User:Cyberbot I/AfD's requiring attention

Below are the top 25 AfD discussions which are most urgently in need of attention from !voters. The urgency for each AfD is calculated based on various statistics, including current number of votes, time until closing date, number of times relisted, overall discussion length, etc. This page is updated by a bot roughly every 6 hours, and was last updated on 13:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC).

AfD	Time to close	Votes	Size (bytes)	Score
Mizuki Otake	20 days ago	3	4827	1635.67
Kartal Anatolian High School	14 days ago	1	4508	1411.52
Shekar Natarajan	16 days ago	2	11823	1383.71
Tanha Dar Mazrae	12 days ago	0	3712	1280.82
Greg Schiemer (2nd nomination)	15 days ago	4	5971	1249.9
Alexis Strum (2nd nomination)	14 days ago	2	11493	1247.11
Rouzbeh Rafie	11 days ago	0	6073	1212.89
Iranian American Women Foundation	12 days ago	1	5161	1209.23
Santhosh Suvarna	12 days ago	1	3114	1200
Kimeshan Naidoo	11 days ago	1	4798	1194.56
Vector TDx	12 days ago	1	5307	1183.89
Embassy of Moldova, Berlin	13 days ago	3	3968	1136.89
Healthera (2nd nomination)	10 days ago	0	3662	1133.93
Railway stations in Karaikudi	10 days ago	1	3440	1126.91
Olivia McIsaac	12 days ago	3	3503	1111.61
Online panel	13 days ago	4	12397	1102.76
Central Library, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi	10 days ago	1	4741	1095.28
Velappaya Mahadevar temple	13 days ago	4	7808	1091.35
Pinch to Punch	12 days ago	3	8992	1064.52
Réjane Magloire	11 days ago	2	5148	1062.37
Flora Plumb	11 days ago	2	5290	1059.83
Lil Tony (Georgia rapper)	12 days ago	4	4500	1058.46
Sonali Phogat	13 days ago	4	6660	1058.25
Pedro Neves (poker player)	12 days ago	3	3597	1049.99
List of Royal Yacht Squadron members	11 days ago	3	4737	1048.38

Mizuki Otake

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

Fails WP:BLP and WP:NBAD Stvbastian (talk) 14:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Badminton, and Japan. Stvbastian (talk) 14:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:53, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep - As the runner-up in the 2024 Indonesia Masters Super 100 I, she and Miyu Takahashi have finished on the podium of a BWF World Tour tournament passing WP:NBADMINTON. DCsansei (talk) 20:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete. NBAD is subordinate to the higher requirements of NSPORT, including SPORTCRIT, which demands an IRS SIGCOV source be cited in the article. Routine event recaps don't count towards notability, and we don't have evidence of meeting SPORTCRIT through any other coverage. JoelleJay (talk) 02:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

What is the point of having the WP:SNG guideline if they are not given some level of deference? I agree that writing this article was likely premature but the fact remains that as of September 1, 2024, she has now passes a subject-specific notability guideline. In the spirit of ignore all rules, I don't see the point of deleting an article now when the guideline states that she now meets a level where significant coverage is likely to exist (or will very soon exist). Wikipedia is not served by deleting articles for individuals for whom "appropriate sourcing likely exists" just to recreate them. DCsansei (talk) 11:29, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep per DCsansei’s general points, but especially about “appropriate sourcing likely exists”. Absurdum4242 (talk) 06:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Kartal Anatolian High School

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

I did a search and this seems not to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 19:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 19:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Procedural keep: While I acknowledge that high school articles are not automatically notable, there is a community consensus that a good faith WP:BEFORE that includes some print resources or local newspapers is needed, per this RfC. This is especially important given the underrepresentation of high schools from the non-English-speaking parts of the world on the English Wikipedia. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 23:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
@TheJoyfulTentmaker Not quite sure what you expected me to do about “print resources”. I don’t live in Istanbul so cannot pop round to a local library in Kartal, but there must be plenty of editors who do live in the city, so if they wish to find offline resources to cite to keep the article it will be easier for them than for me. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Added one source about a controversy. The point is that, for high schools with a history, a deeper BEFORE is needed, according to the community consensus. This nomination does not even have the findings of a regular BEFORE. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 17:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment may be saved if existent sources are added. --Johnpaul2030 (talk) 12:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
@Johnpaul2030 Great. Glad you found suitable sources - could you add them? Chidgk1 (talk) 15:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 22:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:25, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Added couple of sources since the nomination; some about its sports teams and some related to the controversies. I believe these satisfy WP:SIGCOV to some degree and contribute to the school's notability. Also, I still believe that more sources can be found in the print archives; from around the time when the school was being opened. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 04:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Shekar Natarajan

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

Promo article. Fails WP:BIO. Refs are mostly interviews and profiles. No indication of being notable. scope_creep^Talk 07:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:04, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Telangana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

There is so many citations on his work in this article and he is well known in the world of Supply Chain. 75.149.50.222 (talk) 02:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=M1dROmoAAAAJ&hl=en 75.149.50.222 (talk) 02:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I would like to address the concerns regarding the notability and reliability of the references in this article.

