User:Snotbot/AfD's requiring attention

Isha Malviya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The article heavily relies on unreliable sources as per WP:ICTFSOURCES. Single significant role in Udaariyaan. Does not meet WP:SIGCOV and WP:N. Editingmylove (talk) 08:15, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Beauty pageants, Fashion, and Madhya Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: At least one significant award won and 3 significant award nominations have her meet WP:ANYBIO imv. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
• Comment - Delete - Eye raising nomination, but that aside, I think this is close. There is a lot of fancruft references, interviews, general announcements, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, etc. And, winning an award or appearing on a television show does not give inherent notability (I think the Indian Telly Awards individual categories may not meet notability either). However, there are at least two references that are bylined and not just routine announcements here and here. I'll reserve a !vote at the moment in hopes someone can point out coverage that isn't routine. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I have not seen anyone provide coverage that would show notability so changing to a delete !vote. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

• weak delete: most coverage is about the TV show Big Boss [1], I wouldn't call it extensive coverage. This is a RS, but what's used in the article are all marginal reliability sources per Cite Highlighter, so I'm not sure we have enough to keep the article. Oaktree b (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: The user who has nominated the page for deletion is a new account created solely to ensure the page is deleted. The previous two nominations have also been a result of fandom war. As for the notability, it has been established the last 2 times as well. She has done 2 lead roles, one major reality, show, numerous music videos, a web series in post production, notable award nominations and wins. [FYI, Indian Telly Awards and Indian Television Academy Awards are two of the most notable ITV Awards regardless of whether the pages are well updated on Wikipedia or not.] The actress has sufficient coverage, apart from all her work and has more on the way. Hasty deletion to fulfill online fan wars makes no sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.39.32.83 (talk) 10:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

  Looking at your contibutions which is only this comment and anyone can say that you are the account created to this comment only. Columbidae5 (talk) 15:03, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:16, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 09:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: The article is looking like fan made article who is doing undo removed content. Neutral point of view is also missing in the article. It looks like promotional content. Columbidae5 (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: Notable personality. Filmography with different credits. Nominations and wins in terms of two known awards. Additionally, this seems to be another potential attempt by online supporters of other actors. The previous deletion discussion of this page was quite similar and was started by a fan of another ITV actress. This seems to be yet another example of social media hate propaganda. OCDD (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep as she is a notable actress and model who has gained significant recognition for her role in the popular television series "Udaariyaan," contributing to her widespread popularity. Additionally, her career achievements and public interest make her a relevant figure in the entertainment industry --RodrigoIPacce (talk) 17:54, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
• Delete: Per nom and Columbidae5's comment above. M S Hassan (talk | contributions) 09:28, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Please do not focus on the nominator and instead consider whether NACTOR is met and assess the quality of the sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: The sources are all passing mentions within routine announcements and contain zero biographical detail. Inclusion on Wikipedia is determined by sourcing, not by number of awards, award nominations, popularity, public interest or strong fanbase. The actress clearly doesn't meet WP:NACTOR.--Ilovetvshows (talk) 16:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
• Comment: This is decent coverage, but it's quite short. [2], Still not quite enough. Oaktree b (talk) 00:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
• Weak delete: Not seeing enough in-depth coverage that's not from poor quality sources or paid/churnalism. Ravensfire (talk) 21:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

  Starting to have some concerns that this is a bad-faith nomination by a sock / meat puppet of a blocked editor. My view still stands. Ravensfire (talk) 16:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Per WP:SBST, "tabloid journalism is not significant coverage," and that's what this WP:REFBOMB of a promotional article is. Twenty-two citations are to the Times of India's tabloid entertainment channel ([3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24]), which is considered an unreliable source per WP:NEWSORGINDIA. TellyChakkar ([25], [26]), Bollywood Hungama ([27], [28], [29]), TimesNowNews ([30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36]), News18 ([37], [38], [39], [40]), Economic Times Panache blog section, Zee News, DNAIndia, and the rest have similar problems (search for these publications on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard). Several links are to WP:YOUTUBE which for these purposes is a primary source. Basically, there is no non-tabloid, non-affiliated, reliable-source WP:SIGCOV of this individual to satisfy the tests of WP:GNG, WP:NBIO or WP:ENTERTAINER.

Ali Maisam Nazary (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for politicians and living persons WP:GNG and WP:Politician.A significant part of the text in this article lacks reliable sources. The sources provided only mention this person in passing, without significant coverage that would establish their notability in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines. Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 12:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

• Keep I believe this page merits retention. Several notable news sources have published articles in which Nazary figures prominently, such as this one by the New York Sun. Dan Wang (talk) 22:31, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Afghanistan. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 13:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: Highly WP:BLP concerns especially with the sourcing, which doesn't clarify or meet WP:SIGCOV in independent sources. In general view of this discussion, the article doesn't meet WP:NPOL. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  • What elements of the article are inadequate in their sourcing? Let's work to improve them before we move to scrap the page outright. Dan Wang (talk) 03:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

    Why are you so focused on preserving this article? Do you have any benefit? Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

    @Dan Wang What is your connection with this person and the political organization in which this person is active? (National resistance front) Your focus is only on the National Resistance Front and its individuals. Almost all your edits are related to this organization and its affiliated individuals. This is a clear violation of Wikipedia's policies. I would like to draw the attention of the respected admins to this issue. Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 19:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

