Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 October 17

Recent AfDs:    Today    Yesterday      October 22 (Tue)      October 21 (Mon)      October 20 (Sun)     More... Media   Organisations   Biography   Society   Web   Games   Science   Arts   Places   Indiscern.  Not-Sorted

Purge server cache

2004 in Turkish television (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)

tagged uncited for many years and does not seem to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 13:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Lists. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• I deproDed the page. I have seen other years taken to AfD. But why? This is a pretty standard way to approach history of television by country. Mexico has them, Korea has them, and so on. Turkey is a major country with a long history of television. What's the issue? Non-notable, how? I would !vote Keep but that would imply restoring all the other years. But I don't understand. It's very easy to source every event with books and/or news. And for general coverage, just open Yanardağoğlu, Eylem,  Television in Turkey: Local Production, Transnational Expansion and Political Aspirations, Springer International Publishing, 2020; "The Transformation of the Media System in Turkey: Citizenship, Communication, and Convergence", Springer International Publishing, 2021; The Regulation of Turkish Network Industries. (2022), Springer International Publishing. A source for each and every programme broadcast is easily found. I am seriously confused.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  If you want to keep it vote keep. I don’t think that would implying restoring other years as some years in television are more notable than others. Chidgk1 (talk) 05:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  OK: Keep and restore all years. This year in Turkish television is notable and so are apparently all years I checked, given the existence of sources for individual events and about trends/years in the Turkish history of television. Also for navigation reasons.and procedural reasons; targeting one year after another to delete the whole range of articles (that precisely make sense as a whole) brick by brick is not a good idea when the general topic is notable.

  some years in television are more notable than others. Maybe (I don't think so) but then, it seems you want to have ALL years of Turkish television deleted and I am very much against that idea. Is it your idea?

  Another solution would be to change the approach by creating lists by decades and redirecting/merging the individual years (in)to the decades (2000s in Turkish television and so on) but I won't do it myself (as I favour individual years)-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  No I have not proposed deleting all years and that is not my idea. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Very well, I had the wrong impression, my apologies. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:59, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: there are only 4 years left in the category. The ones that have been deleted lately were, if I am not mistaken, in the 2000s and 2010s The other years haven't been created yet.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is about the 2004 article. To restore articles previously deleted at AfD, please see WP:DRV.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, consider my !vote a simple/single Keep then (but restoring other years should also be done); this is part of a set and is justified in terms of navigation, that's what I mean. Notwithstanding the individual notability of this page, deleting random years one by one without considering this type of page in general or the whole is not a good approach. Also may I remind the nominator that WP:NLIST says: "Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability.". -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Overspecific page name/scope; notable events can be added to 2004 in Turkey. Geschichte (talk) 08:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello, I am sorry but, again, I am very confused, how is this overspecific? This is pretty standard: have a look at Category:2004 in television by country please. Again, if you think Turkey has a less substantial history of television than, say, Brazil or Japan (I don't think so), considering a different organisation and redirect years to (not-yet-existing) pages about decades might make sense, but just deleting that year for that country (although it can be easily sourced) seems extremely confusing to me. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:47, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello, the dire state of the article (and yes, I'm going by the current state of the article, and I'll explain why shortly) shows that it was a bad idea to start a page about 2004 in Turkish television. The "years in country" absolutely need to start with the basic year in the country, in this case 2004 in Turkey, and then branch out when size dictates so. Moreover, it would make sense to branch out to "2004 in Turkish media" before further sub-division into television, radio, cinema, press etc. As for other similar pages existing, I checked a dozen of the entries in the nabvbox, and most of them are embarrassingly bad. Geschichte (talk) 19:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

People's Republic of China's civilian motor vehicle license plates (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)

Odd fork of Vehicle registration plates of China. Another editor redirected it there, but was reverted with the (dubious, in my opinion) reason that "zh wiki has two separate articles". Most of the content here duplicates Vehicle registration plates of China and I can find no compelling reason to keep a fork. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and China. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Some contents are duplicated with Vehicle registration plates of China. Shwangtianyuan Defeat the virus together 14:52, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or Redirect to retain the functionality of the language switcher from zh.wp. The xtools reports for the zh articles are pretty interesting: the vehicle registration plates article is slightly older, but the civilian vehicle registration plates article has fifteen times as many inlinks and sees three times as much traffic. Both have similar numbers of edits and distinct editors. This isn't an argument for or against any course of action here, but the fork is somewhat mystifying. Folly Mox (talk) 11:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Kent (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:BASIC. Lacking "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Sole acceptable source is from BBC Scotland Business news reporting on his appointment to lead the Scotch Whisky Association. Not sufficient to demonstrate notability as a "mention in passing (example given at BASIC is "John Smith at Big Company said..." or "Mary Jones was hired by My University")" AusLondonder (talk) 08:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Bilateral relations. AusLondonder (talk) 08:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The CMG is a high honour which isn't handed out in cornflakes packets. Only about 30-40 awarded every year in a country of 67 million people. Clearly notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  As we established at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Shearman, honours, which are routine for British ambassadors to receive from their employer, do not eliminate the requirements for "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." AusLondonder (talk) 12:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  We established no such thing. Only a minority of diplomats or even ambassadors have high honours such as the CMG. You made a patently false claim by citing only very senior ambassadors who do have such honours and the AfD was closed before I could answer. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It's not false. A very large number of British ambassadors have received honours from their employer, many with fairly unremarkable careers. That doesn't override BASIC. AusLondonder (talk) 20:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That sounds very much like WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Who are you to state they've had unremarkable careers? A high honour would suggest otherwise. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The only instance of IDONTLIKEIT is your approach to the requirement for significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. AusLondonder (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Meets WP:BASIC after adding references which were trivial to find: WP:BEFORE exists for a reason. Jonathan A Jones (talk)

