers, he had spells at important clubs in those places, didn't he really find any WP:SIGCOV? Svartner (talk) 14:50, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AFD Patrol. While there is no clear consensus, the evident lack of SIGCOV is a strong policy-compliant argument. Spartathenian (talk) 19:34, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:35, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Lyza

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

Fairly unremarkable other than a few published papers on a largely niche topic (tornadoes/severe weather). By this stretch, every meteorologist (especially many professors in academia) who author papers should have Wikipedia articles, which isn't the case. United States Man (talk) 20:54, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Science. United States Man (talk) 20:54, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete Hate to say it but I agree that they just don't meet the bar of notability. I think instead of making new articles on meteorologists we should, as a project, work on improving the quality of existing articles; see the dreadful state of Ted Fujita, for instance. Departure– (talk) 14:56, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also say that the USA Today source doesn't mean anything for notability in my eyes. Lyza was brought on as an expert to explain the individual study about the same topic covered at EF5 drought. This is, in my eyes, as routine as coverage gets - especially his qualifications being described by USA Today as simply lead author on the new study about the EF5 tornado drought. It would be different if the article was specifically about Lyza, or if Lyza was described as being top of his field or otherwise academically vital. Departure– (talk) 02:52, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - enough sources to justify notability.

WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk) 20:14, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Several secondary reliable sources besides academic papers reference or interview/quote Anthony Lyza and his works, including the New York Times and many other articles: [52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59]. Clearly passes the bare minimum of WP:PROF and WP:BIO, especially since the US government even posted he is a tornado “expert”. WP:PROF says if a person passes any of the listed items, then they are notable. The first point of WP:PROF is “The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.” That seems clear, given the tons of sources discussing Lyza and his work. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 21:01, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Alabama, and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:42, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
?. The subject has a very small number of citations in GS. What is the reason for this? Xxanthippe (talk) 05:28, 16 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

@Xxanthippe: Small? This indicates he has 13 publications from 2017-2024, +1 not listed published in January 2025. So, he has at least 14 different publications that would be on GS. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 12:09, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak~~ Keep - The USA Today reference is the make-or-break for me here, as it does indeed show him being mentioned in major news outlets. — E_F⁵ 12:57, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GS gives 167 cites. Normally 1000+ cites is required for notability under WP:Prof#C1. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:01, 16 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

@Xxanthippe: Oh! That is what you meant by not many GS citations. Most meteorologists use respective country-based academic publication societies, rather than GS to find sources. For example, in US is the American Meteorological Society (AMS). Just by looking at the AMS-website metrics alone for the 2025 paper that Mr. Lyza was lead author on ([60]) show 7281 full text views. AMS does not keep track directly of who cited the paper, only records of downloads and views. That paper has over 7,000 views just since January 2025 (it was released January 23, 2025). Hopefully that helps. AMS contains probably 80% of the meteorologically published papers that are often cited in textbooks or by other meteorologists. This is one of those fields of science where GS is actually not the most used/useful measurement tool. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:37, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete after reading the above discussion. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:44, 17 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Opinions are evenly divided.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:49, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, appears notable enough so it's not improper to include him. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:30, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 15:06, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: per WP:ACADEMIC. He has a PhD, and you don't need a job at a university to be an academic. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:27, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Having a PhD is not mentioned anywhere as a criteria for notability. Departure– (talk) 15:33, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Source assessment table:

Per my analysis, the sources presented in this discussion do not contain significant coverage of the person in question, hence he does meet WP:GNG which states thatA topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. WP:NACADEMIC states that an academic is notable ifThe person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. There is no evidence in independent reliable sources that their studies have had a "significant impact in their scholarly discipline." Additionally, he does not meet the rest of the criteria as set forth at WP:NACADEMIC. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Aviationwikiflight: I disagree entirely with your claim that "There is no evidence in independent reliable sources that their studies have had a "significant impact in their scholarly discipline." Numerous of the articles above are related to the EF5 drought study led by Mr. Lyza. In fact, Wikipedia has an entire section just about Mr. Lyza's study: EF5 drought#January 2025 study. Regarding the EF5 study led by Lyza, I can find [61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68]. All of those sources are specifically in regards to the study produced by Lyza. Could you go into more detail and explain why ypu believe the EF5 study discussed by all of these RS do not provide such evidence? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:20, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What changed after they published their study? What "significant impacts" were there after they published their study? It's nice and all that the sources covered the study, but they don't provide evidence that it had a "significant impact" in "their scholarly discipline". For example, if there is evidence that this study led to a reform of the Enhanced Fujita scale in regards to rating tornadoes, or maybe something changed within the field of tornadoes, meteorology... that would fulfil the first criterion. But as of yet, it's probably too early to tell and it seems that most of the coverage is on the study than the authors themselves. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:36, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add that the EF5 drought is just a small trend in the greater subject of tornado climatology, so one study analyzing this subject in-depth wouldn't equate to "significant impact" across meteorology. Not yet, anyway. Departure– (talk) 16:43, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Departure–, while it is relatively benign with general meteorology (the NWS is likely choosing to ignore it), the general public and public media have definitely picked up on it. But yes, the Lyza drought study isn't super significant in the field, mainly outlining the reasoning, which is already well-known (survey ignorance). — EF5 ^(questions?) 16:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Under that logic, the shift focuses from academic notability to public interest and we run back into GNG arguments again. While the EF5 drought is notable and Lyza's study of it helps demonstrate that, it doesn't itself make Lyza himself notable. Departure– (talk) 16:48, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete does not pass WP:NPROF nor WP:GNG (see table above). --hroest 20:16, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - our usual rules for citations works about as well for meteorological purposes as the EF-5 standard, which is to say, not very well. Bearian (talk) 21:31, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the general rules of WP:NPROF should apply here just as well, for example "significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources." should apply to meteorology as to any other discipline. Maybe your argument is that the independent reliable sources here should not be Google Scholar but something else? --hroest 15:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dov Shafrir

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

My WP:BEFORE results in insufficient sources and especially WP:RELIABLESOURCES for this to pass WP:GNG. The mention at best should be cited in another article about Palestinian re-settlement, but this person does not meet GNG for an article unto themself. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:09, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Loads of sources, in the scholarshp and news: passes WP:ANYBIO. Senior character in the newly-independent Isreal government: passes WP:NPOL. Cheers, Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 17:18, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. Easternsahara (talk) 23:36, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Perhaps there's an appropriate redirect or merge target. All the sources added today are not coverage about Shafrir, and there were no sources presented that demonstrate WP:SIGCOV of Shafrir himself to satisfy WP:NBIO. From looking through the sources, these are simply singular, mostly single-line mentions of Shafrir's appointment in 200+ page books. We've deleted based on far more coverage. Obvious WP:GNG fail. Longhornsg (talk) 18:56, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and Palestine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have added two links that provide basic biographical details; per WP:BASIC multiple sources can be combined in lieu of significant coverage. His involvement in the redistribution of Palestinian property is of historical interest and his work is well documented (e.g, in this encyclopedia entry which quotes his report at length. The fact that other deletions proceeded under supposedly analogous circumstances is a non sequitur. Oblivy (talk) 02:35, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"...trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability" So then it must just then be proven that these are not routine coverage or passing mentions in order for WP:BASIC to qualify. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:53, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sources are discussing him in the context of his project, and coverage of that project was more than trivial. You don't get to stop with "He was appointed to head the X project" if the rest of the paragraph is about X project.
If there was consensus for merge Iand redirect to Israeli land and property laws#Absentees' Property Laws I'd be prepared to support it. I still think this can live happily as a well-documented stub. Oblivy (talk) 13:26, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would support that over a Keep. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:41, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails Wikipedia:Notability_(people). There seems to be no SIGCOV of him. He seems solely known for being the first Israeli Custodian, a role which isn't itself notable enough for an article. Some of his work definitely seems notable for mentions in an article, but presumably they're already included here: Israeli land and property laws -- Bob drobbs (talk) 15:53, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to presume; you can look at the linked article and see how it's handled. That's why I suggested a merge and redirect. Oblivy (talk) 22:30, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:52, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Israeli land and property laws#Absentees' Property Laws. Per nom, there isn't enough WP:SIGCOV in WP:RELIABLESOURCES to justify a standalone article on the subject.--DesiMoore (talk) 23:26, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If consensus supports that, then I would support the merge to Israeli land and property laws#Absentees' Property Laws as you suggest. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:35, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect (nominator here), updating my !vote to reflect the positive and most recent suggestions that instead of a full delete that the subject article title be redirect instead to Israeli_land_and_property_laws#Absentees'_Property_Laws. This is a good suggestion and the best AtD. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:58, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as the editor who suggested merge and redirect as an ATD:

First, biographical coverage of the article subject appears limited, but his work is covered in great detail in a few sources, for example here at 69 et seq. Every time the word "custodian" is mentioned in relation to that period it means this one person.
Second, the more important topic is the initial redistribution of seized property, which is addressed at the target article but in an extremely clinical manner despite the lengthy quotes. The focus of that article is not history, but a series of statutes and institutions. I'm not sure how the merge would sit within that article but perhaps a short paragraph about the initial seizure and redistribution would be appropriate.

I still think this article is fine as a stub. It could be appropriately rescoped into an article about the custodian's office -- I'm not knowledgeable enough or in a position to devote time to doing it, but IMHO that would be the best thing for the encyclopedia. Oblivy (talk) 00:55, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone search Hebrew-language sources? WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:35, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scholar has two links which are paywalled, one of which is on transfer of lands. He has an autobiography that's available in some Worldcat libraries. I'm pretty limited here. Oblivy (talk) 05:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:13, 28 April 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" [69]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]

Rajinder Gupta

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

Completely promotional article, paid contribs and the company he founded doesn't even have it's own article so there's no use having his. If some one searches his company's name this article doesn't pop up. The article has total 1500 views and is a stub from 10 yrs ago _saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs^⚔ 09:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Finance, and Business. _saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs^⚔ 09:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Punjab-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:40, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. From my observation, the article is not at all promotional and adheres to WP:NPOV. The article also has multiple reliable sources and thus passes WP:BIO. The absence of an article of the company he established is not a reason to delete this page. Same goes with the pageviews and class of the article. Warriorglance(talk to me) 11:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Three sources are generic profiles and don't provide in-depth coverage of the subject, and the final one just links to the most recent issue of Hindustan Times. All sources I could find online are, if anything, about Trident Group more than Gupta. Cortador (talk) 11:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: The Padma Shri award seems notable. There is a limited amount of sourcing that confirms the win. [70] is typical of more recent coverage tha feels promotional. Also come coverage about the cricket association [71]. Oaktree b (talk) 13:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. No consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- From my point of view, the person is presumed notable since he has received a award by Govt. Of India as per WP:ANYBIO, by searching him, I found that their are multiple reliable sources with significant coverage on subject which confirms it's notablity. Since, we are discussing on person not on its organization, so it's not a valid point to delete as his established company doesn't have a article. VortexPhantom🔥 (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: would still benefit from a bit more input
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 09:31, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep The style of writing shows an introductory style which a subject recieves at some interview or advertisement per WP:COI and WP:NPOV. The reason for Weak Keep is an award by a national government which is a verified claim. There are some mentions in sources about work as well as for him being awarded and some passable mentions in news articles which are more specifically about the company or group whatever it may be. HilssaMansen19 (talk) 16:20, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People

People

I. H. Sangam Dev

Perry Mansfield

Jack Cade (scout)

People proposed deletions