    • Which policies am I violating (the ones your Talk page is littered with reprimands about)? In the last week alone I've edited a half-dozen different pages, ranging from musicians to American political events. A lot of my edits are indeed on Afghan topics, because I think it's an interesting subject area that merits documentation, and one I've been trying to improve the sourcing for. In the interest of full disclosure, I was the original creator of this article (I've created several over my 15 years as a Wikipedia editor), and I do want to see it preserved—not out of any inordinate attachment, but rather because I believe the de facto foreign minister of a major party to the 50-year-long Afghan conflict meets the notability standards for a Wikipedia page. Dan Wang (talk) 01:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

      I think if that is why you are creating an article about this man, the topics that should be discussed is his involvement in the conflict, not his early life and schools he graduated from 77.103.192.51 (talk) 20:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

      Good point, I wanted a good base of non-contentious material for the article (since pages touching the Afghan conflict have seen edit wars), but you may be right the ratio of past to recent experience might be a bit off. Dan Wang (talk) 00:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: If there should be WP:ATD, then redirect to the National Resistance Front of Afghanistan, since he is the foreign minister (still a non notable office). Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per Dan Wang. --Un assiolo (talk) 23:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
• Delete does not meet Wikipedia policies.Helal Ahmad Sharifi (talk) 19:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Garh Raipur Girls' High School (HS) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Seems very run-of-the-mill. Sources are all primary/government databases. No evidence of meeting WP:NORG * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:16, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

  I have fixed the issue. Please close this discussion. Arijit Kisku (talk) 07:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Sources updated,please remove afd. Arijit Kisku (talk) 00:12, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Independent sources has been added. Please close this discussion.Arijit Kisku (talk) 07:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. I have searched for sources and not found any. The current sources are not good enough. They are all primary, apart from possibly the teachers' journal, which I can't access. Leaning redirect to Raipur, Bankura#Education, but will wait to see if anyone else can find reliable secondary sources. Tacyarg (talk) 18:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

  Attached more independent sources. They are not government directories or any primary sources.They ate independet sources,so I request you to close the deletion discussion page. Arijit Kisku (talk) 07:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for adding two more sources. They are still not reliable sources, though. This is a request to tender for building works. It is a primary source. I'm not entirely sure what this is, as a pop-up ad I can't remove blocks part of the screen for me, but it looks like some sort of school listing, probably commercial. Do you know if the school has been covered in any off-line sources - books about the history of the area, memoirs of staff or people who attended? As Pppery said in the nomination, so far all we have are primary or commercial sources, nothing independent or reliable that shows notability. Can you access the teachers' journal - do you know what that says about the school? Typically, deletion discussions run for at least 7 days, so this is unlikely to be closed before then, so that other editors can comment. Tacyarg (talk) 11:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't have access to teachers' journal, but i can confirm, it's on page number 96, there is a teachers' information who was associated with the school. Arijit Kisku (talk) 15:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 16:16, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect to Raipur, Bankura#Education, as still lacking reliable secondary sources. Tacyarg (talk) 17:50, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:13, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:54, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Duri Kosambi, Cengkareng (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No sources, 2-sentence stub. Shows no notability. GoldRomean (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

• I would PROD this but it has been PRODed before, in 2012. GoldRomean (talk) 16:39, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. GoldRomean (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
• Keep a sub-district of a sub-district, but seems to pass GNG fairly easily if not GEOLAND: [41] [42] [43] Most of the best sources appear to be in Bahasa. SportingFlyer T·C 17:45, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
• At this point, delete. We're working from a decided lack of information here but GMaps shows this as, apparently, a neighborhood in Jakarta. Maybe it represents some level of administration, but it's patently not a village as the word is normally used in English, and the Indonesian term {Kelurahan} doesn't automatically correspond to a notable political/geographical unit. This comes across as part of yet another database dump except that we don't even know what database was used. Yes, we can verify that it's a "thing", but until we can say something about it in its own right, I have to go with deletion. Mangoe (talk) 21:12, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

• Note that a kelurahan is an official government designation in Indonesia - who knows who’d translated it to an "administrative village", but it's a real unit with a designated office where you go to handle papers and whatnot, listed in Indonesian ID cards as its own item. Juxlos (talk) 10:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: Not going to vote because I'm not familiar with how region designations work in Indonesia, but if this were to be deleted, shouldn't Kedaung Kali Angke, Cengkareng Barat and Cengkareng Timur also be deleted because they are unsourced stubs about administrative villages? C F A 💬 00:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus right now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 22:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Not sure SportingFlyer's sources meet GNG, although they're enough for a couple of sentences. If this does end up on the deletion side, it would be better to redirect to List of administrative villages of Jakarta, which could then be slightly expanded to say eg. "Duri Kosambi, named in reference to a Schleichera plantation which used to exist in the area." CMD (talk) 00:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
• Keep WP:GEOLAND, and the area has clear coverage from secondary sources in Indonesian. Not a self-governing part (mostly by virtue of being in Jakarta), but it's official and it's there. Juxlos (talk) 10:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Foundation for the Education of Needy Children in Fiji (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No real evidence of notability. The sources found in the previous AfD are all either dead and not archived or do not discuss the company in sufficient depth to satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH, instead consisting of routine announcements of companies dontaing to them. While that's a noble goal it's not notability-establishing * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:31, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, and Fiji. Shellwood (talk) 18:55, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:48, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: All coverage is WP:MILL. Not really anything about the company itself aside from funding announcements and press releases, which don't count towards notability per WP:ORGTRIV. The article is also in pretty rough shape and while I don't like deleting stuff for this reason, there simply isn't enough coverage out there to write a better article beyond a short stub. C F A 💬 00:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. There is a lot of coverage out there, most of it appearing to be press-release-based churnalism. But I think enough of it goes beyond WP:ORGTRIV, for example, these piece in the Fiji Times that involve reporting ([44], [45]), and this piece in FBC News ([46]). There is also some mildly critical coverage that for sure wouldn't be from a press release, see Fiji Times ([47]) and FBC News ([48]) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dclemens1971 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