The two most recent sources you've added are primary. I actually did see the government sources before nominating but I know that per BASIC "Primary sources may be used to support content in an article, but they do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject." AusLondonder (talk) 20:32, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm seeing some routine announcements about his appointments, but nothing independent, secondary, and significant. And content following "According to the official biography" is obviously not independent or secondary. Receiving an award also doesn't mean the subject is exempt from notability requirements. JoelleJay (talk) 03:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Appears to pass BASIC, see e.g. Buenos Aires Times (158 words), Nation Thailand (327 words), MercoPress (176 words), VietnamPlus (about some sort of award he received from the Vietnam government, 100 words), Press and Journal (287 words), Bangkok Post (1000+ words w/quotes), etc. Also, if everyone failing ANYBIO but meeting BASIC gets an article, and everyone meeting ANYBIO has to pass BASIC to get an article, that effectively means that ANYBIO is 100% wholly worthless. Or maybe, just maybe, there is a purpose in having such criteria, such as that categories of people winning major awards should be complete. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A point I've made many times. If ANYBIO is routinely ignored then what on earth is the point of it? The point of it is to catch people who have had careers in unglamorous occupations but who have received high honours from their country, in recognition that, glamorous or not, they have made a significant contribution to the world. Wikipedia is not a reality TV talent contest, but a serious encyclopaedia that should cover such people. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Except WP:ANYBIO explicitly, unambiguously states "meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included." It does not in any sense override BASIC requirements. It's a guide that indicates a likelihood of notability, not a free pass. If you want that to change, feel free to propose it instead of bringing up reality television at every AfD. AusLondonder (talk) 14:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As for the sources identified, I can't see them contributing to notability. Interviews are primary sources. A brief mention of his appointment to lead the Scotch Whisky Association is not an acceptable source as I pointed out in the nomination. AusLondonder (talk) 14:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dismissing all of those sources, especially the Bangkok Post 1,300-word feature on 'The workaholic ambassador', which contains over 700 words on Kent that is not quotes, is ridiculous. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware what it says. I'm pointing out that if it's sneered at whenever it's mentioned then it's utterly pointless, which suggests it's intended to be taken into consideration. What do you think it's there for precisely? Don't actually think I've mentioned reality television before! -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Appears to meet WP:BASIC, per others. SirMemeGod  15:10, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Non-notable station, also strongly sets off my "this is AI" senses. The glossy promotional tone screams LLM. The sole source in the article verifies nothing beyond the fact that it exists. I'd redirect this to Northern Line myself, but I'm sure that would be contested with an edit summary saying "take it to AfD", so here we are. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations, Transportation, and Sri Lanka. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, its actually on the Batticaloa line not the Northern line. Dan arndt (talk) 01:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That's... rather concerning. Thanks for correcting it. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or Merge to Batticaloa line if sources can't be found (has anyone attempted to look for sources in the local language?). Whether the article was or wasn't written by AI and/or whether it does or does not have a glossy promotional tone (I don't see it myself) are irrelevant to AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 10:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Dan arndt was kind enough to resolve the issues with tone. Compare what it looked like when I tagged it for tone versus after Dan arndt rewrote it: [1]. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with Batticaloa line would be the best move, since sources that could establish why this station is notable are thin on the ground. TH1980 (talk) 00:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tosin Eniolorunda (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)

Uncertain if this subject is notable so bringing here for consensus. The claim of notability rests on the awards the subject has won, and his featuring as one of the 100 most influential Africans. To me this seems pretty flimsy but other editors may feel it’s sufficiently solid to pass. Mccapra (talk) 20:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Mccapra (talk) 20:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Some of the subject's claim to notability rests on him being CEO of Moniepoint Inc., and he's been profiled by a few publications because of that (discounting those that are more obviously promotional like the Forbes contributor article). It looks like he meets WP:GNG on the basis of the published work that profiles him alongside other entrepreneurs in the field. Reconrabbit 18:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tam Duong bus crash (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 sustained coverage in secondary sources and had no lasting effects. This is a news article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Vietnam. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Just imagine if an accident that killed 19 people that happened in the UK or USA was nominated for deletion! Clearly WP:SYSTEMIC. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:24, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:10, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It was a fatal accident but wasn't significantly covered. I can only find a (very) few articles about the crash posted at the time it happened and it was never mentioned again. This was not enough to make the article pass WP:GNG. Lâm (talk) 06:03, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If we have no sources demonstrating SUSTAINED coverage, there is no reason to keep this article as a standalone. And maybe in a country where 20% of bus drivers had been in crashes in the previous 3 years such incidents just have less staying power in the news cycle, much like school shootings in America. JoelleJay (talk) 02:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2009 Espinar bus crash (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 sustained coverage in secondary sources and had no lasting effects. This is a news article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:52, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Peru. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:52, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Just imagine if an accident that killed 41 people that happened in the UK or USA was nominated for deletion! Clearly WP:SYSTEMIC. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:08, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete – There appears to be some continued coverage that may demonstrate the event's notability,^[1][2][3][4] however, the fact that some do not provide significant coverage of the event plus the lack of demonstrable lasting effects all make me lean towards a weak delete. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 17:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dong Hyun Kim (businessman) (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:BIO. The sources are more about his food chain Wasabi (restaurant) rather than significant coverage of Kim. LibStar (talk) 23:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Food and drink, South Korea, and Canada. LibStar (talk) 23:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep: I found three articles from major platforms mentioning about him.

  https://www.ft.com/content/d633fb5e-66dd-11e2-a805-00144feab49a

  https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/news/korea-opportunities-once-asia-s-least-trendy-food-now-everyone-s-getting-in-on-the-kimchi-act-8944580.html

  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/12/kim-dong-hyun-seoul-stylish-senior-citizens Christianjbotella12 (talk) 23:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I wouldn't regard this as WP:SIGCOV. And this seems to be about a namesake photographer aged 29 in 2022 and not a restauranteur born in 1973 as detailed in this article. Ft.com is behind a pay wall so need more details to assess. LibStar (talk) 15:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No significant coverage about him in the sources. Ratnahastin (talk) 05:21, 13 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!} 23:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yoginder Sikand (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, Several articles authored by the subject are frequently cited as references; however, they have yet to receive significant mainstream media coverage (WP:SIGCOV). Jannatulbaqi (talk) 22:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Authors. Jannatulbaqi (talk) 22:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:25, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no independent sources to establish notability, mainly are self published, fails WP:GNG. TheSlumPanda (talk) 12:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. I find several reviews of the books [2][3][4][5], also [6] (but I'm not sure of the reliability of the last source). I think it's enough for WP:NAUTHOR. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 14:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. All sources on the page are unreliable, dead domains, page not found and non-secondary independent. Fails WP:GNG, WP:NAUTHOR and WP:NBIO. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as writer is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 16:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Not sure why the rush to delete this. Several of the books look to have healthy citations in GS, and Russ Woodroofe has found multiple reviews. Merely having dead links on the article is not a deletion rationale. Espresso Addict (talk) 07:55, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I always make sure to preserve articles and only consider deletion after thorough investigation. I would advise other editors to follow the same approach: take your time, conduct careful research, and then provide your comments. Avoid rushing the process. Thank you--- Jannatulbaqi (talk) 12:39, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kingsley Okonkwo (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 article about a "family life and relationship coach, TV personality, and author" sourced entirely to shady pieces. While most of the publications are reliable on their own, the pieces sourced to are either unreliable, of the subject's opinion, run of the mill coverages or vanispamcruft. It's either the subject is publishing their opinion or it's an unreliable "things you need to know about X" piece. Nothing to confer inherent notability here either. Fails WP:GNG over all. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Television, and Christianity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:15, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 22:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep: The subject appears notable and subject of discussion in national dailies here, here and could pass [Wp:GNG|GNG] with wide coverage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hackesan (talk • contribs) 12:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Takayuki Fujii (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)

Overt failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT, with no significant and independent coverage (including in the ja:wiki), and 6 games in Japan's third league being his claim to notability. Creator is globally locked. Geschichte (talk) 22:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 12:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:NATHLETE. SirMemeGod  15:11, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tatsuya Suzuki (footballer, born 1988) (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)

Blatant and utter failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. No indication of notability anywhere. Geschichte (talk) 22:48, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 12:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Corresponding article on Japanese Wikipedia only provides press release. This full name is very common, so it's possible to find namesakes unless people search in kanji. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melville Jones (racing driver) (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. Lack of WP:SIGCOV. Demt1298 (talk) 19:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Sports, Motorsport, and United States of America. Demt1298 (talk) 19:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:04, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, per Point 1 of WP:NMOTORSPORT. The Indianapolis 500 is the oldest and most important American auto race. Please consider the deletion discussions here, here, here, and here. These are the first four I located, and in each case the consensus has been to keep the articles of early 20th century drivers - I believe this is due to the clear notability of the event and/or the achievement of competing in it, and because of the fact that sources likely exist, but may be harder to locate and access due to the time period of their creation.

