Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 October 13

< October 12 October 14 >
Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

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 delete‎. asilvering (talk) 18:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of ASEAN countries by IQ

[edit]
List of ASEAN countries by IQ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Oh well. I don't want to reignite the old CTOP, but measures of intelligence across countries like this have always been controversial, if not fringe, and presenting a "list of countries by IQ" as a factual-looking article is probably not the best way to tackle it. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:51, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm also concerned about there being some WP:FRINGE in this article because IQ tests and their accuracy are debated and there may have been many different factors in how the countries determined the average IQs of their citizens, which might make the comparison between them inaccurate. I also don't think that this meets WP:GNG because there really isn't any significant coverage of the average IQ in countries in ASEAN specifically; all of the data is taken from lists of the average IQ in countries around the world. That Tired TarantulaBurrow 00:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This definitely isn't a type of article that we should be encouraging, and the major source in the article, [1], is selling stuff, which is a disqualifier for the numbers presented here. Nate • (chatter) 01:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I think this is a stupid concept. "IQ of nations" is something only a very fringe subset of people care about. In addition to this, the average IQ of ASEAN countries isn't something well documented or scientific. -Samoht27 (talk) 04:03, 20 October 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.
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 delete‎. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alessio Bisutti

[edit]
Alessio Bisutti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no media coverage about him in Italian publications and no article on Italian Wikipedia. Entries in databases are not helpful to pass WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 20:48, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

— 101.51.160.60 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete Coverage appears to be mainly reporting of fight results and announcements. That doesn't meet WP:GNG. Despite the claims of many titles, WP:NBOX is not met. The UBO is one of many minor boxing organizations so that title shows nothing for WP notablilty. Since the article says he's won WBA and WBC titles I looked up those organization's heavyweight rankings to see if he's in the top 10. The WBC shows 3 champions and the top 40 contenders[2] and the WBA shows 2 champions and the top 15 contenders[3]. He's not shown in either listing so he clearly fails to meet WP:NBOX which requires a top 10 ranking. Papaursa (talk) 13:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:19, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. asilvering (talk) 18:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atlantica (trade zone)

[edit]
Atlantica (trade zone) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Did WP:BEFORE and wasn't able to find anything about this except for one report [4]. The name comes up in a lot of different contexts but I wasn't able to pin down sources for this. There are external links on the article but they weren't much help. If anyone finds any thing please ping me. Dr vulpes (Talk) 20:41, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:19, 13 October 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.
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 'soft delete'‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC) It has been brought to my attention that there was a previous PROD and this was therefore not eligible for soft delete. My apologies, I neglected to check the talk page before choosing that option. Changing result to just plain old delete. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 23:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Otherways

[edit]
Otherways (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A quick google search reveals that this term is used for many things, meaning I couldn't discern if it even deserved to be the primary topic. Intriguingly, most of the sources online were only mentioning it as if it were real, which compromises their usage. Regardless, this shoddy award doesn't meet the general notability guideline as it hasn't been covered by 3 reliable sources. Tavantius (talk) 16:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A declined PROD, not eligible for soft-deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:39, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:18, 13 October 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.
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 delete‎. Per the WP:TNT argument. No prejudice against recreation with proper sourcing, should it be found. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Sebiba

[edit]
Battle of Sebiba (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. M.Bitton (talk) 17:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (with improvements) - appears potentially notable based on scale of the battle. Second source seems to be The Complete History which is a significant work. Probably needs some "according to" etc. given that we are inevitably dealing with historical accounts. Per WP:NONENG if any of the statements are controversial, some translated quotation of the original source(s) might be helpful. YFB ¿ 17:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to Delete for WP:TNT as it makes no difference to my ability to recreate (there's essentially no usable material to start from) and will hopefully help support a consensus so this discussion can be closed :) - when I get round to it I will use the spelling Sbiba for consistency as suggested. YFB ¿ 19:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Can't find any mention of this in reliable (English) secondary sources, so it's certainly not a major or noteworthy engagement. Ibn al-Athir (The Complete History) and al-Idrisi (quoted in text) are primary sources, so even if there's no WP:OR involved here (which I'm not confident about), its mere mention in primary sources, in the absence of any mentions in secondary sources, means it doesn't meet WP:GNG. Overall, it just looks like another pseudo-puffery piece squeezed out of an obscure historical military engagement. R Prazeres (talk) 19:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not easy to research this topic as most of the Arabic-language texts I can access e.g. via Google Books don't seem to support text selection (to check translation). However I found the following paper in the Algerian Historical Journal (for example) via a quick search for معركة سبيبة (Battle of Sebiba) https://www.asjp.cerist.dz/en/article/224926
I'm not sure how Ibn al-Athir can be considered a primary source in this context? He wasn't born until 95 years after this battle took place and he doesn't appear to have been directly connected to either of the combatant tribes. But IANA historian so perhaps I'm misunderstanding how this works. YFB ¿ 20:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I found a French translation of Ibn al-Athir which is a bit more accessible to me at least. There is a whole section devoted to this battle, the context and its aftermath so it does seem fairly significant. Quick Google translation below of an extract:
"Then the Riyâh' and the Zenâta all set out together, and on his side En-Naçir having advanced at the head of the Çanhȧdja, the Zenâta and the Benoû Hilal, the two armies met [ P. 31 ] near the town of Sebiba ( 1 ) . Following the charge which the Riyâh' and El-Moʻizz made respectively against the Benoû Hilal and the Zenâta, these last two groups fled, and the troops of En-Naçir imitated their example. The fugitives were pursued with swords at their backs, and twenty-four thousand Çanhâdja and Zenâta were massacred. El-K'ȧsim ben 'Alennâs (2) , brother of En-Nåçir, was also killed, but the latter himself was able to flee with a small number of his men. The Arabs thus became masters of a rich booty consisting of everything that belonged to the vanquished, money, weapons, horses, etc., the sharing of which was carried out as agreed. This affair completed the Arabs' complete mastery of the country; having arrived without resources, poor and having very few horses, they then found themselves rich, abundantly provided with weapons and mounts, in the presence of a country almost without defenders. They sent the standards, the drums, the tents of En-Nâçir and the horses they contained, to Temim, who sent them back to them, saying that it would be shameful for him to seize the spoils of his cousin. The Arabs greatly appreciated this act of generosity."
I also found the following in https://www.persee.fr/doc/ccmed_0007-9731_1968_num_11_43_1452
"La défaite de Sabîba (1065), qui fait au Magrib Central pendant à celle de Haydarân, constraint bientôt al-Nâsir d'abandonner la Qal'a pour Bougie, qu'il vient de fonder (1068-9). Vannée suivante, il conclut avec Tamïm une paix que lui et ses successeurs respecteront jusqu'à la mort de Tamïm (1108)."
This is another secondary source that ascribes significance to the event. Definitely enough for GNG in my view. The article needs a lot of work, I will see what I can do to bring it up to scratch if retained or moved to Draft space.
YFB ¿ 00:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another source, in English, which devotes more than two whole pages to this specific battle: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=BvTjCQAAQBAJ&pg=PA43 (pages 43-45) YFB ¿ 01:17, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking. That last source (Baadj 2015) is the only one that gives me pause about notability, but it's still just one book, which doesn't fully solve the WP:GNG problem because you'd have to write most of the article from this single detailed source. (As for Ibn al-Athir and Idrisi, as asilvering notes below they are primary sources in the sense that they are medieval accounts from the same era, so they should be mediated by professional historians.) A quick reading of Baadj's account also makes it clear that this article, as is, would need to be completely re-written to even be understandable. I'd support draftifying at best, if there's a chance a competent editor would rewrite it, but WP:TNT otherwise. R Prazeres (talk) 05:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy with WP:TNT. I will write a new article using the above sources plus this one https://ixtheo.de/Record/792329171 which dedicates three sub-chapters (6 whole pages) to the battle, its aftermath and a comparison to the Battle of Haydaran which was part of the same conflict. @M.Bitton would you be content with moving to Draft space for me to do that? YFB ¿ 21:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. M.Bitton (talk) 21:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Yummifruitbat well, he's a secondary source in the sense that he wasn't at the battle, but from the perspective of writing history, we don't want to be basing articles on what someone said several hundred years ago, with no interpretation by modern historians. -- asilvering (talk) 03:25, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. YFB ¿ 21:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:41, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (though it needs improvement) or Draftify per YFB's offer to improve. Searching the Arabic name, موقعة سبيبة (the phrase I'm finding in these), finds a number of passing and more-than-passing mentions of the battle and its importance in shifting power at the time. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 17:36, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This probably needs a rename if kept given the name of the wikilinked town used later is "Sbiba". There is also the 1943 Battle of Sbiba and an earlier (824? 825?) battle where the Aghlabid army was routed[5][6]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:17, 13 October 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Krishna Shroff

