Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday

WP:AFD/Y

Purge page cache if page isn't updating.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< January 05	January 07 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Paula Flechas

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

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this Colombian rhythmic gymnast. JTtheOG (talk) 23:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Colombia. JTtheOG (talk) 23:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails SIGCOV. No significant coverage in independent reliable sources. I do see some passing mentions but that does not satisfy our notability criteria. Probably WP:TOOSOON. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 02:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriela Vega

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

I am unable to find enough coverage to meet WP:GNG. The closest to WP:SIGCOV that I found was a few sentences of coverage here. JTtheOG (talk) 23:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Argentina. JTtheOG (talk) 23:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Camden, Fresno County, California

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

PROD was declined last year. Non-notable location; only appearance in media is a trivial mention in a 1955 article about cattle breeding: [1]. Modern satellite view reveals a Camden Mobile Home Park and nearby gas station: [2], but that is insufficient for notability, as is the short-lived post office. Fails WP:GNG (which is the relevant standard for trailer parks) and WP:GEOLAND. Another effortless mass-created stub made in 2009 by the prolific Carlossuarez46. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 22:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and California. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 22:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I also found no significant newspaper or book coverage. Jfire (talk) 00:45, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unable to presume notability as described per GEOLAND. Routine coverage of cattle breeding does not satisfy SIGCOV for this location. Also, no significant coverage in reliable sources. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 02:34, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above, and frankly it's time we talked about a more extensive solution to the egregiously erroneous mass-creations of Carlossuarez46 and similar editors. After five years, the California clean-up is still ongoing with no real end in sight, Iran was fixed in part by mass-deleting a lot of C46's articles but that still leaves tens of thousands to go through, and we've barely even started on Azerbaijan or Sri Lanka. FOARP (talk) 11:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zorch

AfDs for this article:

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

seems to fail gng by... a lot. according to a previous afd, they might be notable, but the complete lack of sources, inappropriate external links (why myspace?), and the fact that results have become an unusable mush of miscellaneous companies, cryptobro jargon, pizzerias, and chex quest jokes lead me to believe that a tnt is due, and there's only a chance that it will get recreated consarn _{(formerly cogsan)} 18:00, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. consarn _{(formerly cogsan)} 18:00, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Clearly fails all criteria on NMusician. No evidence of passing GNG either, I can't find any evidence of the existence of the band in major English or Ameican press.

Noah ^💬 23:19, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This article has already been brought to AFD in the past so it is not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (first choice) or redirect to Stonehenge Free Festival#Bands (second choice). The band was formed in 1972 and split up in 1975. I found a Picador book, Gillett 2023 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFGillett2023 (help), that provides two pages of coverage about the band. That a book spent two pages covering a band that had disbanded 48 years ago strongly indicates the band is notable. The other sources I found were largely passing mentions. I am supporting retention on the basis of the extensive coverage in the book.
If the consensus is against a standalone article for the band, I support a redirect to Stonehenge Free Festival#Bands (where the band is mentioned) per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternative to deletion. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future.
Sources
1. Gillett, Ed (2023). Party Lines: Dance Music and the Making of Modern Britain. London: Picador. ISBN 978-1-5290-7062-0. Retrieved 2025-01-05 – via Google Books.
  The band receives nearly two pages of coverage in the book. The book notes: "One early outlier in the gradual process of sonic expansion visible over the course of the 1980s was the first 'proper' Stonehenge festival in 1974, at which the only music on offer was electronic, performed by a group called Zorch. Billed as England's first all-synthesizer band, they played burbling arpeggios and meditative drones on a set of three EMS Synthi AKS synths deep into Saturday night, followed by a solo set from band member Basil Brookes on Sunday, ‘during which he completely freaked out a guy in the audience who thought he was conjuring up Dark Forces', according to one anonymous account of proceedings. Zorch's only LP, recorded in 1975, offers a loose and incomplete approximation of these live performances: on the 24-minute 'Return of the Elohim' triangle-wave pulses and discordant tones sweep across the stereo field, growing slowly in intensity, building to an almighty climax, then dissolving into ambient washes of soft pad sounds, submarine pings and muffled voices. What limited other evidence remains from Zorch's brief three-year existence between 1972 and 1975 suggests sonic connections between the earlier synth experiments of US groups like Tonto's Exploding Head Band and British synth-rock pioneers Gong, contemporary European synth auteurs like Vangelis and Jean-Michel Jarre, and the dreamier elements of UK rave sounds to follow—from later electronic-Traveller crossover bands like Eat Static or Ozric Tentacles to more prominent names in the UK house and techno pantheon. Much like Hawkwind, while Zorch's wigged-out repetition and the fantastical allusions of their song titles suggest the terminally unhip hinterlands of prog rock, a surprising amount of the sonic character of this free festival proto-rave has survived into later UK dance music. The unlicensed nature of events at Stonehenge is critical to this: with no legal curfew to adhere to and no one to tell them what to do, Zorch's synth meditations could run as long as six hours, accompanied by a mind-meltingly complex light and laser show dubbed the Acidica. Far closer in form and function to an all-night DJ set than a rock show, these performances arguably represent the very first illegal electronic music events in the UK, ..."
2. Less significant coverage:
  1. Byrne, Eugene (2024-06-20). "Solstice at Stonehenge - the full story behind the hippies, Wallies and free festival 50 years ago". SomersetLive. Archived from the original on 2025-01-05. Retrieved 2025-01-05.
    The article notes: "Over the coming days, a few hundred people arrived – many of them had walked from London - and a small festival took place some distance from the stones, the only music being provided by the pioneering UK electronic music band Zorch over a terrible PA system."
  2. Berger, George (2009). The Story of Crass. La Vergne: Omnibus Press. ISBN 978-0-8571-2012-0. Retrieved 2025-01-05 – via Google Books.
    The book notes: "Basil Brooks, Zorch: "There was a little police Cortina parked in the road - that was the police presence! Innocent days." Not many people turned up for the first festival. Rimbaud describes it as a 'few hundred' whereas Andy Worthington (in his book Stonehenge: Celebration And Subversion) counts “about 500 people at the most". Musical entertainment came from a band Worthington describes as 'early synth pioneers' called Zorch that was in fact a synth duo the UK's first, allegedly—who were purported to have a mind blowing lightshow as well as a psychedelic-synth sound."
  3. Lynner, Doug (March–April 1977). "Steve Hillage & Friends". Synapse: The Electronic Music Magazine. Vol. 1, no. 6. p. 13. Retrieved 2025-01-05 – via Internet Archive.
    The magazine quotes from Zorch member Basil Brooks. The magazine notes: "Basil Brooks: I started out in school as Steve just said, with “psychedelic” music. That kindled my interest I suppose, in the first instance. I also have an Uncle who's a composer that's got a little electronic music studio, He got one of the first EMS machines. He showed me this machine and I was. stantly amazed by it and wanted to get to know more about it, Finally I took an evening course in synthesizers. About then the money came to buy an AKS and I went from there with two other guys who played EMS equipment, and formed a group. The synthesizer band I was in was called. "ZORCH" and was first formed in London in late 1973. We moved to the country in 1974 and were joined by two light synthesists who quickly became an equally important part of our live performance with their combinations of various projected images; something that I feel has yet to be explored to the fullest extent. We made three reco during our existence. The first was done live in the open air, the second using Revoxes and the third using the EMS Synthi 100 and multi-track facilities. Part of this last recording was used as the sound track for a film called “Mother Earth” which was made using “Spectre” the EMS video synthesizer ZORCH folded due to lack of funds and total commitment. However, the chances are it will reform sometime, probably for a free festival, these having been the high points of our performing history."
  4. Roberts, Andy (2008). Albion Dreaming: A Popular History of LSD in Britain. London: Marshall Cavendish. ISBN 978-981-4328-97-5. Retrieved 2025-01-05 – via Internet Archive.
    The book notes: "So chaotic in fact that free festival synthesiser band, Zorch were unable to play because one of their musicians, Basil Brooks, was “incapacitated by LSD”."
  5. Pearson, Mike Parker (2023). Stonehenge: A Brief History. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 138. ISBN 978-1-3501-9224-9. Retrieved 2025-01-05 – via Google Books.
    The book notes: "The first Free Festival at Stonehenge for certain was organized at the solstice in 1974 by a counter-culture figure who used the pseudonym Wally Hope. Fewer than 200 people came to listen to Zorch (no, I'd not heard of them either) and other bands."
  6. Worthington, Andy (2004). Stonehenge: Celebration and Subversion. Loughborough: Alternative Albion. pp. 38–39. ISBN 1-872883-76-1. Retrieved 2025-01-05 – via Internet Archive.
    The book notes: "The first Stonehenge Free Festival duly took place at the summer solstice in 1974, alongside a by-way just a few hundred yards to the west of the stones. Despite a leafleting campaign and promotion by Radio Caroline, it was a small gathering, numbering about 500 people at the most. The only music was provided by early synth pioneers Zorch, who set up stage facing the stones, and who had to compete with a wonky PA system. (Shark 2003d)"
  7. Darvill, Timothy (2006). Stonehenge: The Biography of a Landscape - Page 274. Stroud, Gloucestershire: Tempus. The History Press. p. 274. ISBN 0-7524-3641-4. Retrieved 2025-01-05 – via Google Books.
    The book notes: "Recollections of the event vary, but early pioneers of synthesizer-driven prog-rock Zorch played from a small stage facing the stones. After the solstice around 30 people decided not to leave straightaway and set up a camp to continue the festival beside ..."
  8. Dines, Mike (2023). "Learning on the road: Stonehenge, skool bus, and the development of alternative pedagogies in the new age traveller movement of the 1980s". Punk Pedagogies in Practice: Disruptions and Connections. Bristol: Intellect Books. doi:10.1386/9781789387063_10. ISBN 978-1-78938-706-3. Retrieved 2025-01-05.
    The book notes: "The only music was provided by early synth pioneers Zorch, who set up a stage facing the stones, and who had to compete with a wonky PA system. (2004: 38–9)"
Cunard (talk) 08:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Pinging Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zorch participants: Dracolych (talk · contribs), Pishcal (talk · contribs), Rpclod (talk · contribs), Andy Dingley (talk · contribs), and Richard3120 (talk · contribs). Cunard (talk) 08:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: to provide further time for evaluation of the above sources
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 22:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Independent Municipal Party of Ljusnarsberg

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

Sure, this ultra-local party will have some coverage in its local municipality of 4,407. But it's just no way that it is notable on a larger scale, so fails WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Geschichte (talk) 16:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 16:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The nominator seems to be hinting at WP:AUD with the statement about coverage in its local municipality, which specifies that to pass WP:NORG a subject will need coverage beyond a local area. However, the article already has WP:SIGCOV present in its single source thus far in a national Swedish newspaper. The nominator has not described the results of a BEFORE search to indicate whether any other qualifying coverage exists. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nerikes Allehanda is not a national newspaper, it is a regional newspaper for Närke. The piece in question is not mainly about Ljusnarsbergs Obundna Kommunparti either. Geschichte (talk) 22:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The example at WP:AUD is 'the weekly newspaper for a small town', Närke has a population of 223 000 people and Nerikes Allehanda is a daily newspaper with 20 000 paying digital subscribers and a print circulation of 43 000 in 2015. AlexandraAVX (talk) 12:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It also says "At least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary.", covering Närke makes it regional. AlexandraAVX (talk) 12:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I've added some additional sources from the regional radio station SR P4 Örebro. I also believe I saw some other print sources in Mediearkivet, but I've lost access since I last looked at this article. AlexandraAVX (talk) 09:43, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Both Nerikes Allehanda and P4 Örebro have a wide enough coverage area that I don't believe either is affected by WP:AUD, as said above. AlexandraAVX (talk) 09:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at https://tidningar.kb.se there seem to be some mentions that at least go beyond reporting results in national newspapers, but I don't have access to this either without going to an archival institution. AlexandraAVX (talk) 10:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 22:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

T S Ayyappan

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

Fails WP:NSINGER. Subject doesn't appear to be notable enough for a standalone article, and coverage from reliable sources is clearly lacking. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and India. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : It is a stub article and I am working on it. Moreover he passes multiple criteria of WP:NSINGER. He has sung in over 20 feature films in various languages for the prominent music composers including A R Rahman under various major record labels and national chart topper songs. He was won major music awards including Dada Saheb Phalke Film Festival Award. He has been featured in Times of India, Indian Express, Malayala Manorama etc. passing the Criteria 1,2,5,6,8, 9 and 10 of WP:NSINGER Taurussun (talk) 03:07, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - a made up in one day award; only reliable coverage is in the Times of India, and as experienced editors know, it has become deprecated. So the subject doesn't meet WP:SIGCOV. Bearian (talk) 02:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:TOOSOON. The sources used and those I found WP:BEFORE are not independent of Ayyappan and do not establish notability. Perhaps in the future his work will be more broadly covered but I have not seen anything so far. Recon rabbit 01:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 22:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Malcolm

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

Biography for an extremely WP:ROTM Presbyterian clergyman who fails WP:GNG/WP:NBIO. Two of the sources are WP:USERGENERATED photos uploaded to Commons ([3], [4]), another user-generated geneaology page ([5]), a single WP:TRIVIALMENTION in a report on the Boy Scouts ([6]), a single mention of his WWI service ([7]), and a routine brief mention in a local Presbyterian trade magazine ([8]). A WP:BEFORE search turned up no WP:SIGCOV in reliable, independent sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, Canada, and Michigan. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. There isn't really even a claim to notability in the article, just that he was an ordinary clergyman who served in World War I. Didn't find any additional sources of note. MCE89 (talk) 02:35, 7 January 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 DAB deleted G14 by BusterD, then I pagemoved the actress article‎. (non-admin closure) Nate • (chatter) 02:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zoe Gardner

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

This disambiguation page was made when there were two topics with this name, one being an actress and the other the researcher. The researcher has been deleted, meaning there is only one person by this name, and no point for a disambig page. Evidently the actresses page should have (actress) taken off the end now, but I guess that has to wait for this page to go first Unknown Temptation (talk) 21:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and move Zoe Gardner (actress) to the page per nom. मल्ल (talk) 22:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:14, 6 January 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.

Mathieu Ostiguy

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

Non-notable figure skater; absolutely does not meet the criteria of WP:NSKATE, with zero senior-level competition and zero junior-level international medal placements. Despite the volume of provided sources, most of those are competition results and databases, and what isn't appears to mostly be skating blogs. I'll let the community decide whether what's there qualifies as "significant coverage." Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A fair bit found on this one such as in the Granby Express [9], the QuinteNews [10] and [11] and also in the Journal deChambly [12] and [13]. Canary757 (talk) 06:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Presentation director

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

No refs since (I think) 2009. The problem here is that I see references to people who had this role but nothing much to base a page on. I can't see how the contents of the page as it stands can be WP:V. JMWt (talk) 20:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. JMWt (talk) 20:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to master control UK-specific title for someone who works as a master controller. Nate • (chatter) 23:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shree Tribhuvan Secondary School

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

Fails WP:SCHOOLOUTCOME or WP:NSCHOOL, sources are not independent and don’t provide SIGCOV coverage. GrabUp - Talk 17:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Nepal. GrabUp - Talk 17:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:44, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JCC Maccabi Youth Games

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

Redirect to parent org Maccabi World Union, where it is better contextualized. Youth version of the notable Maccabiah Games. Longhornsg (talk) 16:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Judaism, Sports, Olympics, Israel, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 16:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge (highly selectively) into Jewish Community Center. I do not see it mentioned at the target so the proposed redirect is not really an option. Plus, it's basically a program of the Jewish Community Centers, in collaboration with Maccabi. No objection to delete either. gidonb (talk) 03:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we have two different Redirect/Merge target articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naftali Schiff

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

Fails WP:GNG. The article reads a lot like a CV. The piece "Rabbi Naftali Schiff: Aish UK's wonderwall" by The Jewish Chronicle might be one source that counts towards notability, but other than that, I haven't been able to find much. Mooonswimmer 15:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Judaism, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 15:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Thanks for the nomination -- I had thought about AfDing this article when originally creating Josef Lewkowicz. Most of the sources currently in the article are poor, and it needs a WP:TNT. But there are multiple, in-depth profiles in the Jewish Chronicle and Jewish News over the years [14], [15], [16], multiple=page coverage in a book [17], with additional coverage of Schiff role in his charities [18], [19], [20], that could suffice for notability. Longhornsg (talk) 16:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Israel and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:04, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a professional at work. Misses the bar of the GNG. gidonb (talk) 03:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources provided by Longhornsg. Whizkin (talk) 19:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ryo Nakamura (footballer, born 1989)

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

Light years away from meeting WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. Geschichte (talk) 14:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 15:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fail to meet WP:GNG (WP:SPORTCRIT / WP:FOOTYN) criteria. Material not available for WP:V. QEnigma talk 15:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 16:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No significant coverage what so ever. CNC (talk) 17:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP, but merge with corrections — this article seems like a duplication of the already-existing Reo Nakamura (footballer, born 1990) and hence a merge into the existing article may be more appropriate, once the errors have been corrected. It seems like the author of the article has made a spelling error, instead of “Reo” (the correct first name) they have put “Ryo” as the name of the subject and (for some reason) changed their DoB from 1990 to 1989.