  The first set of articles consists almost entirely of quotes from the organization hence fails WP:ORGIND. The second set does not discuss the organization in sufficient depth to satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:15, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

  I guess we disagree about what constitutes sufficient depth. I think several paragraphs constituting the whole of a news story on a single organization counts; I would describe the two more critical stories in particular as delivering "a level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements" per WP:CORPDEPTH. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. I think the sources support the article well and particulary the sources that include some negative press. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockycape (talk • contribs) 05:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:28, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per Dclemens1971. --Un assiolo (talk) 23:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Laboratory Response Network (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No WP:SIGCOV to establish WP:RS. Redirect to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, of which it is a part. Longhornsg (talk) 23:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Terrorism, Behavioural science, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 23:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
  • "No reliable sources"? There is one reliable source. None of the included material would be found in the CDC article. My vote: Retain. Valerius Tygart (talk) 17:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

    Per WP:GNG, the topic should receive SIGCOV in multiple RS, which having only one source does not satisfy. In addition, the coverage is simply WP:DICT, not WP:SIGCOV. Perhaps a merge. Longhornsg (talk) 18:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

• 'Redirect as above as lacking independent coverage. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is additional support for a Keep, Redirect or Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Weak keep Upon a preliminary look, it doesn't seem very informative, well sourced, or well written. Now to check if other sourcing exists... Okay, we could use the official site to at least clear up what the LRN is. Google Scholar shows that a number of research teams have written evaluations of the LRN: Public Health Reports, American Society for Microbiology, Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness... USA Today printed two opinion pieces from the same author on the subject [49]. Okay, I'm feeling weak keep. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
• Strong keep For reasons given above. Valerius Tygart (talk) 13:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep per Darkfrog24. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:52, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Do the sources brought up in this discussion contribute to the "multiple RS" required?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:55, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Divedapper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Draftification was undone so I'm bringing it to AfD. Both the sources used in the article and the sources found online as part of WP:BEFORE are uniquely interviews with the founder, with no sign of independent notability. In particular, WP:ORGCRITE is not met because of the lack of secondary sources. I suggest a Merge or Redirect to Kaveh Akbar as WP:ATD. Broc (talk) 05:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and United States of America. Broc (talk) 05:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

  It is not correct that "sources found online as part of WP:BEFORE are uniquely interviews with the founder." Only three out of the eight sources are, and those are interviews with NPR, The Indianapolis Star, and a student newspaper of Butler University, each focused on a festival organized by Divedapper.

  It is also incorrect that "WP:ORGCRITE is not met because of the lack of secondary sources." In fact, all of the sources used are independent and third-party sources. None run afoul of WP:NIS. For them to be "primary sources," that would indicate that Divedapper owns or has financial or legal interests or ties to these sources. Nothing I find in my research suggests so.

  Can the page Divedapper be improved upon? Absolutely. As can any other page. What has no basis in facts is the notion that it fails to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

  If it does fail to meet any criteria, one would expect a proper notification to that effect. Instead, Broc commented out the magazine's logo and did not state that he did so in the Edit Summary, which I found suspect and led me to conclude some bad faith at work. I took a look at their Talk page and found that they had used such "unorthodox" --- their own words --- methods before and a User had complained about it. In that case, Broc moved an article to AfD; but when there was no consensus, Broc voted "Keep," and then draftified the article. A User described the move as "misleading." In response, Broc wrote: "I understand I might have bent the rules of the process a bit." If all editors bent Wikipedia rules at will, then the purpose of the site is defeated.

  "Misleading" and "bending the rules of the process a bit" are descriptions I'd use for Broc as it concerns Divedapper. I'd very much prefer for things to be done in the right manner. I'd say "Keep." LityNerdyNerd (talk) 16:22, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need to hear from more editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

DWAD-TV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This was marked as {{db-hoax}} by Myrabert01. Not sure whether it is a hoax or not, but it is certainly unsourced and was until recently about a different station of the same name. Expert attention needed to decide what should be done here. See also the talk page. —Kusma (talk) 15:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. —Kusma (talk) 15:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
• Looking at the (blocked) page creator's talk page and other contributions certainly makes "hoax" look very likely. —Kusma (talk) 16:11, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
• Speedy delete I see trouble ahead. The details in the infobox do not make sense to anyone who understands the history of All TV or ABS-CBN. Even if this wasn't a hoax, I'd have problems with sourcing and possible existence thereof. I am pinging one user whom I trust to have the final word: WayKurat. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Revert, then delete or redirect to a list of ABS-CBN transmitters. Even de-hoaxing it does not provide significant coverage to work from. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
• Revert to older version This is the last stable version of this article, before it was bombarded with hoax information by several IP editors. Deleting this article should not be done since the hoax edits were just made last June 2024. -WayKurat (talk) 01:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Live Art Development Agency (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Sources not passing WP:ORGIND and I believe it fails WP:NCORP Graywalls (talk) 07:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Entertainment, Organizations, Companies, United Kingdom, and England. Graywalls (talk) 07:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
• Comment: As well the 2011 piece by Lyn Gardner of The Guardian which is referenced in the article, searches also find a 2019 piece by the same author. It is partly an interview with the co-founder of LADA, but starts with the writer's overview of the Live Art field and evaluation of LADA's role in it. AllyD (talk) 12:32, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