[edit]
Krishna Shroff (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks significant independent coverage and mostly relies on promotional content, particularly for Matrix Fight Night. The tone suggests potential paid editing, violating Wikipedia’s neutral point of view. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPERSON. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 19:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The article does not qualify for a Speedy Keep.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:45, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Editing can clean up the conflict of interest aspects of the article. The sourcing looks okay to me. Doha Dear (talk) 00:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to also hear from more experienced editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:17, 13 October 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.
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 redirect‎ to Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University. With no prejudice against relisting, owing to low participation. asilvering (talk) 18:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Faculty of Engineering, ÇOMÜ

[edit]
Faculty of Engineering, ÇOMÜ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

We already have page for the university, I don't think this faculty is notable on its own we don't need this page. Similar to this one Pedian4169 (talk) 23:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May I offer a suggestion? Rather than take up other editor's time with deletion discussions, why don't you just BOLDly redirect these articles to the main article? If you get resistance, then come here. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 18:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:15, 13 October 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.
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 draftify for now.‎. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:27, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Effects of Social Media on Youth

[edit]
Effects of Social Media on Youth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A clear example of WP:NOTESSAY Ibjaja055 (talk) 23:14, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Behavioural science, Social science, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:30, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: An unsourced essay (no inline citations), feels like a high school term paper. Not for wikipedia. Oaktree b (talk) 19:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify: there's tons of sourcing available for this topic, but this brand new article as it stands isn't in the best of shape for an encyclopedia. However, the article isn't entirely junk either, some of it is actually well-written in encyclopedic tone and plausibly sourceable, which makes this a WP:PRESERVE situation. Take for example the "mental health" section:

    Excessive use of social media has been linked to increased rates of depression, anxiety, and loneliness among teenagers. The constant exposure to idealized images and curated lives on platforms like Instagram and Snapchat can lead to body dissatisfaction, low self-esteem, and FOMO (fear of missing out).

    Deleting would de-motivate a relatively new good-faith editor and throw away some of their good work, whereas draftifying would give them a chance to re-work it if desired and seek feedback from peers. Left guide (talk) 04:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm fine with !draft if it goes that way. Oaktree b (talk) 16:47, 17 October 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.
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. I assume the crossed out deletion nomination indicates that this AFD is withdrawn by the nominator so I'm closing this as a Speedy Keep. Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sirikanya Tansakun

[edit]
Sirikanya Tansakun (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPOL and the sources do not prove that the subject pass WP:GNG. Ibjaja055 (talk) 07:37, 15 October 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.
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 delete‎. A bit early, but WP:SNOW. asilvering (talk) 18:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Olufemi Ajadi Oguntoyinbo

[edit]
Olufemi Ajadi Oguntoyinbo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject fails WP:NPOL. The awards received are not notable and there are routine news coverages that do not qualify for WP:GNG. Ibjaja055 (talk) 21:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The figure is notable because he contested for Governorship Elections in Ogun State under NNPP, and I included secondary sources to back it up. Johnvictor82 (talk) 21:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnvictor82 Thank you very much for creating this article and I really appreciate the efforts you have put into it. However, contesting for a gubernatorial post does not pass the Notability guidelines for Politicians. Please, go through the General Notability Guidelines and Specific Notability Guidelines of Wikipedia. Ibjaja055 (talk) 22:39, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: @User:Johnvictor82, Notability is not automatically granted by candidacy, simply running for political office, even a significant one, does not inherently establish notability according to WP:POLITICIAN, tbh, a quick check and I can’t find a significant public recognition outside of the candidacy, maybe you can point me there. B.Korlah (talk) 22:34, 13 October 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.
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 merge‎ to Barnier government. asilvering (talk) 18:38, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024 French vote of no confidence

[edit]
October 2024 French vote of no confidence (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:NOTNEWS, not significant no-confidence motion with little chance of passing, along with limited news reporting. At best should be merged into the Barnier government or French anti-Barnier government protests articles. Zinderboff(talk) 21:18, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 21:24, 13 October 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ribbon (band)

[edit]
Ribbon (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An unsourced article about a Japanese pop group. Not to disparage Ribbon, but pop groups are a dime a dozen in Japan. No indication that WP:NBAND is satisfied. Yes, their single Little Date was used as the theme song for a single season of Ranma 1/2, but that would not do it on its own. No indications they charted any singles or otherwise satisfy NBAND. Safiel (talk) 20:08, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 21:23, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Deleting instead of relisting due to the BLP concerns. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hemant Batra

