Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 15

Recent AfDs:    Today    Yesterday      November 19 (Tue)      November 18 (Mon)      November 17 (Sun)     More... Media   Organisations   Biography   Society   Web   Games   Science   Arts   Places   Indiscern.  Not-Sorted

Purge server cache

Mick Manning (darts player) (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)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 22:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Shellwood (talk) 22:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Based on 1 primary source. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 22:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:45, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. There is some coverage in google books if one searches "Mick Manning" "darts". It's not particularly in-depth but he does get passing mentions in secondary sources.4meter4 (talk) 01:17, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reg Harding (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)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 22:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Shellwood (talk) 22:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. No indepth coverage found. LibStar (talk) 02:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:45, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Federico Heinz (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 don't think this passes WP: N. I found one book that makes several mentions of Heinz (by Anita Say Chan), but everything else I could find is either not independent of the subject or references the subject in passing. HyperAccelerated (talk) 23:42, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Computing, and Argentina. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:27, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Here are some secondary sources with coverage. [1], [2], [3], [4], Whether this amounts to WP:SIGCOV is up for debate. To me it is borderline.4meter4 (talk) 01:26, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found [1] when doing a WP: BEFORE. [2] looks like a trivial mention. No comment about [3] and [4] as they are in a language I cannot read (though other people are more than welcome to translate those passages and make comments about them here). HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a strong opinion either way on this one. A possible WP:ATD would be redirecting to Fundación Vía Libre.4meter4 (talk) 04:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm comfortable with your proposed ATD. HyperAccelerated (talk) 20:46, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Frew (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)

Former professional lacrosse player. All I found were passing mentions such as 1 and 2. JTtheOG (talk) 23:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Maryland, and North Carolina. JTtheOG (talk) 23:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Palfreyman (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)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 22:56, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Just another single primary source creation by JRRobinson. A search turned up nothing of significance on which to base this article, outside of primary sources and bare results. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:56, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree on deletion for the same reason as Hammersoft. No major news coverage outside of professional darts organizations. Urchincrawler (talk) 20:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joey Palfreyman (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)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 22:56, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Based on primary sources and fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 22:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where The Robots Grow (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)

You know how sometimes it's hard to tell if a subject is barely notable and low profile (for now, anyways) or not notable at all? That's the problem with this article. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 22:13, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 22:13, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Comics and animation. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:01, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is absolutely no better than the hundreds of Vyond/GoAnimate grounding video or MS Paint masterpiece articles that have hit the AfD/speedy bin over the years, except an adult is proud of typing in a few things into a box and calling it a movie. At least you can say children are more creative than this (I tried to watch it but it made me ill from the uncanny valley framerate). Nate • (chatter)
• Comment: There's a full-length Forbes article about the film. I'm not ready to vote Keep yet, but that's a good start. Toughpigs (talk) 00:16, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Content written by Forbes contributors is deemed generally unreliable (WP:FORBESCON), so that particular article can't be used for establishing notability. toweli (talk) 23:35, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify. Being the first AI generated animated film seems like an important milestone. It looks like the film was created more as a way to show what the production company can do as opposed to releasing a real film. More coverage may emerge over the next week or two to prove WP:SIGCOV. I say move it to draft and require that it go through draft review before coming back to mainspace. If better sources don't emerge it will time out in draft.4meter4 (talk) 01:37, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @4meter4 I thought of that, but this is a situation where a draft was technically objected to. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 01:51, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's the advantage of an WP:ATD at AFD. We can force an article to undergo a draft review.4meter4 (talk) 02:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4 My thought exactly. Deletion, redirect, draftify, significant improvement...anything other than "the article existing as is" is good, to be honest. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 06:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Way too soon - this film is only a month old. Short announcements pop up in AI/SciFi informal web sites, but that's all. IF (big if?) this eventually becomes a film that has had an impact, an article can be created then. I don't even think there is enough here to warrant draftify. Lamona (talk) 01:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The film doesn't pass notability guidelines at this point in time. The only usable source is the one from Deadline, which isn't enough on its own to pass notability guidelines. As far as the claim of it being the first AI assisted film goes, there are two issues with this. The first is that this is only going to be noteworthy if it's covered in-depth by independent, secondary reliable sources. The second is that well, we can't guarantee that this is actually the first AI animated film. A search for the term "first AI animated film" brings up more films than Where the Robots Grow (WTRG) - I found people making the same claim for this film and this one, as well as this cartoon series for example. I do see a lot of info for WTRG, but this could be a result of the company being fairly liberal with their marketing campaign. Basically, we can't guarantee that this is the first one so we can't use that as a sign of notability - especially as there are people out there who have made the same claim and at an earlier point in time than the production company for WTRG. It's why coverage is so important and why even with an abundance of coverage we would have to specifically state that the film "claims to be the first AI animated film".

If someone wants to draftify this in their userspace, that's fine, but at this point in time the film just doesn't pass notability guidelines. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:20, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Giant Country Horns (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 has been unsourced since it was created in 2006. This group fails WP:BAND, no significant coverage found in reliable sources. None of the members are notable, they haven't released any albums, or won any awards. Their initial claim to fame is based on them playing with Phish during a 1991 summer tour. Isaidnoway (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:30, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV. See the following [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], Best.4meter4 (talk) 01:47, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vermont-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:03, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per 4meter4’s sourcing. WilsonP NYC (talk) 14:05, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

^txt2regex$ (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: N. I can't find any credible secondary sources that would establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 21:52, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I can't find anything other than passing mentions. Fails WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 01:51, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Ditto about passing mentions. I was somewhat surprised to find that this code, originating in 2001, has had some recent (2-4 years) updates. Possibly a useful utility, but not notable. Lamona (talk) 02:08, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Useful tool, but not notable. ThatIPEditor ^{Talk · Contribs} 09:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect: Redirect and add to Regular expression as an example.VectorVoyager (talk) 11:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pranav Adani (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 individual. Sources are promotional and cited to WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Only known for being a relative of Gautam Adani. See WP:INHERITED. Ratnahastin (talk) 09:54, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Gujarat and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - as noted above, infomercials have taken over previously responsible media there, so sourcing about business in India requires better quality sourcing. Bearian (talk) 08:54, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: per WP:BEFORE, subject passes WP:BASIC. And this article has persisted since 2018. AFD Nomination seems intentional or any paid agenda. B-Factor (talk) 13:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:BASIC states- "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." — So far not a single source has been provided that offers significant coverage to the subject and doesn't fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA, which raises concerns as to whether the supposed coverage is even independent. Articles are not considered notable only because they have existed for some time on Wikipedia. Your last sentence is a serious aspersion without any basis. - Ratnahastin (talk) 06:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:INHERITED. Nothing shows he is notable outside his relationship with Gautam Adani. Lorstaking (talk) 04:11, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: The subject holds multiple notable positions in notable organizations, and the sources are reliable enough. Citations can be implemented.Lalu Faizy (talk) 19:06, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Holding positions in notable organisations does not make one notable by association, see WP:INHERITED. - Ratnahastin (talk) 04:02, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources India.com, Business Standard, DD, DNA India, Business TodayFugoja (talk) 20:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  These are very poor sources for establishing notability, as all of them are Indian news organisations, which are known to release paid articles without any disclosure, as outlined in WP:NEWSORGINDIA.

  Your first source is sourced to india.com which is written in a promotional language. Same thing with the second source, your third source is only a DD footage of his speech at Uttrakhand GIS 2023, your fourth source also appears to be a paid article given the promotional tone, and your fifth source is only a transcript of the speech he made at GIS 2023. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:36, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:INHERITED. None of the references above establish WP:GNG. Dympies (talk) 05:32, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: The article is live since 2018, and the article has maintained a certain level of notability over time. Since it's creation, the article has been developed with reliable sources, and although it may have room for improvement, its longevity demonstrates to met WP:GNG and WP:PEOPLE when it was initially published. Regemoso (talk) 08:04, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Articles that have existed for far longer than this get deleted regularly at AfD, keeping an article only because it has existed for some time has no basis in policy. - Ratnahastin (talk) 08:10, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Do we have a possible WP:ATD here? A redirect to Gautam Adani? Or would that be irrelevant to that article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Close as No Consensus. I think its time to close this as WP:NOCONSENSUS. The problem with the whole WP:NEWSORGINDIA argument is one is never sure whether the coverage is paid or independent, and it essentially means that anybody living India who draws national but not international news coverage might become the target of such an AFD. To my mind, this kind of reasoning is a shot in the dark because it could be legit, and it might not be. What is certainly does is reinforce WP:SYSTEMICBIAS against article on Indian people which is problematic. With people on both sides of the issue, and with no definite proof that the coverage isn't independent I'm not seeing a strong consensus to delete at this time.4meter4 (talk) 02:02, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:N. There isn't one source that has significantly provided coverage to this person. The sources only give him little importance because they are discussing Gautam Adani. CharlesWain (talk) 03:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete undoubtedly fails WP:GNG. Not opposed to creating a redirect. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. As relative of a notable Gautam Adani does not make the subject notable. WP:INHERITED. Not opposed to Redirect. RangersRus (talk) 13:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• 'Weak Keep as per the following three reliable references; South China Morning Post, Financial Express, and Business Standard. If there are more such citations, the page could meet the criteria outlined in the Heymann Standard. However, we should keep in mind that WP:THREE and WP:HEY are essays, not an established guidelines. Charlie (talk) 13:26, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @CharlieMehta: South China Morning Post source is discussing Gautam Adani and only giving short coverage to Pranav Adani based on his familial relationship and the benefits that come with it (positions in his companies). The Business Standard is an Indian news organisation and the source is written in promotional tone, it also says "Pranav Adani, Managing Director, Agro and Oil & Gas, Adani Group" at the very bottom of the page which is very unusual and the Financial Express source only has a generic byline and same promotional tone, therefore both would fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA as likely sponsored articles. - Ratnahastin (talk) 04:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete based on the source analysis provided by Ratnahastin. Charlie (talk) 15:46, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep In terms of notability, the subject passes WP:GNG as there is significant coverage Bloomberg, DNA, India.com. Regarding the concern about promotional sources, Indian media employs such a style to attract readers to drive traffic, which can sometimes come across as promotional. The subject has the potential for improvement rather than deletion. Tedamime (talk) 19:00, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Except for Bloomberg report (which concerns Adani's slum rehabilitation program), all three of the sources have been addressed above. If you think Indian media does not engage in undisclosed paid releases, then you should get such a consensus on RSN. - Ratnahastin (talk) 19:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete completely fails WP:N. Sources do not discuss his biography. The above hand-waves about notability are dubious. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 11:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep:- There is no definitive proof that the coverage is not independent. Unless clear evidence is provided to discredit the sources as unreliable or paid. The article appears to meet WP:BASIC, as it has received significant coverage in multiple sources. Not found any strong consensus for deletion. Avishek Pilot (talk) 19:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:NEWSORGINDIA is very clear on what to consider when assuming an article to be a sponsored content. "Look at the tone and language of the article, its placement in the publication, use of generic bylines not identifying an individual reporter or reviewer, overlap in language with articles found in other publications and on other websites, and others" Almost all the presented sources have one or all of the aforementioned issues. This is also the first AFD you have participated in, like many of the "keep" votes above, I wonder what's going on.- Ratnahastin (talk) 00:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Please see WP:AVOIDYOU. Avishek Pilot (talk) 10:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note to closer - Adani family is known for its bad history with Wikipedia Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-02-20/Disinformation report which involved socking and paid editing spanning a decade, even this article has a shady history. This AFD is also seeing a wave of new users that have never participated in deletion nominations before, coming here to vote "keep". Please take this into consideration when closing. Thanks. - Ratnahastin (talk) 01:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep According to an old saying, for every successful person, there are a number of people who hate them for no reason. The same is true in this case with the Adani family. Without a question, Adani Group is the most famous business group in India and the world. The nominator also nominates this 2nd time: Adani EnterprisesLet's come back to Pranav Adani, He is one of the notable businessman of Adani Family, passes WP:GNG. Having presence on notorious resources passes WP:SIGCOV. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Prove how it passes WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV, vague hand waving at policies does not amount to much. - Ratnahastin (talk) 13:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Many sources have been posted by users wanting to keep this article, although I have already addressed and analysed them in my replies, I'm still going to post a source analysis in tabular form to make it easier for the closer.