Notability and Achievements:

Shekar Natarajan is a recognized expert in the field of supply chain management. His contributions to the industry have been significant, as evidenced by his receipt of the Medallion Award from the Institute of Industrial and Systems Engineers (IISE) in 2010, which is awarded for notable contributions to the field. It was awarded to only 10 people over the last decade. This award recognizes individuals that have made a notable impact on the industrial engineering profession. The full list of awardees, including Mr. Natarajan, can be viewed here - https://www.iise.org/awards.aspx?id=10802.

Reliable Sources:

In addition to the IISE recognition, Mr. Natarajan has been acknowledged by various reputable industry sources. For example, Material Handling and Logistics News has recognized him as an expert in supply chain logistics. More details about his work and expertise can be found in their coverage here - https://www.mhlnews.com/shekar-natarajan-expert.

Given these points, I believe Mr. Natarajan's notability is well-established within his field, supported by reliable third-party sources.

Thank you for considering these points. 75.149.50.222 (talk) 04:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Shekar Natarajan has received several prestigious awards and recognitions throughout his career, acknowledging his significant contributions to the supply chain and logistics industry.* Medallion Award (2010): Awarded by the Institute of Industrial and Systems Engineers (IISE), recognizing his contributions to the field of industrial engineering and systems.

DC Velocity Rainmaker (Year): Named as one of the "Rainmakers" by DC Velocity magazine, which highlights professionals who have made substantial impacts in the logistics and supply chain field. Source.
Consumer Goods Visionary (2010): Recognized as a visionary by Consumer Goods magazine for his forward-thinking strategies in the consumer goods industry. Source.Given the multiple awards and recognitions that Shekar Natarajan has received, it is clear that he has made a noteworthy impact in his industry. Deleting this article would mean removing valuable information about a recognized leader in supply chain management, whose work continues to influence the field. This article serves as a credible and informative resource for those interested in learning about influential figures in the industry.

2601:644:9385:FB0:542B:A7A2:4997:3559 (talk) 05:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This discussion needs to see more participation. Looking at the comments thus far, it seems like this subject might have won some prestigious industry awards. Notable awards go beyond the Oscars and Nobels, by the way. A source review would also be helpful here as this is a heavily referenced article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment These are corporate awards and are non-notable here. scope_creep^Talk 10:50, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Strong keep Highly notable as a high-level executive who has worked at or been contracted by major Fortune 500 companies such as Coca-Cola Consolidated, PepsiCo, Anheuser-Busch, and also Disney, Walmart, Target, American Eagle Outfitters.

Parts of the article look promotional but can be cleaned up, but that does not mean that the subject is not notable. Clearly meets WP:BIO, with copious citations all over the web (WP:SIGCOV). Also search for Chandrashekar Natarajan. Plenty of Google Scholar contributions.

Some awards and sentences about him being a "thought leader" can be trimmed since I believe they're too promotional, but the sources clearly demonstrate that this is a notable Fortune 500 company executive. Natarajan is covered by the Wall Street Journal, Reuters, New York Times, Harvard Business Review, and many other top-tier sources that can also be included.

Copyediting needed? Yes. But notability fail? Definitely not. I'd recommend keeping and then cleaning up. Nyangaman4 (talk) 01:55, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

No. On the Google Scholar citation list , only one paper is above 100 cites which means that record of achievement is invalid. Too low a h-index/citation count to count towards WP:NACADEMIC. Being contracted or having worked at place isn't inherently notable. Only coverage denotes notability and its not here. We will look at the references today. scope_creep^Talk 08:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete. I could not find any WP:SIGCOV piece on this person in a quality independent national RS, a zero in an international one. His awards are not notable and "working for" major US corporations in a local country is also not notable. Article is very WP:PROMO and written like his resume. Getting into WP:G11 territory but regardless, no evidence of notability on any basis. Aszx5000 (talk) 18:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete: This is the best article, but it's penned by this person [1], unfortunately. There just isn't enough about this fellow to show notability here. Brief mentions in the few sources used in the article that are RS aren't enough. Oaktree b (talk) 22:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Comment. I have just removed promotional resume-like content and puffery. This article has been up since 2010, but it appears that different people have been inserting promotional content over time. But that does not mean this person is not notable. If cleaned up, it will meet Wikipedia criteria and can be kept. Nyangaman4 (talk) 15:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
I could not find a single piece of WP:SIGCOV on this person in any quality Indian RS. This was probably a WP:UPE case that should never have been a BLP, but somehow it survived. 15:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC) Aszx5000 (talk) 15:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm normally opposed to having a third relisting, but we may need time to consider changes that removed some self-promo content.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 18:34, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment I did consider those changes, and while there is still a lot of non-notable awards and positions listed, the main issue remains, which is that there are no WP:SIGCOV pieces - never mind WP:3REFS - on this person in any quality independent WP:RS. They are just not a notable person. Aszx5000 (talk) 19:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Tanha Dar Mazrae

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

No reliable sources (a.k.a. no wiki links) and no reliable reviews. This may fail Wikipedia:Notability (films). This article about a short film is short because no other sources exist.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sayeye Penhan. I am also nominating the following related page because it is also is sourced by a similar website (akhbarrasmi, is it notable?):

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, no participation so far.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I saw this movie in Iranian cinema.

Khosli is attractive and spectacular and this movie has found many fans.