The article's own source shows the name of the subject as “Reo”, not “Ryo” (as the author has put) and the correct DoB of the subject as 1990, not 1989 (as the author has put). The reason the others (CC: @GiantSnowman, @CommunityNotesContributor, @QEnigma) could not verify/find sources was because the author wrote the incorrect information on the Wikipedia article. The career statistics section, especially, I feel could be merged into the already existing article.

~~~~ Nyxion³⁰³ 💬 Talk 19:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted - but where is the significant coverage of this person? Giant Snowman 19:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For Reo Nakamura (correct name), I was able to find some through this Google search and this one — 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 just to name a few.

At the moment, it appears the player plays for Ezra F.C., in the Pepsi Lao League 1.

~~~~ Nyxion³⁰³ 💬 Talk 19:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, your sources consist of match reports, database profiles and primary sources. Nothing come close to significant and independent coverage of the player. Geschichte (talk) 22:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In your opinion, would you say the player qualifies as being notable under WP:FOOTYN? Nyxion³⁰³ 💬 Talk 11:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOOTYN is an essay, not a formal Wikipedia policy or guideline, and has no relevance in AfD's. The subject must pass WP:GNG with multiple significant sources from publications independent of the subject. Alvaldi (talk) 13:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Geschichte: Of the seven sources, only the fifth one signals significant coverage on Nakamura as it tells about his personal life. However, one SIGCOV is not enough; the whole GNG needs multiple instead. Transfermarkt is obviously unnecessary to be added to Wikipedia articles as it is claimed unreliable. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - as this person and Reo Nakamura (footballer, born 1990) are the same, we may need to consider sending Reo Nakamura (footballer, born 1990) to AfD if this AfD concludes as 'delete'. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:56, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Have done this already: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reo Nakamura (footballer, born 1990). CNC (talk) 19:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there are still any valid arguments to Keep or Merge with another article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't look likely as Reo Nakamura is currently at a 5-0 delete Geschichte (talk) 22:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Annmarie Hanlon

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

Does not meet WP:ACADEMIC. — Moriwen (talk) 20:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — Moriwen (talk) 20:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:Prof#C1 in a high-cited area. Not enough for GNG. It would have been helpful if the nominator had given more results of their WP:Before search. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dell Axim

AfDs for this article:

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

This article has barely any citations and is rich in detail that I don't believe can be substantiated by secondary sources. Additionally, the product has been defunct for nearly 20 years and doesn't seem to have left a lasting cultural footprint. I would recommend deleting with a redirect to the Dell Technologies article. Please note that I'm a Dell employee with a COI, so my opinion shouldn't be a determining factor. I'll leave developing consensus up to independent editors. Thanks! JM with Dell Technologies (talk) 19:58, 6 January 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 January 6. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are links to some reviews in the External links section. Seems to be quite popular line in its time - judging how easy was to find some reviews/news:
- PC Mag, 5 August 2003, p. 33 - 1/4 page First Looks
- PC Mag, 25 November 2003, p. 38 - 1/3 page First Looks
- Maximum PC, September 2004, p. 76 - full page review (X30)
- PC Mag, January 2005, p. 36 - 1/2 page First Looks
- PC Mag, 22 November 2005, p. 48 - 1/4 page First Looks

The nominator is right that the article is in a bad shape with only few references and too much unreferenced content. From my POV, the article subject is notable, but my computer time is limited, so I'm unable to improve it much (well I may provide some references on the talk page for others to use). Pavlor (talk) 09:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peggy Batchelor

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

Contested draftification of an article on a non-notable actor. There is no reliable source for the WP:OR claim that she was the oldest-ever actor who had appeared in Doctor Who (not that that is even a claim to notability). The source for this claim appears to be a Doctor Who wiki. She fails WP:NACTOR as her handful of roles appear to be minor parts, and they are sourced to IMDb, an unreliable source. She fails WP:GNG/WP:NBIO for lack of coverage in independent, reliable sources. There are a couple of articles in a hyper-local village newsletter ([21], [22]), another WP:SPS ([23]), and a self-published as-told-to quasi-autobiography. As for WP:ANYBIO #1, I looked into her Fellowship in the Royal Society of Arts, but it's not a rare honor (there are 31,000 active Fellows) and can be acquired by online application and payment of a fee. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Actors and filmmakers, Women, and England. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dclemens1971: Hello. I understand. However, what I do not understand is how some articles such as this one are accepted but not others. This seems like discrimination. There are people as notable as Peggy Batchelor or less notable than her who have pages. Please explain. Spectritus (talk) 15:04, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not discrimination in any way. It's about independent, secondary, reliable sources. IMDB isn't a reliable source. Wendover News is not likely an independent source. Peggy Batchelor's as-told-to, self-published autobiography is not a reliable, independent, or secondary sources. Pointing to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS doesn't make Batchelor any more notable. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dclemens1971: Doesn't the fact someone wrote a book about her make her notable enough? Also, may I ask how users are supposed to find sources if Wikipedia condemns almost all of them?

The author wrote a book "as told to" her, which means it's basically Peggy Batchelor talking about herself, and thus not independent. And the biography was published by AuthorHouse, which is a vanity press and thus it's a WP:SELFPUBLISHED source and not reliable. English Wikipedia does not condemn almost all sources; it has specific standards, and the ones you used in this article don't meet them. If you have questions about individual sources or sourcing more generally, please visit WP:RSN. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Zero coverage found for this individual, acting roles are minor, would not pass notability for actors. A voice role in Doctor Who isn't the stuff of notability. Oaktree b (talk) 19:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete She was featured in only 1-2 episodes of each TV show she was in and played relatively minor roles in films. The article itself seems to be fixated on the (likely original research) trivia of her having once been the oldest person who had been a cast member of Doctor Who, which as we discussed in this AfD, isn't particularly relevant or notable. Waddles 🗩 🖉 01:19, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note I agree this would be better in draft space. She also had a stage career, which has not been included in the article yet. I am sourcing and adding references and information, and will then consider whether she meets notability guidelines. If she is, the article needs editing, as it reads more like a eulogy than an encyclopaedic entry. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Spectritus (talk) 10:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Having found and added sources, I think that she does meet WP:BASIC. There are multiple, independent sources, some substantial, some less so, but they add up. There is coverage across her life in both national newspapers and local papers around the UK (around England, and also Northern Ireland and Scotland). The article could still use some work - I'll work on the lede and info box. RebeccaGreen (talk) 02:55, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I cannot view the many British Newspaper Archive links you added since I don't subscribe and it's not available through the Wikipedia Library. However, I looked at a few of the other links you added and they don't seem to add up:
- A mention of her name in a radio programme cast
- A single mention in a local newspaper's stage play review: Outstanding performer in a capable cast was Peggy Batchelor who admirably sustained her role of a fussy specimen of nice womanhood with mothering tendencies towards the male Godfrey Bond turned in a splendid piece of characterisation of tne class beloved to English comedy writers the butler who is incapable of being surprised and is always adequate to meet all emergencies
- A user-generated source on the history of a local theater club
- A single reference in a local news story
None of these adds up to WP:SIGCOV. Can you better characterize the British Newspaper Archive sources so editors can properly evaluate them? Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:09, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I wrote, I think that she meets WP:BASIC - "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability." The number of times a source is referenced gives an idea of the amount of detail in the sources - the profiles of her published in newspapers in Tyne and Wear and Cambridgeshire are particularly detailed, while the Belfast source has a bit less. There is more detail in The Stage article about the drama school she founded in Essex that I have not included. There is coverage over many years - 1925, 1938, 1947 all deriving from her appearances at the Wembley Tattoo; 1946-1966 in stage shows; 1970s-1980s as founder of a drama school and as a nationally recognised adjudicator.

You mention that being a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts is not a rare honour. Being a Fellow of the Guildhall School of Music and Drama is - information online [24] states "The Guildhall School offers the following honorary awards for distinguished services to the School and to the profession: the FGSM (Fellow of the Guildhall School of Music and Drama), awarded to distinguished professors, examiners and past students and the Hon GSM (Honorary Member of the Guildhall School of Music and Drama), awarded for services to music or drama and to the Guildhall School. Limited to 100 holders at any one time." That is an indication of her professional standing, in addition to the news coverage about her.

I am not suggesting that all the sources contribute to notability - 3 of those you link to provide evidence of facts in the article (her appearances in two radio programmes; the date she left the drama school she founded; the facts that she taught at drama festivals as well as adjudicating, and that she worked at drama festivals in Wales as well as England and N. Ireland). RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. A review of sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tunku Irinah

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

Minor royal and non-notable business exec. Sole claim to fame seems to be a lot of awards received from her own family, though sources on the awards are pretty thin on the ground. In a WP:BEFORE search I could find only passing mentions in Malay and English. A redirect might be the best alternative to deletion, but I couldn't work out an appropriate target, so brought it to AFD for discussion. Wikishovel (talk) 14:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and Malaysia. Wikishovel (talk) 14:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED. Waddles 🗩 🖉 01:25, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ja'afar of Negeri Sembilan#Issue (her father's page) where she is listed. It might be interesting to check whether her siblings, most of whom are blue links there, are notable? PamD 16:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. The subject is a member of the Malay royalty. Wikipedia:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility actually might be a good place to reach out regarding this. desmay (talk) 20:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dadı

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

Tagged 6 years ago for lack of cites. As far as I can tell the cites on the Turkish article are just for stuff like what time it was on rather than whether it was a good show or successful Chidgk1 (talk) 13:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_foreign_adaptations_of_The_Nanny#Turkey: until better sources are added but AfD being for deletion not cleanup not opposed to Keep (notable cast, 3 seasons on major networks) -Mushy Yank. 10:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ziya Taner

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

Tagged 7 years ago as unsourced. I checked a couple of the sources on the Turkish article but not sure they are enough - for example they don’t support the first sentence here saying he was born in Macedonia Chidgk1 (talk) 13:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, North Macedonia, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If I were to judge purely based on their managerial career – having managed Beşiktaş J.K., one of the three major Turkish football clubs and having led Ankaragücü to a Turkish Cup win – I'd say there's no doubt they are notable. Robby.is.on (talk) 13:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:07, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Robby, this guy is clearly notable, just needs improvement and offline, Turkish language sources. WP:COMMONSENSE needed. Giant Snowman 16:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you would think with his career that good sources would exist somewhere. Perhaps native speakers of Turkish are not very interested in editing Wikipedia. I would not be surprised, as I find Turkish Wikipedia generally unfriendly and frustrating. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zensai AI

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

Contested draftification, so off to AfD. Company fails WP:NCORP, and it's a particularly egregious case of WP:ADMASQ, almost to the line of a G11. Contrary to the article's claim, it does not appear on the 2024 FT 1000 list (not that that would confer notability if it did). The rest of the sources are limited to:

Corporate press releases ([25], [26], [27], [28], [29])
Articles by Zensai employees ([30], [31])
WP:PRIMARYSOURCES like Zensai's description of its products in app stores ([32]) and other Zensai sponsored content ([33])
A promotional product review ([34])
Sources that I'm guessing were added in error since they either don't mention the company ([35]) or are the website of an entirely different company.

WP:BEFORE search turns up only more corporate press releases. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Denmark. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Agree with the source review above, PR items and other sources that aren't reliable. I can only bring up PR items in my searches as well. Appears to be PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 18:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article on Zensai AI meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines, with independent coverage highlighting its innovations in AI applications across healthcare, finance, and education. It documents industry recognition, impactful partnerships, and contributions to global challenges. The article is neutral, well-sourced, and provides valuable information on a significant player in the AI field. I recommend retaining it and addressing any concerns for compliance with Wikipedia standards. Hussainxyz (talk) 02:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly recommend you not use AI tools to generate responses and actually address the source analysis in the nomination. (GPTZero rates this as 100% probability of being AI-generated.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Any concerns" are mainly the lack of sourcing. Ask the AI to help find some, which it likely won't, but anything's worth a try. Oaktree b (talk) 17:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:NCORP per source analysis by nom. ~ A412 ^talk! 08:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:52, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vanispamcruftisement. XOR'easter (talk) 20:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adil Qadri

AfDs for this article:

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

This article appears to have escaped a CSD G4 on the technicality that the CSD tag was removed not by the page creator but the by editor who moved this page into mainspace. That said, it's previously been deleted under an alternate name (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohamadadil Asif Malkani) and has been repeatedly deleted.

Since we are now forced into a second AfD, here's the rationale and source analysis. The subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Appearing on Shark Tank India does not generate notability. It is also WP:ADMASQ, with WP:PROMO language like Qadri's journey into the world of fragrances began at an early age, driven by his passion for fine aromas and an interest in traditional perfume-making techniques and As a self-made entrepreneur, his journey serves as an inspiration to aspiring business owners looking to break into niche markets. The sources do not support notability. We have:

Unbylined coverage that is unreliable per WP:NEWSORGINDIA ([36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42])
WP:ORGTRIV focused on his company, not on him ([43], [44], [45])
Tabloid journalism ineligible as WP:SIGCOV per WP:SBST ([46])
An apparent piece of WP:SIGCOV ([47]) but on a promotional site that publishes paid articles without disclosure.
An article that does not even mention him ([48])

I didn't find anything else qualifying in the WP:BEFORE search. Given its history of recreation, I am requesting editor support for WP:SALTING this title. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article on Adil Qadri should be retained as it meets the notability requirements outlined by Wikipedia. Adil Qadri has been the subject of significant coverage in independent and reliable sources, which detail his entrepreneurial achievements and his contributions to his industry.

The article provides factual and verifiable information, offering readers a comprehensive understanding of his professional background and impact. While there may be areas for improvement, such as refining the structure or adding more citations, deleting the article would overlook the documented relevance of this individual.

I suggest addressing any concerns constructively rather than removing the article entirely. Hussainxyz (talk) 02:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly recommend you not use AI tools to generate responses and actually address the source analysis in the nomination. (GPTZero rates this as 100% probability of being AI-generated.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Clearly WP:PROMO, an admin needs to lock the page so that it cannot be created again after deletion. Xoocit (talk) 10:13, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Resignation of Justin Trudeau

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

Nothing significant compared to previous resignations of Canadian or other international PMs. The article is likely to become a list of reactions, and most of the content can be included in the background of the 2025 Liberal Party of Canada leadership election article. Basque mapping (talk) 19:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 19:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, no rationale provided for deletion. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak Keep~~Draftify We don't delete an article about what it might become. For now we know Trudeau resigned effective once the leadership campaign for the LPC wraps. That's a notable basis for a WP:EVENT article. But we may find it routine enough to roll into some other article in the future so I reserve the right to change my mind in the future. Simonm223 (talk) 19:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In light of subsequent comments from SportingFlyer and Ivanvector and reflecting upon my own WP:SYNTH concerns (at article talk for this article) I am changing my !vote to returning this to draft. Simonm223 (talk) 20:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probably created too soon and probably sent to AfD too soon, we can have another squiz in a week. SportingFlyer T·C 19:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That being said, I'd prefer to draftify or merge at this time until WP:LASTING is satisfied. SportingFlyer T·C 02:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy merge This belongs at Premiership of Justin Trudeau and Justin Trudeau, not a standalone article. This is or will also be discussed at 2025 Liberal Party of Canada leadership election and 2025 Canadian federal election, and a separate duplicative page is unnecessary. Reywas92^Talk 19:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, probably with either the article for Justin Trudeau or with a separate article. From what I've seen of articles for other notable political resignations, they've always been a part of the article for that person or a larger notable event which the resignation was a part of. I would maybe argue the same for the article on Chrystia Freeland's resignation. Obviously, there are other resignation articles like the one for Pope Benedict XVI, so I'm not fully certain of how the notability policy should be applied, but I still feel that merging would be appropriate.

PaTeKor (talk) 19:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that Benedict's resignation gets to a standalone article, as it was being the first Pope to resign in six centuries. If we are going to take the path of merging, the 2024–2025 Canadian political crisis article could be the target of Trudeau's and Freeland's articles. Nonetheless, at this moment, the article needs a lot of work before the merge can be done. Basque mapping (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the redirect of this "crisis" article to Resignation of Chrystia Freeland, rather baffling that is was just created as a copy-paste duplicate of that page. However I could potentially support renaming that article (which probably didn't need to exist in the first place either) to incorporate the broader fallout that led to Trudeau's resignation. Reywas92^Talk 21:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These articles are all just one long process that culminated in Trudeau's resignation and should all be at one article, similar to the October 2022 United Kingdom government crisis and July 2022 United Kingdom government crisis for Truss and Johnson's resignations as UK PM amid similar internal party crises. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 22:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this an affirmation to merge to that title; we really don't need much of this article, which just sums up a resignation speech along with the usual other party's 'responses' which are so WP:MILL and what usually happens in a parliamentary democracy. Nate • (chatter) 23:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Routine resignation that does not require a separate article and can just be covered in Justin Trudeau. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Widely-reported, notable resignation that should have its article kept for now. Future discussions can arise on whether a merge into Premiership of Justin Trudeau or Justin Trudeau is necessary. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 19:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Close discussion per WP:RAPID. 1 day is not enough time to determine whether this event has WP:LASTING coverage. -insert valid name here- (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So why was an article created in the first place? If we don't know if there's enough lasting coverage, the content should go in the existing Premiership of Justin Trudeau article or related pages. Ridiculous comment. Reywas92^Talk 21:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just because we don't know if there's enough lasting coverage doesn't mean we should assume there isn't. Whether keeping an article should be the "default" feels more like a question of inclusionism vs deletionism, an argument of which every editor has an opinion by now and that seems to be unable to be settled any time soon. However, considering this article has no serious BLP issues and is well-sourced, there appears to be little harm in keeping it for a few days until the state of lasting coverage becomes more clear. I am reminded of the article for Maxwell Azarallo's self-immolation, which was nominated for deletion before he even was declared dead; at that point, it was unclear whether, like Aaron Bushnell's self-immolation, it would sustain lasting coverage. However, a month later, that coverage did not materialize, and editors voted to redirect. -insert valid name here- (talk) 23:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to 2025 Liberal Party of Canada leadership election or 2024–2025 Canadian political crisis, per other resignations found in Category:Resignations and the arguments per PaTeKor and Reywas92. Trudeau's resignation after his failures is only just a part of the larger political crisis in the Liberal Party. Per the precedents in other Commonwealth heads of governments: the resignations of Tony Blair, David Cameron, Theresa May, and Thatcher redirect to the successive leadership election, the resignation of Liz Truss redirects to the larger political crisis, and finally Jacinda Ardern's resignation has her own article, but it's likely to be merged into 2023 New Zealand Labour Party leadership election. ⁂CountHacker (talk) 19:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep - clearly sufficient details and notability. Mtaylor848 (talk) 20:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now - unknown if LASTING will apply. It's been like 16 hours.

Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 20:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - plenty of independent, third-party, reliable sources covering one of the biggest recent events in Canadian politics. Extremely notable event and passes WP:GNG. 2605:B100:10C:C96E:AD8D:62D0:F8B3:44B (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify until NPOV issues can be resolved. As it stands this article is a WP:COATRACK for undue and largely unsourced synthesis of negative opinions about its subject. It's also cherrypicking negative approval ratings: the article notes that Trudeau had the second-lowest approval rating of listed prime ministers but doesn't note that from the same list he also had the second-highest within his tenure. It's also stretching to attach the resignation as a black mark on Trudeau's tenure, as though prime ministers resigning from office is not a common occurrence in Canada: the article notes that nine prime ministers have resigned from office, but omits that only 12 retired after electoral defeat (2 more died in office), so this is in fact rather common and mundane. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - all Canadian prime ministers (accept Macdonald in 1891 & Thompson in 1894) have resigned from office. GoodDay (talk) 20:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect into Justin Trudeau#Resignation and merge the information this article has that the section doesn't into the section. --SpectralIon (talk) 21:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Major political event in Canada and has made international news. PM’s resigning mid-term in Canada is rare (last one was over two decades ago), and Justin Trudeau is one of the most noteworthy world leaders right now. Precedent to keep includes articles such as the Resignation of Jacinda Ardern & Resignation of Chrystia Freeland (both of whom are less noteworthy than Trudeau, considering he is the leader of a G7 nation.)

Factchecker72946482 (talk) 21:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article says nine PMs out of just 23 have resigned midterm, how is that rare? Two decades ago was just three PMs ago. Yeah Trudeau is noteworthy, that's why there's a whole article on his premiership! Doesn't mean everything he does need another article! There's a merge proposal for the Ardern page, and I question the need for the Freeland page as well (merge it to 29th Canadian Ministry#2024 shuffle and crisis or rename it to cover the broader tumult in this Canadian government). Reywas92^Talk 21:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and as I also stated in my own argument, the US had a similar when President Joe Biden dropped out of the 2024 race. Biden’s article Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election is still up and can also be used a precedent to keep Trudeaus article up as well Phx3216 (talk) 01:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Where's the article for the resignation of the President in Bhutan, Brunei, Burundi, Sao Tome and Principe? This is just another example of the euro and americancentrism I see on this site. Why do we see indifference to African nations but quickly applaud and make articles on European and North American leaders when they peacefully resign according to law. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 21:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you can come up with WP:SIGCOV for those events to fill out an article then by all means, be my guest. WP:BEBOLD. The fact that nobody has written articles on those events doesn't mean this event isn't notable enough for an article. RachelTensions (talk) 22:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m starting to question whether SSCG needs some sort of tempban from projectspace in order to better understand PAGs, because between their behavior here, at ITN/C, and their attempted deletion of WP:TDS, they don’t seem to. The Kip ^(contribs) 01:09, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, serious consequences for the world and the G7. User:Rushtheeditor User talk:Rushtheeditor 23:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable event, the article is fully fleshed out and will likely become more fleshed out in the coming days and weeks. RachelTensions (talk) 21:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect preferably to Justin Trudeau#Resignation and merge any relevant information. We can wait to see if there becomes a need for a separate article - but it appears there are a bunch of articles that already provide context for the resignation, such as 2024–2025 Canadian political crisis. It is unnecessary to create separate articles for every event. --Enos733 (talk) 21:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Obviously meets notability standards with the amount of coverage. The issue is whether a separate article is required or not. Resignations by prime ministers not following an electoral defeat/defeat via on-confidence are relatively rare and that's reflected by the content of the article, since some of the encyclopedic material there would not be suitable for inclusion in some of the proposed targets (e.g. opposition parties' positions on the resignation, specific quotations from the speech, detailed summary of caucus group statements). Ideally, this should all be merged into one parent article such as 2024–2025 Canadian political crisis along the Resignation of Chrystia Freeland article, similar to how we have the July 2022 United Kingdom government crisis for Boris Johnson and October 2022 United Kingdom government crisis for Liz Truss. However, that does not require deletion and should be discussed on a talk page. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 21:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In terms of merging, I would probably suggest moving this to a the political crisis title, and merging an appropriate amount from the Freeland article, which is probably already overly detailed and will in terms of long-term significance will be subsumed as part of the overall crisis that culminated in today's events. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to WP:TOOSOON. Trudeau did not actually resign today but merely announced a potential future resignation after a leadership election takes place. We do not know yet whether the resignation will actually happen. There is national (and family) precedent for such resignations never actually happening--for example, the 1980 Liberal Party of Canada leadership election never actually happened, and the elder Trudeau stayed on as leader and won another election. Of course, there was pressure on P. Trudeau to stay on due to the 1980 election, but there is considerable pressure to hold an election soon now as well, and it remains to be seen whether it will actually be possible to hold a leadership election in the current context. Alternatively we could Move to 2025 Prorogation of Canadian Parliament since, unlike the resignation which is a speculative future event, the prorogation really did happen today. Dash77 (talk) 22:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prorogation is very routine, and happens in almost every Parliament. That aspect can be mentioned in 44th Canadian Parliament. Nfitz (talk) 22:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michaëlle Jean herself did not consider the prorogation in 2008 to be routine. See for example Gov. Gen. Jean explains 2008 prorogation. However there are AFAIK no reliable sources saying today's prorogation was anything but routine so, unless and until there are, it is probably WP:TOOSOON to create 2025 Prorogation of Canadian Parliament much as it is also WP:TOOSOON to create Resignation of Justin Trudeau. Dash77 (talk) 23:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, it's way too soon. Wikipedia needs to get out of the habit of letting poor articles stay up that (I agree with others here) serve only as COATRACKs and NPOV violations, just in the hopes that they eventually have LASTING notability. Not every news story needs its own article, and like many others, this one can be sufficiently covered in the articles for Justin Trudeau, the Ministry, or the Parliament, or as others have suggested an article about the entire crisis if that becomes necessary due to size/amount of information (which is unclear yet). And again, please guys, stop trying to create independent articles ASAP on every news story that can be, at least temporarily, covered in other articles. There is no rush to create articles. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 22:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Adding on that while it likely needs its own AfD at this point (since this one has too many comments to add it on here), I also support deleting Resignation of Chrystia Freeland for the same reasons. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 22:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a shitty reason to delete. I'm sorry, it just is. The resignation of Trudeau is incredibly important and it deserves its own article. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 07:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there's no reason this can't be covered by Justin Trudeau#Resignation, the article for the convention, or 44th Canadian Parliament. Also support deleting the even less relevant Resignation of Chrystia Freeland. Nfitz (talk) 22:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The difference, for me, with Resignation of Chrystia Freeland is that Freeland's resignation has actually happened. She was replaced as Finance Minister, at least, by day's end. By contrast, if a Prime Minister wants to resign, then he or she turns his resignation in to the Governor General. Trudeau met with Simon earlier today. He did not resign. If he had he would no longer be PM. That is why I say it is WP:TOOSOON in Trudeau's case. Dash77 (talk) 23:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The US had a rather similar situation when Joe Biden decided not to seek reelection last year. There is an article detailing the events leading up to and the events following his decision to not seek reelection. As in Biden’s case, the events surrounding his resignation and the ensuing political turmoil it will undoubtedly cause will likely be served best in its own article rather than be merged with another article. Phx3216 (talk) 22:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Arsenal winning 7-0 doesn't happen every day either. Perhaps even less frequently! What policy supports not merging? Nfitz (talk) 00:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Politicians resign all the time, particularly prime ministers in parliamentary systems. Put this information into existing Trudeau articles and 2025 leadership article. Yeoutie (talk) 22:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Precisely Marincyclist (talk) 06:41, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Phx3216. This kind of thing doesn't happen every day and deserves its own article. Urbanracer34 (talk) 23:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with existing current developments in Canadian politics regarding Trudeau & the Liberal Party crisis. I agree with Patar knight that as indicated by the United Kingdom, resignations rarely receive any standalone articles. This will remain a stub, contribute little and serve no value when it could easily be merged. Hauntbug (talk) 23:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for reasons stated by Phx3216. Minikiwigeek2 (talk) 23:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Justin Trudeau, Premiership of Justin Trudeau and/or 2025 Liberal Party of Canada leadership election. A summary will also likely be included at Liberal Party of Canada leadership elections#2025 leadership election.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 23:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as this is a major event. No reason to delete, and, as Phx3216 said, this happened last year, and the page is still up. AndrewGarfieldIsTheBestSpiderMan (talk) 00:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – This is a major event in Canadian politics deserving of its own article. The arguement that "all prime ministers resign so Trudeau's isn't significant" is garbage and pays no respect to Canadian political customs. A prime minister resigning as they are bound by constitutional convention to do so once they lose an election is not the same as a prime minister resigning following an unprecedented government crisis. The significance of the event, article size, and widespread media coverage exists, so why should this be deleted. RedBlueGreen93 01:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge It does not warrant a standalone article; a comprehensive article could be created that also includes Chrystia Freeland's resignation, titled "The 2024–25 Canadian Government Crisis," for example. Valorthal77 (talk) 01:31, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Resignation of Chrystia Freeland, they are not really discrete events. Article title TBD. The main Trudeau article is large enough and there is enough that happened to justify a standalone article. I T B F 📢 01:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article should be kept, whilst it may borderline violate WP:NOTNEWS; which has been referenced before, along with the aforementioned article being "Routine Coverage"; it is clearly in the safe zone and doesn't violate this criteria, and this rule as stated in WP:NOTROUTINE, and WP:N. The article's fate, however is firmly in question along with the Resignation of Chrystia Freeland, as it is TBD if the articles merge and become the 2024–25' Canadian Political Crisis. I support this decision, as both are interlinked with each other, and are the major parts of the aforementioned crisis. If this article should be kept, it would suffice; although it would be optimal if the aforementioned articles are merged sometime after the 2025 Canadian Federal Election, so we can thoroughly contemplate the aftermath of said crisis. That being said, just to clarify; I would support the keep option due to the fact that merging the article's right now would be lacking proper hindsight, but once we get past the 2025 Canadian Federal Election, it would be adequate to consider merging. --- SN102813 (talk) 02:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the head of government of Canada suddenly announcing his resignation during a political crisis is a major event with ample amounts of national and international news coverage to meet notability guidelines. Both Trudeau's and Chrystia's resignations are very notable independent parts of the overall political crisis. As time goes on, more information will continue to be added regarding his resignation and its consequences. – Handoto (talk) 02:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per aboves DeadlyRampage26 (Chat) 04:22, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, this is very clearly a notable event and it will remain so. Something like this does not happen very often at all. Contrary to what others are saying I do think that in the long run this article will satisfy WP:LASTING. IncompA 04:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, he officially announced it, and it is most definitely notable. Félix An (talk) 04:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Justin Trudeau, Premiership of Justin Trudeau and/or 2025 Liberal Party of Canada leadership election. Marincyclist (talk) 06:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Premiership of Justin Trudeau and Justin Trudeau or delete: The topic meeting the WP:GNG (which it does) is not the only question here; not everything with wide news coverage needs a separate article, and there's no evidence this event needs one either. The Canadian prime minister's resignation having a standalone article would not make sense in ten years. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 07:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What guideline specifically states that not all notable events need a separate article? And yes, it would have relevance in 10 years. This is the first time in decades that a sitting Prime Minister has announced their intention to resign, and adds to the very short list of people who have resigned or announced their intent to resign as the sitting Prime Minister. Saying this doesn't need separate coverage is doing a disservice, especially considering the fact that Wikipedia is already a heavily-leaning U.S. central platform as is. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 07:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No offense but your interpretation of prime ministerial resignations is incorrect. In recent history both Jean Chrétien and Brian Mulroney resigned prior to an election call. Campbell, Harper and Martin did not but that's three out of the last six. It's normal for PMs to resign before an election call. Simonm223 (talk) 12:38, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Incredibly notable event covered at a significant international level; it also throws Canada's current political climate into more uncharted territory so close to the inauguration of a new U.S. president. People voting delete think only certain articles have relevance on Wikipedia, yet this is an insanely important world event, as Canada hasn't had a Prime Minister resign in literally decades. This is a strong keep from me. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 07:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with 2024–2025 Canadian political crisis. I feel that the two articles cover what is basically the exact same topic. The events that have occurred since 16 December definitely do warrant a separate article, but it's less clear whether it warrants 3 separate ones. Gust Justice (talk) 08:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

P. Shanmugam (CPIM)

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

Becoming the president of a political party’s state or national unit does not inherently confer notability. The subject fails WP:GNG as no significant coverage has been found beyond the news of their appointment as the state unit president, making it a case of WP:BIO1E. Additionally, the subject fails WP:NPOL as they are not an MLA or MP. GrabUp - Talk 18:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, India, and Tamil Nadu. Shellwood (talk) 19:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elan Group (company)

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

Sources do not provide significant coverage. They include trivial coverages such as investment news, MOU announcements, and contract news, which are insignificant and do not contribute to notability. The subject fails to meet WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. GrabUp - Talk 18:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 19:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Haryana-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hauptmann's Ladder

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

I found one alright article on this and nothing else. Does not pass WP:GNG or WP:NBOOK. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Crime. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This was all I could find [49], which isn't enough. The one source used in the article now is fine, but we need more to show notability. Oaktree b (talk) 18:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: does not meet WP:NBOOK. I found [50] as well, but I think it's WP:UGC. Although the book was published by a university press, the author is a private practice lawyer, which may explain why it wasn't reviewed academically. Jfire (talk) 22:34, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jfire I don’t think Reader’s Favorite is UGC, but I believe it is paid, which is also not usable. Just for reference PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:34, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shirish Kumar Maurya

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

Sources are unreliable and consist of passing mentions. The subject fails WP:GNG due to the lack of multiple significant coverages and fails WP:AUTHOR as no multiple reviews of their books have been found. GrabUp - Talk 18:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Poetry, and India. Shellwood (talk) 19:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Maharashtra. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss X (decedent)

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

Fails WP:GNG, only one source helpful for notability, the rest are non RS. An outside search found no more. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There is no sourcing about Miss X, which is a rather hard name to search for... She might have been identified, which is fine, but simply another non-notable missing person. Oaktree b (talk) 18:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Delaware. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Database seeding

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

A dictionary definition, as far as I can tell. No footnotes, only one of the external links seems relevant but describes "data seeding" instead of "database seeding". Mostly example code with no context given, no explanation of the technique or its purpose or applications; or its development or relevance. Certainly, no expressed claim to notability. mikeblas (talk) 18:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. It's certainly 'a thing', but I can't see any possible claim to notability, or anything that could really be said about seeding beyond the dictionary definition. At the very most it might merit a sentence in an article like database as one of the possible steps involved in set up. MCE89 (talk) 00:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Court-martial of Federico Merida

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

Does not pass WP:NEVENT, no coverage outside of the immediate period. There is a one sentence mention in 10.1080/01436597.2010.518790, and a few masters theses (not RS) (mostly over him using the gay panic defense), which is not enough. There is a single source that contributes to notability, [51], which has about two pages but I am unsure if this is enough. If kept it should be moved to Murder of Falah Zaggam (what the only secondary source calls it). PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Military, and Iraq. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This phd thesis [52] allegedly says something, but IDK if it is sigcov. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cloudfone (brand)

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

Sources are not WP:SIGCOV as no significant coverage of the subject found, hence failing WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. Maybe sources are PR stuff and unreliable. GrabUp - Talk 18:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 18:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Salt evasion of Cloudfone. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manhunt for Theodoros Theofanous

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

The manhunt is definitely not notable per WP:NEVENT. Searching for names in Greek, the 2011 murder he was convicted for might be, but while there are sources I'm not sure they're enough to pass NEVENT. Should either be deleted, or if that murder is found to be notable moved to that, but I have my doubts it is. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Cyprus. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. The murderer escaped and was recaptured without very much fuss. Whoopee. Why, oh why, should there be an article about a manhunt when the escapee himself doesn't have one? Clarityfiend (talk) 19:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Clarityfiend Well, what I'm asking here is, is he notable? He's a Cypriot and our coverage of that place is not great. That case might be. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think he is. The triple murder is sad, but nothing special in these times. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, nothing's special. Depends on how it got covered. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Police. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

神戸駅

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

Does not meet WP:NONENGLISHTITLE requirements. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Japan. – The Grid (talk) 18:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations and Disambiguations. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. See Category:Disambiguation pages with Chinese character titles and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/板橋 (keep). This exists for the same reason that redirects in languages other than English exist. Adumbrativus (talk) 11:55, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

美州

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

Meets neither WP:DAB nor WP:NONENGLISHTITLE requirements. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Japan. – The Grid (talk) 18:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tyson Billings

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

Fails WP:NCRIMINAL. Minor figure in the convoy protests. No longer in prison, not a public figure. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Canada. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Some coverage in the CBC is all I can find, calling him "notable" but he was a minor figure in the overall scheme of things, I don't think we have criminal notability. 6 months probation isn't a notable sentence, was a non-notable individual before this event and appears to have faded away after jail. Oaktree b (talk) 18:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Punjab Colleges

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

Fails WP:NCORP: other than unproven 2024 controversy, there is no direct and in-depth coverage about this WP:MILL group of colleges. The article has a history of promotional content as well. Gheus (talk) 16:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 17:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kids Zone

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

Fails WP:GNG: this is a press release and other articles just briefly mention it. I think WP:TOOSOON applies. Gheus (talk) 16:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The network launched six years ago; was this rationale meant for another nomination? Nate • (chatter) 23:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TV One Pakistan

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

Lacks direct and in-depth coverage to pass WP:ORGDEPTH. Fails WP:NORG. Gheus (talk) 16:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kemer Cup

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

Tagged for a year as unsourced and when I click the external link it blocks me Chidgk1 (talk) 16:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Tennis and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't find anything about a tennis event, there seems to be a soccer event with a similar name that pops up in Turkish sources. The one source now in the article is primary, so not helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is usually just called the ITF Istanbul but is also called the Kemer Cup. Mid level payout minor league event at the time. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:31, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

¿Por qué diablos?