Reference Number	Reference	Comments	Independent	Significant	Reliable	Secondary
1	https://www.india.com/business/meet-man-who-studied-at-harvard-and-boston-works-closely-with-gautam-adani-he-is-adanis-7278041/	Promotional tone and emphasizes his "blood relation" to Gautam Adani, falls under NEWSORGINDIA.	No	Yes	No	Yes
2	https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/pranav-adani-powering-ahead-114111201488_1.html	Promotional flattering puff piece from 2014 that falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA.	No	Yes	No	Yes
3	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMe6BgJCXfM	DD footage of his speech at GIS 2023.	Yes	NA	No	No
4	https://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-meet-pranav-adani-one-of-the-heirs-to-india-s-leading-business-empire-he-is-gautam-adani-s-nephew-3111696	Appears to be a promotional press release like the business standard source above, falls under NEWSORGINDIA.	No	Yes	No	Yes
5	https://www.businesstoday.in/magazine/columns/story/indias-green-journey-why-the-country-must-tone-down-its-reliance-on-thermal-energy-according-to-pranav-adani-418968-2024-02-26	Probably the transcript of his speech at a summit,the source lists Pranav Adani as the author.	No	No	No	No
6	https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/article/3281554/meet-4-heirs-poised-inherit-gautam-adanis-us213-billion-empire-karan-jeet-pranav-and-sagar-company	A few passages dedicated to him emphasizing his role as the inheritor of Adani's fortune.	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
7	https://www.financialexpress.com/life/lifestyle-meet-pranav-adani-the-lesser-known-nephew-of-gautam-adani-and-brother-of-karan-and-jeet-adani-know-about-his-career-education-and-more-3588785/	Indian outlet & promotional puff piece, has generic byline and falls under NEWSORGINDIA.	No	Yes	No	Yes
8	https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-08-08/adani-group-says-it-can-revamp-dharavi-even-as-it-becomes-political-flash-point	Only the second last paragraph covers him,while the last one is quoting him, the source only appears to state his relationship with regards to Adani group's efforts at slum rehabilitation.	Yes	No	Yes	Yes

- Ratnahastin (talk) 08:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As discussed on WP:NEWSORGINDIA, there is no indication of sponsored content, such as supplements, published by these media outlets. Additionally, there is no evidence of Brand Wire, Press Release News, Business Spotlight, Brand Post, or Impact Feature. It remains unclear why the nominator continues to consider the content as paid. Avishek Pilot (talk) 10:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I already addressed this. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal opinions alone may not serve as a valid basis for arguments. The entire summary of the AFD seems to rely on personal thoughts without supporting or verifiable evidence to substantiate the concerns raised. Some comments made during the discussion seem aimed at challenging opposing point. As this is a collaborative discussion, it’s important to consider all perspectives and await the final decision. Avishek Pilot (talk) 11:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This does not address what I wrote there. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:33, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Per source analysis provided by the nominator, the subject appears to have only received coverage in paid advertorials while reliable and independent sources only offer rudimentary coverage, that too for being Adani's nephew. Nxcrypto Message 14:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Many sources are available, and as per WP:BASIC, established WP:GNG. Please see the coverage the rediff.com here, Indian Express here, Livemint here, Navbharat Times here. The arguments on WP:NEWSORGINDIA seem to center around the confusion of whether the content is paid or not. However, as per WP:NEWSORGINDIA, there is no indication of paid coverage, only a writing style often used in Indian media. Historically, Indian media uses a promotional tone to attract readers, this does not necessarily indicate paid coverage. If this standard were applied broadly, no Indian article would remain on Wikipedia, as the common issue would always be a promotional tone without evidence of paid coverage. Deleting an article based on such a premise does not align with WP:PURPOSE. Kevarove (talk) 18:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The source analysis is persuasive, far more so than any of the Keep analyses. Edwardx (talk) 19:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- The source analysis by the nominator appears to be based on personal interpretations, as reflected in comments like 'promotional tone,' 'promotional press release,' 'probably the transcript,' 'Indian outlet,' and 'promotional puff piece.' These points lacking in dependability. Additionally, as WP:NEWSORGINDIA is under question. The subject is a well-known business entity, recognized in India and globally. The analysis by Kevarove Pass WP:SIGCOV. Wyzoqaku (talk) 20:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Cranston (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)

Subject played one season of professional lacrosse. I found this piece (continued here), which appears to be WP:SIGCOV at first glance but really only amounts to about six sentences of independent coverage of Cranston. There is also this and this from his post-playing career, which is why I decided to put it up for discussion. JTtheOG (talk) 21:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, California, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. JTtheOG (talk) 21:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cole Stratton (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 performer; lacks significant coverage in independent reliable sources, failing WP:NACTOR / WP:GNG. All references are mentions of subject in articles about podcasts/live appearances, no significant coverage found in Google News. -- Wikipedical (talk) 17:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, California, and Michigan. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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, asilvering (talk) 21:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep or redirect to SF Sketchfest as an WP:ATD. Here is one good source example from San Francisco Gate: [12]. There are bunch more there in this search result; most of which are related to the SF Sketchfest, but some also reviews of his performances as a sketch comic. As the founder of a notable festival in San Francisco there is a certain degree of notability, but it might just be better to redirect to the festival page.4meter4 (talk) 02:17, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore Wind Symphony's Percussion Ensemble (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)

Subgroup of an ensemble that currently does not have a page. The Singapore Wind Symphony may be notable from my research, but the percussion ensemble is not. Why? I Ask (talk) 18:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Singapore. Why? I Ask (talk) 18:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• delete no evidence of notability. --Altenmann >talk 18:59, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - sounds interesting, but there aren’t enough sources to make even a stub. Bearian (talk) 03:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. The Drum: A History (2012, Scarecrow Press) gives it a brief mention as a notable ensemble on page 186. It's not in-depth, but a fact that the ensemble even gets a nod in an academic book about the history of the drum is a clue that the ensemble may be notable. This is an article about the group winning an international percussion competition. This is an interesting article promoting a Berlin concert; although it clearly wouldn't be considered independent. It's possible foreign language sources exist about the group given they have toured to Europe as well as in Asia. Perhaps something in the Berlin press for example? 4meter4 (talk) 06:18, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:34, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Gilman (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)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Shellwood (talk) 21:30, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT, only primary sources and IMDB supplied. LibStar (talk) 00:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Herbert (darts player) (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)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Wales. Shellwood (talk) 21:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT, only a single source provided. LibStar (talk) 22:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea Micheletti (darts player) (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)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 21:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT, only primary sources provided. LibStar (talk) 00:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Eastwood (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)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Shellwood (talk) 21:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT, only a single source provided. LibStar (talk) 22:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Goldie (darts player) (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)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Scotland. Shellwood (talk) 21:30, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no notable achievements nor coverage of any significance ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 13:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elephant football (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 secondary sources that shows WP:SIGCOV Demt1298 (talk) 20:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism, Football, Nepal, Thailand, and India. Demt1298 (talk) 20:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• There appears to be some coverage of the topic of elephants playing football, e.g. Newsweek, Reuters, The Independent, AS, News9, as well as some books, e.g. [13] & [14]. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Elephants are sadly abused in many ways, but the fact that this happens doesn't make it a specific notable topic. If anything there can be a sentence at Elephant polo saying they are forced to play other sports, but these sources don't justify an article here. Reywas92^Talk 21:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:03, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or perhaps find a suitable WP:ATD such as a merge to Captive elephants. There is coverage on this (both as an event and people protesting it) in secondary sources: [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21] Best.4meter4 (talk) 02:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 08:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Captive elephants as above. GiantSnowman 08:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: It makes no sense to redirect to captive elephants. If such logic is applied all sports involing animals will be affected. There is no harm in keeping and incubating the article. Such sports is basically for tourism activities rather than for hard core sport activity. Also as 4meter4 pointed out, there is WP:SIGCOV as well. nirmal (talk) 04:21, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• KeepAs per 4meter4 and BeanieFan11 there is WP:SIGCOV for this.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanun Pyriadi (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 on this previously-unreferenced BLP about an academic and chemist, and have added one reference. I cannot find other coverage, however, and on the basis of what I can find, cannot see that notability is demonstrated. I accept I may be missing coverage in Arabic. Please see the commented-out section headed "Additional contributions by professor Thanun Pyriadi since 2006 up till now": I do not think that anything listed there pushes the article into notability (and it is unreferenced anyway), though would be pleased if other editors can demonstrate otherwise. I do not think there is an obvious redirect target. Tacyarg (talk) 20:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Science, Iraq, United States of America, and Massachusetts. Tacyarg (talk) 20:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: There certainly are a lot of claims of notability, but a lack of reliable sourcing verifying those claims. No prejudice against recreation should such sources appear in the future, but we cannot sustain the article as is. Ravenswing 23:04, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I cannot find anything that would qualify for WP:NPROF, his citation numbers are quite weak and I see no major awards. There is nothing else that might qualify him for a different class of notability. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Train simulator (disambiguation) (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)

