Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 23

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< November 22	November 24 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Anne Ross (Australian sculptor)

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

NN artist Ceoil (talk) 14:17, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Our enemy is here, they are lying that it is America

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

Violator of WP:RECENTISM. No sustained notability of protests ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Iran and United States of America. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Utkarsh Gupta

AfDs for this article:

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

Still fails WP:NACTOR, so fails WP:GNG. One ref, questionable, was added after the previous AFC decline, and it isn't WP:SIRS. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:33, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. UtherSRG (talk) 12:33, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Page was previously deleted, created by sock account, and created again by IP likely same sock and after AFC decline, it was submitted for AFC review again by sock account User:Aloo92. From 14 srcs on the page, 8 are unreliable sources and the other 6 have no significant coverage on the subject to pass WP:NACTOR. RangersRus (talk) 12:52, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:00, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. "I came across this page on AFC and was about to reject it after seeing the record of the previous 8 deletions and the poor references cited. But, after some web research(which I do for all pages I reviewed), I found some reliable sources, (i.e: [1], [2], [3], [4],[5] and [6], I believed it met WP:NACTOR and convinced me to grant it a chance for improvement and a notability banner is all that's required, let's wait for the votes. ANU^writes

Source 1 and 2 are not independent, source 3 has mention about subject quitting mtv show, source 4 and 6 are unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES and Source 5 is passing mention about the subject about being first choice for the show. RangersRus (talk) 20:47, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How's source 2 not independent in entertainment category? Reminder, it's ruled out as not entirely independent in politics because of it's Political Alignment with the current indian regime.^[1] Source 2 isn't the passing mention as it covers the subject who's quitting the show also source 5 covers two actors who were competing for some film role, the subject is among them, how's that the passing mention? (Reminder: Article titles usually tell readers what/who the article is going to cover/who's the subject). source 4 and 6 which are from the same website are indeed ruled as questionable in most cases but looking at it's discussion here, you have to choose what to source as it's still trusted by majority, also we are required to read any questionable context to see whether there's any sign of WP:COI, these articles (4&6) which are said to be of 2015 have some quality and reliable information in them plus less or no promotion. I still think the article should be kept. ANU^writes 12:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source 4 and 6 are unreliable for all reasons and that is why by consensus it was listed under unreliable Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Generally_used_sources. You can discuss about the source on WP:ICTFSOURCES talk page. When I mentioned about source 2 not independent means that the article is not independent of the claims (interview) made by the subject himself. Sources are recommended to be secondary independent. Source 5 is just passing mention and nothing significant that is needed to pass notability. RangersRus (talk) 13:54, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A WP:NACTOR pass with at least 2 lead/main cast roles (ergo significant) in notable productions; existing sources (some presented here) allow to verify it. Mushy Yank (talk) 23:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance and Maharashtra. Mushy Yank (talk) 23:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source Analysis. Note that in show "Kaisi yeh yaariaan" the subject was not a lead but played the character of best friend of the main lead.
Source 1 writes about the subject quitting the show by sharing subject's Twitter message.
Source 2 is unreliable WP:IBTIMES
Source 3 is promotion and advertising the subject by sharing his Instagram.
Source 4 is passing mention.
Source 5 is passing mention about the subject being one of the contestant on the MTV Splitsvilla Season 8
Source 6 is unreliable WP:IBTIMES
Source 7 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
Source 8 has videos of different episodes of a show "Pyar Tune Kya Kiya" and the subject was in episode 1.
Source 9 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES.
Source 10 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES.
Source 11 is not independent with interview of the subject talking about his role in the upcoming TV show.
Source 12 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
Source 13 is dead 404.
Source 14 is linked to jio cinema and suppose to show overview info on fuh se fantasy web series but quickly jumps to another screen but nothing significant on the subject.
Source 15 does not even have an entry about the subject. RangersRus (talk) 13:44, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Two or more roles with verification of those roles is not what WP:NACTOR means. Two or more roles give us the presumption that there is significant coverage (not just verification). The coverage here is all churnalism, unreliable, or WP:NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/times-of-india/

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:39, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The serried history of this article, its recreation per nom and nom's source analysis are pretty damning. A search reveals nothing else of any great note out there, so if this is the sourcing we have, it's simply not enough. Time to SALT as well? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:56, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of wars involving the Mughal Empire

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

Perhaps I dont understand whats need of this redirect it seems as POV Fork and should simply merged with List of Battles involving Mughal Empire and that article should see some improvement.I certainly see that by this we are simply giving someone a peak level of confusion. Edasf «Talk» 13:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Edasf «Talk» 13:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Lists, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:52, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Green Oak, Indiana

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

Baker describes it as a post office, and that's what the maps and aerials show. Mangoe (talk) 13:15, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:50, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ivy Latimer

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

No evidence of notability. Existing refs are non-independent, non-significant, or non-secondary. Souped-up find-sources sans social media:

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

I see nothing here that is reliable, except a passing mention in the Australian Television Information Archive which is not enough to establish notability. Mathglot (talk) 11:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Australia, and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:44, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging users with >5% of added text: @Me Da Wikipedian, 99aquamarine, RoxySaunders, Jackmcbarn, and Sedgewren:. Mathglot (talk) 11:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete She played a mermaid in a spin-off of a children's series and was dropped in series 2. Beyond socials there is nothing, entirely lacking WP:SIGCOV and doesn't pass GNG let alone specifics like NACTOR. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:00, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tengeg Neville

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

Lacking significant coverage, does not meet WP:NSPORT. Frost 11:17, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Cameroon. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:24, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 12:27, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Scott (darts player)

(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) 09:53, 23 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)} 10:43, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pip Blackwell

(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) 09:50, 23 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)} 10:43, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ray Farrell

(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) 09:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Northern Ireland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:44, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Douglas (darts player)

(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) 09:48, 23 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)} 10:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ken Summers (darts player)

(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) 09:47, 23 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)} 10:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wu Sing-yung

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

Seemingly written by someone close to the subject, fails WP:PROF. Remsense ‥ 论 08:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Remsense ‥ 论 08:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Medicine, and China. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:47, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diego Gutiérrez (footballer, born 1993)

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

Not possible to verify that this player played anywhere significant or meets WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. Never played any games for Carolina Switchbacks. Geschichte (talk) 07:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:52, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 09:43, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 09:46, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:47, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Héctor Pérez (footballer, born 1983)

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

Fails WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. First, a WP:BEFORE found no significant and independent coverage, only databases, namesakes and WP:PASSING mentions such as this, this and the ABC piece already in the article (which mentions him in a match lineup). Second, the international appearance for Paraguay seems false. According to NFT, the only Pérez who played that match was Hernán Pérez, a much more merited player, and think about it: why would Héctor Pérez represent Paraguay in 2011 when he has not been verified as having a club that year, playing once in 2010? Geschichte (talk) 08:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Paraguay. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:18, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pokrzywnica-Kolonia