RegalZ8790 (talk) 21:23, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. NMOTORSPORT is subordinate to SPORTCRIT, which requires GNG be met and a source of IRS SIGCOV be cited in the article. Passing mentions with trivial details and routine event coverage do not count as SIGCOV, but that seems to be the only material that exists on this person per the (non-RS) blog post, which repeats what the official Indianapolis Speedway historian (not independent) could find on Jones: The story of MC Jones, the man from Conwy, has been morphed with Milton Jones who died 80 years ago. They share the common Welsh surname, but as resident historian Donald Davidson at the Indianapolis Speedway points out, it's a case of history not keeping up with the Joneses.

"MC Jones and Milton Jones, it has often been assumed, is the same person. MC Jones drove in the 1925 race, and his name was Melville. They are two different people," affirms Davidson from his office at the track. "There are those who have assumed it is one and the same and it isn't.

"In 1925 there was a fellow named Harold Skelly. He qualified a 'Skelly Special', which was a Fronty Ford, which means it was basically a dirt track car with a special head developed by Louis Chevrolet and Frontenac, nicknamed a 'Fronty'. As Skelly was deemed not up to the job, MC Jones stepped in, and I think most of his experience was in boat racing." That's nowhere near SIGCOV, and if that is all the official Indy 500 historian could dig up then that's very strong proof nothing further exists. JoelleJay (talk) 20:42, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The BBC source has 280 words of coverage devoted to Jones – I do not see how that is not significant coverage (i.e. meets SPORTCRIT). There's an obit here, and it seems a number of other mentions from Maine papers and from when he competed at the Indy 500. If OldRacingCars.com is considered reliable you arguably have another piece of sigcov here. You could certainly write a decent bio here, and I don't see why we wouldn't want to have a potential upper-start-class bio on someone who competed in one of the most famous races ever – I don't see who would be benefited by deleting. To suggest that one can just disregard all the sub-NSPORT criteria just by saying 'fails GNG' is really ridiculous – what point is there then in having them if saying two words makes them irrelevant! I'd lean towards keeping. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:44, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @BeanieFan11 From Wikipedia:Notability (sports): "This guideline is used to help evaluate whether or not a sports person or sports league/organization (amateur or professional) is likely to meet the general notability guideline, and thus merit an article in Wikipedia. The article should provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline." (my emphasis). I'm not giving an opinion either way whether the sourcing/coverage provided is sufficient in this instance, but it is a requirement that articles about athletes/drivers meet the GNG. Meeting WP:NMOTORSPORT is an indication that they likely do meet GNG, but is not itself enough to warrant being kept. A7V2 (talk) 23:04, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm well aware that it says that – but seriously, how is it helpful to have that criterion if every single article one creates on that presumption of "likely notability" will be deleted if they don't immediately show GNG, no matter the circumstance and even if they provide one piece of SIGCOV? (since GNG needs two) BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:14, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 22:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of David Cross in Alvin and the Chipmunks (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)

Even if this topic passes WP:GNG, it would then be a classic WP:NOPAGE case. This article is largely a compilation of blog posts, online comments, and celebrity gossip reporting. There may (or, quite possibly, may not) be a place for two sentences about this to be included at David Cross, but that's it -- at most. EEng 22:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I agree with EEng that this is mostly gossip and does not deserve its own page. I think a good solution is a sentence about the Chipwreck producer, and maybe another sentence could be added to the David Cross page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpuddin (talk • contribs) 23:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as unencyclopedic gossip. Esolo5002 (talk) 03:32, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep - As the creator and major contributor to the article, I narrowly (albeit still) encourage the retainment of this page. I had originally made this article where Alvin and the Chipmunks (film)#Response towards Cross used to look like this. I moved most of that content to its own article, adding Chipwrecked content as well. I guess I underestimated WP:SIGCOV; although there is commentary of blog activity, the sources on this article are generally fine (expect maybe the ScreenRant), so verifiability issues aren't a problem. If this doesn't deserve to be its own standalone article, it should be a redirect to David_Cross#Alvin_and_the_Chipmunks. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 16:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – any particularly mainstream coverage (e.g., maybe the LA Times article cited in the article) can be addressed in another article; coverage from smaller entertainment websites is generally trivial. See also WP:NOTGOSSIP. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - horrible offspring of no page and not gossip. Bearian (talk) 09:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tanieya Khanuja (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)

Fail GNG. Article creator has been blocked! Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and India. Shellwood (talk) 21:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and Delhi. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: only gossip mentions, no reliable source which discuss about the subject in depth, fails WP:GNG. TheSlumPanda (talk) 10:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Germany national football team goal records (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 blatant WP:NOTSTATS violation as an excessive listing of statistics. We do not need statistics on every single player that has ever taken a penalty for Germany, nor every single player to have scored in the final minute of a match. A shorter summary of the youngest/oldest goalscorers already exists at Germany national football team records and statistics, while hat-tricks are listed at List of Germany national football team hat-tricks. S.A. Julio (talk) 21:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Germany. S.A. Julio (talk) 21:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 21:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:27, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I agree with you, the main stats article is enough is covers all the key stuff, this feels like overkill again. Govvy (talk) 09:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 12:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deepali Sathe (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)

Media sources only press release. Article creator has been blocked! Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 21:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 21:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and India. Shellwood (talk) 21:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Madhya Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Article does not have significant coverage to meet GNG.

Mon Bhai (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Deepali Sathe is a well known singer, you can search google, this article has significant coverage, i think added to article deletation by mistake. :[[User:Mrofrepigid‬| Mrofrepigid‬] (talk) 12:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - another article by a fan with made up in one day awards for a perpetually new kid in the genre and up and coming performing artist but lacking in significant coverage. Bearian (talk) 15:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Henderson (surgeon) (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 notable sources. Editor has an obvious COI. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 21:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 21:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Medicine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, GS citation record low and little else. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete, no special achievement. Lack independent sources to establish notability, fails WP:GNG TheSlumPanda (talk) 12:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There are not three reliable sources about the subject person to pass WP:SIGCOV. We almost never have associate professors who pass WP:PROF automatically. The remainder of the arguments are not proven by the preponderance of the evidence. Perhaps this article is WP:TOOSOON? Disclosure: my domestic partner used to work at the same large institution. Bearian (talk) 09:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Most references appear to be not directly about him, seems to fail GNG, BIO, etc. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 00:48, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sergio Castañeda (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)