A disambiguation page is supposed to list unrelated topics with the same name. This does neither of those - the topics aren't unrelated (all being of the same class of video game) and aren't all called Train Simulator unadorned either. What this really is is a mistitled list of train simulators, which is wholly redundant to the longer list at Train simulator * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Disambiguations. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to Train Simulator per WP:DIFFCAPS but keep; Microsoft Train Simulator appears to be called simply Train Simulator at times, so there are at least two potential primary topics. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:10, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, I removed entries not titled "Train Simulator", it still leaves 3 entries. Microsoft Train Simulator is called in reviews just "Train Simulator", see this review for example: [22]. --Mika1h (talk) 09:39, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This still has the same problem. It's still a list of train simulators in disquise, and wholly redundant to the broad concept which already lists two of those games and could easily be modified to include the third. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:57, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as this now makes sense due to the changes made by Mika1h. WilsonP NYC (talk) 14:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Now that it's been cleaned up, it's just a normal disambiguation page for things called "train simulator". Yes, these are all video games. Yes, you could probably find them all on a list of train simulator video games. That is not a valid reason for deleting a dab page. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:37, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: valid dab page for things called "Train Simulator", even if they also all happen to be train simulators and mentioned [elsewhere as such. PamD 09:11, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While I agree that these are all in the same genre, they are also all still referred to as "Train Simulator," and there is no primary topic here. This disambig has a valid use case, and is fine to be kept. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:56, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ash-Shatat (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)

Based nearly entirely on unreliable sources, with no lasting significance or impact. nableezy - 17:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Israel and Lebanon. nableezy - 17:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Syria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article currently based on poor sources but there seem to be better ones out there.

[23][24][25][26][27][28] BobFromBrockley (talk) 00:53, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this far out news reports are primary sources. One of those seems fine though. nableezy - 13:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, media reviews/commentary are secondary regardless of temporal distance (which is mentioned at WP:PRIMARYNEWS). Sources above are good. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:09, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those aren’t media reviews, they are news stories. nableezy - 14:14, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They are commentary on the program and its existence, they're not merely "this program aired" they discuss it and its context. So I think it counts. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:15, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There also seem to be a decent amount of mentions of this program in academic books, but most aren't very long admittedly, not passing but not extensive. However there are quite a few. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:22, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - in addition to the sources Bob mentioned, which are indeed secondary, there's significant coverage in books, articles, and government reports, mostly under "al-Shatat" rather than "ash-Shatat". A lot of it I don't have access to, but some public ones are [29] [30] [31] [32]. So I think it meets WP:GNG, the article certainly needs work though. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 23:12, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per xDanielx Andre🚐 01:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Thank you. The sources presented seem to allow to improve the page (which badly needs it) and show it's notable enough. Some contain only a brief amount of coverage on the fiction and a lot of context but all in all, I find there's enough, so opposed to deletion. -Mushy Yank. 03:00, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, History, Politics, Judaism, and Middle East. -Mushy Yank. 03:06, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep:The sources seem good enough to keep as a stub and to allow more work on this article to improve it rather than deleting. The subject is important and Wikipedia should try whenever possible to include articles that show the deeply ingrained antisemitism in the Arab world, as opposed to covering it up as if it doesn't exist. DaringDonna (talk) 20:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Occupation of Lazistan Sanjak (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)

As some ISBN numbers seem to be invalid I am not sure this is notable enough to be a separate article. No objection to merging into Lazistan Sanjak or elsewhere as an alternative to deletion Chidgk1 (talk) 16:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Russia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete along with all the other spurious creations by this editor. Unverifiable is about the politest thing you can say about it. Mccapra (talk) 18:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Mccapra. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS Klabat Jaya Sakti (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 evidence of secondary coverage that shows WP:SIGCOV Demt1298 (talk) 16:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Indonesia. Demt1298 (talk) 16:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep I do see Indonesian articles such as [33] [34] [35] which demonstrate the club is covered in the media on a consistent basis, but I'm struggling with the language barrier. SportingFlyer T·C 18:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 08:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per sources above which (appear to) show notability. GiantSnowman 08:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The sources in the article and this AfD only cover the game results, not the subject itself. As a team playing in the lowest division of football in Indonesia, its notability is limited to its region and it's relatively unknown on a national level. IMO, it doesn't meet the GNG. Ckfasdf (talk) 09:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that according to WP:SPORTCRIT; Local sources must be independent of the subject, and must provide reports beyond routine game coverage. None of sources in the article and this AfD provide reports beyond routine coverage, such as information about the team itself. Ckfasdf (talk) 10:00, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – The sources presented are sufficient for WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 16:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: The sources appear to meet the required standard of notability and provide credible and sufficient evidence Bernie Clay Bear (talk) 01:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Per WP:SPORTCRIT, "Local sources must be independent of the subject, and must provide reports beyond routine game coverage." None of the sources above or in general provide significant coverage of the club itself beyond routine game coverage. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:13, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Elmalıca (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)

Not enough reliable sources (Greek City Times is unreliable) Chidgk1 (talk) 16:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:34, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete along with all the other spurious creations by this editor. Unverifiable is about the politest thing you can say about it. Mccapra (talk) 18:20, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Mccapra. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lazistan campaign (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)

Although the journal exists I cannot find the journal article

https://osmanliarastirmalari.isam.org.tr/dergi/search/index?query=Rebellion+and+Resistance+in+Ottoman+Anatolia&dateFromYear=&dateFromMonth=&dateFromDay=&dateToYear=&dateToMonth=&dateToDay=&authors=

Skudaslazuri - did you use an LLM? If so please could you explain how you used it - for example what was your prompt?

If anything is worth keeping from this article I have no objection to it being moved to Laz rebellion (1832–1834) Chidgk1 (talk) 16:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:34, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete along with all the other spurious creations by this editor. Unverifiable is about the politest thing you can say about it. Mccapra (talk) 18:20, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Mccapra. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lochiel, Indiana (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)

Here we have something of a puzzle. Baker describes it as a post office; google searches produce a railroad liability case from the 1910s in which a girl boards a train here, though the earliest topo I could find, from 1963, shows no trace of a rail line. Another hit is for a grain elevator, and that is still there, or some similar business. But that's it, except for a single house next to the facility. It's very rare for a rail line to evaporate that entirely, so I'm not utterly convinced that these hits all refer to the same place; but all in all I'd say there is a lack of evidence for a settlement here. A rail station seems the best fit. Mangoe (talk) 15:44, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of saints (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)

List has no clear criteria for inclusion. And if we were to include every saint from the four Churches mentioned in the table, then it would be far too long. I've created a new article (Lists of saints) which should serve as a directory for lists of saints, so I believe List of Saints should become a redirect to that. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Religion, and Christianity. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this does get deleted, can we not delete the history and just put the new one over it/histmerge? I would rather not delete a 23 year article history if it can be avoided. Or redirect is fine too just keep the history. No opinion on the proposal itself. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