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

This article was created by now long-inactive Kotbot, there is no equivalent article in the Polish wikipedia, and no reference can be found in TERYT (https://eteryt.stat.gov.pl/eTeryt/rejestr_teryt/udostepnianie_danych/baza_teryt/uzytkownicy_indywidualni/wyszukiwanie/wyszukiwanie.aspx?contrast=default) Kiwipete (talk) 07:46, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following articles for the same reasons:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Poland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:49, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all This appears to be a duplication of Gmina Pokrzywnica under another name? Kolonia Osieck is not a place, although Gmina Osieck is an administrative district, which happens to contain a Kolonia Pogorzel. I'm not up on Poland or indeed Polish, but on that basis alone, getting rid of all of this dubious cruft seems to be a good thing, per WP:TNT. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:08, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Cosnett

(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) 09:29, 9 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) 10:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Having won the British Open and being the first player to have been paid by the UK government to play darts, Cosnett has coverage of its time - Sunday Mercury, Black Country Evening Mail for same, Herald Express for same - for this matter, there's a heap of other regional papers who cover him for being the only player at the time paid by the government for his sporting career. Further coverage of him "rounding off his year in style" in the Black Country Evening Mail by winning the British Open, the national darting competition at the time. There's also the Black Country Evening Mail covering him switching careers to enter the pub business (which isn't quite about his sporting achievements, but it'd be weird for a regional newspaper to cover some non-notable bloke applying for a pub license...). I don't have access to the BNA but there's also a story in the Wolverhampton Express and Star entitled "Darts star John off to seek fame", and in the same publication for him not paying his taxes - again, not really about his achievements, but it's hard to think some random unnotable would get the same coverage, let alone labelled a "darts ace". I'm seeing well enough coverage from his heyday to merit keeping the article. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 17:55, 9 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!} 08:15, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Based on sources uncovered by Ser! above. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:47, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:30, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Ah, the world before 1996... The coverage unearthed by Ser! above does the trick for me, Cosnett clearly passes WP:GNG. And I'm, once again, a poet. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:12, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archana Patnaik

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

Being appointed as the Chief Electoral Officer of an Indian state's Election Commission, whose role is to oversee local elections, does not make her inherently notable. I tried to search for SIGCOV but found only reports about the appointment, and even these don't provide in-depth coverage. The subject fails to meet GNG. GrabUp - Talk 09:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Tamil Nadu. GrabUp - Talk 09:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak Keep~~ Comment: ~~The subject meets the criteria for WP:BIO and WP:POLITICIAN~~ however, the subjects appointment as Chief Electoral Officer was only made today (November 9). Reliable sources may still be in the process of being published, given the significance of this position in government, although some have already been made available. Additionally, the subject is not new to politics, being an established figure in Indian national politics. That said, the article may be considered WP:TOOSOON as well and could be moved to draft status for further development.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 15:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Striking the keep vote with a comment now.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 16:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mims Mentor: Could you elaborate on how the subject meets WP:POLITICIAN and NBIO? GrabUp - Talk 15:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, the subject being an Indian Administrative Service officer newly appointed as Chief Electoral Officer for the Government of Tamil Nadu, falls under the category of WP:NSUBPOL whose members can be accorded presumed notability. — MimsMENTOR ^talk 15:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mims Mentor: Indian Administrative Service officers are not politicians. WP:NPOL is just for judges and elected politicians. You misunderstood NPOL. Read what is listed in WP:NSUBPOL regarding India: It says, “Members of the Legislative Assemblies and Councils of the States and Union Territories are presumed notable. Members of the Autonomous District Councils may or may not have presumed notability.” There is no way an appointed Chief Electoral Officer is included under NPOL. GrabUp - Talk 15:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, thank you. While I'm not opposed to deletion (as mentioned, drafting the article could still be relevant), there might still be potential for significant coverage, as the subject was only recently appointed to the role. This could soon meet the general notability guidelines. — MimsMENTOR ^talk 16:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If so, then this article can be recreated. I am also not opposed to draftification, if consensus decides it. GrabUp - Talk 16:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Is there additional support for Draftification?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:30, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Electoral officer does not pass WP:NPOL, subject in any case does not pass WP:GNG. I can't buy draftification as there's no evidence there's anything more to justify notability, certainly nothing inherent in this role as a local official in a non-political role. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:17, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Two weeks later, the only articles are still about her appointment. Therefore I don't think a draftify would be appropriate. Procyon117 (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tararam

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

Mostly unreferenced topic, with unclear notability. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Hebrew Wikipedia article has 27 references. Left guide (talk) 05:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Israel. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This is not "mostly unreferenced," , furthermore, it should be noted that notability is not related to the current state of the article. As Left Guide noted, the Hebrew article has plenty of sources. The topic meets the threshold of notability. Whizkin (talk) 06:47, 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!} 08:05, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:29, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Have you actually seen the Hebrew sources? "SAP Israel concluded a year"??? "SanDisk celebrates Bar Mitzvah"??? Every time they've played at a corporate shindig? Every corporate campaign that uses them? The article about "a unique internet campaign for Cellcom" doesn't even MENTION Tararam? No SIGCOV, no hit record, no chart placement, no major tour, no major media recognition. There's literally nothing here beyond a local ensemble often hired by tech corporates to play at their junkets. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Robert Watson

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

Hello - recommending this article for deletion for the following reasons.

Seems like a promotional page by a very ocassional contributor to some industry news, with plenty of links to his own website (cited as a source) and references to prominent or notable collaberators who are all not listed on wikipedia.

Suspicious edits by 81.175.147.23 who appears to only be active on this page (this IP address is based in the same town as Mr Watson) as well as https://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=&lang=&q=Special:Contributions/DorianRichard1985 which also appears to be the subject, and created this article. There have been no meaningful edits except by these two contributors, who both appear to be Mr Watson.

This is a promotional page with poor source links, some unverifiable, created to promote the career of an ocassional opinion columnist. Does not meet Wikipedias standard for notability, nor source quality — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ieusuiarnaut (talk • contribs) 10:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Arts, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. No GS trace at all for "Michael Robert Watson", so either he publishes under a different name or his work has received no attention. The detailed education history without sources usually says the article was written by someone who is/knows the subject. Does anyone know if "ZerO books" is the same as Zero Books? Espresso Addict (talk) 15:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per comments below, I checked GS for "Mike Watson"; the highest-cited works I could find had 21 citations (Can the Left Learn to Meme?: Adorno, Video Gaming, and Stranger Things) and 13 citations (The Memeing of Mark Fisher: How the Frankfurt School Foresaw Capitalist Realism and What to Do About It), but I might well have missed something as there are so many other Mike Watsons; I don't think these citations would meet WP:PROF, but reviews should be sought to address potential notability under WP:AUTHOR. If the article is kept it needs to be moved to "Mike Watson ([disambiguator])". Espresso Addict (talk) 09:16, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern here is the article appears to be self-authored, with two key accounts in its creation having only ever edited this article (one IP, one logged in). This would be less of an issue if it was an especially noteworthy subject but at the moment Wiki runs risk of being a promotional page or 'find my articles online' site. Many many academic / media figures who are more prolific, many more citations, do not have wikipedia pages. Also there is some unsourced biographic information here. All in I think it should be deleted unless new high quality sources can be found and more credible evidence of Mr Watson's relevance / impact 85.68.25.118 (talk) 00:50, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Until the encyclopedia actually prohibits writing autobiographical content, rather than strongly discouraging it, suspicions that the article might be authored by the subject are not valid grounds for deletion. However, I've just put all four book titles into JSTOR and come up with nothing, so I'm not arguing for retention unless someone can show that WP:AUTHOR is met by reviews that JSTOR does not index, or GNG is met. Espresso Addict (talk) 14:05, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Indisputably they are one and the same. They have often used that stylising for many years and the content mentioned in this article would make it obvious anyway. RobinCarmody (talk) 18:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. @Espresso Addict: He publishes as "Mike Watson", hence all the references mentioning that name.
Yes, "ZerO books" = Zero Books (sometimes styled "Zer0 books").
(I don't have, as the Brits say, a dog in this fight. I chanced on the article because Mike Watson had a column in the London Guardian.)
Angusta (talk) 08:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Angusta: Ah, thanks, so it looks like he is this Mike Watson[7]. (The piece mentions a further book, by the way.) Espresso Addict (talk) 09:16, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Espresso Addict (talk) 09:16, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Espresso Addict (talk) 09:16, 11 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!} 08:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:27, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Gosh everyone seems to be dancing on the fence here and it's as clear a fail as GNG as I've seen for a while. "Watson completed his PhD thesis at Goldsmiths College, University of London, in the department of Visual Cultures, under the supervision of Alex Duttmann, moderated by Howard Caygill and Peter Hallward." Oh the loving detail! Fails WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:29, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Data based decision making