In our opinion, Iranians, this is the best movie in the Middle East, and if there is a little source now, it is because this movie has just been waiting and the article will gradually mature and grow, and I ask you not to show too much sensitivity on this issue and let it remain an article to avoid wiki law. 5.233.227.181 (talk) 17:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

This article should stay in English Wikipedia 5.233.231.50 (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Greg Schiemer

AfDs for this article:

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

Last AfD was no consensus. Renominating as per previous statement: Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Most of the supplied sources are not WP:SIGCOV about him LibStar (talk) 23:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. LibStar (talk) 23:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Weak Delete. Links appear when you do a basic Google search. However as per nominator, I also think those may not meet WP:SIGCOV criteria. Prof.PMarini (talk) 00:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD before so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep I think some of the sources given in the article can count as SIGCOV, and as long as you have some sources that are SIGCOV, that many of the sources are just trivial mentions make no difference to the subject's notability. I can also see his works being mentioned in books and journals - [2][3][4], while those may not be considered in-depth discussions of his works (but not quite trivial either), they do show that he is known enough to be considered someone noteworthy. Hzh (talk) 22:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep honestly, I don't see a big problem with the article. It seems to be a musical artist. It maintains reliable sources reasonably concise, unlike other articles that do not have it and is more verifiable. On the other hand, the content, at least in its current form, does not seem to me to be bad enough to remain on Wikipedia, perhaps that is precisely what gives it a more encyclopedic tone. --Alon9393 (talk) 16:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Weak Keep This one is definitely boarder line and could go either way. I think there are just enough RS references to justify keeping the article, but would not object if there was a consensus among editors to delete. Go4thProsper (talk) 06:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I see this closing as a No consensus but as I closed the first AFD, I'll let another admin handle this one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:32, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Alexis Strum

AfDs for this article:

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

I don't think the sources here meet WP:NBASIC or WP:NM, save for a writing credit on Why Not Us, which is rather weak on its own. Consult the table of relevant sources in the article. Nothing in my WP:before search was of higher quality.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
Templeton, Tom (31 July 2005). "Introducing...Alexis Strum". The Guardian. Retrieved 2 September 2023.			little content outside of fluff and quotes	✘ No
Scott, Danni (5 October 2023). "'A mix-up over ice cream on Lorraine cost me my music career 20 years ago – but now I'm back'". The Metro. Retrieved 5 October 2023.	~	WP:METRO		✘ No
Strum, Alexis (23 July 2023). "I'm finally the pop star I dreamed of becoming – and I'm in my forties". The Independent. Retrieved 2 September 2023.	written by Strum	~		✘ No
Krieger, Candice (3 March 2011). "Alexis Strum lands a starring role at your fingertips". The Jewish Chronicle. Retrieved 2 September 2023.			Short article from when watching TV on phones was novel, with a few sentences of background on Strum at the end.	✘ No
Glanvill, Natalie (17 June 2015). "Kylie Minogue Songwriter to stage Homeland meets Loose Women play". Guardian Series. Retrieved 2 September 2023.	Mostly quotes or other stuff obviously sourced to Strum	?	~	✘ No
"Comic documentary about failure in development". British Comedy Guide. 15 October 2018. Retrieved 2 September 2023.	mostly quotes from Strum	~		✘ No
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}}.

Mach61 04:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Theatre, and England. Mach61 04:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Entertainment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Did a teeny bit more searching, noting small amount of coverage here. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I disagree with the nomination for deletion.

Strum has co-written two songs on popular 00s albums - Come and Get it by Rachel Stevens and Still Standing by Kylie Minogue in addition to the single, Why Not Us? by Monrose.

Under Notability (music), Strum therefore qualifies under the criteria:

'Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition.'

In addition, Strum is eligible for inclusion under the criteria as a performer:

'Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.'

'Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).' ('Addicted' was released by Warner Bros. major label release - https://open.spotify.com/artist/49DJil4JyZdW8Upoilkfom?si=uoQw-rvcTSOKuvGOyykJkw - her second album 'Cocoon' was also a major label recording, which was shelved and has now been released and distributed on an 'independent label with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable - https://open.spotify.com/album/7vNUTEQtnCVWel68cxx5sC?si=fMuK_Zl5Q1mgtyt1TSqOAQ and https://hmv.com/store/music/cd/cocoon)

Her listing is incomplete, but she is featured on the UK Official Charts Company website: https://www.officialcharts.com/artist/alexis-strum/

In addition, she has released two albums as a recording artist, which are widely available on all streaming platforms, with 8.3k monthly streams on Spotify.

She is also eligible for inclusion under:

'Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, such as a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read the policy and notability guideline on subjects notable only for one event, for further clarifications).'

Go My Own Way was the theme tune to the 'network television show' Vital Signs (TV Show) in the UK, which aired on ITV, starring Tamzin Outhwaite.

She is also eligible for inclusion under:

'Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.'

The music video for Bad Haircut featured Tom Ellis and was aired on The Box and MTV Hits, and has over 100,000 views on YoUTube.

She is also eligible for inclusion under:

'Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.'