[edit]
Hemant Batra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is heavily refbombed (just to make it difficult to judge the notability). On a closer look, I didn't find any in-depth reference. Due to COI concerns, I don't think it is possible to maintain such articles even if he is weak notable. Most of the references are sponsored and not acceptable per WP:RSNOI. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 19:43, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 21:23, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I'm not sure I'd call this promotional as the tags on the article warn. In places, it's the opposite: Batra just wants to be in news by speaking on contentious and critically controversial issues. I haven't investigated the sources but there are evidently some real BLP concerns here. -- asilvering (talk) 18:41, 20 October 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Transworld Group (shipping and logistics company)

[edit]
Transworld Group (shipping and logistics company) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP: mainly covered by WP:TRADES publications or covered by sponsored media, i.e. WP:RSNOI. Gheus (talk) 19:31, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of its subsidiaries is WP:LISTED in India: [9]. Certainly appears to be a notable enough group. Yuvaank (talk) 00:26, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Source analysis of the newly added ones.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 21:22, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 20:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Parviz Hekmatjoo

[edit]
Parviz Hekmatjoo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Bio of a Tudeh activist, lacking in depth coverage in independent sources. Mccapra (talk) 20:54, 13 October 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.
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 redirect‎ to Cycling at the 1988 Summer Olympics – Men's team time trial. Owen× ☎ 20:58, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Julio Illescas

[edit]
Julio Illescas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sign of notability, no coverage in news sources I can find. Fails WP:GNG. Allan Nonymous (talk) 20:29, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 20:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Country Shindig

[edit]
Country Shindig (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't find evidence that this meets WP:NALBUM / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 19:32, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 20:55, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Medialab Technology

[edit]
Medialab Technology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't find reliable sources to add to show it can meet WP:N. Boleyn (talk) 19:27, 13 October 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Owen× ☎ 20:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan Number One Party

[edit]
Taiwan Number One Party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Minor political party in Taiwan with no electoral success nor coverage in reliable sources, either in Chinese or English. Online searches turn up only brief mentions on ROC government lists. Yue🌙 19:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Jin, Wu-feng 金武鳳 (2001-11-09). "魏吉助 向中選會抗議 若王建?政黨屬性空白 他的'台灣吾黨'也應一視同仁" [Wei Ji-shu protested to the Central Election Commission. If Wang Jian's political party attributes are blank, his "Taiwan Number One Party" should also treat everyone equally]. United Evening News [zh] (in Chinese). p. 20.

      The article notes: "魏吉助是台灣吾黨召集人，台灣吾黨於9月成立時，據他表示，全省總共有30餘名有實力的候選人同意接受台灣吾黨推荐，包括嘉義縣立委參選人李雅景、彰化縣立委參選人陳陽德、高雄市立委參選人羅志明和台北縣立委參選人林瑞圖等。"

      From Google Translate: "Wei Ji-shu [zh] is the convener of the Taiwan Number One Party. When the Taiwan Number One Party was established in September, he said that a total of more than 30 capable candidates in the province agreed to accept the recommendation of the Taiwanese Party, including Chiayi County Legislative Candidate Li Ya-jing [zh], Changhua County Legislative Candidate Chen Yang-de, Kaohsiung City Legislative Candidate Lo Chih-ming, and Taipei County Legislative Candidate Lin Rui-tu [zh], etc."

      The article notes: "台灣吾黨已登記為合法政黨，擔任召集人的魏吉助在眾人撤退後，只好當「代表」撐到底，政黨欄裡仍登記台灣吾黨。魏吉助說，全省另有2名政黨欄內仍登記台灣吾黨的參選人，他們是台南的洪中，平地山胞瓦歷斯貝林，因為來不及撤銷而無法更改。"

      From Google Translate: "The Taiwan Number One Party has been registered as a legal political party. Wei Ji-shu, who served as the convener, had no choice but to hold on as a "representative" after everyone retreated. The Taiwan Number One Party is still registered in the political party column. Wei Ji-shu said that there are still two candidates in the province who are still registered as candidates of the Taiwan Number One Party in the political party column. They are Tainan's Hongzhong and Pingtishan compatriot Walis Perin. They cannot change because they have no time to cancel."

    2. Yang, Ke-hua 楊克華 (2001-09-15). "台灣吾黨昨成立王金平南下致賀 魏吉助任召集人 擬提名卅五至四十參選立委" [Taiwan Number One Party was founded yesterday. Wang Jin-pyng went south to congratulate him. Wei Ji-shu is appointed as the convener and plans to nominate people aged between 35 and 40 to run for the Legislative Council.]. United Daily News (in Chinese). p. 13.

      The article notes: "台灣昨天又誕生新政黨，取名「台灣吾黨」。吾黨召集人兼發言人魏吉助在成立大會中說，吾黨，無黨也，全台灣百分之八十五無黨無派民眾的主流民意，即「吾黨所宗」。吾黨計畫提名卅五人至四十人，競選下屆立法委員。"

      From Google Translate: "A new political party was born in Taiwan yesterday, named "Taiwan Number One Party." Wei Ji-shu [zh], the convener and spokesperson of the party, said at the founding meeting that the party is a party-free party, and the mainstream public opinion of the 85% of people in Taiwan who have no party or faction is "the belief of our party." The party plans to nominate 35 to 40 people to run for the next legislative session."

      The article notes: "目前確知將代表吾黨參選立委者，包括施性忠的兒子施乃元在新竹市參選，還有新竹縣議員羅世洞、苗栗縣立委陳超明、彰化縣曾參選國大代表的江播龍、高雄市的三立電視台董事長林坤海，魏吉助本人則在台中市參選。"

      From Google Translate: "It is currently confirmed that those who will represent the party in the election for legislators include Shi Xing-zhong [zh]’s son Shi Nai-yuan who is running in Hsinchu City, Hsinchu County Councilor Luo Shi-dong, Miaoli County Legislator Chen Chao-ming, Changhua County’s Jiang Bo-long, who once ran for National Congress representative, Lin Kun-hai, chairman of Sanli TV in Kaohsiung City, and Wei Ji-shu himself are running for election in Taichung City."

    3. "《新聞櫥窗》 台灣吾黨昨成立 將提名三、四十人角逐立委" ["News Showcase": The Taiwan Number One Party was established yesterday and will nominate 30 to 40 people to compete for legislators]. Min Sheng Bao (in Chinese). 2001-09-15. p. A4.