• The following doesn't contribute to notability here, but I will also note that the present article doesn't mention organisational controversy during 2023 (news item discussing the closure threat and petition). AllyD (talk) 12:37, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Quick google scholar search https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22live+art+development+agency%22&btnG= indicates multiple quality sources referencing the organisation and its significance in global and UK live art, including books https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=wyJHEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA12&dq=%22live+art+development+agency%22&ots=M7sejwMOu5&sig=66lY7cxWvj0E_0jIdmuCmVU5DN8&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22live%20art%20development%20agency%22&f=false and peer review articles dating back to the early 2000s DrawingDays (talk) 09:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

I vote against deletion. While the article has issues, they aren't based on notability. It is clearly a well-cited and long running organisation that is important the UK cultural scene. The article could more clearly lay out the history and challenges of the org, as mentioned above, but this doesn't warrant deletion. genericxz (talk) 13:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep The nominator has invoked WP:NCORP, however from this link [50] we see that the subject is a charity, therefore WP:NONPROFIT applies. It is not necessary for the subject to meet the more stringent guidelines put in place for corporate entities. On this basis - in particular including from the arguments above - there does appear sufficient coverage and citations of the activities of this charity to have a reasonable presumption of notability. ResonantDis_tortion 22:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

• Weak keep. The vast majority of sources in the article are primary or affiliated, or they are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS that discuss LADA in passing. However, we have a bare minimum pass of WP:NORG with Chatzichristodoulou et al., Martin and Keidan. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:54, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

TFhost (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I'm not seeing much third party coverage, likely to fail WP:CORPDEPTH. Unclear how much weight should be given to those awards. KH-1 (talk) 03:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. KH-1 (talk) 03:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

  Hi, as per WP:CORPDEPTH there a couple more recent references made even before this listing, https://von.gov.ng/website-hosting-firm-advocates-enhanced-data-protection-measures/ , https://dailytrust.com/cybersecurity-firm-urges-nigerians-to-guide-their-data-online/ . This nomination for deletion should be rescinded in my opinon 4555hhm (talk) 13:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:41, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:15, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

• The awards are verifiable especially those from NIRA, the Authority Domain Registry in Nigeria. The information on the awards is stated on NIRA website as per https://www.nira.org.ng and that has a lot of weight. 4555hhm (talk) 13:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep There seems to be a bias towards this nomination. By claiming no "independent content", you are a clearly denegrating the sources in the references given. A performance based award is given by an Authority Domain Registry and you acknowledge it as "PR"?. A company that won an award back to back from such Authority is not notable? What is notability if such awards are not deemed notable? If we go by your assertions, then many entities will not exist on wikipedia. As per GNG/WP:NCORP , there are more than 2 significant sources with independent Content on the company. These were clearly ignored by the editor that made the nomination. I am able to identity 4 references that meet the criteria for notability. Let us be fair to African Organisations who may not have the same level of media coverage that other organisations in Other continents may have. This nomination should be rescinded and article kept. 4555hhm (talk) 13:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

• Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. The sourcing is the usual regurgitation or company PR and the "awards" may be verifiable but they are not sufficiently significant to meet notability criteria. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
• Keep There seems to be a bias towards this nomination. By claiming no "independent content", you are clearly denigrating the sources in the references given. A performance based award is given by an Authority Domain Registry and you acknowledge it as "PR"?. A company that won an award back to back from such Authority is not notable? What is notability if such awards are not deemed notable? If we go by your assertions, then many entities will not exist on wikipedia. As per GNG/WP:NCORP , there are more than 2 significant sources with independent Content on the company. These were clearly ignored by the editor that made the nomination. I am able to identity 4 references that meet the criteria for notability. Even though GNG/WP:GNG as regards sources clearly states, "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected". Let us be fair to African Organisations who may not have the same level of media coverage that other organisations in Other continents may have. WP:ORGSIG"However, smaller organizations and their products can be notable, just as individuals can be notable. Arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger organizations or their products." This nomination should be rescinded and article kept.@HighKing 4555hhm (talk) 13:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC) (striking duplicate vote Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:17, 22 July 2024 (UTC))
  • Comment OK 4555hhm, notwithstanding your request to apply different standards to small African companies, you've said that winning an award should be counted towards notability. WP:ORGTRIV says that non-notable awards aren't counted towards notability and if this award were notable, I'd expect it to have its own page (cos we allow pages for notable topics). Most "industry" awards are not notale. You also say you can identify more than 4 sources which meet the criteria - but notably, you've failed to list even one such source. Not sure if you're including the article about the award by the ADR, but that article's content fails to include in-depth "Independent Content" - for example, it is easily proven not to be "Independent" since it is a word for word copy of an article in Nairaland (can't link to it because WP doesn't allow it) nairaland.com/4816995/tfhost-awarded-hosting-provider-year this article published on the same date (without an accredited journalist) and this in Nigeria Communications Week. In addition, this copy relies entirely on information provided by the company including quotes from a company officer. Also, to complete your quote from ORGSIG you must also remember that No company or organization is considered inherently notable. No organization is exempt from this requirement, no matter what kind of organization it is. HighKing⁺⁺ 15:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. It would be nice to hear from more participants.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Manuel D'Lima (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability under SNG or GNG. None of the sources are about him. Sources (and much of the content) are about taitrs. Material on him is just resume type material. North8000 (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Theatre, and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Poor to unreliable sources with no significant coverage on the subject. The subject fails notability. RangersRus (talk) 18:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Goa and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
• Comment a number of references are from offline books. Has the nominator managed to access them ? Atlantic306 (talk) 18:24, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