The album 'Cocoon' has received a large amount of press attention since its initial planned release in 2006:

- https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/music/alexis-strum---cocoon-mercury-1024671 - https://retropopmagazine.com/alexis-strum-cocoon-album-review/

Strum's music career has also been the feature of multiple, non-trivial, published works, as well as being mentioned in articles where she has been listed as a musical performer, worthy of note:

- https://metro.co.uk/2023/10/04/lorraine-mix-up-destroyed-alexis-strums-career-for-20-years-19596176/ - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgl7ld1glk3o - https://www.aol.com/clean-bandit-were-told-stop-233558500.html?guccounter=1 - https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pop-star-music-alexis-strum-album-b2380472.html - https://player.winamp.com/podcasts/womans-hour-podcast-e59d55dc59 - https://www.theguardian.com/music/2005/aug/23/popandrock - https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/festival-finalises-acts-for-v-line-up-12712 - https://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/13337233.kylie-minogue-songwriter-stage-homeland-meets-loose-women-play/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevebritney (talk • contribs) 13:53, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep as well as the above mentioned sources such as The Guardian and the Metro (not convinced it is completely unreliable as the discussion was not clear-cut at RSN) there is also a staff written bio at AllMusic here, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

I've just gone through the RSN discussion links for the Metro and Im not finding any substantial discussion directly about it so unless Im missing a discussion it seems to have been quite a leap to list it as unreliable without a proper discussion, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:17, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep - In its current state, the article needs to be cleaned up so it is less reliant on unreliable/insignificant sources, but it could then be expanded with info from the sources found in the discussion above. There's enough out there in solid sources like the Guardian and the BBC to at least support a stub article, maybe with more focus on her songwriting success. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 18:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Rouzbeh Rafie

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

Fails WP:COMPOSER. None of the sources here establish WP:GNG notability, either on account of not being independent (personal website, profile at Ulysses platform, which appears to allow self published pages, Ermes 404 a publisher of his music, an interview with Rafie), reliable (wordpress blog) or significant (pretty much all the other sources).

Criterion 3 of COMPOSER states that those who have written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers. may be notable, but none of the competitions he has won appear to be "major" (at the very least, they don't have Wikipedia articles) Mach61 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Iran, and Italy. Mach61 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

I added a few more reliable independent sources (e.g. Association of Iranian Contemporary Music Composers (ACIMC)).

In my opinion, Rafie meets criteria for Wikipedia:NMUSICOTHER, saying "Composers and performers outside mass media traditions may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria: Has composed a number of notable melodies, tunes, or standards used in a notable music genre."

The competitions are notable from my point of view, especially considering the small world of contemporary experimental (classical) music. E.G. a festival like MUSEQUAL https://www.kokonainenfestival.fi/?lang=en has a very good reputation, even without a wiki article Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 08:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Klaviermusikfan1972 None of the sources you added move the needle with regard to being independent and in-depth. (for example this is a profile on the website of an organization Rafie is a member of).

Rafie does not meet that criterion of NMUSICOTHER, because a "notable" composition is one that qualifies for an article, by having sources cover it. None of Rafie's originals have gotten that. Mach61 17:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we need more participation here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I added another independen reliable source from the "Bach&Now Festival", where Rafie was chosen Artist-in-Residence. https://bachandnow.de/en/composer-in-residence/ Hopefully this will help to keep the article! Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 15:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

@Klaviermusikfan1972 This profile is written by Rafie (As “Composer in Residence” of the Bach & now! festival, I am thrilled to share my musical journey and artistic vision with you. Mach61 19:03, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

From my point of view, the fact that he was chosen artist in residence by the festival including three commissioned world premiere compositions, proofs that he is a notable composer. I checked the imprint, and Rafie is not a member of the festival board, festival founder or anything else. So it's at least an independent source. Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 20:24, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Iranian American Women Foundation

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

Isn't a notable organization. jwtmsqeh (talk) 07:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment There appears to be sources for this organization including the LA Times, Santa Monica Daily Press, an interview with a local radio station, and a doctoral dissertation. I'll add them to the article a bit later tonight or tomorrow, just wanted to put them here for anyone else to evaluate etc. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Santa Monica Daily Press seems like a press release? The LA Times is actually a localized sub paper, not sure if that or the local radio is considered since Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) specifies that articles "solely from local media (e.g., the weekly newspaper for a small town), or media of limited interest and circulation (e.g., a newsletter exclusively for people with a very unusual job), is not an indication of notability". Also, the article is about an event but the same guideline says "an organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it". Happy to withdraw this if I'm misreading though. jwtmsqeh (talk) 20:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Weak Keep I've finally found some material that helps establish notability. Sorry that this took so long just got lost in the cracks. The organization held vigils and bought advertising nationwide to bring attention to the death of Mahsa Amini with coverage from PBS Newshour, The Times, and a two local news stations one in Denver and the other in Pittsburgh. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:03, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
~~Strong Support~~ ~~As per the wiki notability principle I don't think this article fulfil the minimal criteria prior to Subject Consideration possible reason fair enough~~ भारतसरकार-विभाग (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC) (sock strike Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:04, 14 September 2024 (UTC))

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We don't have enough opinions here on what outcome is appropriate for this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Santhosh Suvarna

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

Non-notable person, lacking WP:SIGCOV outside specialist poker websites. Does not appear to have won any notable, major tournaments. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Games, and Karnataka. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:24, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep The Nagaland Post and the APN News are definately independant non-specialized sources. sportskeeda is specialized in sports but not specificially poker. PsychoticIncall (talk) 16:21, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Kimeshan Naidoo

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

This somewhat promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Despite being a WP:REFBOMB, none of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV in secondary, independent, reliable sources. They are limited to WP:INTERVIEWS, WP:PRSOURCEs, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. His awards are the kind of "30 under 30" cruft not encompassed by the WP:ANYBIO award criterion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and South Africa. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Okay @Dclemens1971, fair enough - thank you for your thorough reasoning and looking into it.