      The article notes: "新的政黨「台灣吾黨」昨天在台中市成立，包括立法院長王金平等各主要政黨人士都到場致賀。台灣吾黨成立的主訴求是「我們要過好日子」，並提出八個第一的理念。吾黨計畫推出三、四十人參加立法委員選舉，最低目標要當選十五席。"

      From Google Translate: "The new political party "Taiwan Number One Party" was established in Taichung City yesterday. Members of all major political parties, including Legislative Yuan Wang Jinping, were present to congratulate the party. The main aspiration of the establishment of the Taiwan Number One Party is "We want to live a good life" and it puts forward eight first concepts. The party plans to introduce 30 to 40 people to participate in the legislative election, with the minimum goal of being elected to 15 seats."

    4. Lin, He-ming 林河名 (2001-09-14). "台灣吾黨成立 今公布首波參選人" [The Taiwan Number One Party was established and today announced the first wave of candidates]. United Daily News (in Chinese). p. 20.

      The article notes: "繼台灣團結聯盟之後，又一新政黨「台灣吾黨」今天將在台中市成立。「台灣吾黨」召集人魏吉助昨晚表示，今天的成立大會將公布首波八位立委參選人，其餘參選人將再分兩批陸續公布，預計共將推薦三十五至四十人。"

      From Google Translate: "Following the Taiwan Solidarity Alliance, another new political party Taiwan Number One Party" will be established in Taichung City today. Wei Ji-shu, the convener of the "Taiwan Number One Party", said last night that today's inaugural meeting will announce the first wave of eight legislative candidates, and the remaining candidates will be announced in two batches. It is expected that a total of 35 to 40 candidates will be recommended. Ten people."

    5. Huang, Fu-qi 黃福其 (2001-09-13). "台灣吾黨明成立" [Taiwan Number One Party was officially established]. United Evening News [zh] (in Chinese). p. 10.

      The article notes: "由無黨籍地方山頭串連籌組的新政黨「台灣吾黨」，明天下午將在台中市舉行創黨大會，之後向內政部報備登記。核心人士說，為避免成員「困擾」，明天的創黨大會將不特別安排介紹成員議程，以求低調，目前已發邀請函請各政黨派代表觀禮，立法院長王金平、台聯黨主席黃主文已確定與會。"

      From Google Translate: "The new political party "Taiwan Number One Party", organised by a group of non-party local Shantou, will hold a founding meeting in Taichung City tomorrow afternoon, and will then register with the Ministry of the Interior. Core sources said that in order to avoid "distress" for members, there will be no special arrangement to introduce the members' agenda at tomorrow's founding meeting in order to keep a low profile. At present, invitation letters have been sent to invite representatives from all political parties to attend the ceremony. Legislative Yuan Wang Jin-pyng and Taiwan United Party Chairman Huang Chu-wen confirmed to attend."

    6. Huang, Fu-qi 黃福其 (2001-08-23). "立委陳超明確定加入 台灣吾黨成員　首批月底亮相" [Legislator Chen Chao-ming confirmed to join. The first batch of Taiwan Number One Party members will appear at the end of the month]. United Evening News [zh] (in Chinese). p. 7.

      The article notes: "繼台聯黨成立，由無黨籍地方山頭串聯籌組中的新政黨，決定訂名「台灣吾黨」，並敲定黨徽、黨歌，預定本月底前會有第一批成員公開現身，宣布成立新政黨，同時向內政部報備登記。立院無黨籍聯盟成員陳超明首度證實自己將加入台灣吾黨。"

      From Google Translate: "Following the establishment of the Taiwan United Party, a new political party being organized by the local Shantou Alliance without party membership has decided to name it "Taiwan Number One Party" and finalise the party emblem and song. It is scheduled that the first group of members will appear in public before the end of this month and announce Establish a new political party and register it with the Ministry of Interior at the same time. Chen Chao-ming, a member of the Legislative Yuan Non-Party Alliance, confirmed for the first time that he will join the Taiwan Number One Party."

    7. "國會改選民進黨87席躍居第一大立委：國民黨68 親民黨46 台聯13 新黨台灣吾黨各1席無黨籍9 縣市長：民進黨9 國民黨9 親民黨拿下台東連江縣新黨保有金門縣無黨籍2" [Congress was re-elected and the Progressive Party became the largest legislator with 87 seats: Kuomintang 68, People First Party 46, Taiwan Federation 13, New Party Taiwan We Party 1 seat each, no party membership 9 County mayors: Democratic Progressive Party 9, Kuomintang 9, People First Party won Taitung Lianjiang The county’s new party retains Kinmen County party membership 2]. Economic Daily News [zh] (in Chinese). 2001-12-02.

      The article notes: "在第五屆立委選舉方面，民進黨昨天展現全面爆發力 ... 山地原住民瓦歷斯·貝林則為台灣吾黨奪下一席"

      From Google Translate: "In terms of the fifth legislative election, the Democratic Progressive Party showed full explosive power yesterday. ... mountain aboriginal Walis Perin won one seat for the Taiwan Number One Party"

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Taiwan Number One Party (traditional Chinese: 台灣吾黨; simplified Chinese: 台湾吾党) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 09:33, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, as Cunard pointed out, there are some Chinese sources on the subject, enough i'd argue to pass WP:GNG, and as Goldsztajn pointed out, they did have some electoral success in 2001. The parties small but definitely meets the notability guidelines on organizations. I do think this article definitely needs some expansion and possible translation, however. -Samoht27 (talk) 15:24, 19 October 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎ and move to Aberystwyth noir. The main contention on the Delete side seems to be around the poor title, rather the underlying notability of the novel series. Owen× ☎ 20:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Louie Knight

[edit]
Louie Knight (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Protagonist of non-notable series. Boleyn (talk) 19:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and rename/refocus on book series. We have a few straggler articles like this, where it’s written after the protagonist and not the series, and when the series is notable it’s best to refocus and not delete. A lot of the plot would be reusable for that so it’s not quite like writing a whole different article. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:46, 14 October 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.
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 delete‎. Owen× ☎ 20:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atma Rama Ananda Ramana

[edit]
Atma Rama Ananda Ramana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

How does a college short film that is screened at its own parent company's film festival yield notability? Annapurna College of Film and Media is owned by the same people as Annapurna Studios. The only reliable source is The Hindu which talks about four other short films too, not just this film. The Telugucinema.com source is about the festival and not the film. All other sources are unreliable (not listed as such at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Guidelines_on_sources because there are so many unreliable sources that exist and not possible to list all of them. tollywoodbuzz.com has the same reliability as Tracktollywood.com or Tollywood.net.