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

Article about unnotable Colombian movie without sources. I searched online for sources, but I couldn't find any. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 16:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 16:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Colombia. Shellwood (talk) 17:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Per the Spanish Wikipedia version, the series was nominated for awards. If not, redirect to the remake Más sabe el diablo where it is mentioned. Geschichte (talk) 07:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tabani's School of Accountancy

AfDs for this article:

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

Only sourced with its official website. Non-notable accounting school, fails WP:NORG. Gheus (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 17:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Professionals' Academy of Commerce

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

Non-notable accounting school, ref 1 is a database entry, ref 2/3 is a primary ref, and ref 3 is a press release. Fails WP:NORG. Gheus (talk) 16:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 17:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Ukrainian literature translated into English

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

This strikes me as an non-encyclopedic cross-categorization per WP:CROSSCAT; perfectly appropriate for a category but failing WP:NLIST under WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:INDISCRIMINATE given the massive volume of potential entries in this list. In a WP:BEFORE I find discussion of the concept of Ukrainian literature in translation but not a discussion of these subjects as a group (and the selection of them, if not indiscriminate, appears to be an exercise in original research). Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Literature, Lists, and Ukraine. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eski Havaalanı (Tram İzmir)

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

As Tram İzmir belongs to the council I think that cite on the Turkish article counts as a primary source. Thus there are not enough sources to show notability. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Egekent 2 railway station

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

Nothing in the Turkish article shows it to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 16:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Commissar Shakespeare

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

Tagged a long time ago as uncited and apparently it is not very good https://www.timeout.com/movies/commissar-shakespeare Chidgk1 (talk) 16:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:00, 6 January 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 ‎ speedy close, draftified (and then draft was deleted per WP:CSD#G7). —David Eppstein (talk) 17:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kerry Sink

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

Biography that does not satisfy WP:NPROF, and unfortunately I don't see any independent significant coverage to satisfy WP:NBASIC. Possibly WP:TOOSOON but presently not notable. Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Women. Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: article has been drafitfied. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 16:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Keiraphillips, you've also tagged it for deletion citing a desire for a clean start, but reviewers have provided feedback in their declination rationales that will likely be valuable to a draft article. It's not necessary to delete it, the draft article could continue to be worked on. Further, though I wouldn't be opposed to procedurally closing this AfD, notability isn't something that would be solved with more time in the draft space. I hope this is a good-faithed effort to improve the article and not an attempt at avoid scrutiny; would you mind expanding more on your thinking? Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ximena Caminos

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

Following brief discussion on the talk page, in which an editor drafted a new version of the article, it makes more sense to delete this article and for active contributors to create something in draftspace in due course. In its current form, it resembles a CV or promotional piece more than an encyclopedia article. The subject is mentioned in reliable sources but, again, too promotional to establish notability. Northernhenge (talk) 15:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Northernhenge (talk) 15:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Argentina. Shellwood (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mommy, I'm Scared

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

Tagged many years ago as uncited. Although it apparently won some prizes when I click on the independent cite on the Turkish article I am blocked. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot Flight 11

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

Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". Other than databases (tertiary sources), there exists no reliable secondary sources that provide significant in-depth and sustained continued coverage of the event, with the occurrence having no demonstrated lasting effects nor long-term impacts on a significant region of the world that would make this event notable enough for a stand-alone article. This article from CHITA.ru was the only piece of non-tertiary coverage that I could find, but as stated before, it doesn't provide significant nor in-depth coverage of the event. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Russia. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a commercial flight with a number of fatalities it surely meets notability criteria. I don't really see what the problem with the sources is either.TheLongTone (talk) 15:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just because it was a fatal commercial flight doesn't mean it's automatically notable. This sort of argument is not enshrined in any notability guideline. As stated above, WP:GNG requires that sources be secondary. Databases (including those cited in the article) are considered tertiary sources and therefore do not contribute to notability. It's been discussed a few times at AfD, WP:RS/N and WT:AV and the general consensus was that Airdisaster.ru isn't reliable. Same goes for Russianplanes.net, which was also discussed at WP:RS/N Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there are times where strict interpretations of WP:GNG don't make sense, and this is clearly one of them. This was a major aviation accident in the Soviet Union, and while I'm not easily able to find modern sources, and it may even be hard to find sources at the time, this is a detailed referenced article and is clearly an article that you would want to have in a set of articles about aviation disasters in 1957. Even though that's a little bit of an WP:IAR vote, I feel strongly enough to say that deleting this would clearly make Wikipedia worse. SportingFlyer T·C 18:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Twenty-seven fatalities in an airliner crash isn't notable??? Clarityfiend (talk) 19:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jabuke i vino

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

Non-notable album. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 14:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Zana (band)#discography; the song itself does not seem to be notable.TheLongTone (talk) 15:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Serbia. Shellwood (talk) 15:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dodirni mi kolena

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

Non-notable album. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 14:57, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Serbia. Shellwood (talk) 15:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, all the covers have to indicate at least some level of long-term significance, at least for the eponymous song. Did you check those sources that appear in a Google Books search for Zana "Dodirni mi kolena"? --Joy (talk) 09:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Joy: Per WP:THREE which is best practice, can you post them up there so I can have a look at them. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 10:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't actually care that much to argue either way, I'm just asking if that was part of your WP:BEFORE routine. --Joy (talk) 10:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Duke University faux sex thesis controversy

AfDs for this article:

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

I am nominating this article because I do not believe it meets notability guidelines.

Note that this article was previously deleted and then undeleted.

WP:EVENT - this content has no enduring historical significance. This does not have widespread national or international impact. This is arguably routine in the sense of shock news/water cooler stories/viral phenomena.
There are no lasting effects
The geographical scope is limited to Duke
The duration of coverage is limited to 2010 with one more article a few months later
There is one NYTimes article surveying the person in question but the focus is on the aftermath rather than the event in question or even the controversy in question
WP:NOTNEWS -
Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion and Wikipedia is not written in news style."
In the original AFD, the author wrote

This is not an article about the faux thesis, it's an article about the controversy that the faux thesis generated.

However, after 10 years, I think it is fair to say that one of the responses to that is quite accurate

But most of the coverage was not commentary on the controversy (and "media discussion over routine privacy breaches" is also very routine and needs a fairly high standard to pass WP:NOT#NEWS. For example, is there evidence that any reliable sources have assessed this controversy within the field of "controversies over privacy" and concluding this is a significant one?). As a controversy, is this seen or will this be seen as a controversy of "enduring notability" (WP:NOT) that changed, shaped or defined the debate on privacy compared to a thousand other private communications that someone's friend posted to the world and went viral?

There are also WP:BLP considerations but I am more reluctant to specifically cite policy because this is not a biographical article. I invite others to do so if they are more confident on the matter. Transcendence (talk) 05:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sexuality and gender, Education, Internet, and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:12, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom, there's no indication there is lasting interest in this event, even at Duke. Campus controversies like this seem somewhat common at this point. I don't think it's even worth a mention at History of Duke University#Recent history: 1993–present, and it also seems undue weight to list at even Template:Duke University. Reywas92^Talk 18:00, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, this has already been brought to AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the matter is properly cited to multiple reliable sources, including indeed The New York Times, which has covered the matter more than once actually: the one in the article is from 2018, eight years after the 'thesis' went viral, so the concern about a brief news event is incorrect. The matter has been covered by numerous other newspapers and news sites so its notability is not in doubt. ~~I'll add~~I have added a few more sources and descriptions of reactions by The Daily Telegraph and The New York Times (including in later years) for good measure, but the article is already correctly sourced and summarizes the story clearly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Multiple reliable sources confirms this event's lasting notability. Add doi:10.1177/1045159514558412 and this to the list of sources. Esculenta (talk) 13:54, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added both of those, and came across yet more useful sources when I did so. One other point: the 2010 AfD only had sources from that year, so it was actually too early to tell if the matter had a wider effect. We now have five substantial sources from later years, in multiple disciplines, so we know that it did. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Multiple reliable sources (and artistic responses) confirm notability. However, I agree with "deletes" it probably does not belong prominently in Duke University templates any longer: the coverage and artistic response does not seem to emphasize this as a notable event for Duke specifically but rather for the Internet and contemporary sexual patterns in general, as an epitome. It may make more sense to attach this page to general Internet events or sexuality templates rather than to the Duke template. RowanElder (talk) 21:28, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Agree with user above who pointed out the event got reliable news coverage eight years after it happened, making it notable. XwycP3 (talk) 18:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have thought this was a SNOW KEEP by now, as we have a) transformed the article with many new sources b) demonstrated multi-year notability and c) different editors have advanced sound reasons for keeping the article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I disagree with the nom's WP:EVENT assertion - reliable sources were citing this faux thesis years after its publication. Also, as Chiswick Chap has noted, its notability is not in doubt.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per Reywas92's reasoning. desmay (talk) 20:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alice Garlisi

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

Non-notable figure skater. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Italy. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tetr.io

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

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NGAME, with no independent reviews or coverage besides listacles found on this article or in my WP:BEFORE searches. Previous blank and redirects were reverted. -1ctinus📝🗨 14:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of Tetris variants. Besides what's in the article, I also found [53] and [54], but it's just a lot of listicles where nobody has written anything substantial or over two paragraphs about the game. ~ A412 ^talk! 16:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Tetris variants#Unofficial games (or an anchor, given the list's length) as it was before, where the game's already mentioned. Definitely does not meet WP:NGAME per nom. (As a disclaimer, I created Tetr.io as that redirect before it became an article.) Nyakase (talk • she/her) 16:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Tetris variants. No real SIGCOV here, just listicles. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khalid Al-Hammadi

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

doesn't seem to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT with no secondary sources -1ctinus📝🗨 14:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Qatar. Shellwood (talk) 15:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bepi Pezzulli

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

An unimportant person promoting himself. Does not meet any notability criteria. Jan Arvid Götesson (talk) 13:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Largely appears PROMO, with most links that are RS about an Italian campaign that the subject seems to be involved with. Nothing showing this is a notable individual either. Oaktree b (talk) 16:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be more specific, Deltete because of vanity and no notability. The whole article is trying to inflate unremarkable things in Bepi Pezzulli’s biography, e.g. he has apparently written two books that no‑one has reviewed, and the article tells us who has prefaced these books, and the jobs of these preface authors are written out in an attempt to make them (and Bepi Pezzulli) look important. Jan Arvid Götesson (talk) 22:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Journalism, Conservatism, Law, Italy, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Haldyn Glass

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Gujarat and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as too promotional for wiki --Moarnighar (talk) 15:06, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tunbow

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

Appears to be wholly promotional Amigao (talk) 06:10, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, and Hong Kong. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 06:12, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only routine business listings found. Fails WP:NCORP. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 11:46, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The company's Chinese name is Tunbow Group (traditional Chinese: 東保集團; simplified Chinese: 东保集团) and the founder is Charles Chan (traditional Chinese: 陳鑑光; simplified Chinese: 陈鉴光). Cunard (talk) 11:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Chong, Cheng-man 莊程敏; Yan, Kiu-ling 殷考玲 (2021-09-09). "老品牌拓疆土升級須創新" [Old Brands Expand Territories, Upgrading Requires Innovation]. Lion Rock Daily [zh] (in Chinese). p. P6. Archived from the original on 2024-12-29. Retrieved 2024-12-29.
  The article notes: "有「熨斗大王」之稱的東保集團創辦人兼主席陳鑑光博士，憑藉2001年推出自家研發塑料製成的電子控溫熨斗，短短一年售出逾70萬件，從此奠定集團在歐洲市場的地位，但他並未因此滿足。去年在港設立研究開發部門，為進軍大灣區9市市場作準備，目標以開拓9+2城市的家庭為主。東保集團成立逾25年，產品走中高端路線，研究開發（R&D）部門一直在內地，但由去年起在香港同樣設立R&D部門並設逾20位開發人員"
  From Google Translate: "Dr. Chen Jianguang, the founder and chairman of Tunbow Group, known as the "Iron King", launched his own electronic temperature-controlled irons made of plastic in 2001. More than 700,000 units were sold in just one year, establishing the group's position in the European market. status, but he was not satisfied with it. Last year, a research and development department was established in Hong Kong to prepare for entering the 9 cities in the Greater Bay Area. The goal is to develop families in the 9+2 cities. Tunbow Group has been established for more than 25 years, and its products are mid-to-high-end. The research and development (R&D) department has always been in the mainland. But since last year, it has also set up an R&D department in Hong Kong with more than 20 developers."
2. "鼓勵溝通合作助企業擺脫單打獨鬥香港模具及產品科技協會見證「百業之母」改朝換代" [Encouraging Communication and Cooperation to Help Businesses Break Free from Solo Struggles: Hong Kong Mould and Product Technology Association Witnesses the Transformation of the 'Mother of All Industries']. Headline Daily (in Chinese). 2016-01-28. p. P40.
  The article notes: "憑首創開放蒸發器熨斗，成功晉身世界五大熨斗代工生產商，贏得“熨斗大王”稱譽的東保集團創辦人兼主席陳鑑光博士（Dr. Charles Chan，見圖），全靠他面對挑戰時視危為機的信念。陳鑑光博士與他的太太在90年代初期決定闖一闖，合組貿易公司，成立東保。在創業初期，東保只是以設計及貿易性質運作。"
  From Google Translate: "With the first open evaporator iron, Dr. Charles Chan (pictured), founder and chairman of Tunbow Group, successfully joined the world's top five iron OEM manufacturers and won the title of "Iron King", all because of his ability to face challenges The belief that every crisis is an opportunity. Dr. Chen Kam-kwong and his wife decided to venture into the business in the early 1990s, forming a trading company and establishing Tunbow. In the early days of business, Tunbow only operated in the nature of design and trading."
3. Sit, Wai-kit 薛偉傑 (2010-08-06). "小家電商 8招抗逆境" [8 Strategies for Small Home Appliance Businesses to Overcome Adversity]. Ming Pao (in Chinese). p. B11.
  The article notes: "東保集團成立於1995 年，主力生產小型家電，特別是電熨斗。其客戶包括多個知名品牌如伊萊克斯、飛利浦、白朗、Kenwood、勝家等。"
  From Google Translate: "Tunbow Group was established in 1995 and focuses on the production of small household appliances, especially electric irons. Its customers include many well-known brands such as Electrolux, Philips, Blanc, Kenwood, Singer, etc."
  The article notes: "另外，東保集團與一般廠商不同的，是它很強調一條龍式垂直生產。該公司自設電路板生產部、五金部、壓鑄部、塑膠部、噴油部等。總之，就是自行生產其小家電所需的電路板、金屬機殼、塑膠機殼，以及自行為機殼噴油。"
  From Google Translate: "In addition, Tunbow Group is different from ordinary manufacturers in that it emphasises one-stop vertical production. The company has its own circuit board production department, hardware department, die-casting department, plastic department, fuel injection department, etc. In short, it means producing the circuit boards, metal casings, and plastic casings needed for its small household appliances by itself, and spraying oil on the casings by itself."
4. Leung Man-fung 梁文峰 (2010-07-12). "東保拓內銷或5年內上市" [Tunbow Expands Domestic Sales, May Go Public within 5 Years]. Sing Pao Daily News (in Chinese). p. B1.
  The article notes: "家電設計、生產商東保集團為開拓內銷市場，正於惠州投資5億元擴展生產基地，預計總產能將提升5 倍。現時深圳兩廠房共有約20條生產線，年產800萬台小家電。"
  From Google Translate: "Tunbow Group, a home appliance designer and manufacturer, is investing 500 million yuan to expand its production base in Huizhou in order to develop the domestic market. It is expected that the total production capacity will increase five times. Currently, the two factories in Shenzhen have a total of about 20 production lines, with an annual output of 8 million units of small household appliances."
5. "圖：深圳港資企業「綠色風」盛" [Tunbow Expands Domestic Sales, May Go Public Within 5 Years] (in Chinese). China News Service. 2010-07-07.
  The article notes: "7月7日，一群香港媒體記者專程來到深圳寶安，釆訪推行「綠色生產」、「綠色小家電」揚名業界的香港東保集團深圳生產基地。該集團為減少生產污染投資3,000多萬港圓對硬體和軟體進行改善工程，企業環保創新產品不斷出現。目前集團20條生產線，年產800萬台各式家用電器，暢銷美國、加拿大及歐盟、東南亞26個國家。"
  From Google Translate: "On 7 July a group of Hong Kong media reporters made a special trip to Bao'an, Shenzhen to visit the Shenzhen production base of Hong Kong Tunbow Group, which is famous in the industry for promoting "green production" and "green small home appliances". The group has invested more than HKD 30 million in hardware and software improvement projects to reduce production pollution, and innovative environmentally friendly products have continued to emerge. At present, the group has 20 production lines, with an annual output of 8 million units of various household appliances, which are sold well in the United States, Canada, the European Union, and 26 countries in Southeast Asia."
6. "東保集團董事總經理鄧美華東保集團積極開拓高技術高加值特色化的家電產品" [Tunbow Group Managing Director, Ms. Tan Meihua: Tunbow Group Actively Expanding High-Tech, High-Value, and Specialised Home Appliance Products]. Hong Kong Commercial Daily (in Chinese). 2018-12-19. p. AA10.
  The article notes: "身為本港知名企業，東保集團積極開拓高技術、高增值、特色化的家電產品，推出電子熨斗、強力蒸氣專業熨斗、電子蒸籠、濃湯機及全自動咖啡機。公司成立於1994年，與香港一同經歷風雨，亦一同成長。作為營商者為公司賺取利潤固然重要，但東保集團更有一份香港精神，與客戶共渡時艱，這更為可貴。"
  From Google Translate: "As a well-known enterprise in Hong Kong, Tunbow Group actively develops high-tech, high value-added and specialised home appliance products, launching electronic irons, powerful steam professional irons, electronic steamers, soup makers and fully automatic coffee machines. The company was established in 1994 and has experienced ups and downs together with Hong Kong and has grown together. As a businessman, it is important to make profits for the company, but Tunbow Group has more of a Hong Kong spirit and shares difficulties with its customers, which is even more valuable."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Tunbow Group (traditional Chinese: 東保集團; simplified Chinese: 东保集团) to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 09:36, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: An additional review of new sources would be useful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Villagers Film Studio