why does the history matter? ―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With pages this old and with this many sub pages, there's an extremely high likelihood this has been content split to some of the other saint lists at some point, so it would need to be kept historically for attribution reasons. Also historically interesting. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't answer if it should be either. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 16:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Lists of saints: This article should not exist in its current form, as it is way too painful to navigate. However, redirects are cheap, and I see no downside to preserving the page history. HyperAccelerated (talk) 23:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Preston Arsement (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:NBIO, nothing really significant just a series of "he did this" or unreliable sources. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Video games. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• weak delete: Source three is likely a RS. the rest don't seem to be... Source six is about his wife. This [36] is a brief listing, I don't think we have enough to confirm notability needed for an article here. Oaktree b (talk) 15:36, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:36, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep there are multiple sources, in here and available. Boleyn (talk) 21:07, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are many sources to make this article bigger 73.216.182.68 (talk) 16:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maronite flag (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 is most likely based on original research. There are no reliable sources about a distinct "Maronite flag." The white flag with a cedar is simply an earlier version of the Flag of Lebanon. Syphax98 (talk) 12:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lebanon-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:27, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The page has multiple sources. Request is just being done by user who does negationist edits to anything Maronite. [37] Red Phoenician (talk) 01:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Also, user failed to notify me of the proposal. Red Phoenician (talk) 01:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sources don't talk about a distinct "Maronite flag". --Syphax98 (talk) 10:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And please just talk about the sources and don't try to label me. I could do the same thing by pointing out the nature of your contributions (we are discussing it here), which are clearly associated with ethnonationalist ideas, deprecated here on Wikipedia. I am active on the Italian-language Wikipedia, not here. Here on the English-language Wikipedia I am limiting myself to these topics, because I was surprised by how much certain users have imposed certain clearly POV ideas in recent years. --Syphax98 (talk) 11:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Three of the sources distinctly talk about a Maronite flag. Please review all the sources before making claims. Red Phoenician (talk) 02:22, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The crwflags website couldn't be considered a reliable source. The Lebanese Armed Forces website does not refer to any "Maronite flag" and calls this version "العلم اللبناني في الفترة الانتقالية (1918-1920)" ("The Lebanese flag in the transitional period (1918-1920)"). The Minbladeh website (also non reliable anyway) makes no reference to a "Maronite flag" and defines this as the "Flag of the region of Lebanon after the fall of the Ottoman Empire (1918-1920)". Some sources refer to the fact that this version was used widely by the Maronite community (which was the main religious community in favor of the formation of an independent Lebanon"), but sources rarely refer to it as the "Maronite flag". The article itself refers to the fact that this flag was designed by Shukri El Khoury and Naoum Labaki, active in the Mahjar (an Arab cultural association); the activity of these two intellectuals was never aimed at creating a separate Maronite identity, but rather an Arab and Lebanese identity that transcended religious boundaries. --Syphax98 (talk) 14:35, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 14:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: this is not the "Maronite flag", it is simply the first version of the Lebanese flag, in use between 1918 and 1920. Some sources refer to the fact that this version was used by many Maronites who were campaigning for independence of Lebanon (being the community most favorable to independence, unlike for example the Sunnis who wanted union with Syria) and this can be written in the article relating to the flag of Lebanon. There is no trace of the use of this flag after 1920. --Syphax98 (talk) 15:35, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regeneration (Doctor Who) (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 reads like a FANDOM page in its entirety. It fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE as it does not explain why this specific plot element is encyclopedic and is almost entirely plot summary. It is also already heavily detailed in Time Lord#Regeneration, rendering an article length treatment unnecessary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Science fiction and fantasy. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep/Speedy Keep/Redirect: It very much does not fail WP:INDISCRIMINATE, it explains how the process came about out-of-universe, and how it has changed. It could be way better, and needs better referencing too, which would need a separate article, so the topic does not its own article. Also, this AfD is doubly strange, because even if failed the above parameters, it would still be a redirect and not deleted; and that the latter section is sourced mostly by primary sources and is way too overly detailed (and needs heavy editing to be encyclopedic). DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 18:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Altering my !vote- There are sources, as McYeee has shown, and therefore should be kept. But a redirect would be fine too, as this article needs heavy editing. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 13:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Time Lord#Regeneration per WP:NOPAGE. As a sub-topic of the concept of Time Lords as a whole, it should (and already is at great length) be covered as part of that article rather than split out. When you take away the massive amounts of overly detailed, in-universe plot information, then there is no need for this to be split out from the parent article, and that parent article already covers the concept of Regeneration in great detail. Rorshacma (talk) 20:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Time Lord#Regeneration. There is some material in "Conceptual history" that should be included at Time Lord. The Regeneration (Doctor Who) article is long and well-developed (over 10,000 words), but there are entire sections with no inline citations to secondary sources. The material in sections like "River Song's regenerations" is backed up only by the in-text citations to the episodes of Doctor Who, which are all fictional primary sources. Those sections can't pass WP:NOTPLOT without original research. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 22:25, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  At least portions of that section could be sourced to [38] and [39]. McYeee (talk) 05:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Concerns of original research should be raised on the talk page, and clear original research should be boldly removed from the article, but that would still leave us with a substantial article. The topic has gotten sigcov. See A Brief History of 'Doctor Who's Regeneration, Doctor Who is now immortal, reveals the BBC, The day Doctor Who changed face – and transformed TV for ever. McYeee (talk) 05:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The actual process of regeneration is discussed less there than the significance of Doctor Who becoming a shapeshifting entity, thus making things largely about The Doctor. I am not convinced this indicates notability for the regeneration process itself, as reincarnation as a plot mechanic surely was not invented with Doctor Who. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  By "Doctor Who becoming a shapeshifting entity", do you mean "regeneration being introduced as a power the Doctor has"? If so isn't that coverage of both the character and the plot device? Why should we see such coverage more primarily about the character?

  Reincarnation as a plot mechanism certainly predates Doctor Who, but the particular use of it "was very much uncharted territory. Up to this point, most changes of actor had either been simply ignored on-screen, or been done by hastily bringing in new characters to cover for an absence" (ibid). The LA Times makes the point that regeneration is different from what we see in other media as well: " Can you imagine if James Gandolfini had been replaced as Tony Soprano every few seasons?"[40].

  If your objection is that every source that's about regeneration is also about the Doctor, then doesn't this mean that divergence should be deleted because ever source about it is also about fields (i.e., scalar fields, vector fields and, more generally, tensor fields), that rigor mortis should be deleted because every source about rigor mortis is about death, and that presidency of Abraham Lincoln should be deleted because every source about it is about him? I suspect that your answer is "no" for at least one of those, I can't see what makes this case different. McYeee (talk) 02:44, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or redirect. While this might be notable, SIGCOV and OR are major issues. I can see this, much shortened, as a section of the Time Lords or such, but right now this is fancrufty trivia that begs for WP:TNT treatment. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  DRAFTIFY WP:NOTCLEANUP bad shape but still workable Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:11, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 14:23, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect per Rorshacma. This is a WP:NOPAGE situation where the topic is already covered somewhere else, with better sources and more context. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Reluctant Redirect to the redirect given in the nomination statement. This subject is something I feel would 100% be notable given its influence on the show as a whole (To the point it's easily one of the most recognizable factors of it) but the sources just aren't there to back that up. I found several books discussing Regeneration, but these sources were all entirely focused on the character of The Doctor and how regeneration affected their character. None of it was inherently independent of any other element of the show, and thus I feel it's better off being redirected until higher quality independent sourcing can be found. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per McYeee's sourcing. I don't find arguments that this only exists as an element of The Doctor consistent with others suggesting that it be merged to Time Lord, which I agree is the most compelling merge target, should a merge be needed, which I don't believe it is. Jclemens (talk) 06:20, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It's consistent in the sense that Time Lord makes more sense as a target for readers wanting to actually know what Regeneration is. The sources discussing Regeneration's impact on the Doctor can be added to that article separately as they focus more on the character on than on the process. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 16:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Trabzon (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)

Cannot find anything in Google Scholar and hard to tell if the linked source is enough to justify the article Chidgk1 (talk) 14:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Bryer seems to be reputable but I am not an academic so I don’t know whether that sourcing is enough. Bryer was writing in the 1960s but a lot of the stuff which was unpublished in his day should now be available by searching for "Trebizond" at https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/results/r?_q=Trebizond&_sd=&_ed=&_hb= so has anyone studied and published a more modern work based on the primary sources? Also the Ottoman archives are available as far as I know, so should not they be cited in some more modern secondary source? And why does the article not exist in Turkish Wikipedia? Chidgk1 (talk) 14:39, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aha at the end of page 202 Bryer says “the attack on Trebizond never materialised” Chidgk1 (talk) 15:09, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Trabzon (1834) (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)

Trabzon is a city so there ought to be more sources for such a relatively recent event Chidgk1 (talk) 13:50, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:50, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete more battlebollox from a user with a record of creating articles full of unverifiable content. Mccapra (talk) 13:54, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete clearly a hoax. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination rationale. Mekomo (talk) 14:50, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, It only refers to the Laz Rebellion, no result on Google Scholar -

𓆩♡𓆪𝘚𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘢𓆩♡𓆪 ・ ︶꒦꒷ 💬・✏️ ꒷꒦︶ 03:58, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Possible hoax. -Samoht27 (talk) 17:09, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Değirmendere (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 page numbers despite my request. So even if someone has the books cited it would be hard to check.

There is a mention of a place with that name in https://ttk.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/10-Mevlut-Ing.pdf but no mention of a battle Chidgk1 (talk) 13:42, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:42, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as I am unable to find sources in Turkish. The creator has a record of creating battle-related article with unverifiable sourcing which get deleted at AfD. Mccapra (talk) 13:51, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Per WP:GNG: The article seems to have been generated using an LLM judging by the fact that the majority of the sources appear to be fabricated when looking for them. A search for sources turns up nothing and most of the information seems unverifiable. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:46, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Track Bangas (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)

Unsourced, lack of notability, was unable to find any reliable sources demonstrating notability. Waxworker (talk) 13:08, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Massachusetts. Waxworker (talk) 13:08, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Very PROMO, only sourced to their website. Nothing else found, no sourcing seems to talk about this outfit/company. Oaktree b (talk) 15:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Kelleher (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 independent coverage of this individual that I could find (some interviews, but interviews are primary sources and fail WP:SECONDARY, and self-published coverage). Article has been tagged as unsourced since January 2024. Jaguarnik (talk) 12:27, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Poetry. Jaguarnik (talk) 12:27, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: No sourcing found for a poet with this name, an obituary and stories about a drowning. I don't see critical reviews of any of the works listed either. Otherwise, article is all primary sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 15:39, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I can prove to myself that his books exist (looking up in libraries), but that is about all. I can find issues of the Yale Review that list him as "michael kelleher is director of the Windham-Campbell Prizes". It turns out that is a position in the Beinecke library. But I find no biographical information about him. Lamona (talk) 02:43, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ela Giorgi (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 and more specifically WP:WEB. Unremarkable video that became a meme in one country, not notable enough for inclusion. A BEFORE search just gave me very few relavant hits due to the common nature of the title, so if there's anyone (particularly any Greek editors) who can find anything to improve this then fantastic, but otherwise I don't think it should stay.