Only played a handful of matches in Bulgaria and nothing even close to passing WP:SPORTBASIC. The best source that I can find is Sportal, which is nowhere near enough depth to warrant his own article. Castañeda hasn't been seen since 2018 so I see little point in incubating in draft either as future notability is doubtful. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Colombia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 11:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 12:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raimundo Sarmento (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 created because Jeca played one minute of international football, something that is no longer considered to be a free pass. I could find nothing better than ASEAN Football, a mere squad list mention. No realistic chance of meeting WP:SPORTBASIC. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Asia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 12:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – I don't follow sports in the country, but playing less minutes at any football match is a weak claim to notability. What is free pass? ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We used to consider anyone that had played even one second of international football automatically notable, even if they failed WP:GNG. Hence we could call it a 'free pass' from having to meet GNG. WP:NSPORTS2022 put this rule to death, though. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:42, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NSPORTS2022 put this rule to death, though. I've also read somewhere else that it is because unfortunately, not every footballer receives significant coverage, even if they have played an international match. See the epilogue from this AfD for example. I understand how difficult sometimes to find something that will pass GNG for such footballers, especially from low-level countries or pre-internet topic. That's why I've been having a difficult time cleaning them up recently. I can say different generation/era and countries provide different (significant) news coverage. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pak Chol-jin is from North Korea, a country without transparent media. There are few if any similar countries in the world, Eritrea being one. When it comes to the many tiny islands around the world, there is a wholly different reason for the scarcity of sources; very low population and comparatively low interest in football (or other subjects). Geschichte (talk) 19:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nando (Timorese footballer) (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)

Nando played in one international match, and that was a mere 13 minute cameo. An international cap is no longer a free pass. My own Timorese search yielded nothing other than Tatoli, which is a passing mention. No evidence of WP:SPORTBASIC. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Asia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 12:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, does not meet any biographical guideline. Geschichte (talk) 19:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Makito Hatanaka (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)

Failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played some games in Japan's third league and 110 minutes in Singapore. I'm not very swayed by the status as a tall footballer. This is curious information that belongs in a list. Geschichte (talk) 11:26, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 11:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: ja.wiki article has additional references which have not been acknowledged, but should be per WP:NEXIST. Left guide (talk) 12:13, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 18:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – The article on ja.wiki is actually much more consistent, perhaps it will be possible to establish WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 12:40, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. As all other articles on ja:wiki, it's completely useless, with every single one of the sources being WP:PRIMARY. Geschichte (talk) 08:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I looked more carefully here and in fact they are redirects to the clubs websites. Therefore, I vote do delete. Svartner (talk) 19:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 19:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Massive WP:BEFORE fail. How did User:GiantSnowman and User:Geschichte miss these really easy to find references from over a period of several years? These are the first 3 that came up in a Google search, and all were good; suggesting there's a LOT more. 1, 2, 3. Nfitz (talk) 20:27, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment jsports - Hatanka tries volleyball, only coverage on him is "(former soccer J-Leaguer), who is 207 cm tall". gekisaka - some info on him. soccer-king.jp - one sentence on his promotion to the 1st team. Dougal18 (talk) 08:53, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Where is the SIGNIFICANT coverage? GiantSnowman 17:45, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haykakan Par (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 struggled to find sources as firstly there seems to be a song or dance of the same name and secondly the article does not say what the Turkish name is. I found a couple of mentions in Google Scholar but not enough to show notability. I don’t know that part of Turkey so happy to be proved wrong if you know better Chidgk1 (talk) 14:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Armenia, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:05, 3 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!} 06:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep- Leaning towards keep because I believe this is more of a transliteration issue. The mountain range is easily confusable with the phrase "Armenian dance". The Armenian translation of Հայկական Պար Լեռներ did yield some results (129,000 on google). It may go by other names such as "Atsptkunq", "Sukavet" or "Bardoghi" according to this [7]. This source also refers to the mountains as "Atsptkunq" and has more precise geographic location confirming the mountain range is near the Araxes river. This source again mentions "Atsptkunq" and the fact that they were renamed "Aghre Dagh" by Turkish inhabitants. In any case, this mountain range does exist, its more so deciphering the correct name of it in Armenian and Turkish. If we can find some native speakers, I'm sure they could sift through the sources and improve the article. Archives908 (talk) 23:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Archives908 I am not a native speaker of Turkish but are you sure that "Aghre Dagh" is the name in Turkish? Because I have not yet managed to find that on a map and surely if it was a range the second word would be “Dağlar” wouldn’t it? I don’t know what a ridge is in Turkish.

  I am a native speaker of English and if it was a ridge I would have thought it would be called “Something Ridge” in English. But is it a ridge do you know? Certainly we don’t call it “Atsptkunq” as we cannot pronounce that!

  Also the text is confusing because Mt Ararat is east of the source of the Aras River not west.

  I cannot understand the map in the second cite - are you able to link to a map which shows it? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:58, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Ah I now suspect that the name in English is Aras Mountains, for which we already have an article. So perhaps this article should be merged into that one or redirected? @North8000: - why do you think they may be different? Chidgk1 (talk) 18:07, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not a native speaker of Turkish either. That's why I said in my comment above, "If we can find some native speakers, I'm sure they could sift through the sources and improve the article". Also, just because you may not be able to pronounce certain words, it does not mean that the range isn't called by that name. There are tens of thousands of articles on English Wikipedia with interesting names, most of which, may be hard to pronounce for native English speakers. But that is not justification enough to delete such articles. Unfortunately, I have nothing more to offer this conversation. I was able to find alternate names of the range, now its up to someone who speaks native Armenian and/or Turkish to help us verify the WP:RS we have. I still maintain my Keep vote on the basis that 1) the range exists 2) this is most likely a matter of transliteration 3) there are sources for these names out there, we just need help deciphering them. Cheers, Archives908 (talk) 22:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  "Atsptkunq" is not merely hard to pronounce for a native English speaker, it is impossible! I just asked a native Turkish speaker and she had no idea how to pronounce it either. So I am sure that is not the name in English or Turkish. We already have an article for what you call Sukavet in Armenian namely Mount Kösedağ (Ağrı). We also have Mount Zor but that does not exist in other language Wikipedias so I don’t know what that is called in Armenian. I have asked for help from Wikiproject Mountains because as far as I know Wikiproject Turkey is not very active. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Unfortunately, your "friend who speaks Turkish" does not constitute WP:RS. Again, Atsptkunq is probably a transliteration of the Armenian or Turkish word. The English name may not even be 100% accurate if there was translations errors. I used Google translate, and I am unsure of the accuracy of it. However, I found about four names in total for this range. That is why we need editors who can read Armenian/Turkish fluently to sift through each of the English names AND their Armenian/Turkish translations to cross-check and verify the correct name of the range -or- to verify if the range already belongs to a another range (ideally, with RS to back it up). Since neither of us are fluent in these languages, its unwise for us to determine with certainty that this range does not exist by any of these names. Archives908 (talk) 00:43, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:45, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was pinged presumably because I raised the concern about a possible duplicate article when doing the NPP review on Aras Mountains. I've been off the grid on a trip and now am only about 5% back on the grid for the next two days. I'd be happy to work on helping figure this this out from a geographic standpoint (and it seems like that should be possible) but could only do that starting 2 days from now. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 02:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is why I pinged you. No rush as not a fast moving subject. I should also have pinged @Riehaiqu: who wrote that Aras Mountains and Haykakan Par are the same thing. If that is correct then an alternative to deletion would be to merge this article into Aras Mountains. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Aras Mountains. This is just me doing my best regarding suggesting what to do. If someone has more insight/knowledge than me on this and thinks otherwise I would defer to their judgement. I tried a deeper dive on this. The IMO the name Aras Mountains isn't on totally firm ground but taking it descriptively as a minimum it's a real area with mountains and ridges in it. I've found where Haykakan Par refers to some things / places in that area but nothing that refers to it as a mountain range or to the overall area encompassed by the Aras Mountains area. I used the word "merge" but the second half of the article is about some general/ cultural / political stuff for general eastern Turkey (not about the subject of the article) and it looks like nothing in the rest of the article is sourced. (including the selection of and the caption of the photo) and so IMO it's best not to bring any of the material over in a merge. Again, this is just me doing my best regarding suggesting what to do. If someone has more insight/knowledge than me on this and thinks otherwise I would defer to their judgement. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback! I am not opposed to a merge either, but I am still leaning on a Keep vote (temporarily). I believe rather than this article being nominated for deletion, it would have been better if the nominator brought this to the talk page where we could have taken the time to do a thorough review and potentially reach a WP:CON. Our dilemma here is, we need a native speaker of Turkish and Armenian in order to conduct a search of all 5 or 6 of the potential names of this ridge to better determine if 1) this is an independent geological formation of notability 2) if it is in fact a duplication of Aras Mountains or 3) if this is a transliteration issue and the ridge goes by a completely different Armenian or Turkish name that we all may be unaware of. I believe a deletion or even a merge may be premature considering we have been unsuccessful to determine this with absolute certainty. I don't think keeping this article (for now) and conducting more research would be a bad thing. It could always be re-nomed for deletion once we have more clarity. Regards, Archives908 (talk) 19:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Susan Gundunas (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)