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

Doesn't appear notable. Referenced to a very small number of academic papers from the mid to late 2000s/early 2010s, but I cursory searches don't lead me to any significant use of the term in the context of education. Article seems to be largely structured based on the ideas of the Bernhardt reference. I would assume these ideas were salient around the passage and initial implementation of the No Child Let Behind Act and not much beyond that. Maybe reduce to a paragraph or two and merge into the article for the law? William Graham ^talk 06:58, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. William Graham ^talk 06:58, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was speedy delete‎. WP:G7 by User:Graeme Bartlett. (non-admin closure) Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

House of Anaum

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

This article does not meet the general notability guidelines or the notability guidelines for companies and organizations. The sources cited provide insufficient significant coverage and are mostly routine mentions lacking the depth required to demonstrate notability. Additionally, the promotional tone of the article is another thing to worry about. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 06:54, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Fashion, Africa, and Nigeria. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 06:54, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nang Kalayar Aung

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

Non-notable singer, as she has not even released a solo album or achieved any significant milestones in her music career. I could not find any reliable sources to support her notability, so she clearly fails WP:NSINGER. Hteiktinhein (talk) 06:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Myanmar-related deletion discussions. Hteiktinhein (talk) 06:13, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Advertising. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nang Kalayar Aung is notable within Myanmar, particularly in the entertainment and music industry. She has gained recognition for her contributions as a singer and model, especially for her work in Burmese cover songs, which are popular among local audiences. Her popularity stems from her performances at live events and her presence on platforms like YouTube, where she connects with her audience through her music

Myanmar Models DB

.

However, her international recognition might be limited, as most of her activities are centered within Myanmar. Her notability is significant in the context of Burmese music and modeling but may not extend broadly outside these circles without additional global exposure. For someone interested in Myanmar's contemporary music scene, she is a recognized figure worth exploring further. Waiyantunoo (talk) 08:08, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nang Kalayar Aung appears to be a notable figure due to her participation in high-profile events alongside well-known celebrities. In the context you provided, she is associated with prominent actors and celebrities such as Htoo Aung, Alinn Yaung, Kaung Myat San, Banyar Phyo Pyae, and Tayzar Linn Yaung at the grand opening of the 10th branch of the Thawara Win Sein Jewelry Store.

Being part of such an event suggests her influence or standing within the entertainment or public sphere. Her involvement with such notable figures and occasions indicates her recognition in social or professional circles.

check here Waiyantunoo (talk) 11:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Our guidelines on notability - especially for musicians - are Western-centric, without a doubt. But this singer fails those guidelines and so, at this time, is not notable per enwiki standards. I do have to add that Apple Music rendering the title of her song, "Bawa A Twat Nin" as "Bawa A T**t Nin" really, really made my day. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now. The subject doesn't meet WP:NSINGER at the moment– not even GNG either. Passing through the creater's talk page, I think they may have some sort of COI relations to the subject. Htanaungg (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Symphony of Heaven

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

The more you look at sources, the more notability seems to be lacking. Many are based on band members' own words via interviews. Some other sources include articles written by band members themselves. Once you see past the notability mask smoke screen, the notability of this band appears quite thin and below meeting GNG. Also, the article was created by an undisclosed paid editing user. That editor appears to have a COI with this article. Graywalls (talk) 06:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Christianity, and Indiana. Graywalls (talk) 06:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like a situation of occasionally come across where an album might be more notable than a band. Season of Death has some significant coverage from HM, The Metal Resource, and Teeth of the Divine. That last one is currently being discussed at the reliable sources notice board. I noticed the review is written by the site owner, which would mean that it can't be used for any biographical statements. The site owner is a reputable music journalist, so that does confer notability to the album. however, apart from the album reviews, most of the other stuff I'm seeing is either press release copy, interviews from unreliable or self-published sources (which are fine for verifiable statements about the band but not for establishing notability), or COI sources (The Metal Onslaught and Indie Vision Music). I am leaning toward merge with Season of Death.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 12:28, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Industry Leaders

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

This is clearly an advertorial-style TV show that lacks notability and coverage in reliable sources under WP:NTV and WP:GNG. In terms of existing sources, the Herald Sun reference is actually to a suburban local paper owned by the same company, not to the Melbourne Herald Sun itself. Boneymau (talk) 03:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Australia. Boneymau (talk) 03:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. The show seems clearly notable as an established broadcast TV program. The fact that the actual content of the show might be fluffy business cheerleading seems to be influencing the nomination, and it shouldn’t, that has nothing to do with the notability of the show.

The fact that this article is fluffy cheerleading however, is relevant, and this article isn’t ready to be public in its current form, hence the nomination. It will need an eventual source analysis but that’s premature until the article is NPOV.