The article itself is minimal, with the photo used in the article not actually at all relevant and merely a photo of a church in a town near where the video was filmed, for example. CoconutOctopus talk 11:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Popular culture, Internet, and Greece. CoconutOctopus talk 11:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article is cited by two independent sources, as the policy of General Notability clearly states. If your before search gave you even a few relevant hits, I don't see why it shouldn't be notable. These hits are still "relevant". The fact that it is "a meme in one country" doesn't stop it from been notable in the English Wiki. After all, the English Wiki is more "global" due to the fact that almost anyone speaks English in our modern, globalized world. To be frank, I can assure you that the Greek wiki is somewhat "conservative" to articles editor percieve as "non-notable". The Greek version was flagged with speedy deletion while it could have just noted as PROD. Thankfully, even the fact that it is just nominated for PROD gives me the opportunity to engage in conversation and defend the article. Thank you, and yes, I mean it😉Μητσίκας (talk) 12:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Wikipedia not a comic book. This is not a significant event that should have an entry in this encyclopedia. Fails all notability rules. Mekomo (talk) 14:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It suceeds all notability rules. Also I doubt you understand what a comic book is🤔Μητσίκας (talk) 17:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:NPA. No need for rudeness. CoconutOctopus talk 17:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zompa (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)

Not listed on http://www.malatya.gov.tr/arapgir#:~:text=Ba%C4%9Fl%C4%B1%20Mahalleler%20%3A%20D%C3%BCzce%2C%20Me%C5%9Feli%2C,%2C%20Sinikli%2C%20G%C3%B6z%2C%20Berenge%2C Has it been renamed or did it never exist? Might be hoax. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There is no mention of this place anywhere in searches and impossible to verify. This might be a hoax given that it was created by an editor with only 18 edit count since 2007. Mekomo (talk) 14:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I can only find obituaries with this name, nothing about a place with this name. Poor sourcing doesn't help either. Oaktree b (talk) 15:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Google Maps seems to show it as somethign like "Yilliz" but I can't fine anything. Crouch, Swale (talk) 23:15, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jarosław Bako (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 about the notability of this person despite being one of the Polish football goalkeepers with the most clean-sheets in Poland national football team. This is no longer considered free pass and Bako must meet WP:GNG only to have an article. I have checked corresponding articles on other languages, especially the Polish one, but none of them provide any significant coverage of him. I was told that the Polish Wikipedia is still inclusionist when it comes to sportspeople, but not sure about football players even if they have not participated in major tournaments. Regarding secondary sources, all I found were interviews as well as news of manager appointment. Onet might be the exception I found, but after translation, it was Bako saying about himself; GNG requires news coverage of someone else talking about the subject instead.

I wonder how long this article survived in mainspace without significant, major updates for 17 years, seeing that none of the previous revisions had any sufficient source either. Although it is quite possible that offline sources exist, given the generation of this former footballer, we can't assume that to be the case. If we can't find any decent source at all, a redirect to Poland national football team#Most clean sheets would be alternative to deletion.

⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Poland. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep Not a great nomination. Jarosław Bako made a whopping 35 appearances for the Poland national team and spent time abroad in the first tiers of Israel and Turkey including a two-year spell at one of the major Turkish clubs, Beşiktaş. This vita itself indicates notability. I didn't dig through newspaper archives or search for offline sources which are sure to exist for a player who mostly played in the 1980s and 1999s but I found online articles at laczynaspilka and wmzpn.pl. Robby.is.on (talk) 19:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 08:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per sources above which show notability. Agree this is a really poor nomination. Subject is clearly notable. GiantSnowman 08:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Robby.is.on and @GiantSnowman: Laczy Nas Pilka is part of Polish Football Association while WMZPN is a governing body of football association, neither of these count towards WP:SIRS. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:48, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – Per above. Svartner (talk) 16:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Clariniie's nomination pattern is a bit of a conundrum, alternating between total unknowns and very notable players who happen to have bad sources at the time. This case is in the latter category. Geschichte (talk) 21:59, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. A GNG-supporting source must be added to this article for it to be kept, but no one has identified anything yet. Unless such a source is uncovered a redirect to the suggested target is the only option consistent with our guidelines. JoelleJay (talk) 00:27, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – More sources that I found [41], [42], [43], [44]. There are also two sources on the Wayback Machine in the article on pl.wiki. Svartner (talk) 01:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment First two sources have already been posted, third is an interview and the fourth is on the website of one of his former clubs making it non independent of him. The pl.wiki sources are brief mentions. Dougal18 (talk) 10:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• @Svartner, as Clariniie noted, the first two sources are from his club/governing org N. The third source is written by him N. The fourth is from his club N. None of those count toward GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 00:11, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – Hi there, to provide context as to why it might be difficult to find sources that meet all of WP:SIRS criteria - while Bako is a notable figure in Polish football history, he represented Poland during a dull and unsuccessful period (except for the 1992 Summer Olympics, which he took no part in), was seemingly not a controversial figure on or off the pitch, and focused on coaching post-retirement, rather than going into management/punditry/politics - all of these reasons might make him seem not as remarkable as his predecessors or successors in Poland's goal, possibly resulting in less interest from the media to write extensive pieces about him.
  The closest I've found would be these two articles - gol24.pl and TVP Sport. Secondary, independent and reliable, but, unfortunately, brief.
  Per Robby.is.on's suggestion, I'll try looking through newspaper archives for more, however I'm not experienced with them much, due to poor (or lack of) results when using them in the past.
  I wanted to inquire further about Łączy Nas Pilka's coverage of Bako's career. Given that Bako has not been involved with PZPN in decades, I'd wager ŁNP is detached enough from Bako to consider it independent from him. ŁNP's series of players' profiles are well-written chronicles, and don't stray from mentioning less-than-perfect parts of players' biographies, such as disputes on or off the pitch, issues with the law, etc. While I can't recall authors analysing moments from players' biographies in-depth, and I can't decisively call ŁNP objective, including such facts can be seen as being critical. KibolLP (talk) 21:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @KibolLP, coverage from a player's current or former leagues, clubs, etc. is explicitly discounted from consideration as they do not reflect independent attention from the world at large, regardless of whether they're ostensibly neutral. SPORTCRIT requires a truly independent, secondary, reliable source with SIGCOV to be cited in the article in addition to the subject meeting GNG. Without such a source the article cannot stay in mainspace. JoelleJay (talk) 00:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Also, the gol24.pl piece states its source is the club itself -- it's not independent. JoelleJay (talk) 00:21, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - This is a difficult situation. All of the online coverage of Bako is from periods long after he retired from playing. Most of it doesn't appear to qualify as SIRS, but it appears to suggest he was notable enough for his play during the 1980s and 1990s that news organizations are still interested in his career decades later. The Przegląd Sportowy article cited above, while primarily a first-person interview, demonstrates lasting media interest in his career. There is a similar article covering his Israeli league career at One (website) that is included in the Hebrew-language article. BeIN Sports published a brief recap of his Turkish career (without a byline, so I can't be sure its SIRS). Hürriyet has an amusing blurb about Stomil suspending Bako for appearing in a league match while drunk in 1999 (not significant, but shows a former Turkish league player still had the media's attention years later). Milliyet has an article about Beşiktaş manager Gordon Milne which makes brief note of Bako (the club apparently signed him while Milne was on holiday). Overall, this article comes up short, but I think there's enough here to suggest SIRS is likely available if we had access to Polish-, Turkish- and Hebrew-language sources from the 1980s and 1990s. Jogurney (talk) 17:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Seeing a majority favoring "keep" here is surprising, as none of the cited references offer a thorough discussion of the subject's impact or significance within the sport. Moreover, there are no significant, independent secondary sources that provide an in-depth analysis of his career to justify a "keep" vote. Unless more comprehensive secondary sources are identified, offering significant coverage of Bako’s career and contributions, the subject fails GNG.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 16:20, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Weak sources above, but nonetheless they are sources, there is a reason why he was selected for the Polish squad. That's a pretty impressive accomplishment really. There will probably be Hebrew and Polish sources out there. I can understand why the article has been sent to AfD, but the depth of football played, and we know he played by other databases showing those statistics and what we have online. This to me is a clear case for WP:OFFLINESOURCES. There is a poster for sale on eBay of him from a magazine, [45], who knows, maybe he did an interview with the magazine also. Again to do the proper research you need to dig deep, and some people do. However this delete culture just because the page is a stub annoys me. It was created as a stub for a reason. It's suppose to be a collective effort to build wikipedia. Govvy (talk) 10:22, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I'm hugely concerned if people are actually calling for this article to be deleted, because that indicates there's a huge problem somewhere. Not only is notability obvious based on his accomplishments, my biggest concern is a WP:BEFORE search is very, very easy to do and we have multiple editors arguing otherwise. I found these in less than a minute by changing language to Polish, and I do not speak Polish: [46] [47] [48] [49] SportingFlyer T·C 18:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jun Yanagisawa (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)

Footballer who played very few games in the J League, 14 of them and not full games either. It would need good, significant coverage to meet WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. No usable sources in ja:wiki. Geschichte (talk) 10:32, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 10:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 08:42, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 08:45, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 16:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luis Hernández (footballer, born 1996) (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)

When 18 games in Mexico's second league is all he has done, the article would need good, significant coverage to meet WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. Without it, deletion is the outcome. The problematic creator is blocked indefinitely. Geschichte (talk) 10:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. Shellwood (talk) 10:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Playing just 18 matches is a weak claim to notability. This is one of the most common birth names in Spanish-speaking countries, so it's possible to find namesakes while searching on Google, failing WP:V too. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:17, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 08:42, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 08:45, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to 2013 FIFA U-17 World Cup squads#Mexico – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 16:48, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kalaignar Centenary Super Specialty Hospital (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 hospital. No sources with significant coverage, and I found none online. (all are about the stabbing, which would make the event notable, but not the hospital itself) '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:36, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Tamil Nadu. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:36, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:07, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:07, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:39, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: per WP:HEY. There are enough independent sources to pass GNG. I have added a lot more apart from the stabbing event and there are more incidents that have occurred since its inauguration that aren't added yet. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:38, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Clearly meets WP:GNG. ThatIPEditor ^{Talk · Contribs} 09:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Access Entertainment (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)

Notability isn't inherited, fails WP:NCORP. The redirect was removed twice, so putting it up here for discussion. Suggest restoring the redirect and protecting the page from re-creation. - The9Man ^Talk 09:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Companies. - The9Man ^Talk 09:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:46, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. This company seems obviously notable at first glance, but the article doesn’t cite any real sources. Disagree with protecting this page as it looks like notability is likely to exist and further coverage will be found. WilsonP NYC (talk) 14:12, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of horse breeds in DAD-IS (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 notability for standalone lists and WP:GNG. This article is a table of entries drawn from a single online database, one which isn't a reliable source itself (see Talk:DAD-IS § Evaluation concludes DAD-IS is generally unreliable for horse topics). Neither this article nor its associated article DAD-IS shows any sources which are independent of the subject, and certainly no significant coverage. All citations are published by FAO, the host of the database. Also fails under WP:NOTCATALOG.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 08:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Organizations.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 08:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:42, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magazines + TV Screens Tour (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)