I was the original writer who put the article together based on my research on the subject. I'm a new editor so I'm still learning the wikipedia requirements. I also added more sources after your initial deletion request, but this is a good lesson in what sources are valid for me.

I would suggest we turn the page back to a redirect like it originally was before I wrote the article. It was a redirect to the Unibuddy page. Informedpanda (talk) 21:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
I would accept restoration of the redirect as an outcome here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I restored it to a redirect but you reverted saying this discussion has to close.

So I will let you handle the process going forward as I'm not familiar with it. Informedpanda (talk) 13:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Basically, once an AfD is open, it has to be closed by a non-involved editor. This will happen in less than a week and since both participants support redirect I expect that will be the outcome. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Dclemens1971, this discussion could probably close faster if you provided a link to the preferred redirect target article. Yes, I know it's buried in the page history but if you identified it, then a closer would probably take care of this discusion sooner. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
@Liz the other editor already mentioned it upthread. Unibuddy Dclemens1971 (talk) 08:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Vector TDx

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

Got reviews from IGN and PocketGamer, everything else is an unreliable source or trivial mention. Attempts to find significant coverage in magazines failed. Doesn't seem to pass the notability threshold for a new article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Could not find more sources about this game. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
I just want to indicate it clearly that I'm undecided on whether the article should be deleted due to the sources I've listed below. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment: I think this might get there. Small review from The Guardian [5]. My read of WP:SALON.COM is that it's borderline as a source. ~ A412 ^talk! 15:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

It's fairly small, so I won't immediately withdraw the nomination, though I do admit that it might push people to "weak keep". Now I essentially have no opinion about whether it should get deleted or not. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I dug through the web and found few more sources: Four more passing mentions on IGN, JayIsGames (twice), Four more passing mentions on Kotaku, and a few more articles on PocketGamer (1, 2, 3, 4). Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: An assessment of newly found sources would be helpful to a closer.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Flash Element TD as a predecessor could be a WP:ATD. IgelRM (talk) 20:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm seeing only slight mentions of that game in gaming magazines, though, and nothing close to SIGCOV. It seems non-notable by all respects. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:01, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Embassy of Moldova, Berlin

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

Unreferenced article that merely is a list of ambassadors. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 12:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Germany, and Moldova. LibStar (talk) 12:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to some article about German-Moldovan relations, don't know which one, and salvage Andre🚐 18:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete nothing on it. Xegma(talk) 14:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm underwhelmed by the participant's comments. If you are suggesting a Redirect or Merge, take 60 seconds to find an appropriate target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete No sources, lacking encyclopedic content and no suggestion as to a target for redirecting. AusLondonder (talk) 09:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
How about Germany–Moldova relations? I was wrong, finding that article just took me 20 seconds. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Healthera

AfDs for this article:

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

it does not provide sufficient independent, reliable sources that prove the company's notability according to Wikipedia's guidelines. Loewstisch (talk) 08:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Loewstisch (talk) 08:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Medicine, Websites, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Railway stations in Karaikudi

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

This might work better as a category instead of a page. Charlie (talk) 18:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation, Lists, and Tamil Nadu. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep or merge to Karaikudi#Transport. Per WP:CLN lists and categories are complementary, and this list has much more information than a category could offer. The nominator gives no reason why they think a category might be better, and I can't think of any. The article could be improved, but that's not a reason to delete. Thryduulf (talk) 09:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 23:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Olivia McIsaac

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; no significant coverage. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 23:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Weak Keep: The InsideHalton article already in the article, combined with [[6]] each provide WP:SIGCOV about the subject which allows for the WP:GNG to be met. Let'srun (talk) 13:18, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep with the second source. Looking at Proquest there are numerous other Halton/Burlington articles about her as well - but that's from the same source. Nfitz (talk) 19:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep : The subject looks notable. EEverest 8848 (talk) 11:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Online panel

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

Declined PROD. This article had no sources for the last seventeen years, but when declining the PROD, the declining user jammed three refs onto the first sentence of the article that do all mention online panels. One appears to be a research paper, which is fine for verification but does not establish notability. The others appear to be brief mentions of online panels in books about market research. I don't believe notability was clearly established by WP:REFBOMBING in this fashion, so here we are. It has not been proven that there is in depth coverage in reliable sources, I don't think we generally consider the <whatever> For Dummies series of books to really be something we should be basing encyclopedia content on, but that's ok because none of the content is actually based on it, it was just tacked on as a ref because a Google search showed that Online Surveys For Dummies contains the words "online panel" a few times. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 19:47, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 19:47, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep. The first source is not a "research paper" it is an edited volume on the concept of "online panels" AKA a 500+ page book that is literally just about the article topic. The third source is not "brief" it has multiple pages discussing the pros and cons and methods of this kind of research. This appears to be a significant concept in marketing research, see here, here , here, here, dozens upon dozens more, etc. The prod said it had been unsourced for 17 years and therefore was clearly non notable which is nonsense. Also, in what world is refbombing adding three sources? My rationale for citing the less academic source is it provided a better explanation as to what the topic was and I didn't want to go jumping through hoops to find that in the edited volume to cite the first sentence. Probably not the best source but not unreliable. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I disagree on a merge, in any case that seems like one of many possible targets and a fairly arbitrary one - it doesn’t seem any closer linked to the focus group concept than many of the other marketing concepts discussed with it. There is a 500 page book about this and many many many articles. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:28, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