When that happens, the analysis of sources should be mindful that this is media, and coverage of media within other media tends to follow different conventions. WilsonP NYC (talk) 16:19, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there more support for draftification?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:00, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The sourcing here is very poor indeed. Tangential sources are used to prop up statements about companies mentioned in the article, bulking up the overall source count but adding nothing to the very scanty notability of this show. So we have a lot of content like "It has been credited with helping businesses gain exposure and recognition, as seen with companies like Core9" sourced to the Core9 blog. And this is by no means atypical. Sources 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 are TV listings (and by no means unique in this - it's just wearying picking through the 79 sources in this article - almost all of which are tangential, non-RS, listings or sourced to the show itself. There's literally nothing there, the whole article's SYNTH, OR and in short a man of straw. And once again, we have descended into poetry... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:47, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International School of Panama

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

There are not enough sources and it seems to be WP:NOTPROMO also has no significant coverage Jinnllee90 (talk) 05:09, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:32, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Panama. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Radius_Intelligence

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Radius Intelligence

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

Article lacks notability; there is not substantial media coverage (WP:SUBSTANTIAL), and the sources cited are niche and industry-specific, lacking sufficient audience (WP:AUDIENCE). The article appears to be self-promotion. Similar issues were raised with the now-deleted article about the company CEO. Tripofmice (talk) 04:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:39, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Convent Wood

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

This feels WP:TOOSOON and exclusively uses primary and unreliable sources, along with original research in the form of maps. You can redirect with Great North Wood which offers a broader concept of the topic. Jinnllee90 (talk) 03:58, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:12, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:39, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Escuela Japonesa de Panamá

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

Nothing found in WP:BEFORE search that works. Jinnllee90 (talk) 03:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:24, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Panama. Skynxnex (talk) 03:32, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:52, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American School (Panama)

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

I have not been able to find anything approaching meaningful coverage of this school, furthermore this article has no sources since its creation in 2015 until a dubious source was added a few days ago, fails at WP:ATD Jinnllee90 (talk) 02:55, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:21, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Panama. Skynxnex (talk) 03:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

B & H Tool Works

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

I came across this in WP:NOV24. I'm not seeing coverage that would indicate a WP:NCORP pass. This is really just an interview with an employee. This piece is much better coverage-wise, but I'm hesitant to use an editorial without a byline to support a NCORP pass. This is partially a discussion with the owner and partially a statement that it received a grant.

I just don't think the above is enough to indicate a WP:NCORP pass. Hog Farm _Talk 02:52, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Kentucky. Hog Farm _Talk 02:52, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:41, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Apparently, this was an AFD in 2006 but I can not locate the previous deletion discussion. But this makes this discussion not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:10, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm not finding anything other then routine government reports involving local companies. No secondary RS. Fails WP:NCORP.4meter4 (talk) 03:15, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The 2006 AFD is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/B & H Tool Works, Inc.. It was closed as keep but the information presented there was based only on notability due to employee count and sales. _Talk 03:26, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for locating that AFD, Hog Farm. I've noticed that in the early years, if there was no consensus, the outcome would be marked as Keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Major Indoor Soccer League (1978–1992) broadcasters

AfDs for this article:

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

I'm not finding coverage of the broadcasters of this league as a grouping from secondary sources to meet the WP:NLIST. Let'srun (talk) 02:12, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Football. Let'srun (talk) 02:12, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per my comments at last AFD (which I started!). Giant Snowman 08:47, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Approximately 52 more sources (so it went from having 135 to now having 187 different references) have been added through the aid of the Google News Archive. BornonJune8 (talk 6:44, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
- Instead of deletion, why can't merging it with the Major Indoor Soccer League (1978–1992) on television be considered as an alternative option to having an stand-alone article for the list of MISL broadcasters? The MISL on TV article though, only covers national broadcasters and not local like in the former. BornonJune8 (talk 10:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping to participants in Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/List of Major Indoor Soccer League (1978–1992) broadcasters (not including those that have already participated above): Seany91, SportingFlyer, Davidstewartharvey, ChrisTheDude. Shazback (talk) 20:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Looking at the article's sources, they seem to be WP:ROUTINE mentions that something happened (e.g., YouTube videos which are just copies of the broadcast of a game, news articles reporting the match's results and participants), making this seem like citation overkill. What are the best sources which establish notability of this list as per WP:NLIST? In particular for the announcers. Shazback (talk) 21:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- My quick assessment of the first 10 sources for information:

**Source assessment table: prepared by User:Shazback**
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
1984 MISL Championship Game 5 Baltimore Blast vs St. Louis Steamers June 8, 1984 on YouTube	~ Uploaded by the club	~ User-generated content / YouTube	Rebroadcast of a game / primary source	✘ No
Woolf, Lee (February 28, 1984). "Regional Stations Sack Usfl Opener. - Page 4". The Free Lance-Star. Retrieved November 17, 2024.			Routine. Full text of the mention: "Baltimore's WJZ will continue to show USFL games each Sunday through the playoffs with one exception, this Sunday afternoon when the football game will be pre-empted for a Baltimore Blast indoor soccer match."	✘ No
MISL Baltimore Blast @ New York Arrows March 27, 1981 on YouTube	~ Uploaded by the club	~ User-generated content / YouTube	Rebroadcast of a game / primary source	✘ No
"Observer-Reporter - Page 17". Observer-Reporter. May 24, 1984. Retrieved November 17, 2024.			Routine. Full text of the mention: "Along with Ruan on nationally televised game will be Al Trautwig, the Blast's play-by-play announcer on WJZ and also the former USA Cable Network play-by-play announcer on MISL broadcasts, and Kyle Rote Jr., an ex-Dallas Tornado player in the North American Soccer League."	✘ No
MISL Buffalo Stallions at St Louis Steamers 2-27-81 on YouTube	? Pseudonymous YouTube uploader	~ User-generated content / YouTube	Rebroadcast of a game / primary source	✘ No
MISL Philly Fever at Buffalo Stallions 12-26-81 on YouTube	? Wrong YouTube link?	? Wrong YouTube link?	Wrong YouTube link? Not relevant to the article	✘ No
"LANCERS MOURN THE PASSING OF LEGENDARY ANNOUNCER WAYNE FULLER". Rochester Lancers. 12 February 2018.	~ Club's website	~ Club's website, appears to be republishing a template biography (same text as next source)	No commentary on broadcasters / announcers as a set. Minor routine mention that Fuller announced games for the Lancers	✘ No
"A SOCCER VOICE IS SILENCED: Wayne Fuller, voice of original Lancers, passes away". Front Row Soccer. February 9, 2018.	Blog / personal website	~ Blog / personal website, appears to be republishing a template biography (same text as previous source)	No commentary on broadcasters / announcers as a set. Minor routine mention that Fuller announced games for the Lancers	✘ No
"March 1987 Sting "Bee Lines"" (PDF). Fun While It Lasted.	~ Club's magazine	~ Club's magazine	Non-searchable PDF, no page referenced - best I can find is the following on page 13, which appears fully routine. Full text: "Next Televised Game. Follow the Sting onSportsVision and WPWR-TV CH. 50 with Howard Balson and David Huson. Watch the Skint live from Minnesota, April 7, 7:30 p.m. on WPWR-TV CH. 50."	✘ No
"Movies Supplant Cable Sports. - Page 22". The Vindicator. July 11, 1986. Retrieved November 11, 2024.			Article that could be relevant in the main article (or MISL on TV) showing commentary that MISL was interesting for cable sports channels that were looking to fill air-time. However, only extremely routine mention of one broadcaster for one channel, not significant coverage of this article's topic.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Merge I think we've deleted broadcaster articles since the last AfD, there's a good merge target, and we could retain relevant information there. SportingFlyer T·C 22:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if the proposed Merge target is Major Indoor Soccer League (1978–1992) on television. It would be nice to see what Let'srun and Giant Snowman think about this suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:08, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Major Indoor Soccer League (1978–1992) on television per WP:ATD.4meter4 (talk) 03:16, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tha Carter albums