WP:RUNOFTHEMILL tour that fails WP:NTOUR. G11 and BLAR has been tried before. Notability-tagged for 11 years. Geschichte (talk) 06:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Events, Ireland, Portugal, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:05, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per above, doesn't meet WP:GNG for an article in its own right and only has a passing mention on the Union J article, so don't think a redirect is necessary. Orange sticker (talk) 09:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Helvenston (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)

Delete and redirect to 2004 Fallujah ambush, the redirect target for the other 3 victims of the ambush. Coverage of Helvenston is in relation to the ambush or subsequent events. Otherwise he was one of thousands of individuals killed during the Iraq War. His notability is due only to the ambush, therefore delete per WP:BIO1E. Longhornsg (talk) 06:12, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Military, Terrorism, Iraq, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 06:12, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - He is known for more than just one event – he was on a reality TV show and was a credited Hollywood consultant, and was the subject of a dedicated LA Times obituary [50]. - Fuzheado | Talk 07:10, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect: as above. I don't see notability outside of the event. 20 years later and there is no sourcing to be found. Oaktree b (talk) 15:44, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  "No sourcing?" The LA Times source has been added to the article, and there is notability outside of this one event. - Fuzheado | Talk 15:53, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I still don't see how he's more notable than any one else killed in the attack. There were too many deaths in the war, most aren't notable. Oaktree b (talk) 20:13, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect per WP:BIO1E, a few sentences/short para there is all that's warranted. Mztourist (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 New Way Cargo Airlines Ilyushin Il-76 shootdown (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)

Per WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:NOTNEWS although notable at first sustained coverage died off quick. There has been no expanded reports on the incident. A crash of a heavy aircraft with fatalities under 10 has no notability in itself.

@ me in the below discussion when you comment so i can get the fastest response or see your comment ASAP. Lolzer3k 03:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, Aviation, and Sudan. Lolzer3k 03:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Not a scheduled flight or a passenger flight (these are generally considered automatically notable), and it appears to have been a military flight or military-operated flight, in which case a shootdown isn't notable, it's fortunes of war. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I created this article when it was said that this was a civilian cargo plane, but since now it is practiacally confirmed it was a military one, and since no important figures were killed, and there were no particular consequences nor continued coverage I think we Can delete it. - SignorPignolini _Talk 06:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. I was going to suggest a merge but I see there's already a brief, but sufficient, mention at the bottom of the Sudanese civil war (2023–present) § United Arab Emirates section. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Jay D. Easy (t) 20:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per norm. EBLDP (talk) 14:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep This won't be kept, but the only issue with it is really that the coverage window was too close in time to the accident. Articles like this show that there may be further coverage, in which case I would have absolutely no problem restoring this article. SportingFlyer T·C 20:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – The event has received significant in-depth coverage in secondary sources that currently justify its retention. It's too soon to determine whether the event will have sustained continued coverage or lasting effects. Sources:^{[1][2][3][4][5]} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aviationwikiflight (talk • contribs) 15:10, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I believe this event meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines:

1. Significance: The incident involves a military aircraft, and any military engagements resulting in casualties often have broader implications for regional stability and/or international relations. This particular event is noteworthy given the ongoing issues Sudan is facing.
2. Media Coverage: There has been significant media coverage of the incident, which explains what happened in the incident thoroughly. Reliable sources have reported on the details of the event. Some citations which I easily found are here, here, here, and here that discuss the incident in detail.
3. Aviation Context: This incident is part of a bigger story about military planes that have accidents in war zones. Adding it to Wikipedia helps people understand the dangers and problems that military aircraft deal with. Also, I don't think heavy military aircraft, like the Il-76, involved in shoot-downs is ordinary. They do have significant information.

Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 05:36, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 05:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Hacked. This is a significant incident with in-depth coverage. The reference to guidelines for “routine” coverage in the earlier discussion are strained. WilsonP NYC (talk) 14:42, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep There's nothing WP:ROUTINE about this story or its coverage. Per Hacked, this article details a significant event, for which there has been WP:SIGCOV. Although the coverage seems to have died down, it think it's still too soon for deletion.--DesiMoore (talk) 16:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boulder Bridge and Ross Drive Bridge (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)

Boulder Bridge exists, as does Ross Drive Bridge; I see no reason why we should have a one-line stub simply because these are listed on the NRHP together; even if expanded out this would still be a content fork of the two sub-articles. Hog Farm _Talk 05:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Washington, D.C.. Hog Farm _Talk 05:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Redirect fine. FINE. I'm still shaking my head at this. Pointless. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:58, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Yes, pointless. Athel cb (talk) 09:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to the 2007 article Boulder Bridge which encompasses both as a U.S. National Register of Historic Places listing. The author who created this one in 2015 probably didn't notice the NRHP article was already in place. — Maile (talk) 16:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. This is here in case someone is searching using the formal NRHP name. Normally it would be a redirect, but as the nominator points out, there are two separate articles for Boulder Bridge and Ross Drive Bridge, and it's not clear where a redirect should point. (I had split the articles in 2015 since the two bridges are unrelated other than both being built in Rock Creek Park in the same decade; they carry different roads over different creeks.) It may be better to treat it as a disambiguation page. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 21:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would redirecting to National Register of Historic Places listings in Washington, D.C. be better? The fact that this is a listing combining two separate things is mentioned there in a note. Hog Farm _Talk 21:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's actually a pretty good idea. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 22:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Here is a possible solution.

(1) - Keep the article named simply Boulder Bridge created by West Virginian 10-22-2007 It is technically correct in content and sourcing. And it's formatted correctly.

(2) - The article named Boulder Bridge and Ross Drive Bridge was created by Antony-22 10-22-2015. It is named correctly, but only contains one sentence and no sourcing.

(3) Need tech advice on how to do this, if it can be done.

Might be a good idea to first delete Boulder Bridge and Ross Drive Bridge.

Move Boulder Bridge to the title Boulder Bridge and Ross Drive Bridge, while keeping its editing history.

Since I've never performed such a article swap before, we need help from an admin who can perform this swap. — Maile (talk) 17:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• As I said above, the two bridges are fairly unrelated and it wouldn't be appropriate to cover them in a single article. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 22:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to National Register of Historic Places listings in the upper NW Quadrant of Washington, D.C. and fix the links there. This should not be its own page, and after a brief search that is clearly the best page to redirect to. SportingFlyer T·C 20:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to National Register of Historic Places listings in western Washington, D.C.. Ross Drive Bridge is west of Rock Creek, while Boulder Bridge straddles it. The NHRP listing is thus in both list articles, but the western one is the more appropriate redirect target. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 22:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Works for me. SportingFlyer T·C 04:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Ditto. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:44, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Clarification for everyone on how these two came to be listed as one. Please see NRHP Nomination Form. It was listed that way by the National Register of Historic Places. — Maile (talk) 15:40, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We have 3 different Redirect target articles being suggested here, can we agree on one that is the most appropriate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to National Register of Historic Places listings in the upper NW Quadrant of Washington, D.C.. This article is obviously not encyclopedic but the title itself is a reasonable search term. Esolo5002 (talk) 08:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect: to the NW Quadrant article. This could still be a search term if you look at the NRHP data. Oaktree b (talk) 15:46, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Fine. FINE. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 17:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to National Register of Historic Places listings in Washington, D.C.. I would have supported redirecting this to National Register of Historic Places listings in the upper NW Quadrant of Washington, D.C., but 3/4 of the bridge pairing is in western Washington, D.C., compared to only 1/4 of the pairing within the upper NW quadrant. National Register of Historic Places listings in western Washington, D.C. would have been a suitable redirect target as well if it weren't in two separate lists. The point stands, however, that there do not need to be three articles on what are essentially only two topics. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:03, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shelby County Airport (Missouri) (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 ran across this trying to source unreferenced Missouri articles for the ongoing unreferenced articles drive. While the essay WP:NAIRPORT suggests that municipal general aviation airports are likely to be notable, that essay does not carry the weight of policy and I'm not finding any substantial coverage for this at all. This from MODOT looks substantive at first, but actually only 4 sentences is about this airport and the rest is about general aviation in the state as a whole. Newspapers.com searching in Missouri for this airport turns up coverage of airports in Alabama and Memphis, but only a statement that a large crowd turned out for a BBQ pork dinner about this airport and a second brief statement announcing a fly-in at the airport in 1961. I know these municipal airports are usually notable, but I don't see a WP:GNG pass here due to the only coverage a fairly thorough WP:BEFORE is bringing up that isn't registration-type listings are the four sentences from MODOT and the two one-sentence passing mentions. The NAIRPORT essay does not carry the weight of policy. Hog Farm _Talk 05:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Missouri. Hog Farm _Talk 05:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. WP:5P establishes that Wikipedia is a gazetteer, and airports are a standard part of such works. WP:V is the guiding line beyond that, and that is satisfied. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Shelby County as an ATD. BTW, Wikipedia is not a Gazetteer (yes, I know it's an essay but still) and WP:GEOLAND tells us that artificial features related to infrastructure need to pass WP:GNG which this does not. So if the redirect target doesn't work for folks, then delete... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:37, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of airports in Missouri, which is a much better target than the county itself. There's just the bare minimum of information about this unattended turf runway that I could find, but I think we're just a source away from being able to restore it if someone comes across this later. SportingFlyer T·C 20:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Agree on this, din't know it was there. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:14, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect per Sportingflyer and Alexandermcnabb. I agree that List of airports in Missouri currently appears to be the best target that allows us to get the most information to the reader. I suppose there's a non-zero chance this may prove to be notable, but I'm also not convinced it warrants a stand-alone page when we have a fully functioning list we can add the information to. If a future editor does end up expanding the articles on Shelbyville, Missouri or Shelby County, Missouri and finds that they have enough for more than two sentences on the airport, then I have no objection to changing the redirect target. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:23, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect to Shelby County Shelbyville, Missouri per previous comments. While WP:NAIRPORT says that municipal airports are "likely" to be notable, WP:NBUILD is a better policy to follow in my estimation, and this airport is not mentioned in secondary sources aside from cursory and WP:ROTM mentions in aviation databases and local news. For what it's worth, I've been AFDing and PRODing obscure Texas airports on an on-off-but-mostly-off basis, and it doesn't take much to establish notability—features in aviation magazines or local news stories that focus on the airport will do it—but this airport doesn't seem to reach even this low bar. Carguychris (talk) 22:44, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Carguychris - I tend to think that this would be better handled at the article for whatever governmental entity operates the airport. In this case, the article states that the airport is operated by the City of Shelbyville, Missouri. What are your thoughts on this? Hog Farm _Talk 23:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    That makes sense. I didn't notice that. Carguychris (talk) 17:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Agree. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There seems to be a consensus to Redirect but we have two different target articles proposed. We have to get that down to ONE.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:30, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luther Stickell (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 don't think that this character is notable. This article has 10 sources, of all are not reliable and passing mentions. It was recently tagged for notability and there is no help at all. My WP:BEFORE failed to show anything about him. If he isn't fixed, i recommend a redirect to List of Mission: Impossible characters or at worse, Ving Rhames.