It's hard to answer with respect to what you are seeing because there have been 104 edits to the article since I nominated this. But I did evaluate them at the time. North8000 (talk) 18:52, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, a lot was added after you nominated this, including several refs, but much of it was WP:PROMO, fluff, repetition, and stuff about the genre of theatre that, I think, has no direct relevance to D'Lima's career. I tried to reduce the promo, cruft, repetition and tangential stuff, but someone else should review the refs to see if they actually discuss Liima's life or career at all. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to assess new additions to the article since it's nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no review of additions to the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Al Bu Sa'ad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article fails WP:GNG and is entirely made up of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. None of the sources mention "Al Bu Sa'ad". Additionally, there is a "Culture and cuisine" section which seems to have no relation to the topic of the article. Skitash (talk) 16:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

The Culture section refers to the culture and cuisine of the Al Bu Sa’ad tribe. Additionally, the sources refer to the Isaaq tribe which is a parent tribe of the Al Bu Sa’ad, or mention the Somali variation spelling of Al Bu Sa’ad as Sacad (bin) Musa. Please help out the article by adding citations rather than nominate the whole article for deletion.

Thanks,

Ismail. Ismail7Hussein (talk) 17:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups and Somalia. Shellwood (talk) 17:58, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more opinions on this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello,

I would recommend keep. As citations 1, 3, 6 & 11 all clearly mention “Sa’ad”, either referring to the actual tribe or the tribe’s progenitor.

Thanks,

Ismail Ismail7Hussein (talk) 14:25, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

• Draftify this is possibly a person writing about a local tribe. But, as the nom notes, none of the sources discuss the topic. It cannot be kept as an article in its current form, but it could be kept as a draft. Walsh90210 (talk) 02:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

6 Engineer Squadron (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The subject of the article does not seem to be notable. There is a lack of independent references provided. PercyPigUK (talk) 11:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Canada. PercyPigUK (talk) 11:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Any unit with a 113-year history is likely to be notable. Lack of independent references is not a good reason for deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
• Delete can't find independent sources to meet GNG. LibStar (talk) 09:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:23, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep As one would expect for such an old unit, there's numerous references to the unit in the media throughout the wars. Even a 1946 book, and discussion in numerous other books about operations in both World Wars as they participated in battles like Vimy Ridge and on Juno Beach on D-Day. The German execution of three captured prisoners (2 from this unit) at the hands of Wilhelm Mohnke in 1944 gets media attention, such as ProQuest 239462705 and also discussed in a book. Nfitz (talk) 16:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

MTA SZTAKI Laboratory of Parallel and Distributed Systems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The whole article currently relies on primary sources. Also, I am not convinced that a research laboratory of a university and/or a research institute needs a separate article, since there are no major achievements for this. All relevant information can be easily migrated to MTA SZTAKI; therefore, the article can be either completely deleted or, more suitably, merged with MTA SZTAKI. Chiserc (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Chiserc (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect to Institute for Computer Science and Control, which also has dubious notability as written. This is just a spammy catalogue entry with no indications of WP:GNG. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
• Institute for Computer Science and Control is also nominated at an AFD discussion and MTA SZTAKI is a redirect to that article, too. Is there another possible target article that isn't up for deletion? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The suggested target article has been deleted. Is there an alternative?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I can't see any other alternative article. Therefore, this article can be completely deleted as well. Chiserc (talk) 15:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Prashanth Venkataramanujam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable BLP. Sources relate either to Patriot Act or Hasan Minhaj. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj, you mean? And he might mean WP:CREATIVE as creator/writer of this series... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Television. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect to Patriot_Act_with_Hasan_Minhaj#Production: which seems to be what he is notable for so far. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
• I agree with the redirect proposed above. Drmies (talk) 22:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Greater Ozarks Conference (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails GNG. The few sources which mention the subject do not constitute significant coverage of it. Gödel2200 (talk) 02:45, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Gödel2200 (talk) 02:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Per WP:AVOIDCOI, making mention that I created the article. Additional information and sources added. Meets GNG's description of significant coverage, "... addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." Even when the article had one source, it sufficiently addressed the topic directly and in detail. Regardless, I have added more information to the article, as well as additional citations from additional secondary sources - all of which meet GNG's definition of significant coverage. I have also added an external link, on the article, to the press release report released by the founding schools when it was established - one of the cited sources also links to it. GuyBanks (talk) 03:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