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Haryana and Punjab. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:08, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - it shows the studio's importance with reliable sources and achievements --Kej Keir (talk) 08:26, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Osvaldo Gutierrez

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

Page on an academic created as part of Wiki Education project, unfortunately with WP:NPROF being ignored. High citation area, so h-factor of 38 is fair but not yet passing #C1. He was recently promoted to full professor, no major awards and only WP:MILL mentions in minor science press -- WP:TOOSOON. (Unis have become quite good at promo for junior faculty.) Perhaps in a year or three it can be revived. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I must have a lower threshold for #C1 notability than the nominator, because I think the case for notability through many triple-digit citation counts is enough. It's interesting that he made it from dreamer to full professor; interestingness isn't a notability criterion but the KCRA video profile and ACS "talented 12" coverage look independent and in-depth (a third source, the NIH career conversation, is not independent because it's just an interview) giving him also a weak case for WP:GNG notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mexico, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gennady Degtyarev

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

Page on an academic created directly in main after being declined once at AfC. Beyond an unsourced statement about creating new naval equipment, the only suggestion of notability is academic participation in D-SELF theory, a very low citation neologism created in 1989. Citations and awards don't pass WP:NPROF and there is nothing for general notability here or via a search. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We have no evidence of WP:PROF notability, except maybe through #C2 and the "Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation". We have no sourcing for this (nor for most of the article content) so I cannot tell whether this award was handed out indiscriminately to many people or as a high honor to a very limited number of people. Without that information I do not feel confident using it as the only basis for notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Milenka Peña

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

The journalist is not notable, with 90% of the information added lacking any sources. Cinder painter (talk) 12:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, and Illinois. Shellwood (talk) 12:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Television, and Bolivia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Neeson

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

Fails to meet ANYBIO, not significant coverage. Blogs or slideshare-like sources only. Cinder painter (talk) 10:52, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Zero coverage found for this individual. Not sure what the "Demand Waterfall" is supposed to be, this does appear to be PROMO for the individual. Oaktree b (talk) 16:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There's a lot of coverage but most of these sources don't look reliable. There is a WSJ article with a minor mention but the rest of the sources seem very weak. Moopaz (talk) 00:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Malcolm McDonald (academic)

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

Extensive promotional content, marketing professor not notable according to Wikipedia:Notability (academics) Cinder painter (talk) 10:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 16:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. "Marketing professor is first to pull marketing stunt" is not really a case for notability. The more likely path would seem to be WP:AUTHOR through reviews of his books. I found 1 1/3 reviews [55] [56] but I don't think it's quite enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: a badly constructed page which is surprising in some ways for a marketing BLP. I did find a claim that his book was a bestseller plus some other stuff here and here, but it is not quite enough to be convincing. Since this page has been around as a weak stub for many years I think deletion is appropriate. If a new editor wants to write a better version they should submit that to AfC. Ldm1954 (talk) 23:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Eisend

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

Many publications and extensive promotional content, but likely not notable Wikipedia:Notability (academics) Cinder painter (talk) 10:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drama Queen (manga)

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

Fails WP:GNG, I've search "Drama Queen" on Google News which yield only non-RS sources such as WP:CBR even the ANN encyclopedia has no news on the manga. I search both Natalie, Oricon and Real Sound and even the Japanese title on Google News yield only non-RS and primary sources. (I search both "ドラマクイーン” and "ドラマクイン”) and even the romaji Dorama Kuin and still nothing. The article is also includes unreliable source involving ScreenRant and ComicBook.com (per WP:A&M/RS this should not be used in Controverial topic which is used in the article). Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 10:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 10:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of series run in Shōnen Jump+#2024 per nom; I looked for sources myself but couldn't find anything worth noting. While there are manga notable due to xenophobia like Manga Kenkanryu, this one doesn't seem to be notable quite yet. That being said, it also has yet to release a volume, so this may be a case of WP:TOOSOON too. Link20XX (talk) 15:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Commane

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

The term "chiefdom of Commane" is not used anywhere it seems[57][58], none of the "notable figures" bear the name Commane. Basically, "Commane" is one of many names originating with the "Ó Comáin" root, but isn't a notable one and not the name of a "chiefdom" apparently either. Simply moving the page to a different title wouldn't solve these WP:OR or WP:V issues, e.g. the first source in the lead, "Sometimes incorrectly 'translated' to Hurley camán a hurly."[59] doesn't seem supported by that source either. Fram (talk) 09:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, History, Royalty and nobility, and Ireland. Fram (talk) 09:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Looks utterly unreliable as it is not backed up by the given sources. The Banner talk 10:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're not looking at the correct sources, writing a reply to this now Kellycrak88 (talk) 10:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback on the article. I would like to address the points raised:

Irish chiefdoms persisted over a long period in Thomond (Co. Clare) during the Middle Ages, partly due to the failure of the Vikings and Anglo-Normans to establish strongholds in the region. As we are discussing the early medieval period, when written records were sparse, scholars have to reconstruct the history through analysis of historical texts, place-names, archaeological excavations and comparative data. The sites of Tulach Commáin and Cahercommaun are physical archaeological locations, which further underline the chiefdom's significance.

The chiefdom of Tulach Commáin, centered on its capital at Cahercommaun, encompassed a territory of considerable importance, possibly spanning three residential sites and the Arran islands. Cahercommaun features a trivallate stone fort, serving as its political and ceremonial centre, a burial and inauguration site for chieftains at Tulach Commáin ('Mound of Commane'), and several associated monastic and ecclesiastical sites, underscoring its religious and administrative prominence in early medieval Ireland.

The primary sources for the Chiefdom of Commane include:

- Gibson, David Blair Ph.D. (1990). Tulach Commain: A view of an Irish chiefdom (500 pages on the subject), which has been referenced in several scholarly works, including Celtic Chiefdom, Celtic State, The Evolution of Complex Social Systems in Prehistoric Europe (1995)

- The Rulers of Tulach Commáin (Chapter Seven), From Chiefdom to State in Early Ireland, Cambridge University Press (2012)

----

1. On the Spelling "Commane":

Notes on Irish Names and Spelling: The reader who is unacquainted with Irish culture, history, and language may experience confusion with Irish names due to their many variations in spelling and different names for the same thing, partly due to linguistic development of the Irish language, so the spelling of words and the names themselves vary greatly between texts, especially in the Middle Ages. The article already acknowledges this challenge, stating:

"The various spellings of Commane and its variants can largely be attributed to the lack of Standard Irish until 1948 and the historical practice of English-speaking officials transcribing Irish names phonetically, often based on how the names were pronounced."

Furthermore, the capital city of the chiefdom Cahercommaun is sometimes locally referred to as Caher Commane, (see: https://www.clarelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/places/the_burren/cahercommane.htm) demonstrating that "Commane" is a primary anglicised variant by the people in the area of the original chiefdom. The Wikipedia article also cites Gibson's book, noting that it refers to "variant spellings throughout: Comáin, Commáin, Comain, etc (different spellings and names are common in Ireland)." This reflects the historically variable nature of Irish names and the necessity of choosing one variant for clarity in an English-language encyclopedia, consistent with Wikipedia's naming conventions for Irish surnames (e.g., O'Brien vs. Ó Briain).

----

2. Historical Terminology:

While the spelling "chiefdom of Commane" does not explicitly appear in primary sources, it reflects the territorial and political structures documented in historical studies Tulach Commáin and Cahercommaun (same names, different spellings). Scholars such as D. Blair Gibson and James Frost describe Cahercommaun as a political and ceremonial centre in County Clare, serving as the chiefdom and seat of the sept in the 8th–9th centuries. "Commane" serves as the English variant for Commáin, and the usage of the name aligns with the historical anglicisation of Irish surnames.

If necessary, I am open to renaming "chiefdom of Commane" to "chiefdom of Tulach Commáin" to reflect the documented place-name and avoid ambiguity, even though this spelling was proposed by Gibson and he confesses to different spelling variants.

----

3. Notable Figures:

It should also be noted that the person's original name and chief in the original gaelic would have been Comáin or Commáin (anglicised to Commane) as quoted in the article "as hereditary surnames in Ireland only began emerging between the 9th and 11th centuries" so the the sons would have been Mac or Ó "meaning" son of or "descendent".

The lineage does includes notable individuals such as:

Saint Commán of Roscommon, Saint and founder of Rosscommon a key figure in Irish ecclesiastical history.

Célechair mac Commáin, recorded in the Annals of Ulster and

Annals of Innisfallen, who was of the Eóganacht Uí Cormaic and died in the Battle of Corcmodruadh (704–705 A.D.).

Coman of Kinvara, Saint

Colmán mac Comán the second abbot listed in the Irish annals

Variants such as "Ó Comáin," "Commáin," and "Comáin" are consistently tied to the same lineage, which historical sources document as playing a significant role in Munster's early medieval socio-political landscape.

In 1052 AD there is a mention of spelling Comman in the Irish annals Part 15 of the Annals of the Four Masters.

In the sourced Early Bearers and Historical Records section it clears shows from the off shoots from Ó Comáin:

Laerunce Commane, 1796 in Flaxgrowers List (Ross, Cork);

Maurice O Koman, yeoman, and son Rory O Coman, 1573 in Fiants Elizabeth §2251 (Kanturk, Cork); Note spellings

These variations are consistent with historical naming practices, as highlighted in genealogical studies and sources like the Dubhaltach Mac Fhirbhisigh's 17th-century genealogical compilation, Leabhar Mór na nGenealach (The Great Book of Irish Genealogies), a key source for tracing Irish lineages.

----

4. Sometimes incorrectly 'translated' to Hurley camán a hurly

Yes, my mistake, I added the wrong source reference to the article for this, which I've now updated.

The words Camán and Comán are linguistically different, none of the Commane variants start with Cam, therefore some sources are incorrectly claim the name is linked to Hurley.

Here is a source to the contrary stating it's a mistranslation.

----

4. Verifiability and Sources:

The article incorporates referenced material from primary and secondary sources, including works by historians like Frost, Gibson, and O'Hart, alongside primary annals. The references also highlight the historical prominence of the Chiefdom of Commane (Tulach Commáin and Cahercommaun).

If further clarity is needed, do let me know. In the meantime I will refine the language or include additional references to bolster the article’s verifiability.

I hope this response clarifies the rationale behind the article's naming and content. Please let me know if there are further adjustments you'd like to see.

----

At the footer of the page other sources are noted:

"Annals of Innisfallen." CELT Project. University College Cork. | "Annals of Ulster." CELT Project. University College Cork. | "The History and Topography of the County of Clare." Frost, James. Internet Archive. | "Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae." O'Brien, M. A. Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies. | "Irish Kings and High-Kings." Byrne, F. J. Four Courts Press. | "Irish Pedigrees: Or, The Origin and Stem of the Irish Nation." O'Hart, John. M.H. Gill & Son. | "Leabhar Mór na nGenealach." Mac Fhirbhisigh, Dubhaltach. Edited by Nollaig Ó Muraíle. De Búrca Rare Books. | "Cahercommaun Triple Ring Fort." Academia.edu. Academia.edu. | "CELT: The Corpus of Electronic Texts." CELT Project. University College Cork. | "Cahercommaun Triple Ring Fort." Academia.edu. Academia.edu | "Discover Cahercommaun with Archaeologist, Michael Lynch." Burrenbeo. Burrenbeo | "Early Medieval Ireland, AD 400-1100: The Evidence from Archaeological Excavations." Academia.edu. Academia.edu | "Picture Perfect: Using Drone Technology and Photogrammetry Techniques to Map the Western Stone Forts of Ireland." Academia.edu. Academia.edu Kellycrak88 (talk) 13:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of words to say very little, it seems. No idea why this is at Commane and not at e.g. "Ó Comáin", unless it is because you have some COI with the Commane family you added to Newhall House and Estate or something similar. Nothing you state above contradicts that there is no reliable source about the "Chiefdom of Commane", or that none of the notable persons you listed are called "Commane" (you listed some rather random persons with the name, no one disputes that the name exists). Fram (talk) 13:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fram, I’m honestly just trying my best to address each of your points thoughtfully. To clarify, my "COI" is that I live in Clare and my surname is Hurley, which often gets incorrectly linked to Commane, a widely recognised surname here. The reference to "Commane" was chosen because it’s the most anglicised form of "Ó Comáin," aligning with the context of an English-language encyclopedia. For example, Wikipedia uses "O'Brien" instead of "Ó Briain," consistent with its naming conventions for Irish surnames. While "Ó Comáin" would be more appropriate for the Irish-language version of Wikipedia, it doesn’t mean the history of the name or its variants is unnotable simply because "Ó Comáin" lacks extensive individual articles. I’d really appreciate it if you could take another look at Section 1 of my response, where I’ve outlined the historical and archaeological basis for the "Chiefdom of Commane" and its connection to Clare. That said, I’m open to collaboration and willing to move the article to "Ó Comáin" if there’s a consensus that it’s more appropriate. My main goal here is to preserve the effort I’ve put into the article, as the the sources are valid, and I’d prefer not to see it deleted. If there are specific concerns you feel remain unresolved, I’m happy to discuss them further and make adjustments. I’m just trying to contribute something meaningful here. Kellycrak88 (talk) 15:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you insist on using "Chiefdom of Commane" when not a single reliable source uses this, I have no interest in even looking at what else you state. Your article seems like a coatrack of everything loosely related to the name, from a long section on a clan or chiefdom to a list of non-notable people named Commane or Comman and a list of notable people not named Commane, and so on. "The reference to "Commane" was chosen because it’s the most anglicised form of "Ó Comáin," aligning with the context of an English-language encyclopedia." Not according to "The Oxford Dictionary of Family Names of Ireland", which doesn't even give Commane a separate entry (or even a "see at" reference), but mentions it once under the entry for Cummins[60], which you are well aware off, since you copied the whole section "Early bearers and historical records" literally from that source. Do I really need to restart the proposal at WP:ANI, considering that the previous problems all seem to persist? @Asilvering: has there been any attempt to get the mentoring or feedback which was supposed to happen after that previous discussion? Fram (talk) 15:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

a broad range of sources are on the page, like this:[61] Kellycrak88 (talk) 16:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That source doesn't state that Commane is the standard anglicization either, it seems... Fram (talk) 16:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No communication since, no. -- asilvering (talk) 16:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fram, as far as I’m aware, it is not a copyright violation to include a list of names from a source, they help prove root of name. Reporting me (again) unjustly to administrators (whose prior review did not result in any action against me) without fully engaging with my responses is not constructive and only creates unnecessary tension. I have taken the time to address all of your concerns and provide balanced explanations, supported by credible sources. However, your unwillingness to read my response and now your presentation of a false narrative is both unfair and unproductive. I remain committed to improving this article collaboratively. However, given your history of targeting me, I believe it would be more constructive for a third party or another editor to engage with me on this matter instead of yourself. Kellycrak88 (talk) 16:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fram I’d also like to kindly ask you to carefully re-read Section 2 of my response, where I state that I am open to renaming "chiefdom of Commane" to "chiefdom of Tulach Commáin." Thank you for your consideration. Kellycrak88 (talk) 15:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fram as you've stated you're not reading my responses, Tulach Commáin means in english "The Mound of Commane". I am happy to renaming it to the Gaelic. Kellycrak88 (talk) 16:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn't. You are the only one ever to use "The Mound of Commane", in two Wikipedia articles. Reliable sources almost invariably use the Irish name (which is a recent invention anyway), not some translation, and one source uses "The Burial Mound of Commán". Fram (talk) 16:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome to buy the 500 page book (available in PDF) and review the source material for yourself:[62] Kellycrak88 (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This [63] is the much more recent book by that scholar, not his PhD thesis, and that book uses "The Burial Mound of Commán" (once) or the Irish name, not "Commane". The term Commane does not appear in that book. Fram (talk) 16:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the quote you just linked to it says Tulach Comma (The [burial] Mound of Comman) notice "burial" is in brackets meaning optional and it's referred to else where without burial. The whole point of my wikipedia article is variations of the name. The same author uses Comáin, Commáin, Comain, interchangeable variants throughout the book and gives an explanation for why which I tried to do on the wikipedia page, it's the same name, I appreciate that's a strange concept from an English perspective.