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Toby2023(talk) 11:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the Fictional characters. Toby2023(talk) 11:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Mission: Impossible (film series) as an WP:ATD. The List of Mission: Impossible characters is for characters from the original TV series; it omits the late-80s revival let alone the film series. The film series article is a better redirect target. oknazevad (talk) 03:52, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United States of America. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:30, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear a few more opinions on this article. By the way, the nominator didn't sign their statement but it was Toby2023.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there more support for a Redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Doing my usual source hunt. This article on ScreenRant seems to address Luther Sticknell specifically. [51] (Maybe this one in CBR too: [52]) Allowing WP:NOTCRYSTAL, there may be more interest and more sources after this movie comes out if they do kill the character off. So if we convert to redirect, which preserves the previous history of the article, we should prepare for a revert in that event. Now to hit Google Scholar... On first blush, there seems to be plenty of material here: [53]. If someone with a JSTOR subscription or university access can get past these paywalls, it may be possible to add enough critical analysis of this character to establish notability. Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:47, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second Grade Municipalitie (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)

Functionally unsourced, and failed a WP:BEFORE search. Already draftified and moved back. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:23, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:23, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (1) It would be better to cover this minor administrative detail at Tamil Nadu#Adminsitration and politics. I'd suggest a merge to there except that nothing in the current article is sourced and some of it is the sort of stuff that is potentially dependent on when the article was written - and I'm not sure the subject is important enough to merge without messing up the balance of the target article. (2) In any case, this sort of generic title, attached to an article covering one state of one country, is never appropriate. It may well be that other states and countries have second grade municipalities too, so the article would have to be moved to Second grade municipality (Tamil Nadu) were it kept. For this reason, a redirect would also be inappropriate. Elemimele (talk) 11:44, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First Grade Municipalitie (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)

Functionally unsourced, and failed a WP:BEFORE search. Was already draftified and then moved back. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, my comments about Second Grade Municipalitie apply equally; (1) It would be better to cover this minor administrative detail at Tamil Nadu#Adminsitration and politics. I'd suggest a merge to there except that nothing in the current article is sourced and some of it is the sort of stuff that is potentially dependent on when the article was written - and I'm not sure the subject is important enough to merge without messing up the balance of the target article. (2) In any case, this sort of generic title, attached to an article covering one state of one country, is never appropriate. It may well be that other states and countries have first/second grade municipalities too, so the article would have to be moved to First grade municipality (Tamil Nadu) were it kept. For this reason, a redirect would also be inappropriate. Elemimele (talk) 11:46, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Hampshire Liberty Forum (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)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Libertarianism-related deletion discussions. BootsED (talk) 03:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating page for deletion for the following issues per WP:DP.

1. Advertising or other spam without any relevant or encyclopedic content

The article contains large amounts of puffery and reads like an advertisement. Majority of the article is a list of speakers at conventions, mentions of their books, and external bare urls to their blogs or other websites.

2. Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and hoaxes

The article does not list sources for claims of speakers at various conferences. Several existing sources are primary sources.

The article makes false and misleading claims, engages in original research with no sources, and presents their subjects in a promotional manner.

Example 1, stating that "James O'Keefe – journalist whose investigations have exposed corruption and malfeasance in major taxpayer-funded institutions, including ACORN, Planned Parenthood and NPR". James O'Keefe is a far-right activist that uses deceptively edited videos to attack mainstream media sources and progressive sources, and whose videos exposing corruption have been verifiably proven false, as in the case with the ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy.

Example 2, stating "Ben Swann – Emmy Award-winning journalist" but not including any mention that he is a well-known, notable conspiracy theorist.

Example 3: stating "Stefan Molyneux – host of Freedomain Radio" but not mentioning how he is best known as a white nationalist.

3. Articles for which thorough attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed

I cannot find reliable, non-primary sources for the large majority of the claimed speakers at these conventions.

4. Articles with subjects that fail to meet the relevant notability guidelines (WP:N, WP:GNG, WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, WP:CORP, and so forth)

Majority of the individuals listed fail notability requirements. BootsED (talk) 03:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Politics, and New Hampshire. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We need more than the nominator's opinion here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Issues in social nudity (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 hardly addresses issues, and is apparent from the get go with the introductory paragraph rehashing info that can be found in many other articles on nudism such as Nudity, Naturism, and Nude recreation, etc.. The article on Nudity especially has multiple sections dedicated to issues, in regards to its legality, cultural acceptance, and child development. The terminology section is totally unnecessary for an article about the issues related to a concept as it does not address any terms related to issues, only the history of naturist related terms themselves. Diversity in nudist clubs is not relevant to its issues unless those issues are stated, discussed, and sourced, which they are not, and would be more appropriate on articles covering specific cultural attitudes towards nudity as shown in https://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=Qlik&lang=&q=Nudity#Cultural_differences. The other issues and legality sections are short and can be moved elsewhere, other articles about nudity and naturism have subsections covering particular countries where these tidbits may be more relevant. Micahtchi (talk) 02:50, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Micahtchi (talk) 02:50, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Anything useful and not redundant here can be merged with one of the existing articles mentioned.--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 05:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment. I poked around Talk:Naturism and apparently Issues in social nudity was intentionally spun off from Naturism in as part of an effort to reduce the size of that article. I don't think that has any bearing on whether or not to keep this article, but any editor wanting to move content from this article back to Naturism should be aware of the issues there. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I saw this before- what I got from it at the time (in the 2000s, so a while ago) was this person made a whole bunch of nudity related articles (that were too specific or unnecessary and were deleted or merged into articles like naturism and nudity, and seemed to get into a lot of fights about them too...). I think the reason it exists was because of old beefs and (in my opinion) an apparent desire to be first when it comes to writing these articles. I got this mainly from the original author's talk page. Micahtchi (talk) 07:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This article has been PROD'd before so is not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Discussion as to whether and how the article can be improved, or whether an earlier split should be reverted, or whether parts of the article should be merged elsewhere, are appropriate for talk page discussion and not AFD. The article has at least some appropriate, not duplicated, referenced content so deletion at this stage is not appropriate. Thincat (talk) 11:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to the Good Article Nudity. The latter is much better written, having gone through the GA process. — Maile (talk) 14:20, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CEWC-Cymru (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:ORG for lack of third party coverage. LibStar (talk) 02:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, and Wales. LibStar (talk) 02:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/redirect to Welsh Centre for International Affairs. As WP:ATD-R. Where the proposed target article covers the parent org ("WCIA") with which this charity org ("CEWC") was reputedly merged/amalgamated in 2014. And its website also redirected to that of the parent. We may as well do the same (merge/redirect). Otherwise, similar to the nom, I'm not convinced that there's sufficient coverage to establish independent notability or support a stand-alone article. Guliolopez (talk) 11:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Related AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CEWC Northern Ireland. LibStar (talk) 13:27, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Is there more support for a Merge/Redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CEWC Northern Ireland (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 could not find significant coverage when searching under short name or full name. The 2nd source is a 1 line mention in a book.

Also nominating CEWC-Cymru for similar reasons. Both articles fail WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 02:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, Northern Ireland, and Wales. LibStar (talk) 02:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. There are two different nominations here. And my own recommendations are slightly different for both. Neither especially cut/dried. In terms of the:

• CEWC-Cymru title, I think this should just be merged and redirected. To Welsh Centre for International Affairs. As, per the text and (granted primary) reference, the former charity now forms part of that organisation. And hence is a reasonable WP:ATD-R.
• CEWC Northern Ireland title, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that this should also be merged and redirected. To Council for Education in World Citizenship. Also as WP:ATD-R. Where the target would be updated so it is no longer a DAB page. But an article covering the "parent" org. I propose this because while, per nom, I do not see that the "CEWC Northern Ireland" org has/had independent notability, the "parent" org perhaps does. Much of the content at the Northern Ireland article could be merged to Council for Education in World Citizenship. With that title (no longer DAB) expanded to cover the concept as a whole. That org being the subject of significant coverage (as the primary topic) in at least one book and several journal articles. Indicating possible notability. There's certainly enough coverage for more than a stub (covering the English, Welsh and Northern Ireland "branches" of the org)...