  Unless the decision is made to delete all the other articles on individual Missouri high school conferences:

  • Big 8 Conference (Missouri)
  • Big Springs Conference
  • Carroll-Livingston Activities Association
  • Central Missouri Activities Conference
  • Eastern Missouri Conference
  • Frisco League
  • Gateway Athletic Conference
  • Greater Kansas City Suburban Conference
  • Kansas City Interscholastic Conference
  • Metro Women's Athletics Association
  • Ozark Conference
  • Suburban Conference (St. Louis)
  • Summit Conference (conference)
  • Western Missouri Conference

  In addition to all the other states high school conferences: Category:United States high school athletic conference navigational boxes

  GuyBanks (talk) 04:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

  Comment: Local coverage, such as what has been added here thus far, is usually not permitted for organizations per WP:AUD. Let'srun (talk) 18:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I think we need to hear from more editors
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep there is enough coverage in the page for a pass of GNG. Frank Anchor 19:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Bhimadeva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

MOS:DABMENTION requires "If the topic is not mentioned in the other article, that article should not be linked to in the disambiguation page". "Bhimadeva" is mentioned only in Bhima of Mahikavati, probably not a good target for a redirect. I suggest this page is deleted in order to enable uninhibited use of Search. A PROD was reverted by @Utcursch: with edit summary (https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=bhimadeva+caulukya) without editing any targeted article. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Bhima I now, quite properly, also mentions "Bhimadeva". The stipulation in WP:DABMENTION gives as the rationale for its claimed requirement "since linking to it would not help readers find information about the sought topic". In this case the links obviously would help the reader so this is one of the occasional exceptions the MOS allows for. Thincat (talk) 08:19, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

2019 CAFA U-16 Championship (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG, no significant coverage Mdann52 (talk) 08:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

1. the initial delete nomination (lack independent sourcing):

Link 1 by Khovar.tj National Information Agency of Tajikistan/ not related to CAFA

Link 2 Tasnim News Agency an Iranian new agency Independent from CAFA

Link 3 Turkmen news agency which is also Independent from CAFA

Link 4 Sport.kg an Information Agency; Sport.kg is the only specialized portal in Kyrgyzstan

and many more; that i will add to the article to enhance it sourcing

2. The tournament is organized by the Central Asian Football Association (CAFA), which oversees football in Central Asia. CAFA is a member of the AFC and, therefore, FIFA. As an international competition between member nations, the tournament holds significant notability. This is particularly relevant now, as some footballers who participated in the tournament are becoming prominent figures in Central Asian football and across Asia. The tournament shall be cited as the beginning of their international careers, further emphasizing its importance. Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 09:31, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Football, and Central Asia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:00, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:31, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

  I included more resources from other independent sources such as:
  jomhornews.com, m.kun.uz, trt.net.tr, and sport.kg. Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 10:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 11:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

  GiantSnowman can you please specify what's make a tournament notable enough; so i can send the sources that adresse it ? Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 12:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

  Significant coverage - the sources above are WP:ROUTINE. GiantSnowman 13:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

  Matchday 1:
  

  • Tajikistan v Uzbekistan at sports.uz
  • Kyrgyzstan v Afghansitan at sport.kg

  Matchday 2:
  

  • Uzbekistan v Iran at Tasnimnews.com
  • Uzbekistan v Iran at Sports.uz
  • Tajikistan v Kyrgyzstan at avesta.tj

  Matchday 3:
  

  • Iran v Afghanistan at Irannewsdaily.com
  • Iran v Afghanistan at farsi.alarabiya.net
  • Iran v Afghanistan at avapress.com
  • Kyrgyzstan v Uzbekistan at sport.kg

  Matchday 4:
  

  • Turkmenistan v Kyrgyzstan at Turkmenportal.com
  • Turkmenistan v Kyrgyzstan at sport.kg
  • Turkmenistan v Kyrgyzstan at Kabar.kg
  • Afghanistan v Uzbekistan at sputnik.af
  • Afghanistan v Uzbekistan at dzen.ru

  Matchday 5:
  

  • Kyrgyzstan v Iran at Tansimnews.com
  • Tajikistan v Afghanistan at sputnik.af

  Iran
  

  • All matches reports at toopball.com

  Kyrgyzstan
  

  • Kyrgystan at for.kg

  Other tournament reports

  • Champion at rus.ozodi.org
  • Championship at nm.tj
  • Schedule at ilna.ir

  Should I add more? The tournament's matches were covered by all the top news agencies in Central Asia.

  Also Asian Football Confederation did post all these covering the tournament

  • Matchday 1
  • Matchday 2
  • Matchday 3
  • Matchday 4
  • Matchday 5

  Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 05:38, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

• Comment International level competition and there are sources, however they are very young. So I am not sure at what level wikipedia should be keeping these. Govvy (talk) 10:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Keep

  let us remember that The Central Asian Football Association (CAFA) was only formed in 2015, and with the tournament being the 8th tournament organised, CAFA has shown significant progress in promoting and developing football in the region. Over the years, CAFA has developed its media coverage and reporting capabilities, making the tournaments more accessible and notable. While the first editions may have had limited coverage due to CAFA's emerging stage and limited experience, the organization's growth and increased attention highlight the importance of these early stages articles being there.
  