Tagged for notability since 2011. Both sources lack independence from the subject. The singer doesn't appear to have performed with any major opera companies or theaters; performing largely at third and fourth tier minor organizations. Not likely to pass WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 18:08, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. 4meter4 (talk) 18:08, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Article does not have significant coverage to meet GNG.

Mon Bhai (talk) 18:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The nomination is harsh. I see lots of coverage on Google News, which might be enough for the subject to pass WP:SIGCOV. No !vote, just comments. Bearian (talk) 09:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bearian I'm not being harsh. The biggest venue Gundunas has performed with is San Jose Opera. She also appeared with even smaller companies in that area in CA, and in the one review where she is the main subject in your google news search is described as a "restaurant singer" in the headline. Part of how we assess opera singers (or actors) for notability is by where they have performed per relevant WP:SNG guidelines. San Jose has a tiny opera company that gets reviews in the local city press, but it isn't a major company with a national or international reputation. It doesn't usually get press in other parts of California even, which CA's bigger companies (San Francisco, Los Angeles, the former Opera Pacific when it was active, etc.) do. Generally when evaluating WP:NACTOR for significant theater works we consider venue. An opera singer performing at the Metropolitan Opera, Lyric Opera of Chicago, Houston Grand Opera, and San Francisco Opera (the "Big Four" of American opera) whose productions get reviewed in the international press and are often recorded or filmed is notable. Outside of these, second tier companies like New York City Opera, Los Angeles Opera, Washington National Opera, Opera Philadelphia, Santa Fe Opera, etc. are potentially notable, particularly if they have been recorded or gotten press outside of their local news which happens intermittently. Beyond these, local theater performances like Opera San Jose generally don't rise to the level of significance for their performers. They are lower level theater companies, of interest to their individual city but not elsewhere. This type of assessment is relevant to the SNG guideline for performers where we generally discredit appearances at lower tier theaters as non-notable; which is the approach used by the WP:WikiProject Theatre, Wp:WikiProject Musical Theatre, and WP:WikiProject Opera communities. Best.4meter4 (talk) 13:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per 4meter4’s reply to my concerns. Bearian (talk) 14:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This person's performances have not been in starring roles in long-running, major-market productions, and, unless they are all missing from the article, she has not had reviews of her performances in multiple significant roles. She has not originated roles in notable works. She does not feature in major roles in notable recordings. She does not seem to have won any Tony Awards, Olivier Awards or similar. I would expect a notable opera singer to have played dozens of major roles in operas at international major houses. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:41, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brooke Schofield (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)

Same issues as the podcast even if it's not quite as bad. Coverage is trivial and routine, there is nothing that meets all 4 criteria (independent, secondary, in-depth, reliable). Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Radio, Entertainment, Internet, and California. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: This Independent article, this Business Insider article, this PinkNews article, this BuzzFeed News article, and this Press & Sun-Bulletin article—which are all used as sources in the article—all seem to meet the criteria perfectly well. benǝʇᴉɯ 01:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Which criteria would you be using that the PinkNews article meets, Benmite? There's quotes from Schofield in there but virtually nothing about her. Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I would honestly say that the PinkNews article probably meets all of the criteria. It's clearly independent from Schofield, it's a secondary source for what it's talking about (her relationship with Matt Rife), it's known for being reliable, and it's relatively in-depth about the relationship between them the claims she makes about her relationship with Rife even if most of what it says specifically about her is that she's a YouTuber, hosts the Cancelled podcast, and, according to her, "has an 'outie' vagina". benǝʇᴉɯ 02:13, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Are you sure you don't mean independent instead of secondary? Secondary means it contains analytic or evaluative claims on the primary sources (i.e. the Schofield quotes). Alpha3031 (t • c) 06:00, 14 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!} 17:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

232d Medical Battalion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Unsourced article that got moved back from draftspace. A WP:BEFORE search got mostly press releases. A subject specific notability guideline doesn't exist for military units/formations, and the article seems to not fulfill our general notability guidelines. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 13:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United States of America. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 13:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. We generally keep articles on battalion-sized units per WP:MILUNIT. But move to 232nd Medical Battalion per norm. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 10 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!} 17:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Error message comes up on this AFD, as well "Do not use {{Draft article}} in mainspace". — Maile (talk) 21:26, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, — Maile ,

I don't see any problems with this AFD or the article and I don't know what draft article you are referring to. I've put "nowiki" tags around this template because it is interfering with discussion here. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I just got that message again by trying to add. See first sentence of this nomination, "Unsourced article that got moved back from draftspace." But if no one else gets that, maybe I'll just avoid this article. — Maile (talk) 23:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maile66 Hate to say this, but I'm not seeing any error messages, either. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 00:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. All the sourcing on the subject is the unit talking about itself. That is neither secondary nor independent. MILUNIT is not a notability guideline and so per WP:N has zero sway here. JoelleJay (talk) 01:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shirley Clelland (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)

She passes WP:NATH with seventh place in pentathlon at the 1970 Commonwealth Games but fails GNG. A search through the British Newspaper Archives just found brief mentions and sporting results. Dougal18 (talk) 14:26, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Sport of athletics, and England. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:05, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, found several newspaper sources in just the first few pages: "BRILLIANT FUTURE FOR SHIRLEY BEGAN 'AS A BIT OF FUN'". Leicester Chronicle. 29 May 1970. p. 28. Retrieved 11 Oct 2024. "PENTATHLON WIN FOR SHIRLEY CLELLAND". Leicester Mercury. 24 Aug 1970. p. 22. Retrieved 11 Oct 2024. "SHIRLEY CLELLAND WINS TWO EVENTS". Leicester Mercury. 23 Sep 1968. p. 24. Retrieved 11 Oct 2024.