The book’s definition set out in its introduction is: “an online panel is a “form of access panel, defined in the international standard, ISO 20252 "Market, opinion and social research - Vocabulary and Service Requirements," as "a sample database of potential respondents who declare that they will cooperate for future data collection if selected" (International Organization for Standardization, 2012, p. 1). These panels sometimes include a very large number of people (often one million or more) who are sampled on numerous occasions and asked to complete a questionnaire for a myriad of generally unrelated studies. Originally, these panels were called discontinuous access panels […] Panel members can be re-sampled (and routinely are) to take part in another study with varying levels of frequency.” Not really a focus group since it involves many many more people while a focus group is small. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

i’ll try to expand it to start class tomorrow so the article actually makes clear what this is (and also because I feel obligated to put my money where my mouth is after writing so many words) PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:07, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

there are now words PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep This is pretty well known concept in the field of research. Taking a quick look at the google scholar results, besides the sources identified by PARAKANYAA, this research paper discussing online panels in marketing research, this research paper that talks about how online panels might have specific biases and this research paper talks about alternative ways to setup online panels to provide better quality data. I also don't understand the rationale of the nom, not having sources for a long period of time has nothing to do with the topics current notability and the refbombing allegations also appear to be exaggerated, all three of the references added are relevant and show that the topic has been written about in depth. Sohom (talk) 21:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Merge/Redirect to Focus group. Searching on scholar shows that "Online panel" and "Focus group" are closely linked concepts [7]. It makes sense to cover them in the same article. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:58, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting once more before potentially closing as No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:49, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge to Focus group - per Hemiauchenia. These are a thing, but they are not really an independent thing. Focus group is where readers will find the related informatio that supplies the context for the online panel. This should be treated there. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:06, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
@Sirfurboy The problem with that is that this isn't a focus group. It is a form of access panel, according to all of the sources that talk about it. If we're going to merge it anywhere it should be there but that article is worse. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
No, Focus group is the correct target. I think access panel should also be merged or redirected there. Neither makes much sense as a subject divorced from the parent subject of a focus group. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
Disagree. It being merged would just make the page worse. It is not the parent subject, they're related subjects but it is not the "parent". It makes more sense for it to be deleted than merged there, as it has no clear space in that article. There is a several hundred page book and several journal articles delineating the specifics of this concept. I think that is enough to keep. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
I would have thought it was clear that a page that already has a heading "Types" and a heading "Online focus groups" clearly has a place for this. As for space, that page has about 3,000 words of prose - half of the lowest threshold for WP:SIZERULE. So there is no problem with space. The reader is better served by having this aspect of focus group engineering treated in situ, rather than hived off to a page where there is little notable to say. Detailed methodology is not encyclopaedic information per WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
They are not online focus groups, though. We have an article on online focus groups already - which is what that section is on. I meant it doesn't have the space as in contextually, without it being made more confusing. There's plenty of notable encyclopedic stuff to say regarding its prevalence, usage, history, etc. PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
They are not online focus groups. Yes. Thus merge and not redirect. All other comments pertain. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
Access panel is a Redirect (it should appear as a green link) so it isn't a suitable target page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:03, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I do not think these topics are closely related enough to warrant merging. Almost all sources discuss them independently - while there are many hits for them together that's because they're two very widely used polling methods so they show up in a lot of academic studies, obviously. These are not the same thing, their only commonality is being "people you ask the opinion of" which is like, a poll. Focus group is usually a handful of people this is usually tens or hundreds of thousands. They are also established individual things (like, the individual panels) in a way that has no analogy in focus groups. By your logic, we should upmerge all of them including focus group to opinion poll. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Central Library, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi

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

no non-primary sources found. Sohom (talk) 04:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Draftify it for now, need to add more independent sources. Xegma(talk) 04:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries, Education, and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Redirect - to the associated educational institution. It's history will still be there in the unlikely event independent sources can be found. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 13:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Draftify that is still possible, it is not too late. Give the originator a chance to find true secondary sources. I think they should exist, but they might not be in english. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
The original creator has had two months to add such sources. Sohom (talk) 02:10, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

You are right ! the sources might not be available in english , it might be available in hindi langugae which is the most common language in india 150.242.22.239 (talk) 11:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Velappaya Mahadevar temple

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

no RS found found based on a google search. Sohom (talk) 04:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Hinduism, and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete I also found nothing. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 19:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
I am still at a delete stance. Citation 1 is just a list of a whole bunch of temples. Citation 2 dedicates exactly seventeen words to the temple and just says its location. The legend of the temple is not going to help contribute to notability much. I don't know about citation four but it's a census which does not give me hope for the amount of SIGCOV it has. Citation 5 is just a list of temples, I have questions about the reliability of citations 6 and 7, and I don't know about citation 8. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 02:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