I genuinely feel that this article was created by [10] to have an extra link at PVR Raja. DareshMohan (talk) 19:06, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 20:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Texas A&M–Corpus Christi Islanders softball team

[edit]
2023 Texas A&M–Corpus Christi Islanders softball team (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSEASONS. This is a run-of-the-mill college softball team that compiled a mediocre 24–24 record, won no championships and did not advance to the playoffs or have other notable accomplishments. Lacks WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources and is based instead on databases sources and/or routine press releases from non-independent, captive sources such as the school and conference websites. Cbl62 (talk) 19:32, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 20:45, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Texas A&M–Corpus Christi Islanders softball team

[edit]
2024 Texas A&M–Corpus Christi Islanders softball team (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSEASONS. This is a run-of-the-mill college softball team that compiled a mediocre 21–22 record, won no championships and did not advance to the playoffs or have other notable accomplishments. Lacks WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources and is based instead on databases sources and/or routine press releases from non-independent, captive sources such as the school and conference websites. Cbl62 (talk) 19:23, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I found no season recaps, no specific games, and nothing notable about the players in their college years. Conyo14 (talk) 23:01, 14 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 20:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Houston Christian Huskies softball team

[edit]
2023 Houston Christian Huskies softball team (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSEASONS. This is a run-of-the-mill college softball team that compiled a mediocre 20–33 record, won no championships and did not advance to the playoffs or have other notable accomplishments. Lacks WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources and is based instead on databases sources and/or routine press releases from non-independent, captive sources such as the school and conference websites. Cbl62 (talk) 18:50, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 20:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Houston Christian Huskies softball team

[edit]
2024 Houston Christian Huskies softball team (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSEASONS. This is a run-of-the-mill college softball team that compiled a mediocre 23-27 record, won no championships and did not advance to the playoffs or have other notable accomplishments. Lacks WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources and is based instead on databases sources and/or routine press releases from non-independent, captive sources such as the school and conference websites. Cbl62 (talk) 18:43, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:FANCRUFT. Conyo14 (talk) 23:04, 14 October 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.
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 delete‎. asilvering (talk) 18:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Colchester City Council election

[edit]
2026 Colchester City Council election (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a planned election for a second-tier local government authority scheduled for nearly two years away. A case of WP:NOTCRYSTAL. AusLondonder (talk) 01:49, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More explanation and policy consideration in the comments would help.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:30, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Staggering lack of sources -- all coverage is from the local government, which is obviously not independent. The lone non-government source makes no mention of this election. This is undeniably a case of CRYSTAL, and I question whether this election will ever be notable considering the articles on previous years are sourced to the city council itself and one local newspaper (failing GNG and SUSTAINED). JoelleJay (talk) 23:42, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted to discuss the issue of whether sufficient sources are available for this topic.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:11, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. asilvering (talk) 18:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mchogoro

[edit]
Mchogoro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and other notability guidelines, and has only two sources that are of unclear reliability also due to the fact that they are also not notable. Plasticwonder (talk) 18:11, 13 October 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.
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 delete‎. Star Mississippi 13:35, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women Medical and Dental College

[edit]
Women Medical and Dental College (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable private medical school: mainly in the news for its violations [11], [12]. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 18:16, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 18:04, 13 October 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.
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 merge‎ to Hamdard University. Star Mississippi 13:34, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hamdard College of Medicine & Dentistry

[edit]
Hamdard College of Medicine & Dentistry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is marked as "PR", other articles I found briefly mention the college in relation to the parent organization. Fails WP:GNG. WP:ATD could be Hamdard University. Gheus (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 18:03, 13 October 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.
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 redirect‎ to Henry Laurens as WP:ATD. asilvering (talk) 18:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eleanor Delamere Ball Laurens

[edit]
Eleanor Delamere Ball Laurens (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Biography of a person, not properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing Wikipedia inclusion criteria. As always, notability is not inherited, so people don't get Wikipedia articles just for being related to other people per se, and have to be the subject of a WP:GNG-worthy volume of reliable source coverage about them doing something noteworthy -- but being a family member of other people is the only notability claim on offer here, and the only footnote in the entire article is a genealogy of her husband on a Blogger blog, which is not a reliable or GNG-building source.
Simply having been married to somebody is not "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have more substantive content, and better referencing for it, than this. Bearcat (talk) 17:29, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to say "which everyone know's we've never done." This was my first article and so I didn't know. You don't need to be rude because I'm a teenager who was just trying to be constructive? I'm disheartened to see my first article go to nothing as I spent a lot of time looking for research only for it to be deleted, but I understand if she's not notable. However, why did some pages, like her son's, have her with a red link if it wasn't possible for her to have a page? I'm upset it needs to go, but I just wish you could've been nicer about it, Bearian. Ali Beary (talk) 14:00, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 18:03, 13 October 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.
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. Nomination withdrawn. Wikipedians however should do better in adding sources, to be sure.Plasticwonder (talk) 03:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC) (non-admin closure)‎[reply]

Rolong tribe

[edit]
Rolong tribe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable tribe, has no sources and never had any sources within 15 years. Plasticwonder (talk) 18:00, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. asilvering (talk) 18:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Kelly (darts player)

[edit]
Dave Kelly (darts player) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 16:41, 13 October 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Concerns about article content should be handled through normal editing. asilvering (talk) 19:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Louise Glover

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Louise Glover (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am nominating this article for deletion as I do not believe that it meets the Wikipedia criteria for notability. In addition, it has had and continues to have a negative impact on the subject of the article and is poorly sourced in many places.

This article was first nominated for deletion in 2007 and later in 2010. At the time, it was argued that Glover did meet the Wikipedia notability criteria. However, a lot has changed since then and she is no longer active in modelling like she was once was.

I believe that given her relative lack of notability, in combination with her personal wishes for it to be removed, that the article should no longer be on Wikipedia as it doing her more harm than good.