I find that the NATH guideline is pretty conservative compared to the others at NSPORT, so it's worth trying multiple search engines if you can't find sources at one. For example NATH says that 4th-placers at the Olympics can't necessarily be presumed to have coverage, but I've yet to find one without GNG sources after searching so far. --Habst (talk) 12:29, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It mainly pertains to pre-WWII Olympics, and more so for team sports than individual ones Geschichte (talk) 19:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I've searched even pre-WWII Olympics to see if there's a non-notable 4th placer and have yet to find one. I agree that in general prewar Olympics were less notable, I just don't think the line should have been drawn at 4th place. --Habst (talk) 12:48, 23 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!} 17:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Sources above from the newspaper archive are fine, the first two are better than the third. Should have enough for notability Oaktree b (talk) 22:45, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Hart (wrestler) (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 notable wrestler. Just worked on an independent level. The article has sources, most of them are WP:ROUTINE results, others passing mentions. Looking for sources, he only has passing mentions on a few events 1 HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Passes GNG with 1, 2, 3, and 4.★Trekker (talk) 15:46, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Wrestling, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:32, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, looking for additional assessments from editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michal Malák (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)

Redirect to Slovakia at the 2010 Winter Olympics#Cross-country skiing because I could not find any in-depth coverage of this athlete to meet WP:GNG. Corresponding article on Slovak Wikipedia is likewise an unsourced dump. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - If you look at his record on the International Ski Federation (FIS) website which is linked in his article, Malak competed in the 2010 Winter Olympics only, not the 2018 Winter Olympics. The FIS database is among the best kept athlete recording from the 1924 Winter Olympics onward. Chris (talk) 16:45, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Database sources don't comply the whole notability guideline (GNG). Following WP:NSPORTS2022, participation in tournaments is no longer considered saved from deletion. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:45, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Searching through sport.sk archives all I could find were a blurb on the Olympics, brief results/participation announcements, and the subject talking about himself. Nothing but stats from ifortuna.sk, nike.sk; zero hits from tipsport.sk; and stats hits for a different Michal Malák on hokejportal.net. JoelleJay (talk) 02:07, 11 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!} 17:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reel Tight (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)

Most definitely fails WP:GNG TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 16:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Tennessee. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and merge text from Back to the Real. Caro7200 (talk) 18:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  What exactly makes it notable though? Looking at the sources for the other page, half of the sources appear to be dead, one is just a wikipedia self citation, and one simply just confirms that the album exists. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:31, 15 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!} 17:49, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Reel Weak Keep, and use sources from the article for their lone album Back to the Real, which strangely is more developed than the band's article. Though I don't have access to the true chart pages at Billboard, their album made a small dent in the R&B charts and they had two mid-level hit singles. They got some minor coverage back in the day for being discovered by Warren G, as seen in a source used at the album article. This is reel close though, and I won't argue with anyone who votes differently. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hosagavi (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 has been unreferenced for years, and I couldn't find sources to add which would back up this information and show this meets WP:NPLACE / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 17:30, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Karnataka. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:GEOLAND. A pretty substantial and clearly recognised settlement. Poor article, but WP:STUB. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:35, 10 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) 17:54, 10 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!} 17:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Potential keep. On one hand, a simple search shows lots of potential sources. On the other hand, I’m loathe to see WP:HEY until someone actually adds at least three references to the stub. Bearian (talk) 09:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC) In the meantime, a Redirect to Mandya district is an acceptable ATD. Bearian (talk) 15:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Bearian, please check now. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Keep per WP:HEY. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:39, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per HEY. Bearian (talk) 12:24, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hamilton International Film Festival (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 smalltown film festival, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing inclusion criteria for film festivals. As always, film festivals are not "inherently" notable just for existing, and have to be shown to have reliable source coverage to pass WP:GNG and WP:NORG -- but this is referenced to just one hit of purely local coverage and two primary sources that aren't support for notability at all, and a Google search mostly found glancing namechecks of this in coverage of films or filmmakers rather than coverage about this.
There's also an ambiguity problem here, as there's a Canadian film festival (without an article yet) that's officially just the "Hamilton Film Festival" but does sometimes get mistakenly called the "Hamilton International Film Festival" -- and a significant number of the hits in the Google search meant the Canadian one and were thus irrelevant here. I also had to unlink almost every single inbound wikilink to this article (except the disambiguatory hatnote in New Zealand's Hamilton Underground Film Festival, which is now the only inbound left), because every single actor or film that was linking here as a "notable because awards" play was referenced to a source that explicitly verified that the Canadian one was the intended topic.
Since I'm still waiting for my restored access to Newspapers.com, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to other databases of archived US media coverage than I've got (or unbroken Newspapers.com) can find more than I was able to find on Google, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt it from having to be referenced better than this. Bearcat (talk) 16:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 16:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. – The Grid (talk) 17:14, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Organizations. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: has received independent coverage. Sources include : https://www.wktv.com/news/entertainment/hamilton-international-film-festival-this-week/article_6fa70b8c-490d-11ef-b1e6-db98625d17b7.html https://www.oneidadispatch.com/2018/07/30/your-neighbor-hamilton-natives-bring-hollywood-to-madison-county-with-film-festival/ https://eu.uticaod.com/story/mid-york-weekly/2012/09/19/film-festival-gives-back-to/41647345007/ https://www.syracuse.com/news/2011/01/sons_to_honor_dads_amazing_col.html. A DISAMB page can be created to mention 3 festivals with this name exist. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:48, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We would need to see more than just four hits of purely local coverage to establish notability here. Bearcat (talk) 00:55, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete A small but heartfelt festival in a small town. Of the 4 sources cited by User:Mushy Yank, #1 is very brief, I couldn't access #2, #3 & #4 are "human interest" stories about the local brothers who founded the festival, but say little about the festival itself. I did finally find a film listing for 2024, and nearly all are short films. There are two full length documentaries but only one even had an entry in IMDB, with very little info, and it had nothing in a web search (except its own web site). I found announcements for the festival in local media (e.g. Colgate college newsletter, Madison County tourism). That's all. Lamona (talk) 04:15, 7 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) 17:55, 10 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!} 17:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Out of the 3 sources, 1 is dead and 1 is primary. A google news did not yield indepth coverage. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 00:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FactGrid (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 find no independent coverage of this database. It does appear useful, but appears to be too soon to be a notable product. A BEFORE shows it's in use and blurbs about how the tool works, but it's from the tool itself.