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

I'm having a hard time finding reliable sources that discuss Lil Wayne's Tha Carter albums as a series or a set. A ranking by Vibe and XXL Mag is pretty much it. The albums have been released in a period over two decades, with not thematic coherence. This seems WP:SYNTHy and unnecessary. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 10:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 10:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. [8][9][10]... Fram (talk) 10:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian again is a ranking, best to worst. The Billboard piece is a listicle of "Black Music Milestones", is three paragraphs long and mentions charting positions and sales. Doesn't discuss the albums as a series. UDiscoverMusic isn't listed at WP:MUSICRS and mostly talks about the first Tha Carter, not about the series as a whole. Where do reliable sources discuss the Tha Carter albums as a series, beyond the fact they got the same title? What makes Tha Carter Lil Wayne's Berlin Trilogy? As a series, what is its meaning, its cultural impact, its legacy? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 11:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards redirecting and/or draftifying. It's probably a viable search term. Not sure we need a ~~third~~ fourth location beyond the artist, individual album, and artist discography articles to discuss it. If there is a need, this article certainly doesn't demonstrate. It's basically just a (incomplete) list of release dates and singles. Put it back in the oven and let it cook. These albums have been out for years. There's no reason someone needed to sloppily rush this out yesterday. Sergecross73 msg me 12:22, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - A completely unnecessary synthesis of four different albums that all have their own articles and are not a distinct "set" or "series" just because they have titles in common. An article that ranks them against each other is pretty much a trivia exercise for reader enjoyment; see this example of how writers can compare anything to anything without the items being a distinct collective entity. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That's very dismissive. The artist treats them as a set, e.g. releasing specifically the singles from the albums as if they belong together[11]. Here is another article from a RS purely about the series[12]. Fram (talk) 14:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why would releasing the singles together mean Lil Wayne treats them as a such "as if they belong together"? Could you elaborate? And while that would be interesting, an artist's own views on their work are secondary to how reliable sources consider it. The Vulture piece is more in depth though, but I'm not convinced as of yet. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 14:25, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That first part was just a reply to the weird claim that they "are not a distinct "set" or "series" just because they have titles in common." The artist considers them as a series, as evidenced by the titles (duh) but also by specifically releasing the singles from these albums together, as if they belong together somehow. While I have no issue with the discussion about whether they are notable as a series and whether they should have a separate article or not, I was rather amazed about the claim that they aren't even a series. But the singles set is not an argument for or against deletion, the Vulture article (which you commented upon, thanks) is an argument against deletion and pro notability. Fram (talk) 14:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree all you want on whether or not it's a "series" but that's the wrong argument. That ignores the much more precise Wikipedia policy cited by the nominator and myself: WP:SYNTH. As currently written, the article has nothing on what makes the albums a distinct collective entity, and merely lists release dates and singles and producers and guests stars. All info is repeated from the respective individual album articles. Any media article comparing/ranking them as a group is trivia as said above. Many of the article's existing sources are unreliable fansites and blogs, and the few reliable sources are about individual albums or songs. Recurring lyrical themes are valid but can be explained at Lil Wayne's article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:56, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really care about the sources in the article or the state of the article, that's not what AfD is about in general, unless it is so egregious that WP:TNT (or in less severe cases draftification) are the best solution. There are plenty of reliable sources treating these albums as a series (and yes, even ranking them means that people consider them a series, something related and comparable and at the same time distinct from the things not listed), and the Vulture article goes way indepth about them, treating them as a separate, important, aspect of his total oeuvre worth discussing as a group: "his Carter records occupy a specific place in his staggering discography [...] But what can looking back at the previous four installments tell us about Wayne as an artist? About how he’s evolved, and what his entire career means?" (that article calls them a "series" and "a project" as well). Fram (talk) 15:16, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, my comment above is rooted in multiple aspects of WP:MERGEREASON, conceptually. There just probably wouldn't much actual merging because I imagine much of this was aped from already existing articles in better shape. Sergecross73 msg me 15:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: After searching for almost an hour, I thought there's no such thing as a "album series" on Wikipedia, but then I stumbled across this category and I found this album series. With reliable sources, we can actually establish this as a valid album series. Vulture's writers had a lot to say about Tha Carter album series; its meaning, ranking and so on. Many reliable publications ranked albums from the series, publications like XXL, The Guardian, and Vibe just to mention a few. One thing we neglect to acknowledge is that those rankings are detailed, they dive into the works and the makings of the album series, they are not just "1–5" lists. dxneo (talk) 00:16, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:54, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Lil Wayne albums discography, or Keep. The sources presented in this discussion do suggest that the albums can be considered a distinct collection of work, but the content would fit into a section on the article covering Lil Wayne's album discography. Svampesky (talk) 13:10, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.

This helps people learn more about the Carter albums without them having to do much digging. It’s easier to just pull up the website that’s filled with reliable and important information about the topic (Carter albums) without the worrying about there being unnecessary information about other things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hwaikdoviwbwwko (talk • contribs) 02:43, 18 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!} 03:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Fram. The artist is clearly intending these to be viewed as part of series of albums. Meets WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 03:11, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chato, Peru

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

The one source linked is invalid and I am unable to find any source at all proving this place is real. Might be a hoax article. Jolielover (talk) 15:33, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 8. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Peru-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:02, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I doubt this article was made by a hoax, as it is made by a long-time editor who is still active today. Those types of editors rarely make hoaxes. Thoughts, @Bejnar? -1ctinus📝🗨 19:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is there some way of involving Spanish-language editors on ADFs involving Spanish-language topics in articles? Searching for small towns / villages has is often difficult for towns in English-speaking countries and using English language sources. In this case, the search is further complicated by the need to search Spanish-language sources and using names rendered into English. Paul H. (talk) 19:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source is now https://geonames.nga.mil/geon-ags/rest/services/RESEARCH/GIS_OUTPUT/MapServer/0/query?outFields=*&where=ufi+%3D+-341758 - it says it's the same as es:Chato Chico; there is also es:Chato Grande in the same area so whether "Chato" can only refer to Chato Chico or to both, or is a combination or both places or just an ambiguous name is unclear. The article should probably be moved to Chato Chico. Peter James (talk) 17:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Actually, I agree that moving the article and name to Chato Chico is appropriate. A report on disaster preparedness said in its introduction, [translated] "The Cura Mori District was created by Law No. 15434 of February 19, 1965, initially consisting of the towns of Cucungará as capital, Pozo de los Ramos, Chato Grande, Chato Chico, Pueblo Nuevo, Buenos Aires, Santa Rosa, Fundo Casaraná, Vega Monteverde, La Para and the town of Chato." Plan de Prevención y Reducción del Riesgo de Desastres 2020-2022 (PDF). July 2020.. Law No. 15434 sets out the borders, and says in part, [translated] "follow this boundary line to the summit of Loma Blanca and continue until you find the Tabanco road, extending to the Piura River bed, following its course, upstream, it reaches the point of the royal road that borders the town of Chato, continuing to the outer part of the urban area;".

I am not sure why the NGA cross-identified Chato with Chato Chico, but sources now talk about Nuevo Chato Chico in reports like Municipalidad Distrital de Cura Mori. Plan de Prevención y Reducción del Riesgo de Desastres 2019-2021 (PDF)..