Svenska356 (talk) 15:42, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I agree. It contains only bits and pieces of the subject's life and career. All with a one-sided negative spin from the subject's twenties, and nothing about the following decade of charity work and fitness model achievements after she abandoned the glamour industry. Coolhandluke00 (talk) 18:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That can be resolved by editing the article and adding reliable sources rather than removing the article entirely. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a lack of reliable sources on Glover's life after 2010 when the article was last nominated for deletion though. And, looking at the sources at least 8 of them, so almost a third are negative. That percentage is quite high given all the positive things she has done since 2010. As a result, I maintain that the article should be reassessed and deleted under the notability criteria. Svenska356 (talk) 21:02, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this article should be deleted. Person in question is no longer in the public eye and original poster has only commented on the negative rather than positives resulting in a negative effect on person in questions mental health.
Deleting this article would benefit as all negative convictions are now spent and will allow said person to move on with their life. 2A00:23C6:6281:5401:EDBA:9093:2DE3:103C (talk) 21:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the subject is still receiving media coverage as of this week. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 22:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - If the subject was notable in 2010 she is still notable. Whether the sources present positive or negative information is irrelevant. Some of the sources are difficult to assess right now because archive.org is offline but hopefully that will be resolved soon.
(For the closer, I will also note that both of the delete votes apart from the nom come from accounts that have zero edits other than to this discussion. The nom also has no edits other than to the subject article and to this discussion. The nom mentions the subject's wishes, and the nom and the two delete !voters mention the subject's recent activities, which aren't mentioned in any sources that have been provided, all of which suggests possible COI editing by all three accounts. The article has a recent history of undisclosed COI editing, such as from User:Happiness2018 who is now blocked for COI editing, and from User:82.33.38.46 whose talk page clearly shows COI.) CodeTalker (talk) 22:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CodeTalker Hello, could you please kindly unbold your mention of delete !votes as it may be technically, visually and procedurally confusing? Thank you (rather use a cap letter, italics or quotation marks). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - notability is not temporary; once notable, always notable. If there is too much weight given to negative incidents and not enough to positive, then this can be fixed by editing. Wikipedia is not censored and if there are reliable sources confirming the negative incidents then they should be covered. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand your points. At the very least, the subject article does need attention so that more weight is put on positive achievements, especially in the past decade or so. As user 'ItsKesha' stated, the subject has continued to receive media coverage as of this week. Some of these more recent sources should be used to update the article, so that it offers a more recent and balanced reflection of the subject's life activities, be they good or bad. Svenska356 (talk) 19:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Some recent coverage [13]. I suppose this is notable; rather sad end to a career, but it's sustained coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 19:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I understand if the article is kept. However, the main issue I have with this outcome is still the level of harm it could cause to the subject versus the benefit of keeping the article on wikipedia.

The deletion policy itself states that "Discussions concerning biographical articles of relatively unknown, non-public figures, where the subject has requested deletion and there is no rough consensus may be closed as delete."
Although, there has been a little bit of media coverage on the subject recently, it is sporadic at best. I concede that it may still pass the notability criteria on paper, but I think that keeping the article up comes down to a moral issue.
The subject, per the latest media coverage, is currently experiencing homelessness. It is possible that the negative information about them on this article is holding them back from career opportunities and contributing to their current circumstances.
Going back to the moral issue, I believe that removing this article is the best course of action from a Utilitarian perspective. I understand the importance of rules and guidelines on Wikipedia. However, I also believe that, in the pursuit of the greatest utility and well-being for the greatest number, there sometimes needs to be room for exceptions.
In my view, the subject's personal circumstances warrant such an exception despite the notability criteria. The subject is no longer as notable and as visible in the public eye as they once were. And there is little information on them past 2007 as a result. This Wikipedia article is not benefitting the subject at all and is of little benefit to the general public. When weighed out, you will find that the level of average utility would increase were the article to be removed.
A strictly deontological approach to decision making disregards empathy. Given the subject's circumstances, I believe that it is very important to act with empathy and take an approach that would minimise the continued harm to the subject's reputation and life opportunities.
As I said at the start, I understand if you decide to keep the article. But, before coming to a decision, I urge you to take the subject's difficult personal circumstances into account in combination with the continued effects this article could have on their personal and professional life. Svenska356 (talk) 23:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Svenska356:
Please kindly remove your bolded !vote indication. Nominators are, unless they indicate otherwise, counted as "!voting" Delete and this might be considered a double !vote, which is not permitted. (No opinion on the subject myself, just a netiquette reminder. )Thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Clearly notable, clearly still notable as in the two current sources cited above. Clearly not someone trying to disappear from public sight, as she is telling her story on Instagram. Past criminal offences are a fact, properly sourced. But the article can be rebalanced by including content from the recent newspaper article: septicemia, climbing to Everest Base Camp as a charity fundraiser, recent work as dog-walker, etc. PamD 07:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, the article should be edited to reflect her more recent activities. It is a delisted good article at the moment in part due to being out of date. If deletion isn't an option, then it needs some attention at the very least. Svenska356 (talk) 19:08, 19 October 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.
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 redirect‎ to Steeleye Span. ✗plicit 14:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Harries

[edit]
Tim Harries (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article as it stands is unsourced. The assertion of notability relies on WP:INHERITed notability from the bands with which he has played, not on WP:MUSICBIO. Those with VRTS access can see ticket:2024091010008831. Cabayi (talk) 10:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:02, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:28, 13 October 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.
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 redirect‎ to Northwest India#Ancient era as a broadly supported ATD. Owen× ☎ 18:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Northwest India (pre-1947)

[edit]
Northwest India (pre-1947) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a non topic, consisting of snippets of information we already cover properly and in depth in other articles. Mccapra (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Pakistan and India. Mccapra (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify or delete if not improved: The article is extremely sparse at present and everything there is already covered in other articles. But the historical-cultural idea of "northwest India" (as opposed to specifically the Indus Valley, Punjab, etc.) does seem to have some scholarly attention, at least from outsiders: [14], [15]. If the article weren't fairly new, I would be a firm delete, but I'm willing to give the author the benefit of the doubt for now. But the article as it is isn't ready for mainspace. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changing my position to redirect to Northwest India#Ancient era as suggested by author. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 21:24, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete, draftify, merge, redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:07, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I don’t support a redirect as this isn’t a plausible search term, and there’s nothing to merge because the content in this article duplicates content we already have in the relevant articles. This article is entirely redundant. Mccapra (talk) 17:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OPPOSE Don't do it. 58.152.63.206 (talk) 09:45, 16 October 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.
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 redirect‎ to Saqiyah. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Persian well

[edit]
Persian well (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Misleading article. There's nothing called Persian well, subject actually refers to Persian wheel and is a WP:Content fork of that article. Kalhana's Rajatarangini is not ancient, it was written in 12th century and, by that time, this mechanism was already popular. The Doom Patrol (talk) 13:27, 13 October 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.
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 no consensus‎. Claims of meager sourcing were adequately refuted, but no clear consensus either way. Feel free to renominate in six months. Owen× ☎ 17:17, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Susan Alice Buffett

[edit]
Susan Alice Buffett (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another heiress with a low profile, i.e. meager sourcing, who doesn't satisfy WP:BIO. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


References

  1. ^ Bailey, Jeff (July 2, 2006). "Buffett Children Emerge as a Force in Charity - The New York Times". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 30, 2023. Retrieved 2023-11-27.
  2. ^ Roché, Joyce M.; Kopelman, Alexander (June 3, 2013). The Empress Has No Clothes: Conquering Self-Doubt to Embrace Success. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. ISBN 978-1-60994-638-8.
  3. ^ Sledge, Matt (2011-09-15). "Warren Buffett's Daughter Takes On Early Childhood Education And Gangs". HuffPost. Retrieved 2024-10-06.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:27, 13 October 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.
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 delete‎. Owen× ☎ 16:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ashu gaur