While I would be fine with a redirect to University_of_Erfurt#University_projects, I don't think it's DUE there, and that has already been contested so merits more discussion. Star Mississippi 17:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Websites, and Germany. Star Mississippi 17:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep it, FactGrid was and is in a way part the official roll out of Wikibase as a common database software. The project was an official collaboration between Wikimedia and the University of Erfurt in 2018, and it is now probably the biggest Wikibase community outside Wikidata. The integration into Germany's National Research Data Infrastructure in 2023 has been the biggest move towards the institutionalization of the database. The platform is now an official recommendation for historical projects to use in Germany. It has projects in Berkeley, Barcelona, Budapest and Paris - with a 1 Million database objects and projects that participate with budgets up to € 900.000 it should no longer be a small website. --Olaf Simons (talk) 08:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• https://blog.wikimedia.de/2018/08/31/many-faces-of-wikibase-die-geschichte-der-illuminaten-als-datenbank-erschliessen/

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah. I was the one who originally WP:BLARed the article, and I admit I probably should have responded to the contesting of the redirection and maybe dropped a note or something, but I've essentially treated it as a contested PROD and did not follow up due to personal reasons. I had more or less forgotten about it by the time I had more time. I do stand by my original assessment, and still believe a redirect is the most appropriate option. While there are some sources, the depth of coverage in independent reliable sources (reliable in a general context) is highly limited, and I do not believe it would be possible to write a standalone article of any length from mostly those sources. In fact, with the state of available sources, I don't believe we would be able to expand much more than maybe 2 or 3 times the current text at University_of_Erfurt#University_projects. While that would be 10% of the current article, I do not believe that would be excessive to the point of being proscribed by WP:DUE, especially if other parts are also expanded. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:36, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus, a source analysis would be helpful as this is what ultimately influences decisions about notability and whether this article should be retained or changed to a Redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Fails GNG. No Sources. Wikibear47 (talk) 17:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Wikibear47 (talk) 17:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Sport of athletics, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete - Hoax. Searching the name gives me zero GHits. The first source in the article does not appear to exist and the second does not mention the subject at all. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 18:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: It doesn't seem like a hoax to me, but it doesn't meet the GNG or even NATHLETE. . — Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:47, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I hesitate to use the H word but I can't find anything about this. There are two references provided:

  1. Fifty years ago in Wellesley Townsman Cathy Brauner. 2011 Retrieved 01 January 2015

  2. Asteria de Sa, "Memories of my golden years of athletics," St. Joseph's Convent School Alumni Karachi 1997

  The first reference seems to be about this article which is about the town of Wellesley, Massachusetts, seemingly completely unrelated? The second reference is just an unlinked book or essay title, and searching for that title on Google or newspapers.com yields no results. The article creator User:Rzafar has not edited since 2018. The lede says "She was the first national champion in long jump" and the body mentions Karachi, so maybe one place to look would be a results archive for the Pakistani Athletics Championships in 1948 when it was founded? --Habst (talk) 20:40, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Doesn't meet the GNG.--Gul Butt (talk) 22:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: None of the sources in the Wikipedia article mention the name Asteria de Sa, which means it definitely is a hoax. ミラへぜ (talk) 17:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:V. Even if it’s true, we can’t verify her existence. Bearian (talk) 09:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arabian Sea Country 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)

Non-notable place. No reliable sources. Just a golf course. Wikibear47 (talk) 16:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Golf and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No RS found on news search.--Gul Butt (talk) 22:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No evidence of good sources; appears to be one of thousands of ordinary country clubs. Bearian (talk) 09:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: cannot find any evidence (both webpages and news) to suggest that it is WP:NOTABLE or deserving of an encyclopaedia article. Only results were info pages about it, Tripadvisor etc. - seems to be just an ordinary country club - see WP:MILL. MolecularPilot 09:07, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete doesn't look to meet WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:57, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Angel home video releases (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:NLIST. Home video releases of Angel are already covered in each of the season articles, see for example: Angel season 4#DVD release. Only references of note are short news announcements by TVShowsOnDVD.com ([9], [10]), a source of questionable reliability.

There are some articles I found about the streaming versions: [11], [12]. Those can fit quite easily to the home video sections on the season articles. Still, I don't think those sources are enough to meet notability. Mika1h (talk) 16:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Television, Lists, and United States of America. Mika1h (talk) 16:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• In principle, there's no reason the video release elements from other articles can't be put together in a list like this. In practice... why bother? In a substantially streaming world, these lists are less important than they used to be. I would actually recommend if we want to clean up Angel articles, they be un-redirected and referenced. Like many older television shows, references are print, not as much digital, so it's non-trivial to demonstrate notability, even when it clearly exists. Jclemens (talk) 17:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. WP:NOTCATALOGUE same reasons as per 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 and many many more. Ajf773 (talk) 09:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per WP:NOTCATALOGUE. TH1980 (talk) 00:32, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine Naglestad (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 is written like a resume. Both sources used lack independence. One is written by her paid talent management, and the other is an interview from the website of her employer. Not clear the subject meets GNG as the article has zero independent sources with significant coverage. 4meter4 (talk) 15:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. 4meter4 (talk) 15:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Fails WP:SINGER. — Maile (talk) 18:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Changing opinion to Keep per dialogue below. — Maile (talk) 18:53, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning keep. The ProQuest test is quite promising with 224 hits. Added a few reviews (e.g. FT.com) to a new Reception section. Could easily add more. Started revising so it sounds less CV-like. Cielquiparle (talk) 23:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - per WP:HEY the true sign of a notable opera singer are the bad reviews. Bearian (talk) 09:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Changing opinion to keep. I would withdraw but someone else already voted delete so I can't. I just found an entry in a German language reference work see here, and this along with the other sources added clearly meet WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 01:47, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Pinging @Maile66 to reconsider previous !vote. There is no dispute the original stub was bad and did not look promising at all, but it turns out that she actually is an internationally acclaimed opera singer who sings a lot of lead roles in a somewhat unconventional career path across Europe with occasional appearances in Japan and the US...and has enough coverage and reviews that doing justice to this bio will take some time. But anyway check out the article now. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see above. I changed to Keep. Thanks for pinging me. — Maile (talk) 18:53, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• This can be speedy keep closed now. Nobody wants to delete the article, and we are unanimous that the article has met WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 03:25, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Türkiye Top 20 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Although this article is rated highly important for Wikiproject Turkey no one has cited it despite it being tagged for a long time and me asking at https://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=Qlik&lang=&q=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Turkey#Articles_without_any_cites_at_all As the talk page complains of false information maybe it should simply be deleted unless anyone is interested in fixing it? Chidgk1 (talk) 15:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, appears to fail WP:GNG. Mach61 16:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Turkish_music_charts: Not notable on its own, I could only find passing mentions like this. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 22:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A sourceless list for music not even originating in its country of origin, and definitely likely book-cooked and influenced by outside sources. Nate • (chatter) 22:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TECO Electric and Machinery (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 believe fits the criteria to be deleted for multiple issues - primarily notability based on WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:NOTADVERT. I made an effort to find references and could only find primary sources. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 15:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Advertising. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 15:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Taiwan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:24, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am against deleting this article. I have just updated the "External links" section. This is a Taiwan company doing business worldwide, so as the descriptions are detailed in its Chinese page, its Enlish page is brief. It must, however, is needed in English for people in other countries. In Wikipedia, don't be a "deletioniist", but be an "encourager" to let other people to participate in update, in order to make a "weak" article a better article. --- By Yoshi Canopus (talk) 01:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoshi Canopus, there are no sources for this article; the company's website cannot show notability. Do you have links to any sources that demonstrate this company is notable by Wikipedia standards? StartGrammarTime (talk) 01:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - all I can find in a BEFORE is ordinary business activities. The article is completely unsourced and there is no sign of notability that I can find. StartGrammarTime (talk) 01:42, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
  1. Sun, Yun-suan (2006). 臺灣奇蹟推手: 孫運璿先生管理講座紀念文集 [Promoter of Taiwan's Miracle: A Collection of Commemorative Essays of Mr. Sun Yun-Chuang's Management Lectures] (in Chinese). Taipei: National Taiwan University Press [zh]. pp. 188–193. ISBN 978-986-00-7834-3. Retrieved 2024-10-21 – via Google Books.