As an aside, the hamlet (case or caserio) of Chato Grande is now quite separate as it was incorporated in 2013 into a new municipality called "Almirante Grau" along with the population centers of the hamlets of Nuevo Paraíso, Ciudad Noé and Nuevo San Pedro. This nugget of information is found in the first report cited above.

It is possible that the town of Chato (pueblo de Chato) of 1965 is the Nuevo Chato Chico of the 2020s. I found nothing explicit saying so. But the town clearly exists both visually and in documentation. --Bejnar (talk) 00:46, 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) 01:54, 16 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!} 03:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't understand why there are doubts about the existence of this place. Google Maps found it in less than a second with a search for "Chato, Peru", and locates it where the article says it is. Athel cb (talk) 08:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Underground

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

There doesn't appear to be enough coverage of the subject for it to meet WP:NCORP. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to founder William Lustig. toweli (talk) 19:16, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Companies. toweli (talk) 19:16, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:51, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The fact that releases from this boutique label appear in Sight and Sound best of the year lists[13][14] (among other things) should be sufficient to meet WP:GNG. --wooden superman 15:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Benison (talk) 19:59, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The company is notable enough (though the article could use some sources that help establish this fact, like the ones my colleague above found).TH1980 (talk) 00:58, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unlikely to meet NCORP, but could do a redirect to William Lustig as a compromise.-KH-1 (talk) 02:29, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to William Lustig as a viable ATD per nom. and KH-1. Fails WP:NCORP. WP:NOPAGE applies. Sal2100 (talk) 00:04, 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) 01:34, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:04, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woolf College, Kent

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this college of the University of Kent, and added an independent reference confirming its establishment in 2008. I cannot see significant coverage in independent sources, however - the reference I have added has only one sentence of coverage - , and do not think it is notable independently of University of Kent. I originally tagged it with notability issues in 2022, and redirected it to University of Kent yesterday, but this has been reverted by another editor. Tacyarg (talk) 21:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, United Kingdom, and England. Tacyarg (talk) 21:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP: Woolf College meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for educational institutions and should be kept as a separate article. A precedent for keeping articles on colleges of the University of Kent was set in the Turing College AfD discussion (2018), where the result was to keep the article. The discussion highlighted that Kent is a semi-collegiate university, and each of its colleges plays a unique role in student life, not merely as halls of residence, but with distinct functions such as administrative offices and college masters.

Specifically, the Turing College AfD concluded that, like other Kent colleges (such as Eliot, Rutherford, Keynes, and Darwin), Turing College warranted a separate article due to its role within the university and the broader context of collegiate universities in the UK, such as Lancaster and York, which also have articles for their individual colleges. The same reasoning should apply to Woolf College, as it too is a functioning residential and academic unit within the University of Kent.

Historical Precedent: Just as Turing College was retained as a standalone article despite concerns about notability, Woolf College should be given the same consideration. The semi-collegiate structure of the University of Kent supports the argument that each college has independent significance and contributes uniquely to the university.

Consistency with Other Colleges: There is a clear pattern of keeping separate articles for colleges at Kent, and merging them into a single article would risk losing the distinct identity and contributions of each college. The precedent established in the Turing College AfD discussion supports this approach.

Given these points and the Turing College precedent, I believe Woolf College should be kept as a separate article, consistent with the treatment of other Kent colleges. GreenALC (talk) 22:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP: I would like to expand on my initial points regarding Woolf College’s notability. While the college's primary role is to provide accommodation, it also hosts a variety of academic events, including international conferences and lectures focused on subjects related to Virginia Woolf and broader literary themes. These events contribute to the college’s unique identity within the University of Kent and enhance its cultural and academic significance.

As an example, in 2018, Woolf College hosted the 28th Annual International Conference on Virginia Woolf, which brought together scholars from around the world. More recently, in 2024, the college hosted a lecture by Professor Rachel Bowlby on the theme of Virginia Woolf and the Property Market, demonstrating its continuing academic engagement with the legacy of Woolf and her relevance in contemporary discourse.

This active role in hosting significant academic events contributes to the college’s function as an academic and cultural hub within the university, much like Turing College, Eliot College, and Darwin College, which have retained individual articles due to their distinct history, facilities, and contributions to the university’s structure. Woolf College, in the same vein, fulfills a comparable function and warrants the same consideration for a separate article.

I hope this additional information helps clarify why Woolf College meets the standards for notability and why it should be retained as a standalone article. GreenALC (talk) 22:50, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Satisfies WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ Redirect Per Miraclepine's redirect target below. ~~I'm terribly sorry about this, because~~ I'd rather this were kept but it doesn't pass WP:GNG on the current sourcing and there's simply nothing out there to get it past WP:GNG - which is the standard we are asked to evaluate even degree-awarding institutions against. Presumed notability is less compelling an argument for a relatively new institution. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Does it or doesn't it meet GNG? Can we get a source analysis?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:30, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Far from GNG. Source 1 is a passing mention

. 2, 8 (Kentish Gazette) I can't access (why are they linked through LexisNexis??). 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 17, 18 are by Kent

. 4 is by a partner, not independent

. 7 doesn't mention the subject

. 12 is an announcement for a seminar held there; trivial, primary, and non-independent

. 13 is a book edited and written by lecturers at Kent; not independent

. 14 is an announcement for a conference held at Woolf College; trivial, primary, non-independent

. 15 is a trivial listing for the same conference

. 16 yet another trivial, non-independent mention as the venue for the conference

.

Even if the Kentish Gazette pieces are both IRS SIGCOV, that's still only one GNG source when multiple are required. JoelleJay (talk) 05:32, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to University_of_Kent#Colleges as ATD absent notability. ミラP@Miraclepine 05:01, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to University_of_Kent#Colleges with thanks to Miraclepine for the ATD. I have been watching this for some time, and could not, in good conscience, vote keep, as the sourcing is missing, but I did not think delete was appropriate for a college of an established university that may well become notable. What was lacking was an appropriate place to redirect, thus preserving page history and allowing a spinout article in the future should notability be established. Noting the section on the University of Kent page, this is appropriate. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as participants divided between Keep and Redirection to University of Kent#Colleges.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:04, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of Colombia–Nicaragua relations