I have both this book and the PhD thesis which is way more thorough and academic but yes similar.

In the PhD version he calls Tulach Commáin - the latest book version it's Tulach Comman -- same author and name Kellycrak88 (talk) 17:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The reference to "Commane" was chosen because it’s the most anglicised form of "Ó Comáin" - really? I'm living in Ireland all of my life, and I have never once heard the name, until today. "Cummins" is the usual translation to English of all of the various forms of the surname listed in the article. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it's predominantly in Muster / Clare (in the area of the original chiefdom) Kellycrak88 (talk) 17:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Asia Pacific Center for Theoretical Physics

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

This international non-governmental research institute for physical sciences fails to meet NCORP and is full of Original research. BoraVoro (talk) 09:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Science, Asia, and South Korea. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2000 Swiss Figure Skating Championships

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

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Non-notable figure skating competition. Recommend deletion or redirect to Swiss Figure Skating Championships. Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sports, Skating, and Switzerland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here is my problem with these stand-alone articles. All four disciplines are often not contested. There are often not enough competitors to award a bronze medal, and in some cases, even a silver medal. Many of these competitions featured no more than two or three participants. And most of the competitors who are listed are redlinked or unlinked (ie. themselves not notable). The competition results and scores are included (or should be included) on a skaters' individual article. The medal results are included on the parent article (in this case, Swiss Figure Skating Championships). But these nations with small national championships are just not worth trying to maintain individual articles for each competition. Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nomination. No sources or in-depth coverage for over a decade since creation. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect all per nom. No sigcov. Reasonable search term. Frank Anchor 15:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect All - Wikipedia is not a sports results database. No SIGCOV, also not notable per WP:NSPORTSEVENT --John B123 (talk) 20:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rajkumar Periasamy

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

Promotional and not important (notable) Indian film director. Nq Wisit (talk) 09:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Poor nomination rationale. To start with, if you could mention which sentence is promotional in this article, it would probably take a minute or two to fix it in an article of this size. There is literally nothing promotional in the article, though. WP:DIRECTOR#3 is met here, as Rajkumar Periasamy has created significant or well-known work, or a collective body of work, i.e., Rangoon (2017 Tamil film) and Amaran (2024 film), both of which are the primary subjects of multiple independent reviews. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table
Source	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/tamil/rajkumar-periasamy-kamal-haasan-sir-was-the-one-who-thought-sivakarthikeyan-would-be-perfect-for-amaran-9175103/	Indian Express is consider RS	Though, Paywalled, by the first bits, it is already passes	✔ Yes
https://www.thehindu.com/entertainment/movies/rajkumar-periasamy-on-sivakarthikeyans-transformation-for-amaran/article68810204.ece	The Hindu is reliable	Article is about him	✔ Yes
https://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/tamil/dhanush-to-collaborate-with-amaran-director-rajkumar-periasamy-in-d55-9659912/	Indian Express is consider RS	Paywalled but base on the title and the first paragraph I can tell this article has already SigCov	✔ Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Keep base on the assessment above and Deletion is not clean up Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 11:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes NDIRECTOR through Rangoon and Amaran. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 12:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mrinmoy Bhowmick

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

Promotional and not important (notable) Indian film director. Nq Wisit (talk) 09:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Karnataka. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I've checked its sources, and although I tried to fix one dead link, most of them are still dead. Additionally, his name is hardly searchable on Google. Aona1212 (talk) 12:33, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Boo Chanco

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

Not notable journalist, no achievements or reliable sources to meet ANYBIO BoraVoro (talk) 08:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On the notability issue, I did mention at least two achievements of the journalist -- winning his alma mater UP's award meant for good journalists like him, and getting another from Rotary Club of Manila for his worthy, hard-hitting opinions. I also mentioned reliable sources thereof. Please reconsider and/or help improve the article. Some Wikipedia articles, in fact, mentioned his name and his thoughts on issues in the Philippines. Dcalviar2 (talk) 09:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and Philippines. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I tagged this page per CSD G12 per the copy vio here. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It seems the article was deleted due to WP:COPYVIO so I guess this AfD discussion is moot? In case anyone wants to start the article, feel free to create it in draftspace and make sure to assert the subject's notability. —seav (talk) 23:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Black Opium (perfume)

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

The perfume looks like non-notable and I did not locate any outstanding or independent reliable sources. BoraVoro (talk) 08:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

as an alternative it could be redirected here Opium (perfume) BoraVoro (talk) 08:52, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't know a lot about perfume or about the reliability of fashion sources so am happy to be corrected by those who know more about this area, but I think there's enough coverage to demonstrate notability. Excluding the dozens and dozens of "top 10 perfume" lists and "this is the perfect Black Opium dupe" junk articles, there seem to be a good number of reviews and product announcements in reliable sources. Some of these are a little shallow, but these are some examples of what I could find:

And that's not to mention the many, many articles about the advertising controversies, which aren't enough to show notability on their own but probably do contribute a little to notability. There were also quite a few scholarly sources in fields like marketing and fashion history that provide mentions of Black Opium. MCE89 (talk) 03:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matthias Bleyer

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

Non-notable figure skater; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Germany. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete A couple of mentions but not SIGCOV. Wikipedia.de no help either.Canary757 (talk) 12:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I agree with @Canary757. Most sources found on Google are merely passing mentions, with nothing indicating significant coverage. The same goes with his partner Nicole Nönnig.Aona1212 (talk) 12:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Nönnig

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

Non-notable figure skater; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Germany. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Found several mentions, but none with significant coverage. Aona1212 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No SIGCOV found on search, failing GNG.Canary757 (talk) 17:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Silvia Dimitrov

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

Non-notable figure skater. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Germany. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CarBone (company)

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

Highly doubt it's ready for Wikipedia and has enough RS. Company's cars Criollo and Tardza have been removed via AfD last year. Taking off shortly (talk) 08:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Transportation, and Poland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RBC Direct Investing

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

Not meeting NCORP, no reliable media coverage. Taking off shortly (talk) 08:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Internet, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jens ter Laak

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

Non-notable figure skater. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Germany. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Osman Boyner

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

The person is not notable as it lacks sufficient independent media coverage, not connected to the subject and with the proper depth Taking off shortly (talk) 08:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Fashion, and Turkey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Zakaria al-Jamal

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

Does not meet WP:GNG. Even the killing of al-Jamal doesn't meet GNG (if it did, this article would still fail under WP:BLP1E). VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 08:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Palestine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BLP1E. He is (maybe) notable only for his death which is against WP:BLP1E and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 11:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Genki Ishisaka

AfDs for this article:

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

Previously deleted at AFD. Doesn't meet WP:SPORTCRIT or WP:GNG this time either. Japanese Wikipedia only contains primary sources, a squad list and a blog piece. Creator is globally locked. Geschichte (talk) 08:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 14:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and SALT - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John B. Lee

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

WP:BLP of a writer, not properly sourced as passing WP:AUTHOR. As always, writers are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show certain specific markers of achievement supported by WP:GNG-worthy third-party coverage about them in media and books -- but this article is completely unreferenced, and is not making any strong notability claims.
The main attempts at notability claims are that he's been municipal poet laureate of a small city, which isn't an automatic notability freebie without sourcing for it, and that he's been a recipient of various minor and/or unspecified literary awards that aren't highly prominent enough to confer instant inclusion freebies without sourcing for them. An award has to be notable in its own right before it can make its winners notable for winning it, so notability doesn't derive from the presence of the word "award" (or sticking the word "prestigious" in front of it) in the article text, it derives from the quality of the sourcing you can show to demonstrate that the award is a sufficiently notable and/or prestigious one in the first place.
Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to pass GNG on his sourcing. Bearcat (talk) 14:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 14:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. He has a substantial entry in Canadian Poetry Online, published by the University of Toronto Libraries, along with some of his poems. There are numerous reviews in the Canadian Book Review Annual, a Globe and Mail review, a review in the journal Essays on Canadian Writing, and he is in the book Five Canadian Poets: Analytical Essays on, James Deahl, John B. Lee, Don Gutteridge, Glen Sorestad, A. F. Moritz. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Easily meets WP:NAUTHOR per Clarityfiend. More sources: [64], [65], [66]. Jfire (talk) 01:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pir (Alevism)

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

Tagged many years ago as unsourced this does not seem notable enough to need a separate article. No objection to merging but I don’t know which other article would be most suitable. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lecoanet Hemant

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Century Textile and Industries

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 11:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Maharashtra. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 11:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Repro India

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RNB Research

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Media sources are either dead links or have no mentions at all. They should be reviewed carefully once again. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Delhi. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Niyogi Books

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Delhi. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nectar Lifesciences

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine, Haryana, and Punjab. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lakshmi Machine Works

AfDs for this article:

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:28, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Tamil Nadu. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:28, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suara Hidayatullah

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

This article does not indicate notability, relying exclusively on two self-published sources.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 07:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 07:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep the sources should be added. I found some that are behind a paywall and hope there is a way to include them, along with any others. --Taking off shortly (talk) 08:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Taking off shortly: Please show us what you find to help us determine if it counts for GNG Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 11:34, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Taking off shortly: Please feel free to add the sources you’ve found, even if they are behind a paywall, as long as they meet the criteria for WP:RS. Without these additions, the article may face deletion due to insufficient evidence of notability.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 16:57, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Risala Weekly

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

Created by a sockpuppet of a blocked user, the article does not establish notability and cites only a self-published source.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 07:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 07:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled Web Series About a Space Traveler Who Can Also Travel Through Time

AfDs for this article:

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

Has a lot of sources but nothing particurly in depth. Most nothing beyond basic release info, plot recap and casting info fails WP:NTV Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Television. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: as there is sufficient coverage in reliable sources, including one page in Playing Fans: Negotiating Fandom and Media in the Digital Age and one paragraph in The Last Pirate's History of Doctor Who... -Mushy Yank. 09:12, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is also a 13-page paper dedicated to the series https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15405702.2013.779505; see also https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15405702.2013.779505. Please kindly consider withdrawing this nomination as your concern seems addressed. @OlifanofmrTennant. Thank you very much. -Mushy Yank. 09:22, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Worth noting that the book Playing Fans reuses large portions of the paper, as confirmed by the book's acknowledgements (and a quick skimming of both sources – the paper can be viewed through Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library), so they're basically a single source. And the mention in The Last Pirate's History is a brief mention in a long list, so I wouldn't call that mention significant. Other sources in the article may contribute to notability as well, but these by themselves aren't enough. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would say they are. But if you want, feel free to add Broadcast in the U.S.: Foreign TV Series Brought to America, p. 232-233. And https://collider.com/community-inspector-spacetime/ And http://braindamaged.fr/20/11/2012/web-serie-zone-inspector-spacetime/ And https://geeksofdoom.com/2014/03/12/inspector-spacetimes-untitled-web-series-needs-help-make-inspector-chronicles-movie And so on. No further comments. Still inviting the nominator to withdraw. -Mushy Yank. 12:24, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why is Geeks of Doom reliable? And most of these are talking about the gag itself which is not up for deletion. The Collider source talks about it at the very end with nothing beyond "this cool thing happened and there was no season 2" Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 19:36, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you open the books? Read the papers? Check other existing sources? -Mushy Yank. 22:20, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"And most of these are talking about the gag itself which is not up for deletion."=No, most of the sources I mention talk about the web series which you took for deletion, and some are "particurly in depth." So your concern that "Most nothing beyond basic release info, plot recap and casting info fails WP:NTV" seems totally addressed (if a page can "fail" an essay, btw). https://www.vulture.com/2012/09/not-inspector-spacetime.html (limited) https://comicbook.com/comicbook/news/communitys-inspector-spacetime-launches-his-own-untitled-webseries/ (for the history of the production) and so on. https://filmschoolrejects.com/the-inspector-chronicles-is-the-doctor-who-spoof-movie-sorta-spun-off-from-community-e844667fd8e7/ It meets the general requirements for notability even if it's only with the dedicated article and 2 of the books. Feel free to add the sources you like best to the page. Thank you. -Mushy Yank. 22:36, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Erratum: in my first reply to myself I linked twice the same paper; the second paper I intended to link was: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461444814558907 -Mushy Yank. 12:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(noting for anyone who can't view the article through TWL) This is another article by the same author, Paul Booth. Per WP:GNG, a series of publications by the same author or in the same periodical is normally counted as one source. It's also a pretty brief mention, with only one paragraph about it in a much larger paper about a broader topic. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:13, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 23:42, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'd like to hear more opinions from editors well-versed in this field.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:08, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm relisting this discussion again before considering a No consensus closure.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HiveColab

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. Imcdc Contact 06:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Africa, and Uganda. Imcdc Contact 06:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Under Hive Colab there are multiple sources that support notability, see New Vision, Independent, AsiaTechDaily, Nile Post, Pctechmag, and BBC FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- There are multiple sources but after looking at them, I do not feel comfortable using these to establish notability. My initial comment is the article is about HiveColab while the focus on a lot of these articles is about YSAU (Youth Startup Academy Uganda) which is one of the accelerator programs under it. Per WP:NOTINHERITED while they are related, we cannot use the program alone to cover for the organization above it and HiveColab should be able to stand by itself. Also something irking me is how promotional the whole thing seems. I see mention of co-founder Barbara Birungi and judging by the state of her article, it feels like there is some PR campaign being held for her (and possibly her firm) on the internet. Anyway:
  - New Vision: There seems to be a related press release for this here. This is reporting on a ceremony for YSAU, a program under Hive Collab rather than Hive Collab itself. Half of it are just promotional quotes by related parties. If you look at the remaining content, most of it looks very similar to the press release. Edit: ITC states it is involved in implementing YSAU so it’s a related party. The press release from Hive Collab is here which has similar wording content.
  - Independent: First thing I noticed is this article is not authored to an individual. There's another site with the exact same content here so I’m wondering if this is just a form of a press release. The focus is on Ugandan startups signing deals at Gitex in Morocco. The focus is not on Hive Collab but the entrepreneurs under it. The latter half of the article can be ignored since not about Hive Collab. So taking out the quotes, its pretty much a non-notable entity named Dain Leaders Corporation signing an MOU with Hive Collab and the supposed benefits in a press release manner.
  - AsiaTechDaily: Non-notable entity GCCEI signs an MOU with Hive Collab. That's kinda it. While it is authored, it seems like a regurgitated press release of a routine deal given how short it is and the language used.
  - NilePost: This one does seem to be more than a press release (I think). But in my view looking at it, the main focus is on YSAU companies attending Gitex in Morocco with a chance to show themselves. There doesn’t seem to be much analysis on Hive Collab itself. Edit: Here is the original press release, the 15 YSAU startups are directly copied so the source is now much weaker.
  - PC Tech: There seems to be a related press release (or update as called) for this here. This article is not authored to an individual. Another ceremony of people from YSAU graduating. Large chunks of it are just kinda copied from the press release.
  - BBC: Very brief mention of Hive Collab and in fact seems to be more on Barbara Birungi herself.
- So looking at all of them, they fail WP:SIRS in my view. To save time just give the best three independent in-depth sources going forward. - Imcdc Contact 05:25, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  You should be clear when you say a press release to indicate how did you come to that conclusion.
  
  All of what you labelled as a “press release” is either not a press release by the organisation, see New Vision or is not one at all, see Nile Post. And I am not sure who did you dismiss the mention by the BBC. This organisation is not in Global West, it is in Uganda and still mentioned by the BBC. FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:55, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  FYI, I have updated the above analysis.
  
  See WP:PRSOURCE. A press release doesn’t need to directly come from Hive Colab. It can come from an affiliated party. We know ITC is affiliated because it itself says the YSAU is implemented by ITC, Hive Collab and several other parties. So no independence there. WP:PRSOURCE also mentions how less reputable news sources will write an article based on a press release which we are seeing here in examples of churnalism. Btw I have found some of the press releases by Hive Collab and updated above based on it. For example we can see now that Nile Post has indeed copied a chunk out of a press release.- Imcdc Contact 12:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mention in books:
- The Bright Continent published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
- Digital Divides published by Taylor & Francis.
- Innovate for agriculture published by CTA.
- Empowering African Women Entrepreneurs in the Fashion Industry published by Springer International.
- Citizen-Driven Innovation published by the World Bank.
- UNESCO Science Report published by UNESCO.
- Disruptive Technologies, Innovation and Development in Africa published by Springer International.
- Africa’s Development Dynamics 2021 published by the African Union.
FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:20, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if its because Google Books is cutting off my access to see the whole thing, but almost everything seems to be a very short mention. A lof seem to be just something like this: ilab (Liberia), Hive Collab (Uganda), Etrilabs (Benin)... and thats it. The only one that offers more is the UNESCO one. But its just one short section giving very general (and sort of generic) description of Hive Collab. I don't think this is enough to meet WP:SIGCOV for an WP:NCORP subject. Imcdc Contact 11:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes all of them are mentions and not a dedicated chapter or even a whole page in the book. I will add the full excerpt later as most of them are not as you described.