retain this article because this article deals with the temple among the 108 Shiva Temples in India and as per Wikipedia guidelines it is enough for an article with three lines and subsequent wikipedians improve it. பொதுஉதவி (talk) 12:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep: Just added a few references and more info to the article. More seems to be available since there are published works containing this topic. The article now passes WP:GNG. Rasnaboy (talk) 19:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Noting that non of the sources added are considered RS. Most of them are listicals or travel guides that provide little to no reliable information. Sohom (talk) 20:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
draftify is the best option as, currently the article lacks historical context, reliable sources, and much more QueerEcofeminist🌈 16:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep Considered in the WP:LOCAL, it has Reliable sources ~~ Spworld2 (talk) 11:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
WP:LOCAL is not a policy. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:05, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a difference of opinion on the quality of sources. They need to be reliable sources that provide SIGCOV, not passing mentions. Also, User:பொதுஉதவி, I'd like to now what "Wikipedia guidelines" you are referring to in your Keep opinion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete: sorry but without any reliable sources available, this temple is not notable. The pleas for keep unfortunately do not relate to any of Wikipedia's standards. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Comment: I did a WP:BEFORE on "Velappaya Shiva Temple" and "Velappaya Mahadevar Temple", but there are no hits on google books or scholars. I believe the temple may have had a different name in earlier times or it is known by another keyword. This could be improved if we can identify the correct term to search for. User:Spworld2, User:Rasnaboy, User:பொதுஉதவி Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
~~Keep~~. As per Google books, a book titled 'The Mahabharta : A Summary For Beginners' written by the author Madhavan Kutty Manikath and published by 'Author's Ink Publications', at the footnote on page number 130, it is mentioned about Velappaya Mahadevar Temple, at Thrissur, in Kerala.

பொதுஉதவி (talk) 06:15, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

User:பொதுஉதவி, you have voted already and a mere mention of the temple's name in a book does not make it notable. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:00, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I've struck the duplicate vote. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, still no consensus or agreement on sourcing. At this point, it would be helpful to get a source assessment table (or a less formal review) to see where the truth lies.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Pinch to Punch

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

This lacks WP:SIGCOV even the article knows it limited information has surfaced online. Oricon yield no result, Natalie yield no result, even the Japanese article has one source, the only thing I could find that is RS is from the Media Arts Database Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 06:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Anime and manga and Japan. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 06:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Also nominating this related articles with the same reason as above

Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 06:15, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

(Keep) and improve with sources from the Japanese WP, that has a lot considering it's a 1969-1970 series! -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Education, and Transportation. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
(My initial !vote above is about Zen-chan Tsū-chan). I hadn't seen this was a bundled nom when I !voted through the assisted script. Procedural keep. These series have very little in common. And it's hard to discuss and improve the 3 at the same time without long tedious explanations and comments about what precisely is relevant to each case. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC) (The nominator indicates they nominated the pages "with the same reason" but the 2nd article has >10 references to reliable newspapers on JaWP, for example.)
I'll just seperate the 2nd one. Thanks for pointing out Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 13:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, my mention of ’the 2nd article’ is unclear: for the record, I mean Zen-chan Tsū-chan. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Redirects to the respective networks should also be considered.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:57, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
~~I would like to see some way to keep the content, and suggest a merge to Fuji Television.~~ For the ones which are made by Fuji, which doesn't include Zen-chan (please, please, don't do combined nominations of disparate articles!). Not sure about Zen-chan, as like @Mushy Yank this came up as a single article for me and I hadn't given it any thought before starting this comment
On Pinch to Punch it's unfortunate that there is so little secondary material out there although it seems even the primary material has been lost. This attests to its importance in the context of the development of Anime. This article could be perfectly happy as a stub, verified by what little information is out there~~, but it's hard to make a case for IAR on this.~~
Keep based on the anime encyclopedia entry and the existence of multiple shorter sources in the en. article and in the jp. article. Although the encyclopedia is the only lengthy treatment found, the article subject is clearly a launching point in the history of Japanese anime. The article is verifiable and the project benefits (and has little to lose) from these stub articles. Since this is basically an IAR argument, I've struck my inconsistent comment above. I still wouldn't object to a merge as a backup. Oblivy (talk) 07:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The issue with developing these articles would be our inability to access archives which would have information about an anime series from 50 years ago. Hard to imagine that Pinch and Punch, a series with 156 episodes airing on a national TV channel, wouldn't be notable with access to the correct archives. If someone is interested, perhaps Fuji or the National Film Archive of Japan can help? I would personally either keep or merge the articles at a minimum. DCsansei (talk) 07:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is no consensus here. But I don't see any support for Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete Yes lack of WP:SIGCOV.

Note - maximum sources are databases. and it's an enough reason to delete. Xegma(talk) 13:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

No. That is not true. References to Japanese newspapers of the time on the JA WP page. See my comments above, thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 01:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

There's multi-paragraph coverage in this book at 634, less extensive at 132, 146, and 268. Oblivy (talk) 02:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Réjane Magloire

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

Appears to fail WP:NMUSICIAN. Couldn't find any significant coverage or chart listings. C F A 💬 23:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and New York. C F A 💬 23:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
I’m not sure about this one. The current stub focuses on her acting as a supporting role in a film that lacks its own article (although it could be notable - Denzel Washington played opposite her. Can we hear from the relevant projects? Can someone please tag or list them? Bearian (talk) 01:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC) I vaguely recall this film, Wilma, because it was so terrible, like cult-status bad. Bearian (talk) 01:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep per WP:HEY. She had three charting singles and an album in multiple countries. I found a lot online. I’m not sure how deep the nom searched, or if they asked any Gen X person, or if they looked into stage and band names. Her acting career was marginally notable, but her musical career was big stuff. Even Mariah Carey covered one of her songs. Bearian (talk) 02:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete: I don't find any coverage of her in the BNF Gallica [8], Gbooks or anywhere else. Gsearch is only where to stream her music. Oaktree b (talk) 01:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Small notice in Billboard [9], the tiny photo in the box down near the bottom right, talking about royalties owing... That's all I can find. Oaktree b (talk) 01:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Flora Plumb