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

Unnecessary split of Colombia–Nicaragua relations. In fact, I'm not familiar with any other timeline article on foreign relations. This page covers some incidents not mentioned on the parent article, yes, but there's no reason it couldn't be covered there instead — the parent article is not very long and would absolutely benefit from more context. — Kawnhr (talk) 00:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:NLIST. We'd literally be deleting every timeline on wikipedia if we accepted the nominator's rationale as valid. Timelines are a valid secondary form of presenting content. Per NLIST they are not considered a duplicate or a content fork of an identical topic covered within a prose article. Given that the prose version of the article has lots of WP:SIGCOV sourcing; it would be an easy matter of using those sources to improve the sourcing on the timeline page.4meter4 (talk) 01:12, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, History, Lists, Colombia, and Nicaragua. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:00, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy merge to Colombia–Nicaragua relations. If you want to propose a merge so the parent article covers this, you can generally follow the instructions at WP:MERGE rather than nominating it for deletion. That includes just boldly doing it yourself – I doubt anyone would object when no one's really touched it since it was created in 2007. I agree that the main article should have this context, rather than having this unnecessary split. Reywas92^Talk 02:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. No sourcing, except for the last sentence in the last entry. There is no verification of any of this list, save that final citation. — Maile (talk) 02:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Change my Delete vote to Merge, makes more sense — Maile (talk) 11:44, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just Merge into the Colombia–Nicaragua relations page. Neither is very big. Sheesh. Yilloslime (talk) 16:25, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, only one source, no need to cover this topic twice. Allan Nonymous (talk) 15:54, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I see no compelling reason to delete. No problem with the article cannot be resolved with improvements. As for the existence of these types of articles, here are some international relations timeline articles: Timeline of Hungary–European Union relations, Timeline of Japan–United States relations Mason7512 (talk) 23:22, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as participants are divided between Keep and Merge outcomes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:02, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge since the topic is not large enough to warrant a split. Do this without prejucide for other timelines; at the same time, the existence of other timelines is not relevant to the outcome of this particular timeline. Geschichte (talk) 10:17, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Parker Molloy

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

Subject fails WP:BIO notability, most of the sources aren't independent of the subject. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 02:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Journalism. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 02:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV per the sources found in the first AFD, which can be viewed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parker Marie Molloy. Best.4meter4 (talk) 02:13, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1st source listed is WP:HUFFPOCON, 2nd and 3rd don't mention her just a controversy she was involved with, 4th is a blog post that mentions her on the same controversy, 5th is a dead link, 6th is a petition, 7th, 8th, 11th are from same site about the same thing but could potentially be an ok source, 9th is a blog, 10th is the same thing as 8th. 12th is dead.

So really there's one potentially good soucre there, doesn't exactly establish notability. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 02:32, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheLoyalOrder I'm counting 28 sources in that AFD, and its difficult to know what sources you are talking about specifically because they are not numbered. I suggest doing a WP:SIRS table source analysis here for clarity. You might also want to include the sources currently cited in the article as well. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:40, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

sure, i'll do that soon. thanks TheLoyalOrder (talk) 05:27, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


From	Source	Significant?	Independent?	Reliable?	Secondary?	Pass/Fail	Notes
Currently used in article	https://windycitytimes.com/2014/06/25/windy-city-times-30-under-30-to-be-honored-june-26/	no	presumably	presumably	no	X	Mentioned in a list of a bunch of people by this local newspaper
	https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/03/31/2014-trans-100-includes-cece-mcdonald-fallon-fox#toggle-gdpr	no	no	presumably	no	X	Mentioned once, seemingly because she writes for them
	https://web.archive.org/web/20190203133449/https://www.mediamatters.org/authors/parker-molloy/382	no	no	presumably	no	X	an article she wrote, not about her
	https://newrepublic.com/authors/parker-molloy	no	no		no	X	its just a link to their author page
	https://www.salon.com/writer/parker_marie_molloy/	no	no		no	X	ditto
	https://thought.is/what-its-like-to-come-out-as-transgender-at-work/	yes	no	?	no	X	article about herself
	https://web.archive.org/web/20141104114234/http://parkthatcar.net/2012/07/16/oneoftherottenones/	no	no	?	no	X	blog post by her
	Parker Marie Molloy (February 25, 2014). My Transgender Coming Out Story. Thought Catalog. ISBN 9781629210605.	?	no	?	no	X	dead link to ebook she wrote
	https://web.archive.org/web/20150312125430/http://chicagoist.com/2014/03/02/interview_parker_marie_malloy_on_ca.php	yes	no	presumably	no	X	interview of her
	https://www.salon.com/2014/02/05/piers_morgan_grills_trans_activist.../	no	yes	debatable	yes	X	just quotes a tweet of hers
	https://web.archive.org/web/20201206162642/http://archive.azcentral.com/community/gilbert/articles/20140124gilbert-golf-inventor-suicide-website-essay-anne-vanderbilt.html	no	yes	?	no	X	she's not mentioned
	https://grantland.com/features/a-mysterious-physicist-golf-club-dr-v/	no	yes	?	no	X	ditto
	https://web.archive.org/web/20170914124936/https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/3-signs-we-have-a-long-way-to-go-on-trans-rights-20150113	no	no	no	no	X	an article she wrote, not about her
	https://www.huffpost.com/voices/topic/transgender	no		debatable		X	its just the topic page for all trans articles
	https://www.salon.com/2013/08/23/the_happy_story_of_my_transgender_coming_out/	yes	no	debatable	no	X	article about herself
	https://apnews.com/article/trump-media-election-rallies-facts-kamala-harris-e906e990b5dcfe44b5e672336fe82b32	no	yes	yes	yes	X	leads with briefly mentioning her perspective on sanewashing of trump and then talks about other people
	https://archive.ph/20141108192631/http://nlgja.org/2014/transgender-journalists-and	no	no	?	no	X	just lists her a particpating in a talk
	https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/style-blog/wp/2013/08/22/trans-activists-scrutinize-pvt-manning-coverage/	no	yes	yes	yes	X	just quotes a tweet of hers
	https://web.archive.org/web/20141108220813/http://theweek.com/article/index/250110	no	no	?	no	X	quotes her amongst other trans people
	https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/2014/12/31/transgender-teen-leelah-alcorn-death-needs-mean-something/4hw6uPd8NtjIbn8kAdyAbM/story.html	no	no	presumably	no	X	her commenting on something, not about her
	https://www.autostraddle.com/let-it-go-for-the-last-time-trans-women-were-not-born-boys-255055/	no	yes	?	yes	X	briefly quoting an op-ed she co wrote, amongst other trans people
	http://www.thetrans100.com/about/	no	presumably		no	X	just a link to the trans 100 org, she's not mentioned
	https://web.archive.org/web/20150213020921/http://www.nwpc.org/2014emmanominees	no	presumably	?	no	X	list of people who received an honor from an org
	https://web.archive.org/web/20141108212634/http://www.lapressclub.org/Resources/Documents/Finalists_NAEJ_2014.pdf	no	presumably	?	no	X	ditto
	https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/04/17/t-word-new-n-word	no	no	presumably	no	X	an article she wrote, not about her
	https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/03/18/rupaul-stokes-anger-use-transphobic-slur	no	no	presumably	no	X	ditto
	https://www.huffingtonpost.com/parker-marie-molloy/gay-dudes-can-you-just-not_b_4330353.html	no	no	no	no	X	ditto
	https://web.archive.org/web/20141108213125/http://www.pqmonthly.com/parker-marie-molloy-elaborates-gay-dudes-can-just/17814	yes	no	?	no	X	interview of her
	https://www.huffpost.com/entry/parker-marie-molloy_b_5077322	not really	yes	no	yes	X	not really about her, author mostly talks about their own experience in response to parker
	https://www.advocate.com/commentary/2014/04/17/op-ed-burning-books-one-word-time	no	yes	?	no	X	doesn't mention parker
	https://www.thestranger.com/seattle/about-the-word-tranny/Content?oid=19946137	no	yes	?	no	X	ditto
	https://boingboing.net/2014/04/04/rupaul.html	maybe	yes	probably not	yes	X	perennial soucres describes boingboing.net as a group blog
	https://web.archive.org/web/20160311044304/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/our-lady-j/rupauls-drag-race_b_5148719.html	no	yes	debatable	yes	X	doesn't mention parker
	http://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episodes/episode_498_-_rupaul_charles	?	yes	no	?	X	ru paul podcast episode, presumably paul talks about his opinion
	https://web.archive.org/web/20160819021941/http://roygbiv.jezebel.com/huffpostgays-offensive-video-of-drag-queen-shooting-tra-1566525131	no	yes	no	yes	X	short blog post it looks like
	https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/04/14/rupauls-drag-race-logo-tv-apologize-transphobic-slur	no	no	presumably	yes	X	an article she wrote, not about her
	https://web.archive.org/web/20141029221559/http://www.glaad.org/blog/update-female-or-she-male-sketch-and-rupauls-drag-race	no	yes	presumably	yes	X	doesn't mention her
	http://freethoughtblogs.com/zinniajones/2014/04/open-letter-100-trans-women-stand-against-calpernia-addams-and-andrea-james/	not really	?	no	no	X	a petition defending her
	https://www.huffpost.com/entry/calpernia-addams-andrea-james_b_5146415	not really	?	no	no	X	ditto
	https://www.queerty.com/trans-violence-watchdogs-issue-advisory-warning-against-advocate-writer-and-trans-activist-parker-molloy-20140903	not really	yes	?	yes	X	mentions a previous article about parker and then that were added to a list, that's all
	https://www.queerty.com/park-that-attitude-the-danger-of-trans-activist-parker-molloy-20140827	probably	yes	?	yes	?	unclear on the reliability of Queerty. also not sure if its coverage of her is signifcant
from prev AFD	https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/05/06/alaska-thunderfuck-apologizes-controversial-video	not really	no	?	no	X	reads like an ad for a podcast she was on
	https://www.thestranger.com/blogs/2014/10/30/20923525/sl-letter-of-the-day-drag-trans-trans-drag	not really	no	?	no	X	article isn't about her, author just asked her opinion on something
	links to a bunch of websites that she writes articles for		no		no	X	these aren't sources
	https://web.archive.org/web/20210623155424/https://www.glaad.org/blog/author-transphobia-perfectly-natural-asked-take-leave-ad-agency	not really	yes	yes	yes	?	short article about Gavin McInnes that quotes a tweet of her's
	https://windycitytimes.com/2014/05/14/chicagoan-writes-nationally-from-the-t-perspective/	yes	?	?	no?	X	its mostly an interview, which would be primary source