[edit]
Ashu gaur (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

this article is edited and created by with same name. i suspect conflict of interest. and format of that article is not ok, for example what about "Quotes by Ashu Gaur"? we have separete project for this. please delete. other people wait weeks for approving an article but that user just created.. how? ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 12:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

also check: User_talk:Ashugaur#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Ashugaur ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 12:29, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've assessed all of the sources and none of them show significant coverage of you, hence you are not notable enough for an article here. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 15:52, 13 October 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.
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 delete‎. ✗plicit 10:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per Skau

[edit]
Per Skau (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Competed for many years at the top level of his sport, even if he wasn't successful.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Page creator seems to have a thing for creating articles with little to no notable sources, which is why his talk page is littered with notices of deletion discussions. Like the nominator suggested it does indeed fail WP:GNG.Plasticwonder (talk) 17:15, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No evidence of GNG being met. Competition level is irrelevant. JoelleJay (talk) 20:03, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 10:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Atkinson

[edit]
Barry Atkinson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:22, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 10:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Jouannet

[edit]
Barry Jouannet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:21, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 10:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arto Lintunen

[edit]
Arto Lintunen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:21, 13 October 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.
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 draftify‎. ✗plicit 10:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luc Marreel

[edit]
Luc Marreel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:21, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Competed for many years at the top level of his sport, even if he wasn't successful internationally.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:06, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. Could not find coverage in newspaper archives, hits on google limited to non-RS and primary sources. There is some bewildering coverage in something called The Daily Star, but this touts itself as The Daily Star is the global home of fun. [...] Whether it's appointing the galaxy's very first Extra Terrestrial Reporter to cover all the latest alien news or getting our body language experts to reveal the secrets that miserable celebrities didn't want you to know. so it seems no better than a tabloid. I did find this, which could contain SIGCOV, so draftifying is an option I guess.
. JoelleJay (talk) 20:16, 13 October 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.
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 redirect‎ to List of laptop brands and manufacturers. ✗plicit 10:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dell laptops

[edit]
Dell laptops (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Propose redirect to List of laptop brands and manufacturers (or another target). Prose primarily consists of unsupported and, at times, subjective and vague assertions. The list seems like it has a useful navigational purpose, but is more or less redundant to Dell's section on the broader list. This proposal is not for lack of notability but because the content is not suitable for an encyclopedia, I would otherwise have suggested a merge (to a different target). Bringing this to AFD instead of BLARing because it was previously PRODed. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:06, 13 October 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.
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 deletion. Already done. (non-admin closure)‎ ⸺(Random)staplers 05:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pei Kottu

[edit]
Pei Kottu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not pass WP:GNG or WP:NFILM. My BEFORE search returns only PR links. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:57, 13 October 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.
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 delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of intercity bus stops in Wisconsin

[edit]
List of intercity bus stops in Wisconsin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:LISTN WP:NOTTRAVEL. For the same reasons as per these articles, this is a list of unremarkable, non notable bus stops in a particular state

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are similar articles:

List of intercity bus stops in Illinois (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
List of intercity bus stops in Iowa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Ajf773 (talk) 08:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone explain the difference between these articles and a list of Amtrak stations or list of Wisconsin State highways or anything like that? Thanks. Znns (talk) 03:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Someone might be able to explain better than I can in terms of Wikipedia policy, but my thinking is just that things like train stations and highways are much more permanent physical infrastructure (and therefore significant/notable), whereas buses can stop anywhere and the routes themselves change somewhat frequently. I could be convinced to vote keep on this, I'm not fully sure it needs to be deleted, but it definitely feels less notable than other transportation-related lists. Rovenrat (talk) 13:29, 16 October 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. ✗plicit 10:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amor de otoño

[edit]
Amor de otoño (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable film, actors are also not notable, and there are no sources either. Plasticwonder (talk) 07:48, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has an entry on page 10 of Manrupe, Raúl; Portela, María Alejandra (2003). Un diccionario de films argentinos II 1996-2002. Buenos Aires: Editorial Corregidor. . Has reviews in Argentine publications. Some cast and crew articles are notable and can be created.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:12, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 06:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ernakulam–Banaswadi Superfast Express

[edit]
Ernakulam–Banaswadi Superfast Express (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable, this is an unnamed train and the "name" is basically "[TERMINAL A]-[TERMINAL B] Express" (redirect therefore makes little sense). The name in the title does not even match the name inside the article. Delete as a very wordy and hard to read substitute for run-of-the-mill line(s) in a railroad timetable. As such, all the arguments of WP:NOTTIMETABLE, WP:NOTADATABASE, WP:ROTM apply. A full discussion about multiple similar articles can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barauni–Lucknow Express Викидим (talk) 06:22, 13 October 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.
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 delete‎. ✗plicit 04:11, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Imaginary Cloud

[edit]
Imaginary Cloud (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an Unipessoal Lda that's on the FT1000 list of fastest growing companies... as rank 727. Outside of those WP:ORGTRIV awards in that section, there is essentially zero coverage of the company. I'd almost A7 it. Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:42, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:16, 13 October 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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. I see no objection to the nomination. Owen× ☎ 18:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

St Austell Golf Club

[edit]
St Austell Golf Club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails the general notability guideline. None of the sources in the article are reliable or have significant coverage of the subject, and a quick look for more did not turn up anything promising. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:49, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Beyond the nominator, we don't have participants stating what should happen with THIS article that is being assessed and evaluated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:39, 13 October 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.
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 no consensus‎. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Helaman Jeffs

[edit]
Helaman Jeffs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of standalone notability. Hardly any coverage of the subject; notability is not inherited. (NPP action) C F A 💬 20:19, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Multiple references (already found on the article) are stating that he is claiming to be the current head of the FLDS church, I will hunt down some more sources. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 12:54, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't really matter. There needs be significant coverage in independent, reliable sources in order to meet WP:NBASIC. C F A 💬 14:40, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:01, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify -- I feel like draftifying this until further notability is presented later on is suitable, considering he is the son of a cult leader so there is probably something likely to come up in the future and if these sources are presented by User:Thief-River-Faller then we could improve on the article. 79lives (talk) 17:12, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:INVALIDBIO So far, we only know he's a presumed possible heir to his imprisoned father. And possibly being used to carry out his father's wishes. He may or may not be viewed by others as his father's heir as a cult leader, but Wikipedia does not predict or presume the future. — Maile (talk) 01:02, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I'll just add that no new sources have been added during this AFD. A review of sources might be useful as there is not much discussion of them here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:37, 13 October 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.
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 redirect‎ to Confrontation (Rackham). I see consensus that the sources, including those added during the three weeks this AfD has been running, are not sufficient to meet our guidelines for a standalone article. Owen× ☎ 18:34, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rackham (company)