Still, given it was mentioned in all of these sources (books/News) = coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Whether you consider that satisfy the “significant” part or not, I will leave it to you. I am of the opinion of keeping the article.

Also your comment about the BBC source is unfair, as Barbara Birungi was talking about HiveColab, quoting “"It's not about strict business. It's also about coming here to share your ideas, and collaborate. Because out of sharing and collaborating come ideas," says Ms Birungi. The Hive CoLab was opened to give the technology scene in Uganda a space that they could call their own and come and collaborate, says Barbara Birungi. "Apart from just offering them a space we see how we can take an idea to the next level. Because many startups fail within the first two years of existence."” FuzzyMagma (talk) 22:00, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Lacks sustained notability over years. For example I could not find any notable and independent coverage between Jan 1, 2015 – Jan 5, 2019 XwycP3 (talk) 18:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@XwycP3 that is not a policy. Coverage does not need to be "sustained"! by the same token, we should delete many articles because you cannot find a coverage about them between Jan 1, 2015 – Jan 5, 2019 FuzzyMagma (talk) 18:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article's coverage is from 2013 and I wanted to see if it lacked coverage after that due to it not existing or simply not have being added to the article. Wikipedia:Notability: "Brief bursts of news coverage may not sufficiently demonstrate notability. However, sustained coverage is an indicator of notability". When I extend the search to today, the result is the same. XwycP3 (talk) 20:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting the sentence just above what you quoted from Wikipedia:Notability: “Notability is not temporary; once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage.” + The sources just above your comment are from that period. FuzzyMagma (talk) 23:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gaudreau brothers cycling incident

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

WP:REDUNDANTFORK of Johnny Gaudreau#Death. The Kip ^(contribs) 06:33, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ice hockey, Sportspeople, Crime, and New Jersey. The Kip ^(contribs) 06:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Transportation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, the Johnny Gaudreau article already covers the incident in enough detail, no need for a stand alone article. - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 08:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Johnny Gaudreau#Death per nom. The main article has more detail than this one Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 11:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Johnny Gaudreau#Death: Per nom, there is no reason for a WP:REDUNDANTFORK. Let'srun (talk) 14:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cycling-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 14:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Johnny Gaudreau#Death per nom. Definitely no need to provide an article that has fewer details than the main. Conyo14 (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abayima

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

Fails WP:NORG. Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. Imcdc Contact 06:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Africa, and Uganda. Imcdc Contact 06:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~Merge with Jon Gosier: Plenty of sources, but no sustained coverage. All the coverage is in the context of their "Open SIM Kit" after they got funding from the Knight News Challenge in January 2013, but it seems like the project fizzled out pretty quickly. Most coverage is from January. The latest source I could find was from August 2013. This source is a trade publication, which should be given less weight due to WP:TRADES. Their GitHub repo was last updated in September 2013. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 08:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Soft Delete : Fails WP:ORG and lacks SIGCOV.Gauravs 51 (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Also, Soft Deletion is not possible because there is an argument to Merge this article and it also has been PROD'd before.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Izin Akioya

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

The subject does not seem notable enough to meets WP:GNG or WP:SNG as there's limited information about her achievement or works. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Absolutely nothing makes this pass WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:BASIC. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Does not pass any notability Ibjaja055 (talk) 07:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Promotional crap. She doesn't meet WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:BASIC and her companies and book aren't notable.Ynsfial (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This fails WP:GNG; sources are promotional and not independent. Moopaz (talk) 22:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indie Source

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

It fails WP:CORP and its features in 1 episode of Music Moguls or in Forbes 30 Under 30 in Manufacturing in 2018 and Apparel Magazine's Top Under-30 Elite in 2018 aren't enough for notability Ynsfial (talk) 06:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Fashion, and United States of America. Ynsfial (talk) 06:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cynthia_Akanga

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Cynthia Akanga

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

I believe Cynthia_Akanga fails the WP:GNG criteria. Person has brief bios on both linkedin and imdb but very little independent coverage. SallyRenee (talk) 05:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Dance, Africa, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: could not find any reliable source to establish notability most sources are primary and IMDb FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I believe the relevant guideline is WP:ENTERTAINER. It says that the person may be considered notable if the person has had significant roles in multiple television shows or stage performances. Akanga has had multiple roles, two to be exact: a stage performance and a role in a television show. Wikipedia does not have a lot of articles about Togolese women. Conscious of the WP:Systemic bias, I vote keep. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 03:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
can you share the source(s) for these performances?

In general, WP:ENTERTAINER does not override WP:BASIC. FuzzyMagma (talk) 18:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Ruud Buitelaar and per WP:ENT. She had significant roles in multiple notable productions. – Anne drew (talk · contribs) 04:12, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She had an appearance on a podcast and was a substitute jury for an obscure show. What notable productions? FuzzyMagma (talk) 18:41, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The French sources are the same as the ones used here, only confirming she was a judge on a TV show, not unlike American Idol is. I don't think that's enough for notability. They are simple "meet the celebrity" articles. Oaktree b (talk) 17:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki version history

AfDs for this article:

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

This article has absolutely no reason to exist. It's an unsourced duplicate of mw:Release notes and mw:Version lifecycle. The "notable changes" column is entirely original research. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Internet, Software, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTCHANGELOG. ~ A412 ^talk! 08:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTCHANGELOG Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 11:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:NOTCHANGELOG. Those looking for the release history can just visit MediaWiki. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 15:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTCHANGELOG. Looking at the 1st AfD, I would say MediaWiki was limited in 2012. It has greatly expanded since then with the dedicated wiki (and other Wiki services) easier to access. There's a detailed log of their version updates. – The Grid (talk) 18:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
MediaWiki.org has been around since 2004. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

India naming dispute

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

There are various disputes over this name and have been sufficiently covered with Names of India.

This subject fails WP:GNG on its own and article is just an expansion of a POV and involves use of mostly unreliable sources. - Ratnahastin (talk) 05:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Politics, Pakistan, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards Merge with Names of India. The article looks like a WP:POVFORK but it has possibility. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 11:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Names of India as above. Upon further review as the AfC reviewer, this should be merged as it is a WP:POVFORK. I want to maintain that this article more than likely fulfils GNG, but should be deleted due to other parts of the deletion policy EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 20:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Necrofauna

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

This page is horribly outdated and has not been updated since 2017 outside of bot edits. It still treats de-extinction as a far future hypothetical event when there have been numerous successful de-extinctions since then such as the Judean date palm, tsori, aurochs, Montreal melon, and Floreana giant tortoise. The term is also not widely used outside of one book, and everything discussed on the page is mentioned on or can be mentioned on the main de-extinction page. Edelgardvonhresvelg (talk) 04:44, 6 January 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 January 6. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Biology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:57, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to suggest keep because the subject is notable, but since the article at De-extinction basically covers the same ground and is much better, I'd have no objection to converting Necrofauna to a redirect to De-extinction. We wouldn't really even need necrofauna were it not for the book. Elemimele (talk) 11:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The necrofauna page is also HORRBILY outdated, as it refers to de-extinction as a far future hypothetical. That would be like if pages about AI or NFTs still treated them as far future hypothetical technologies, which is obviously not the case in 2025 for de-extinction, AI, and crypto. Edelgardvonhresvelg (talk) 19:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Since citation 8 is (embarassingly) the only one of the 8 sources that even mentions the term (and then in passing), I don't see the need for even a redirect. Reywas92^Talk 16:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with the reasoning. "Necrofauna" is not a widely accepted nor recognised term while de-extinction is. Britannica and Oxford English have entries for de-extinction, but not necrofauna. Edelgardvonhresvelg (talk) 19:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personal wiki

AfDs for this article:

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

This is a WP:REDUNDANTFORK of List of wiki software with no useful salvageable value.

The section "Multi-user wiki software" lacks any useful inclusion criterion - MediaWiki (the software that this wiki runs on) does not have a "personal edition" in any reasonable sense. Yes, it's configurable enough you can use it for a lot of things, but the standard for when that would be would be entirely arbitrary. Most of the remaining entries do not have any mention of personal wikis in their article.

The section "Single-user wiki software" is almost entirely duplicated at List of wiki software#Personal wiki software.

The rest of this article is just a trivial definition of the concept - "a personal wiki is a wiki for personal use". And that's it. Delete or redirect to List of wiki software#Personal wiki software (since an individual instance of a personal wiki is by definition a complete nonentity with no existence outside of that of its sole user the software is the only significant bit). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is probably broader cleanup work needed in the broader area of: Personal wiki, Personal information manager, Personal knowledge base, Personal knowledge management, and the inevitable Digital garden. Presumably some or all of these are the same concept with terminology changing over time. Brandon (talk) 17:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Avani Soni

AfDs for this article:

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

The actor is not notable. Most of the sources in the article are promotional/PR sources. The consensus on previous AfD was delete because it was non-notable and created by PR agency. Coderzombie (talk) 04:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Gujarat. Coderzombie (talk) 04:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - She has nothing to pass WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:NACTOR. Casting and special thanks credits are not acting or directing credits and her cameo is insignificant.Ynsfial (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She is notable as a casting director working in multiple films, not as an actor. The last AFD was 5 years back! which is not a valid reason for consideration. Justort (talk) 05:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Savannah Smith

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

Non-notable former college basketball player (only appeared to play off the bench for ~3 seasons). Fails WP:GNG as notability WP:NOTINHERITED from Chris Christian (father). Epluribusunumyall (talk) 03:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Sports, Basketball, and Texas. Epluribusunumyall (talk) 03:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage. Was unable to find anything of significance during a search og Google and Newspapers.com. Her basketball career doesn't indicate any likelihood of her having received any significant coverage. Alvaldi (talk) 10:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arsenal Women 2–3 Wolfsburg Women

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

The subject of this article does not meet WP:NSPORTSEVENT (the specific notability guideline for a single match) nor any general notability guidelines. This is because it is not an individually notable match in itself, as just one of a series of knockout games in regular competition, and because it does not appear to have much media coverage that is not WP:ROUTINE. It therefore does not meet any of the four criteria for NSPORTSEVENT, and the lack of non-primary sourcing prevents it from meeting GNG. Kingsif (talk) 03:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Still holds the record as the match with the biggest attendance in women's club football on English soil. I added some non-routine coverage. --Lyndis Parlour (talk) 06:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lyndis Parlour: The sources you have linked (without actually adding any article content, just the sources) are, top to bottom: a non-RS that is a player interview mentioning the game in passing (see SIGCOV), an Arsenal fan blog than lauds the game's attendance (see SPS), and a simple list of match attendance figures (see DATABASE). None of these are suitable for use in the article (which I think you actually know, just putting them in as external links), let alone establishing notability. Kingsif (talk) 08:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nominator. I was waiting for someone to try and present notability-establishing sources; the article's advocate has made an attempt but seems to know they can't. Kingsif (talk) 07:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Football, Germany, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This match is very notable and represents a historic moment in the history of women's football in England. This is also reflected in the links and references provided with the article that comment from a range of reputable sources. The article was written to detail the history and to provide information about the game both from UEFA, media outlets and players to provide historical context to the events that occurred. I have now added even more links. This game is far more significant than any standard game of football and any consideration that is isn't suggests that that person is not well informed on women's football - a chronically underreported sport and poorly represented on Wikipedia. Which of the reference sources from itv, ESPN, the Guardian, the New York Times, and BBC sport aren't considered notable by @Kingsif? As noted in this "Some games or series are likely or almost certain to be considered notable, including but not limited to the following:" the list given are just examples. In the history of Women's football, this game is a match of note. The coverage alone makes that clear. The quotes from the players about the match also made that clear but they were deleted from the article. Notability is often so subjective with articles on this platform and too many people have an agenda to devalue perfectly notable articles because of their subject matter. Perhaps @Kingsif is not familiar with what is considered routine coverage at this point in time in the women's game to note the difference. Evmoon (talk) 16:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You do not have any sources that say the match either represents a historic moment in the history of women's football in England or is far more significant than any standard game of football. UEFA match reports, and match reports from RS outlets, are still WP:ROUTINE coverage, which I implore you to actually read and understand before asserting that others don't know what routine coverage is. What you personally think is notable is not the same as Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

Stop with the bad faith accusations. There is a difference between making sure we create and maintain N-compliant articles focused on women's topics and (something too many people try to do now:) making stubby articles about non-notable women's topics just to boost the quantity without care for quality, overall harming the intention of gender parity in Wikipedia coverage.

As this discussion is about N-compliant sources, I will assess the sources you have added. These three; two for saying the match was the first time Arsenal W.F.C. had sold out the main stadium (TBF, a logical assumption) - one of these being a press release from the club itself (see PRIMARY) - and the other a passing mention that due to ticket sales in this and other matches, the main stadium would continue to be used. Look, I am sure it is possible to find the minimum of three non-routine, non-SPS, SIGCOV, RS sources about the match if you really try. The question is to ask yourself: does this a standalone article warrant. Or is the actual notable content that can be gleaned from those sources simply better suited as a "they set the attendance record for a women's club football game in England and sold out the Emirates" mention at the 2022–23 Arsenal W.F.C. season article. Kingsif (talk) 21:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fuck off youbsexist prick 80.46.208.236 (talk) 08:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The fact that's it's the best attended women's football match in England would be a reason to mention that in a list article about attendences if one existed. However, it does not make the match itself automatically notable as some people above are trying to do. No WP:SUSTAINED coverage, so doesn't need a separate article. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FYI List of women's association football attendance records - which actually shows that two more recent club matches in England had larger attendance, too. The record is currently held by Chelsea F.C. Women and Manchester United W.F.C. Kingsif (talk) 22:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Puppy love

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

As noted in a message on the page, 'This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic.' The article contains a non-dictionary definition and characteristics of puppy love, a sub-article on puppy love in China related to China's marriage age laws, and statistics which do not mention puppy love of Taiwan, China and the United States. Though the article has existed for a long time, it is still rated as 'Start-class' on Wikipedia's content assessment scale (see the Talk page). The article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignemnt between 24 January 2023 and 19 May 2023, and yet is still rated as a 'Start-class'. There was a requested move on 9 February 2023. The article is not encyclopedic in nature, and is minimally informative, I'd recommend deleting it. Re34646 (talk) 03:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article is definitely in poor shape, but I think the concept of 'puppy love' or a 'crush' is fairly trivially notable. The article cites plenty of sources in gender/sexuality studies, literary studies, and adolescent medicine, and I have no doubt at all that there are many, many more sources out there discussing the idea of childhood/adolescent infatuation. A lot of the material on China does need to be cut or slimmed down, but I don't think the article is anywhere near bad enough for this to be a case of WP:TNT. MCE89 (talk) 01:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Heiberger

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

Not seeing genuine evidence of notability per WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. A couple of brief interviews, but the rest are PR, non-independent, or passing mentions. Seems like a run of the mill businessman. —Ganesha811 (talk) 03:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and New York. —Ganesha811 (talk) 03:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree, a non-notable person. Re34646 (talk) 03:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with deletion, the most notability-instilling source cited is a NYT "30-minute interview" but that was part of a series of short interviews of "prominent developers, brokers, property managers and builders in New York commercial real estate", which is a specifically narrow scope and to me does not indicate that the subjects of those interviews are necessarily notable enough for WP:GNG (and is maybe even borderline non-WP:IS). Jokullmusic 05:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with deletion. This person is not notable. I would also add that it seems likely this page was originally created by Andrew himself (or a friend) as the only contributions by the original user are related to Andrew Heiberger. WP:AUTO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Craycraytevana — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiWingsuit (talk • contribs) 07:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- probably self-created promotional page, subject fails notability criteria, only main space links to the page are List of University of Michigan alumni, List of University of Michigan business alumni, List of University of Miami School of Law alumni. BabelStone (talk) 11:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there were a number of social media posts today tying the article subject to a person who complained about New York congestion pricing. See, e.g.,[67]. No idea if this will get any news coverage (not saying it should). Oblivy (talk) 13:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The coverage has begun:

NY Post, quotes and brief discussion of article subject [68]
Daily Mail, about him, coverage of the online skewering [69]
Jalopnik, about him, on the online skewering [70]

Oblivy (talk) 02:19, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Do not believe he's notable enough to meet WP:GNG. Ueutyi (talk) 14:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable, article looks like a puff piece. Kiran_891 ^(TALK) 18:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Benedikt Johannes Hofer

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

Non-notable person. None of the sources are reliable (tiiny.site is user-generated), and I found no reliable sources online. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 03:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Computing, and Germany. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 03:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete: previously deleted via Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gaming Benni; doesn't this qualify for some speedy deletion criterion? Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 12:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jake Lent-Koop

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

Cannot find any WP:SIGCOV on this player. Everything that comes up, both in searches and in the references, is either WP:LOCAL or databases/signing announcements. Appears to fail WP:GNG. Anwegmann (talk) 03:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and New Mexico. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Taiwanese sentiment

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

Insufficient WP:RS here to merit a stand-alone article Amigao (talk) 03:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups and Taiwan. Skynxnex (talk) 03:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete Putting aside cross-Strait relations and Taiwanese independence, the sources that I could find don't seem to suggest that anti-Taiwanese discrimination is a sufficiently distinct phenomenon from anti-Chinese or anti-Asian racism to merit a separate article. On the other hand, nationalist/anti-Taiwanese independence sentiment in mainland China is certainly a notable thing, and I did find some sources discussing the ways in which anti-Taiwanese independence rhetoric can feature outright negativity towards Taiwanese people and culture (e.g. see [71] and [72]). But I'm not convinced that there's enough coverage of that specific sentiment to merit a separate article, and I think it's probably better discussed in the context of wider Chinese nationalism and Chinese unification. MCE89 (talk) 01:50, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced Technology Development Center