TheLoyalOrder (talk) 07:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

probably wrong on some of these judgements but not wrong to the point it changes the determinations, i think. 0 definitely good sources. Also most of these, regardless of quality, talk about like 1 controversy from a decade ago TheLoyalOrder (talk) 07:09, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was speedy keep‎ as withdrawn by the nominator (they did not use the standard AfD closure templates, which at the very least throws off the archival bot at the delsort lists) (non-admin closure) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:43, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Flood

The result was KEEP. WP:NAC: withdrawn by nominator. Thank you for your feedback, 4meter4. My WP:BEFORE yielded less, but I agree with your conclusion. JFHJr (㊟) 03:15, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

This subject fails WP:GNG for not being the subject of substantial coverage by multiple reliable sources unrelated to himself. He also fails alternative criteria from WP:NMUSIC and WP:NAUTHOR because his works in these fields are not notable, except apparently for Oceana Fine which has its own article. This is a 1E author at best and can be mentioned or even discussed with due weight in the OF article. A standalone article for this author is unencyclopedic. JFHJr (㊟) 01:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Authors, and Australia. JFHJr (㊟) 01:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:GNG. The article is in a terrible state, but the author is clearly notable. Passes criteria 1 of WP:ANYBIO as the winner of the Miles Franklin Award for his novel Oceana Fine; widely recognized as Australia's top literary prize (equivalent to winning the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in the United States). Clearly passes criterion 3 and 4 of WP:NAUTHOR as the winner of that prize. I can't imagine that any sort of WP:BEFORE was done as there is lots of WP:SIGCOV in google books. Also you can access his biographical entry in The Oxford Companion to Australian Literature through the Wikipedia Library. Here is his biography in the Australia Literature Gateway which is published by the University of Queensland in collaboration with the Australian National Library. There is also coverage of him in [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20] Best. 4meter4 (talk) 02:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Nikita Hand

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

Not notable, simply because she was recently mentioned in the news Nswix (talk) 01:18, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:57, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:57, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. WP:VICTIM applies. Guliolopez (talk) 02:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not pass WP:VICTIM and will not pass WP:INDEPTH due to lack of WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE on Hand. Grahaml35 (talk) 05:40, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In Googling, I cannot find anything of note other than the McGregor case.--A bit iffy (talk) 05:43, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Grahaml35. Coverage of Hand is limited to her connection with McGregor’s sexual assault case and the related investigations and trial. Relevant details about the crime and her involvement as a victim should be incorporated into a dedicated subsection within the "Controversies" section of the article on McGregor. Mooonswimmer 06:25, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage of Hand is already done and adequate in the McGregor article. Spideog (talk) 09:12, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 07:16, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete in accordance with the Subjects notable only for one event policy and the WP:VICTIM policy. Spideog (talk) 09:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and WP:BLP1E. Spleodrach (talk) 09:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shamayim "Mama Shu" Harris

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

Article fails general notability guidelines Nxcrypto Message 00:27, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:59, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 02:00, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pics.io

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

Defunct? software for which no notability appeared to have ever been attained. I cannot identify a merger or redirect target Star Mississippi 00:25, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Photography and Software. Star Mississippi 00:25, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This was a cloud storage image plug-in...of which there is very little use of overall because most users of cloud storage edit images on their devices, not in a janky web interface that doesn't even offer any clarity on who developed it. Wasn't notable in this guise, not notable in the usual 'pivot to AI' sense, either. Nate • (chatter) 02:44, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Just another bit of software, nothing inherently notable about it. Also, the editor that created the article was possibly an undisclosed paid editor based on their arguably spammy contribs. -OXYLYPSE (talk) 10:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Lupu

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

Delete as not notable - my WP:BEFORE turned up no decent sources to establish or support WP:NACTOR - the article as it stands makes some claims about acting awards, but I couldn't confirm these, and in any case the awards do not seem notable enough in their own right. The only substantial webpages about the subject that I found were https://www.cinemagia.ro/actori/dan-lupu-41852/ and https://www.filmneweurope.com/news/romania-news/item/108375-fne-europa-distribution-distributor-of-the-month-dan-lupu-transilvania-film but neither gave me any sense that there might be extant references that could be used to support notability. That said, it is possible that there are better sources in Romanian that I did not find, and if that is the case I would happily rescind my nomination. Finally, I note that the article has remained unreferenced since its creation, and there is no corresponding page on rowiki, which I might have expected if the subject were notable. SunloungerFrog (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Romania. SunloungerFrog (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://mediabiasfactcheck.com/times-of-india/

[1]