[edit]
Rackham (company) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable corporation that fails GNG (no inherited notability from a product to it's designer), what little coverage exists is routine coverage of corporate changes and going bankrupt. Suggest redirect & merge of relevant content to Confrontation (Rackham), their most popular game. Macktheknifeau (talk) 23:28, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:24, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus here. This is usually where a source analysis proves helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Backstab Magazine (I found a copy of it online and translated it) is a few paragraphs with the company owner giving a background on himself and some marketing fluff on their games. Not significant enough to qualify for GNG for the company. Miniatures Collectors Guide source is a database of various products put out, routine coverage, certainty not significant enough to confer notability. The last 4 sources are all minor, routine coverage of the corporate restructurings. I haven't changed my view that a deletion is appropriate unless multiple examples of in-depth, significant coverage of the company are found to satisfy NCORP. Macktheknifeau (talk) 12:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Confrontation (Rackham) per TarnishedPath. I have evaluated the sources found to date and confirm I have found nothing better. There is one source that I cannot find (not helped by the partial state of the Internet Archive just now). If anyone can help find Bouet (2001), I'd be happy to look at it. It may well be the best source. Even if it meets WP:SIRS we would not have multiple sources that do, so I think I can safely !vote. Not notable for a page, but the reader would be well served by the redirect to the Confrontation page, which would also be a good target for expanding information about the company (particularly the insolvency, which is the only thing we have anything much to say about). Here's my assessment:
Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Secondary? Overall value toward ORGCRIT
Bouet, Gregory (2001). "Critiques". Backstab (in French). No. 28. p. 16.
 I have not found this source.
"Rackham". Miniatures Collectors Guide. Retrieved 2024-09-29.
 Yes Doesn't state its sources. No This short coverage does not meet WP:CORPDEPTH Yes Appears to be secondary and independent
"Rackham re-emerges as Rackham Entertainment". Tabletop Gaming News. 2008-10-28. Archived from the original on 2008-11-01. Retrieved 2024-09-29.
 No Republished press release. Not independent Appears to be user generated content but didn't investigate further No Not at WP:CORPDEPTH although it is something No Primary: off a press release
"Rackham Assets Acquired". Archived from the original on 2014-02-22. Retrieved 2018-09-19.
 Yes I expect it is reliable. Haven't fully investigated as it does not pass on other measures There is some info here about the company. I don't believe it meets WP:CORPDEPTH though. But I'll leave it unresolved. No This is news about the company insolvency and acquisition of assets. A primary news report source
"Rackham Entertainment". Archived from the original on 2010-11-07. Retrieved 2010-11-04.
 No Appears to be from themselves Yes Information should be reliable, for what it's worth No Just the announcement that it is in liquidation No Primary news reporting

Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:12, 16 October 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.
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 delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ave Maria International Academy

[edit]
Ave Maria International Academy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There's nothing to indicate that this school meets the notability guideline. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:23, 13 October 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.
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 no consensus‎. It appears we are no further ahead than we were when Star Mississippi closed the bundled nomination seven months ago. There seems to be some agreement that the topic is notable, and that a general article about Finnish exonyms could be written, but that this minimal-prose, extensive list isn't it. Editors are encouraged to expand the prose and trim down the list to a few examples needed to support it, or to discuss a merger to a more general article on the Talk page. Despite the popularity of the WP:TNT essay, cleanup via deletion is not supported by policy for this type of situation. Owen× ☎ 18:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Finnish exonyms

[edit]
Finnish exonyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Indiscriminate mostly unreferenced list of proper names, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Other such articles have recently been deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/French exonyms. toweli (talk) 23:37, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is that much useful content in the current article, but a new article could probably be written based on these sources. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 05:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:23, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Trim: A few names in the list are evidently not cognate to the respective endonyms, and I'd preserve these. Otherwise, delete as trivial; each language adapts foreign words to its own phonology and orthography, okay, we get it. —Tamfang (talk) 23:57, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is a confusing AFD discussion to close because almost all participants are making editing recommendations and, if offering a closure outcome, it is dependent on future changes happening to this article if it is Kept. I will relist this discussion in hopes of more specific feedback being offered but right now it looks like No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:20, 13 October 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.
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 delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 06:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Topline Schools

[edit]
Topline Schools (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Couldn't locate any reliable source mentioning this school, theres no indication that this subject is notable enough for an article. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:20, 13 October 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.
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 delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 06:38, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

De World International Secondary School

[edit]
De World International Secondary School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Barely any coverage in reliable sources. This article fails to meet the notability criteria set by WP:NSCHOOL. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:17, 13 October 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bahirbhoomi

[edit]
Bahirbhoomi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NF, and does not meet GNG either. Htanaungg (talk) 04:52, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep passes WP:NF, and GNG reliable multiple published news sources 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8.
Msnlalithprem (talk) 18:23, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep according to the references mentioned in the article.
Induvadhone (talk) 03:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear some opinions from editors more experienced in AFD article and source reviews.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:16, 13 October 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.
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 delete‎. Editors can create a Redirect from this page title if they so choose. Liz Read! Talk! 06:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ender Cengiz

[edit]
Ender Cengiz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can see many people with the same name, but I’m not convinced this one is notable. Just being chairman of a football club isn’t sufficient. Mccapra (talk) 03:55, 13 October 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.
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 delete‎. ✗plicit 03:10, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ernakulam–Patna Superfast Express (via Nagpur)

[edit]
Ernakulam–Patna Superfast Express (via Nagpur) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article was deleted after an uncontested PROD, was recreated in substantially the same shape without a WP:RFU. The original PROD was along the lines (no copy in the log): Non-notable, this is an unnamed train and the "name" is basically "[TERMINAL A]-[TERMINAL B] Express" (redirect therefore makes little sense). Delete as a very wordy and hard to read substitute for run-of-the-mill line(s) in a railroad timetable. As such, all the arguments of WP:NOTTIMETABLE, WP:NOTADATABASE, WP:ROTM apply. A full discussion about multiple similar articles can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barauni–Lucknow Express. Викидим (talk) 02:37, 13 October 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.
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 redirect‎ to List of US officials who resigned over Biden's support for Israel in Gaza war. Liz Read! Talk! 00:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hala Rharrit

[edit]
Hala Rharrit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A low level government employee known only for her resignation. Her resignation is already sufficiently covered at List of US officials resigned over Biden's support for Israel in Gaza war. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 00:49, 13 October 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.