  Furthermore, for Central Asia, where international sports events are relatively scarce, CAFA's tournaments hold notable significance. The early editions of the tournament are crucial for understanding the development of football in the region and providing a better statistical context. As CAFA continues to grow and attract more attention, the historical records of all editions, including the first ones, will be valuable for researchers, fans, and anyone interested in the football in Central Asia.
  

  Therefore, despite its relatively young age, CAFA's tournaments are notable and deserving of coverage on Wikipedia, as they contribute to the broader narrative of international sports in Central Asia. Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 19:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect must be redirect to the Central Asian Football Association.Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 21:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We have arguments to Keep, Delete and Redirect right now. Let's get a few more sports fans in here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: Redirecting it would diminish the significance of the tournament compared to other international competitions. This is an Under-16 level event organized by all confederations; the article should remain. Similar to UEFA and AFC tournament editions before the 2000s, the early editions of the CAFA tournament need to be preserved.

Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 23:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@Lunar Spectrum96: you can only !vote once, I've removed the duplicate above. Mdann52 (talk) 07:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Kindergarden (demoparty) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. There is a Digi.no article, but it consists of telling what one of the organizers said. Other than that, I was only able to find mentions and short descriptions, such as "The two pure demo parties in Norway are Solskogen, which is organised in July every year, and Kindergarden, which is held in November. Kindergarden can boast that it is the world's oldest demo party that is still organised."

A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 14:35, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Computing, and Norway. toweli (talk) 14:35, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Redirect: All the sources are self-published or that Digi.no article which is pretty much just an event announcement. Could not find anything on google for it either. Probably sufficient to put "Amiga-focused demoparty which began in a kindergarden in YEAR and ended in YEAR, reaching 200 attendees in YEAR". Mrfoogles (talk) 15:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

i.e. just write what is possible based off those sources and maybe their website Mrfoogles (talk) 15:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Yabani (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am not sure but want a definitive consensus on the notability of this TV series. First off, the article doesn't meet our guideline per WP:NFP–there is totally a decline of SIGCOV, or maybe because I didn't find either, but I tried searching only to see release dates announcements, etc, and thus, doesn't satisfy WP:SIRS.

On another note, I found out that the additional criteria WP:NFO, and WP:NFIC may push for the userfication, given thoughts that it may still meet notability at the highest release (seems like it has been released), and because it started notable actors and actresses. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Film, Television, Entertainment, and Turkey. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Added a few things for verification; a lot of so-so coverage exists (in Turkish, English) and, although not great, it seems to show some attention to the production. Notable cast. A redirect to producer/network is imv warranted, so very opposed to deletion.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:26, 6 July 2024 (UTC) Updated !vote:I have added things and I am now convinced it meets the requirements for notability (more sources exist).My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, if there was a Redirect, what would the target article be?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:25, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

The target if redirect is chosen could be NOW_(Turkish_TV_channel)#Weekly_series.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:12, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep, it was one of most popular shows of the last season of Turkish TV. Don't have time to look now but I'm sure episodes received significance reviews, attention etc. Tehonk (talk) 04:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

You need to provide the reviews. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Also, redirect is better. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:27, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Alexander Heid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

References, when reliable, do not provide significant coverage of the subject to meet WP:BASIC.

• Rolling Stone primarily covers HackMiami, mentions Heid in passing as an organizer of the event.
• Financial Times quotes Heid in relation to the 2017 Equifax data breach.
• Ars Technica doesn't mention Heid in the article at all. Brandon (talk) 05:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Computing, and Florida. Brandon (talk) 05:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
• Keep, seems to meet WP:GNG per these two sources [51][52] which give sigcov but are not cited in the article. The RollingStone could also be of support because the subject is mentioned in at least three paragraphs. But almost all sources cited in the page fail notability requirement as the subject received zero mentions. Ednabrenze (talk) 07:48, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This needs more participation from editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep, seems to meet WP:GNG per the above referenced sources [1][2] which give significant coverage, the subject was the lead involved in all media interations for the content of the articles. The RollingStone article was coordinated by Heid as he is the founder of the HackMiami organization and the lead media liaison, and assisted in the entire process all the way through fact checking with RollingStone editors - additionally, as reverenced above the subject is mentioned in at least three paragraphs in the RS article.

Re: Financial Times - Heid was not only quoted in Financial Times but his discoveries were published in Forbes and referenced by a Senate Commission which names his employer at the time, and he was also the lead PR liaison with that as well - disclosing his discoveries directly to the press.

The Ars Technica article's content was based on a cybersecurity publication authored by Heid during his tenure at Prolexic, which received significant coverage. Infosecwiki (talk) 12:14, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

You've added Youtube videos to the article but those are not considered reliable sources. I had removed the ones previously in the article. Please do not continue to add these. Lamona (talk) 00:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect to HackMiami. The sources in the article are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of Heid, or else WP:PRIMARYSOURCES like patents or official bios and WP:PROMO fluff like "top 1000-cited papers on blockchain" (look closer: his paper on this list was cited just twice). The sources identified by Ednabrenze do not qualify. The Russ Banham article is self-published. (While it might otherwise count as WP:EXPERTSPS, given his reputation, the policy is very clear to "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.") The Caplin News article is published by Heid's alma mater FIU and written to spotlight him as an alumnus; it fails the test of independence. The sources not holding up to standalone notability, a redirect is an appropriate AtD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

  Reference the JSTOR, the Blockchain paper was cited over 38 times and has been circulating for over 11 years. Infosecwiki (talk) 16:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

  Vote to Keep: The Caplain News article is not an article highlighting alumni, as Heid never graduated from FIU and only attended for a few years in the early 2000s. The Caplain News Article was written by an independent journalist, Antonio Gimenez has authored numerous pieces on cybersecurity luminaries such as YTCracker, his interview subjects have no affiliateion to FIU unless it is coincidence. FIU will not claim the subject as a graduate, hence proof this is not an alumni fluff piece.