My 2x cents anyway... Guliolopez (talk) 21:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. User:LibStar, this is not a proper bundled nomination, you might have tagged CEWC-Cymru but this nomination isn't formatted properly. If you wish it to be included, please review WP:AFD instructions for multiple page nominations.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will nominate CEWC-Cymru separately now. LibStar (talk) 02:25, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Guliolopez, a new AfD is set up here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CEWC-Cymru, you may wish to copy your comment across. LibStar (talk) 02:27, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Thanks for the ping @LibStar:. I've struck and moved my !vote on what to do with the Welsh charity title (CEWC Cymru) to the new AfD. In terms of the Northern Irish charity title (CEWC Northern Ireland), and for clarity, my recommendation remains to merge/redirect to Council for Education in World Citizenship. Guliolopez (talk) 11:13, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There has been discussion but the only outcomes proposed are Deletion and Merge/Redirect with a consensus for neither. Here's hoping that a few more days might bring some more opinions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Hoffmann (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)

Marked for notability concerns in 2013, and a complete lack of inline citation. The external links provided are primary (government) sources. A search for sources yielded namesakes. Ambassadors are not inherently notable. LibStar (talk) 04:56, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations and Canada. LibStar (talk) 04:56, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relato K (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)

POV forking and WP:UNDUE; the article is based on the opinions of far-right politicians such as Axel Kaiser. Also WP:OR?? JPerez90 (talk) 01:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Argentina. JPerez90 (talk) 01:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please define what do you mean when you say "far-right". Do you mean that he's right-wing, but more enthusiastic than others? How would that make him an unreliable source? Or do you mean that he's racist, white-supremacist, or something similar? That would be something else, right, but I would like to see a specific reference of that, not just a generic label that seems to be applied at random. Cambalachero (talk) 03:24, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Far right, the opposite of far left. Oaktree b (talk) 13:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which, of course, means nothing. The article of Kaiser now has a reference of a book that calls him far-right, but again, only that, a label, without any specific racism, supremacism, or wrongdoing attributed to him. Calling someone "Far-right" seems to be becoming like Fascist (insult) nowadays. In fact, if we check that source, it says that Kaiser is far-right... in the middle of a grand conspiracy theory about how the far-right (the only kind of right-wing politics there seem to be) is out there to conquer the word, destroy the left, abolish democracy, and enslave the helpless working class. I have my doubts that can be considered a reliable source to begin with. Cambalachero (talk) 19:58, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It really doesn't matter how you define it, the article isn't notable regardless. Sourcing is a mess and is mostly SYNTH. Oaktree b (talk) 20:14, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: This appears to be SYNTH, I don't see the sources saying these various bullet points are related. Article draws conclusions that don't seem to be there. Oaktree b (talk) 13:07, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The article should make more clear that the "relato K" concept has been used in several books and hundreds of articles in the press. I'm working on it. It has been used even in the context of the Spanish-language Wikipedia by an Argentine historian (in relation to hundreds of articles on Argentine history). I quote this Argentine historian and provide the citation:

"En 2014 dirigí una Enciclopedia Histórica Argentina que editó Clarín. Revisé varios cientos de entradas de Wikipedia referidas a la historia argentina, desde los casi ignotos guerreros de la independencia hasta conocidos personajes de la historia más reciente. Son contados los casos en que no me topara con una intrusión o manipulación con el clásico sabor del relato K."^[1]

AwerDiWeGo (talk) 14:01, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried a translation: "In 2014 I was in charge of an Argentine History Encyclopedia, published by Clarín. I reviewed hundreds of articles related to Argentine history, from little-known fighters for independence to well-known personalities of more recent history. There were few cases in which I did not find an intrusion or manipulation with the classic taste of the K narrative (relato K)." AwerDiWeGo (talk) 19:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Americanoid (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)

Delete or possibly merge with Okunev culture. The first paragraph is about a "discounted" theory which probably doesn't deserve its own article. The second also is not deserving of its own article and can be merged if it isn't already in the Okunev article (I only skimmed it). PersusjCP (talk) 04:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Archaeology. PersusjCP (talk) 04:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Russia and North America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:17, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Based on searches this was a theory regarding Siberian and other northern ancient peoples that was promulgated in the early 20th century, specifically by Russian anthropologists. As it is no longer an accepted designation, a few sentences in an article for the subsequent theory should suffice. I did find one article that criticized the term and attributed it specifically to Russian racism, but that perhaps could be a marker of scientific enmity and distrust of Russian science. Lamona (talk) 23:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Panorays (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 seemingly lacks any sources aside from trade press. Even then a significant amount of coverage is related to fundraising events. Brandon (talk) 01:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and New York. Brandon (talk) 01:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep: [54] is definitely SigCov. This book also uses it as an example. (I also found 3 perhaps–slightly-questionable sources: funding, funding, research. I think the last source is unfortunately just a ton of trivial mentions. Depending on how one reads the "trivial coverage" part of NCorp, the funding ones may or may not be SigCov as they both have in-depth and independent coverage of what the company does.) Aaron Liu (talk) 12:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 03:59, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sizwe Nxasana (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)

Unsourced BLP article, edited by possible COI editors and IPs LR.127 (talk) 01:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Education, and South Africa. LR.127 (talk) 01:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A WP:BEFORE search didn't find many useful sources, aside from his resignation at NSFAS. Article also reads like a resume. Procyon117 (talk) 16:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. high profile South African businessperson. Passes WP:GNG with sustained coverage in multiple WP:RS. Former CEO of Firstrand bank and Telkom. These are some of South Africa's largest and best known companies (WP:WORLDWIDE) and he received a lot of direct coverage because of this. Article is not in great shape but WP:NOTCLEANUP. Coverage in WP:RS [55][56][57] (South Africa's highest paid banking CEO). Also includes negative coverage: [58][59][60]. More: [61][62][][63][64][65][66][67] ("Nxasana, who has been CEO since April 1998, has seen the company through a number of challenges, including the successful initial public offering on the JSE Securities Exchange, South Africa, and the New York Stock Exchange.").[68][69][70] His opinions were viewed as important by mainstream papers [71][72][73][74]. Here's some coverage by Harvard Business School, so he gets the Anglosphere tick: [75]. I can find more references if needed. Park3r (talk) 00:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Per Park3r. However, the article is in bad shape, voting keep without improving the article won't take us anywhere since someone might AfD it again tomorrow. dxneo (talk) 23:28, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A more comprehensive analysis of the sources provided would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 03:59, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Park3r. Many of those references are coverage of him in his role at a high-profile company; but they are all more than trivial mentions of him. Needs more cleanup. Walsh90210 (talk) 20:38, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conquests of Inal the Great (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 is an unnecessary WP:CONTENTFORK of Inal the Great. There is insufficient sourcing for Inal's conquests to warrant a standalone page. The sources are all passing mentions of Inal himself (here, here, here), don't even mention him or describe him as a legendary figure), with the one exception of a self-published Circassian nationalist blog. The article was created by a sockmaster and a redirect preferred by multiple editors is being repeatedly reverted by a likely WP:LOUTSOCK. I am seeking consensus for restoration of a stable redirect to Inal the Great. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Georgia (country). Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Omspace (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:ORG and WP:GNG - The9Man ^Talk 18:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Spaceflight, and Gujarat. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:31, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 19:22, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. May you explicate why you believe that this article fails WP:ORG? In the article alone I see three sources (1,2,4) that I believe to satisfy significance, reliability, and secondary.Arguably, the sources are quite recent, but I believe that aged sources are only the requirement for events (WP:EVENT). Pygos (talk) 04:33, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first link is a blog article, the second is an interview that isn’t about the company, and the 4th is also not a reliable news source - it's a blog masquerading as a news website. None of these sources come close to fulfilling the requirements of WP:ORG. - The9Man ^Talk 11:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@The9Man The fourth source is not a blog. It's news website for TV9 Telugu, a mainstream TV network in India. It's absolutely a legitimate news source made by professional journalists.4meter4 (talk) 02:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete. There are a couple of solid sources, but overall there isn't enough here to pass WP:ORGCRIT. It's a young company. Probably a case of WP:TOOSOON.4meter4 (talk) 02:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I do not see a pass of WP:ORGCRIT, not from here, not from a cursory search. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

East Glebe & Potomac station (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)

Page devoted to a bus stop with no detectable notability or reliable secondary source coverage. Propose that articles be deleted in favor of a consolidated route map on the Metroway page. Each bus stop does not warrant its own page, though, especially considering most of them are simply a small standard bus shelter or sidewalk sign.

I am also nominating the following articles on non-notable bus stops on the same bus line under the same nomination:

• East Glebe station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Reed station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• South Glebe station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 33rd & Crystal station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 27th & Crystal station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 23rd & Crystal station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 18th & Crystal station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 23rd & Clark station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 26th & Clark station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Swann station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Custis station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Potomac station (Metroway) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Fayette station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

nf utvol (talk) 01:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transport and Virginia. Kpgjhpjm 02:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Metroway#Stations. Amount of infrastructure does not determine notability - availability of sources does - but I can't find any sources discussing these in any detail. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:39, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Metroway#Stations. The character of these stops (no real infrastructure, just a location that a bus stops at) and lack of independent RS coverage supports this relegation. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mehrdad Mehryar (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 notability. he never played for the national team. looks like he played for some European clubs but they are not top clubs, mostly in lower divisions. if you google his name you rarely can find anything. Sports2021 (talk) 00:09, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Iran. Sports2021 (talk) 00:09, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fails WP:SPORTSBASIC.4meter4 (talk) 00:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Can't find anything supporting notability through WP:SPORTSBASIC. nf utvol (talk) 02:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: The provided references do mention the subject, but most are related to local sports coverage, player signings, or match reports, without providing in-depth coverage of his career, achievements, or impact in the sport. Thats said, fails WP:SIGCOV and so WP:GNG.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 17:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Handball-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:20, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I couldn't find any sources witch prove notability. In the article is written that he played in Switzerland for TV Endingen. I have access to the database of the Swiss handball federation and I couldn't find him and no Source which mentioned him that he played in Switzerland. I think this fact with Switzerland is made up. 🤾‍♂️ Malo95 (talk) 18:34, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Wylie-Kellermann (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 indication of notability. Fails WP:NAUTHOR. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Christianity, and United States of America. UtherSRG (talk) 00:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep His books have been reviewed in major publications. He is also well known as an activist. See coverage in this article in the Guardian: No water for poor people: the nine Americans who risked jail to seek justice Thriley (talk) 17:06, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Passes WP:NAUTHOR and WP:GNG. In addition to the sources in the article, here are a couple book reviews from SAGE: [76] and [77]. Best.4meter4 (talk)
• Keep: Would seem to pass AUTHOR with the reviews given above, needs a bit of a rewrite though. Oaktree b (talk) 17:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, as per the arguments above. -Samoht27 (talk) 17:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wuzhen Initiative (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)

Likely violates WP:NPOV. Does not appear to meet notability requirements.

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and China. Shellwood (talk) 19:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]