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

Fails WP:NACTOR with no major credits. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and United States of America. CptViraj (talk) 00:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep: her career as theater actress and educator seems rather notable and her contributions to TV series/film might be seen as prolific. I haven’t searched for better sources so this is a weak keep. Would a redirect to the Personal life section in the article about her sister be an acceptable ATD? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre, Education, and California. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Rebuttal. "Prolific"? Single TV episodes in about 20 shows and 6th billing in a film nobody's heard of denote a journeyperson actor. And being a high school teacher doesn't make her a notable educator. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:51, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
"a film nobody's heard of".....Except the critic from the LAT, for example. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, practically nobody's heard of. In any case, not a major film, and NACTOR asks for multiple notable films. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete In searching newspapers I find her named in places like TV listings. These attest to the fact that she appeared on the named TV shows but those short sentences or two are about the plot and her character, not about her. These could be useful in recreating her career if there were also 2 or more substantial articles about her and in reliable sources. This I do not find. The sources given here are two short obits, an article saying that she won a student award (not notable), and a paragraph in a newspaper naming some roles she had in minor productions. I don't find anything longer than a paragraph, and nothing in major news sources. I can't find that she won a major award. I'll swing back by to check on progress, if there is any. Lamona (talk) 02:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Lil Tony (Georgia rapper)

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Could not find sources to establish either this or WP:ANYBIO. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Georgia (U.S. state). Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep: Pitchfork and HIp Hop News are RS, we also have decent coverage in [10]. Not much coverage, but that's three sources and more than most articles we see in AfD Oaktree b (talk) 14:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
@Oaktree b Pitchfork and HipHop News are definitely reliable sources, but they do not provide the relevant significant coverage that we're looking out for. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
The Hip Hop Canada link I added above adds context, with the three, I think we have musical notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
I respect your stand, by the way :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 23:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete. I don't think Oaktree's sources add up to enough coverage to call this a WP:GNG pass. -- asilvering (talk) 20:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Weak Keep per Oaktree. The notability isn't great, but it is (probably) sufficient. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
Weak keep per Oaktree b. There's also this article by BroadwayWorld, and it's worth noting that the rapper is signed to Priority Records. Admittedly, it seems to be a borderline case of notability. Mooonswimmer 16:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Sonali Phogat

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBLP. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 15:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Politicians, Women, Television, and Haryana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep: Significant coverage in reliable sources, including BBC and The Hindu, and bylined articles in other media, indicating her notability as social media personality, politician, or related to her death. She meets the requirements, in my opinion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Goa. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi M S Hassan. Thanks for reviewing this article. However Wikipedia platform is created with principles and articles of public interest which has notability and I feel this article has. Request you to withdraw this notice.Thanks.Gardenkur (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Mushy Yank.Thanks Mushy Yank for his opinion.Gardenkur (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete – news coverage appears to be only connected to her death. As tragic as that event was, WP:BLPCRIME as well as WP:BLP1E applies. --bonadea contributions talk 11:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete. I'm finding the same as bonadea. Here is something more recent that mentions her, but again in the context of her death and without significant biographical coverage. -- asilvering (talk) 20:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
I should add that there is limited coverage of her in the context of her striking another politician with a shoe (example), which is also not very useful for WP:GNG, and some routine election coverage (example). So while I think it's plausible that there is solid biographical coverage out there, I don't think we've found it yet. If anyone can turn up an obituary (rather than an article about the circumstances of her death) that might give us something to go on. -- asilvering (talk) 20:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep - just from a quick search, appears across all major news media in country, both regarding death and various controversies. --Soman (talk) 00:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Pedro Neves (poker player)

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

Non-notable person, lacking WP:SIGCOV outside specialist poker websites. Does not appear to have won any notable, major tournaments. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:42, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Games, and Portugal. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete not notable. Alon9393 (talk) 20:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to hear from some experienced editors here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Weak, weak keep. Granted there's not much WP:SIGCOV, but two million-dollar cashes, including a win in a big WSOP event (8703 entrants = notable major tournament), are nothing to sneeze at. Otherwise, redirect to 2024 World Series of Poker. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep Has won a notable major tournament. PsychoticIncall (talk) 04:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

List of Royal Yacht Squadron members

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

Does not meet WP:NLIST. Might be WP:A3 eligible. Conyo14 (talk) 18:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete It looks like before it was removed, the list was mostly sourced from this unsourced (random?) list of supposed members of the squadron. cyberdog958^Talk 20:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge the full content (ie, before it was disruptively removed, eg [11]), to Royal Yacht Squadron. Each individual item on the list should be checked to see if their inclusion is supported by the content of their own biographical articles, but there's no reason to delete this list and no reason to remove the list of names wholesale without checking individual ones. -- asilvering (talk) 17:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Also, a random sampling of half a dozen members (those that have actual articles) shows none of them even mention the RYS. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)