  The Russ Banham article is not self published, as the self publishing requirement would dictate that the subject need write the article on their own - Russ Banham is a third party journalist who interviewed the subject and the article was synicated on various outlets. Infosecwiki (talk) 16:12, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

  No, please read WP:SPS. It doesn't only refer to material by the subject, it refers to any self-published source and Banham is publishing the article on his own site like a blog. I agree, he's an expert reporter, but the policy explicitly restricts self-published sources from being used on BLPs. As for the FIU piece, it specifically describes Heid as a former student (alumnus does not necessarily mean graduate) and it's thus not independent. Finally, please stop !voting "keep" with every comment. You've !voted three times and it appears that you are trying to throw off the conversation. One !vote is enough. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for the feedback. I will put it into practice. I updated the reference to include more than just the Caplain article. Infosecwiki (talk) 22:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: Sourcing in the article is patents, and articles that mention the person in passing. Nothing found for notability otherwise, some PR items. Oaktree b (talk) 14:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

  Patent links removed, replaced with relevant notable content such as documented association with John McAfee. Citations updated for missing citation on conferences. Infosecwiki (talk) 16:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

  In regards to above, i vote for Keep Infosecwiki (talk) 16:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Infosecwiki, you can only "vote" once so I struck your duplicate votes. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. Infosecwiki, do you have a WP:CONFLICTOFINTEREST that you need to disclose? Above you state that Heid is "the lead media liaison, and assisted in the entire process all the way through fact checking with RollingStone editors." You also state that "he was also the lead PR liaison" on the Financial Times piece. Neither the Rolling Stone nor FT pieces say that Heid coordinated the PR process, and the HackMiami site does not say that either. That's the kind of information that, if true, could only be obtained by someone affiliated with or otherwise close to Heid and HackMiami. That plus the fact that you have only edited on these two topics raises concern that you may have an undisclosed conflict of interest. Can you address this? (P.S. If Heid was involved, as you say, in the production of these articles, that would argue against them being able to meet the independence standard required for notability.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

  I am referring to old Twitter discussions that I remember observing from years ago when the articles were released, I do not have any proof of these claims in present day 2024. I openly disclose I not only edited this article, but I created it over a decade ago. I am fully willing to disclose that I am the original author of this article as well as the HackMiami article. The subject of this piece has had notable accomplishments outside the realm of HackMiami and had a page created, and for the last decade it has stood the test until recent inquiries. I fully support the regular review of this article for continued inclusion, as such diligence is what makes Wikipedia the global standard of information. Infosecwiki (talk) 22:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reminder that editors can only cast one bolded vote.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:21, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

SMK TTDI Jaya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article does not satisfy Wikipedia's general notability guidelines (see WP:GNG.) The school already has an article in Malay Wikipedia so an English one would be unnecessary. N niyaz (talk) 07:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 July 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Malaysia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

• Merge: We should not delete the article on SMK TTDI Jaya. Yes, there is a parallel in another Wikipedia edition. Yet, each language edition has distinct readers and needs. The English version fails WP:GNG due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. In that case, it may be suitable to merge the English content into a broader article about schools in the region. Or, we can draftify it until we find more sources. This approach respects the need for information on other language Wikipedias. It also maintains the quality and notability standards of English Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AstridMitch (talk • contribs) 07:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
• Comment ms:Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan TTDI Jaya is the other article; unfortunately it is completely unsourced. Walsh90210 (talk) 15:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
• Comment If you are arguing for a Merge or Redirect, you have to identify an existing article in the English Wikipedia that it can be a viable target article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
• Comment - There are 11 thousand schools in Malaysia, schools like SMK TTDI Jaya, SMK Seri Kembangan and SMJK Yoke Kuan that lacks notability shouldn't be merged. If the outcome of these schools are merged or keep, it would mean 8-9 thousand schools are also eligible to have an article of its own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by N niyaz (talk • contribs) 00:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Orsett Heath Academy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this school, which opened in 2020,and cannot see significant coverage in reliable sources which is not run of the mill. I think it is WP:TOOSOON for the school to be notable. Tacyarg (talk) 09:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, United Kingdom, and England. Tacyarg (talk) 09:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
• Maybe merge to Orsett Heath or Grays, Essex (as its not actually in Orsett Heath). Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:45, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Try to focus on one Merge target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep as the academy plays a key role in the local community and its educational system, making it a relevant topic.--RodrigoIPacce (talk) 10:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Merge: Can probably be covered on Grays,_Essex#Secondary_education. IgelRM (talk) 11:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. Sufficient sourcing available to meet WP:GNG as with pretty much any other secondary school in the western world. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

  Is there significant coverage beyond the October 2019 opening announcement? IgelRM (talk) 10:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)