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. Imcdc Contact 02:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Organizations, Companies, United States of America, and Georgia (U.S. state). Imcdc Contact 02:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:08, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: I found two independent sources ([73], [74]) and added them to the article, but I'm not sure about reliability and the first one seems pretty promotional. I'd be more confident if someone could find another piece of coverage that isn't connected to the ATDC or Georgia Tech. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:04, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to try another relisting before considering closing this discussion as No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rachid Ghanimi

AfDs for this article:

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

This article has been rejected as a draft and deleted already. This its third incarnation, and I still can't find any WP:SIGCOV of this player. The player still appears to fail WP:GNG. Anwegmann (talk) 03:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 03:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NOLYMPICS. It was deleted as WP:TOOSOON but then he won an Olympic medal. St Anselm (talk) 03:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't searched for sources yet, but note that he passes WP:NOLYMPICS as a medalist at the 2024 Summer Olympics; he'd be the sole 2024 medalist without an article, I think, if deleted. BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I note the French article has 26 references - we can safely assume there are lots of sources in Arabic. This is precisely why we have WP:NOLYMPICS. St Anselm (talk) 03:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Haven't done a comprehensive review of the Arabic sources, but the references I viewed didn't contain any WP:SIGCOV of Ghanimi specifically. While the subject was on the team for the Olympics and won a medal, he didn't appear in any matches from what I can tell. Still undecided here. Let'srun (talk) 03:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Olympics. Let'srun (talk) 03:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – This time is enough WP:SIGCOV to estabilish the article. Svartner (talk) 04:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Morocco-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per above. Shmego (talk) 14:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per arguments above which show notability. Giant Snowman 20:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Information Processing Society of China

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

Looks to be almost entirely self-promotional in nature. Amigao (talk) 02:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Organizations, Computing, and China. Skynxnex (talk) 03:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will try to eliminate or reduce the tone. Ctxz2323 (talk) 09:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Qian, Duoxiu (2023) [2014]. "Translation Technology in China". In Chan, Sin-wai (ed.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Technology (2 ed.). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. p. 308. ISBN 978-0-367-76736-5. Retrieved 2025-01-06 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "There are many active participants in the research and development of machine translation (MT) and CAT. One leading organization is the Chinese Information Processing Society of China (CIPSC; www.cipsc.org.cn/index.php). It was established in June 1981, its mission being to develop methods for processing Chinese with the aid of computer technology, including automatic input, output, recognition, transfer, compression, storage, concordance, analysis, comprehension, and generation. This is to be done at different linguistic levels (character, lexical, phrasal, sentential, and textual). The field has developed into an interdisciplinary subject area in a very robust way with collaborative work by scholars from fields like philology, computer sciences, artificial intelligence, cognitive psychology, and mathematics. This organization has been in close contact with the outside world, playing a very active role in the world MT-Summits."
2. Yan, Yiming 颜逸明; Yin, Binyong 尹斌庸 (2002). 语文现代化论文集 [Collection of Papers on the Modernization of Chinese Language] (in Chinese). Beijing: Commercial Press. p. 141. ISBN 978-7-100-03535-4. Retrieved 2025-01-06 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "1981 年,以钱伟长为理事长的中国中文信息学会成立。中文信息学会及所属的汉字编码专业委员会、《中文信息学报》《中文信息》等杂志成为组织交流汉字编码的理论的场所和媒介。1981 年至今中文信息学会、汉字编码委员会召开国际性、全国性学术会议 10 余次,发表的国内外论文和公布编码方案约在 1000 份以上,申请专利超过 200 件,上机运行的也有近百种。"
  From Google Translate: "In 1981, the Chinese Information Processing Society of China, chaired by Qian Weichang, was established. The Chinese Information Processing Society of China, along with its affiliated Character Encoding Committee, the Chinese Journal of Information and Chinese Information magazines, became venues and mediums for organizing and exchanging theories on Chinese character encoding. From 1981 to the present, the Chinese Information Processing Society and the Character Encoding Committee have held more than 10 international and national academic conferences, published over 1,000 domestic and international papers, and released encoding schemes. More than 200 patents have been applied for, and nearly 100 encoding systems have been implemented in machines."
3. Zhang, Pu 张普 (1992). 汉语信息处理研究 [Research on Chinese Language Information Processing] (in Chinese). Beijing: Beijing Language and Culture University Press. p. 231. ISBN 978-7-5619-0211-0. Retrieved 2025-01-06 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "1981 年,正式成立了中国中文信息学会,推举钱伟长教授为第一任理事长,学会下专设了一个“汉字编码专业委员会” ,专攻汉字键盘输入技术。 1983 年,中国中文信息学会与联合国教科文组织在北京联合召开“中文信息处理国际研讨会” ,仅在会议同时举办的“计算机中文信息处理展览会”上,就展出了 15 个省市 34 个单位的 38 项成果,展期销售成交额 1078 万元。这个成绩不只受到联合国教科文组织欧沃拉比先生及国内外观众的赞赏,也使盯着中国这一庞大市场的国外各大计算机公司大吃一惊,他们没想到中国的步子迈得这么快、"
  From Google Translate: "In 1981, the Chinese Information Processing Society of China was formally established, and Professor Qian Weichang was elected as the first chairman. The society set up a "Chinese Character Encoding Professional Committee" to specialize in Chinese character keyboard input technology. In 1983, the Chinese Information Processing Society of China and UNESCO jointly held the "International Symposium on Chinese Information Processing" in Beijing. At the "Computer Chinese Information Processing Exhibition" held at the same time as the conference, 38 achievements from 34 units in 15 provinces and cities were exhibited, and the sales turnover during the exhibition period was 10.78 million yuan. This achievement was not only praised by Mr. Owolabi of UNESCO and domestic and foreign audiences, but also surprised major foreign computer companies that were eyeing the huge Chinese market. They did not expect China to move so fast,"
4. Liang, Qinghai 梁清海; Man, Hing-wu 文兴吾; Lam, Tsz-hing 林子卿 (1992). 当代中国科学技术总览 [Overview of Contemporary Chinese Science and Technology] (in Chinese). Beijing: China Science and Technology Press [zh]. p. 319. ISBN 978-7-5046-0862-8. Retrieved 2025-01-06 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "1981 年 6 月成立。由钱伟长、中国中文信息学会甄建民、安其春、李金铠等人发起。宗旨是:团结广大科技工作者,繁荣发展我国科学技术事业,促进科学技术的普及和推广,促进科技领域出成果、出人才;为振兴经济,促进两个文明建设,加速实现我国社会主义现代化做贡献。该会设有土地利用、地籍管理、土地复垦、土地经济、建设用地、土地信息与遥感、土地法学等专业学术组织。出版刊物《中国土地科学》。 1988 年以来,先后与香港测量师学会、英国皇家特许测量师学会、国际测量师联合会、香港房地产建筑业协进会筹建立了联系。该会隶属中国科学技术协会,挂靠国家土地管理局;会址:北京市海淀区大柳树北村 25 号;邮政编码: 100081 。"
  From Google Translate: "Founded in June 1981. Initiated by Qian Weichang, Zhen Jianmin, An Qichun, Li Jinkai and others from the Chinese Information Processing Society of China. Its purpose is to unite the vast number of scientific and technological workers, prosper and develop my country's science and technology, promote the popularization and promotion of science and technology, promote the production of scientific and technological achievements and talents; to contribute to the revitalization of the economy, the promotion of the construction of two civilizations, and the acceleration of the realization of my country's socialist modernization. The association has professional academic organizations such as land use, cadastral management, land reclamation, land economy, construction land, land information and remote sensing, and land law. It publishes the journal "Chinese Land Science". Since 1988, it has established contacts with the Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, the International Federation of Surveyors, and the Hong Kong Real Estate and Construction Industry Association. The association is affiliated to the China Association for Science and Technology and is affiliated to the State Land Administration; the address is No. 25, Daliushu North Village, Haidian District, Beijing; the postal code is 100081."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow the Chinese Information Processing Society of China (simplified Chinese: 中国中文信息学会; traditional Chinese: 中國中文資訊學; pinyin: Zhōngguó Zhōngwén Xìnxī Xuéhuì) to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The "Purposes and activities" section is sourced to the the subject's website and could be considered to contain promotional wording. I consider the rest of the article to be largely neutral. The policies say that articles containing flaws should not be deleted if they can be improved. Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion says, If editing can address all relevant reasons for deletion, this should be done rather than deleting the page. Wikipedia:Editing policy#Wikipedia is a work in progress: perfection is not required says, Perfection is not required: Wikipedia is a work in progress. Collaborative editing means that incomplete or poorly written first drafts can evolve over time into excellent articles. Even poor articles, if they can be improved, are welcome. Cunard (talk) 10:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reminding.

Different sources and citations have been added, with the content edited accordingly. Ctxz2323 (talk) 02:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yutong Group

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

No indication of notability using WP:RS. Amigao (talk) 02:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Transportation, and China. Skynxnex (talk) 03:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Restore redirect to Yutong, this new article does not provide any additional context or knowledge that cannot be put in the Yutong article. Jumpytoo Talk 05:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Restore redirect to Yutong as this article is about the same topic as Yutong and providing a small amount of additional information that could be merged to Yutong. Cunard (talk) 10:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Nothing indicates this qualifies for a standalone page under NCORP. Obvious UPE. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Randolph

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

The only thing approaching WP:SIGCOV that I could find is this, but it is from the student newspaper of one of his colleges, and it was published while he was a student at UNC–Wilmington. So it is WP:LOCAL. As a result, this player appears to fail WP:GNG. Anwegmann (talk) 02:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 02:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This player made a professional debut, had a notable college career, and has just extended his contract with his current club. I feel like deleting this would be unfair. Shmego (talk) 14:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NSPORTS2022, making a professional debut is meaningless toward notability and so is a college career. Anwegmann (talk) 23:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. Professional debut is irrelevant. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Monroe (soccer)

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

This player appears to fail WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Everything I could find was either passing, "local" by his college, club, or league, or database/signing announcement—nothing of significant, meaningful coverage. Anwegmann (talk) 02:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 02:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miche-Naider Chéry

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

Several searches have not uncovered any WP:SIGCOV of this player. None of the sources cited in the article meet those standards as well. This player, then, seems to fail WP:GNG. Anwegmann (talk) 02:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Haiti. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question - Is coverage from fox sports not enough coverage? Shmego (talk) 14:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is just video of his goals in one match because it was an upset by his team over an MLS club, not WP:SIGCOV about him. So no, it is nowhere near enough. Anwegmann (talk) Anwegmann (talk) 22:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Max Glasser

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

Am I missing something here? I can find a lot of announcements and "local" coverage, either from USL, FC Naples, or UC Davis, but there doesn't seem to be any WP:SIGCOV on this player. Possibly WP:TOOSOON, but still seems to fail WP:GNG. Anwegmann (talk) 02:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify/Merge - I had created Draft:Max Glasser back in 2023 (relevant to this discussion it was moved back to draft space in March 2023) but no one had edited it since August 2024. It seems that the creator of this article may have missed the draft article, so while this version we're commenting on can't technically be moved back into the draft space as it didn't exist there previously as far as I can tell, I do think that merging this draft with the preexisting one to be fleshed out with more content and most importantly more independent sources would be for the best. Christiangamer7 (talk) 07:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would support draftifying this article. Shmego (talk) 14:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Drafify - not currently notable, but might be in future. Giant Snowman 20:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – Per above. Svartner (talk) 03:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Creek

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

I can't seem to find any WP:SIGCOV on this player. Perhaps it's a matter of WP:TOOSOON, as he is in the beginning of his career and has seen the field a few times, but right now, he seems to fail WP:GNG. Anwegmann (talk) 02:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 02:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Missouri. Shellwood (talk) 02:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – WP:TOOSOON. Svartner (talk) 04:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Y Tu Tambien

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

Created by a single purpose editor and marked for notability concerns 10 years ago. 12 of the 18 sources are Facebook, the other sources do not cover this organization in detail. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 02:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, and New York. LibStar (talk) 02:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Found this [75], but it doesn't appear independent. All other sources I found were either connected to Columbia or were blogs. Massively promotional anyway, would have to be cut down to three sentences to remove all the puffery. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Belarus–Spain relations

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

Article is based primarily on primary sources. 4 of the 6 sources are the Spanish Foreign Affairs, the 1st source is an embassy website. There is no third party significant coverage of these relations. LibStar (talk) 02:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Belarus, and Spain. LibStar (talk) 02:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. On a cursory google search, some content can be found in third-party sources.--Asqueladd (talk) 10:10, 6 January 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 keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ LibStar (talk) 00:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]

World Institute of Pain

AfDs for this article:

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

Previously deleted. Still fails WP:ORG. Sole source is a primary source. LibStar (talk) 00:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Medicine, and North Carolina. LibStar (talk) 00:53, 6 January 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.

All-time Tampa Bay Rowdies roster

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

Subject appears to lack notability under WP:LISTN due to a lack of sourcing. PROD was removed with the claim that this grouping is notable, but no sources have been added since so I'm bringing this to AfD. Let'srun (talk) 00:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Football, Lists, and Florida. Let'srun (talk) 00:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Halifax train crash

AfDs for this article:

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

This run of the mill crash with zero fatalities does not appear to have the WP:LASTING coverage to meet WP:NEVENT here. Let'srun (talk) 00:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and North Carolina. Let'srun (talk) 00:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - there is no WP:MINIMIMDEATHS. Accident seems to have comparisons to Hixon. Article appears to need updating (NTSB report?), but that is not a reason to delete. Mjroots (talk) 09:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'd raised concerns back in 2015 about lasting notability: Talk:2015 Halifax train crash#Notability. If the NTSB released a full report I can't find one. The FRA's Office of Railroad Safety released a perfunctory report: [76]. The report says, in effect, the driver screwed up. Grade crossing accidents, by themselves, are routine. Hixon had outcomes and commemoration. Mackensen (talk) 12:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep "run of the mill crash"es don't leave 55 people injured. Also, as MJRoots pointed out there is not a requirement for deaths in a rail accident. 55 injuries makes this notable on its own. When is the last time a rail accident caused nearly 5 dozen injuries, and it didn't have an article? I stand behind this article. Juneau Mike (talk) 19:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Mackensen. It's a fairly ordinary grade crossing accident with no lasting impact. Number of injuries don't determine notability; continued coverage and impact does. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of rail accidents (2010–2019)#2015, where it is already listed. It doesn't merit a standalone article. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment if it is kept, it should be renamed to include Halifax, North Carolina in the title to disambiguate from Halifax, Nova Scotia and similar to 2018 Crozet, Virginia train crash - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 23:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note This is a bizarre argument. Synopsis: It doesn't make it notable or not if people were killed. But it also doesn't make it notable or not no matter how many injuries were incurred. No matter how this AFD goes, it's one to remember! I stand by my above !vote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelh2001 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WineGUI

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

PROD removed with insufficient reasoning, just "Stop deleting this wiki page". No notability whatsoever. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 00:34, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: All you can find are download links and blog posts, nothing we'd use for reviews or any critical discussion. What's in the article for sourcing isn't helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 01:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No notability GUI, also, the article haves only primary source. Vitorperrut555 (talk) 01:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Wine_(software)#Third-party_applications, where it is mentioned. मल्ल (talk) 22:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per मल्ल. Seems like an easy enough target. Conyo14 (talk) 00:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sandwitches

AfDs for this article:

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

Article with no indication of notability or importance. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 00:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No content here, only infobox. Vitorperrut555 (talk) 01:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Don't delete This has a good amount of history that dates back to 2011. At the very least, retarget back to Goblin (album) and/or draftify the current content. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 02:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Goblin (album) per above. No point in draftifying as this is just an infobox which could be easily recreated and isn't worth saving on its own. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 06:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to redirect to Goblin (album): an infobox alone does not an article make, especially since the redirect was itself the result of the previous nomination (and the article obviously had more content then… which still wasn't enough). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Goblin (album) - Back in 2014 the song article was redirected to the album, and since then there has been no further coverage of the song in its own right to merit a standalone article. Also note that someone later retargeted the term to sandwich for an unconvincing reason. Yesterday an inexperienced editor reverted the redirect and formed the no-content song article that we see now. There is little likelihood that it can or will be further (re-)developed into a full article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Armageddon Through Your Speakers

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

Article about an album by a band that doesn't have an article on here. Doesn't establish why this album is notable. LupinOnTheFritz (talk) 00:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Can only find links to Discogs and social media. Does not seem to be a notable album from 20 some years ago. No critical commentary, no reviews. Oaktree b (talk) 00:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 02:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sputnikmusic review is a user review, thus ineligible per RSMUSIC, and I can't say I'm confident in RoughEdge. But both AllMusic and Exclaim! are valid reviews from reliable sources. I don't think it's in as bad shape as claimed above. There's also a mention in this article about the artwork of David Ho which would be worth including if kept. Unfortunately I couldn't find anything else, but for an Interscope release at that time I have to imagine there's more out there. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 06:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I just noticed that the cover of the album says Armageddon Through Your Speaker, not Speakers, so the name of the article is incorrect. Still doesn't appear to be very noteworthy based on the sources found for "Speaker" instead of "Speakers". LupinOnTheFritz (talk) 09:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]