     The book covers the company on six pages. The book notes: "在集團轉投資方面,東元近年來更展現了旺盛的企圖心,除了電 子、電機、通訊之外,東元投資領域已經橫跨半導體、光電以及其他相 關的關鍵零組件、通訊固網、網路軟件、流通餐飲等行業。在多年經營 下,東元電機已由原來的重電、家電領域邁向全球化的高科技企業,從 製造、行銷等多面向發展,建立起縱橫世界的國際品牌——TECO。"

     From Google Translate: "In terms of group reinvestment, TECO has shown strong ambition in recent years. In addition to electronics, motors, and communications, TECO’s investment areas have spanned semiconductors, optoelectronics, and other related key components, communications fixed lines, and networks. Road software, distribution catering and other industries. After years of operation, TECO has moved from its original heavy electrical and home appliance fields to a global high-tech enterprise, developing from manufacturing, marketing and other aspects, and established TECO, an international brand that spans the world."

  2. Shelton, Paul (2024-05-07). "Taiwan's TECO Electric and Machinery faces proxy battle. Shareholder group demands change of management and core business focus". Taiwan News. Archived from the original on 2024-05-07. Retrieved 2024-10-21.

     The article notes: "Taiwanese electronics conglomerate TECO Electric and Machinery Co. (TECO) is in the middle of a proxy battle ahead of its upcoming annual general meeting on May 24. Eugene Huang (黃育仁), the grandson of TECO founder Lin Ho-yin (林和引), has released his vision for the company’s future with the launch of the FutureTECO campaign. Huang, whose father Theodore Huang was chair for many years but resigned from his board seat in 2021, has asked shareholders to support his eight nominees for TECO’s board at the upcoming general meeting. ... Founded in 1956 as an industrial motor manufacturer, TECO has evolved into a major business group, spanning heavy electric equipment, home appliances, information technology, communications, electronic components and parts, infrastructural engineering, financial investment, dining, and services."

  3. Wu, Jing-fang 吳靜芳 (2021-07-23). Wu, Ting-yun 吳廷勻; Wang, Li-hua 王儷華 (eds.). "東元之爭》父子惡鬥、家事變公事 　15萬股民權益在哪裡？" [TECO Battle》Father and son fight fiercely, family affairs turn into business affairs. Where are the rights of 150,000 shareholders?]. CommonWealth Magazine (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-09-12. Retrieved 2024-10-21.

     The article notes: "東元集團黃茂雄、黃育仁父子經營權之爭，因為疫情進入2個月的延長賽，終於畫下暫時的逗點。"

     From Google Translate: "The dispute between the father and son of TECO Group Huang Maoxiong and Huang Yuren for management rights has finally come to a temporary end after entering a two-month extension due to the epidemic."

     The article notes: "這是一門代價不小的家族傳承及公司治理課。東元股東會投票結果，只是另一個開始。兩方公開收購戰還在進行，未來，東元電機必須更努力證明，自己仍是連續7年公司治理評鑑前5％的模範生。"

     From Google Translate: "This is a costly lesson in family inheritance and corporate governance. The voting result of TECO's shareholders' meeting is just another beginning. The public takeover battle between the two parties is still ongoing. In the future, TECO Electric must work harder to prove that it is still a model student in the top 5% of corporate governance evaluations for seven consecutive years."

  4. Wu, Jing-fang 吳靜芳 (2024-09-11). Hong, Jia-ning 洪家寧 (ed.). "銀行教父如何改造傳產老店？專訪東元新董事長利明献「我來危機管理」". CommonWealth Magazine. Archived from the original on 2024-10-21. Retrieved 2024-10-21.

     The article notes: "去年是東元業績最好的一年，去年毛利率創下七年新高，營收和EPS也刷新史上紀錄，財務健全、負債比率低，無庸置疑是一家營運穩健的公司。但過去這幾年，也是東元經營權紛爭最多的時期，父子反目的戲碼比八點檔還好看，吸住全民的注意力。現在經營權之爭已休戰，東元由華新麗華焦家、寶佳兩大股東共治的局勢落定，利明献認為，中長期來看，過去紛擾必定對品牌以及軍心有所影響，東元現在急需一個能扭轉態勢的掌舵者。"

     From Google Translate: "Last year was TECO's best performance year. Last year's gross profit margin hit a seven-year high, and revenue and EPS also set new historical records. With sound finances and a low debt ratio, there is no doubt that it is a company with stable operations. But the past few years have also been the period of most disputes over TECO's management rights. The drama about father and son's rebellion is even better than the 8 o'clock show, attracting the attention of the whole people. Now that the dispute over management rights has come to an end, TECO is now governed by the two major shareholders, Walsin Lihua Jiao Family and Baojia. Lee Ming-hsien believes that in the medium to long term, the past turmoil will definitely have an impact on the brand and military morale. TECO There is an urgent need for a leader who can turn the situation around."

  5. Zhang, Rui-yi 張瑞益 (2023-05-03). "東元永續績效 國際肯定 榮獲MSCI AA評級 列全球同業前15% 生產據點全都通過ISO 14000環保認證" [TECO's sustainable performance is recognised internationally Won the MSCI AA rating and ranked among the top 15% of global peers. All production sites have passed ISO 14000 environmental certification.]. United Daily News (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2023-06-22. Retrieved 2024-10-21.

     The article notes: "東元電機是國內推動ESG相當積極且有成的企業，根據國際知名評比MSCI（Morgan Stanley Capital International）ESG Rating最新發布的2023年4月評比報告，東元再進一級，由A級升等為AA級，永續發展績效評比成績為全球同業中的前15%。MSCI在報告中指出，東元董事會運作良善，董事獨立性符合投資人期待；而東元全球的生產據點皆通過ISO 14000環保認證，為業界翹楚。"

     From Google Translate: "TECO Electric is a very active and successful company in promoting ESG in China. According to the latest April 2023 rating report released by the internationally renowned MSCI (Morgan Stanley Capital International) ESG Rating, TECO has moved up a level and been upgraded from Grade A. It is rated AA and ranks in the top 15% of its global peers in terms of sustainable development performance. MSCI pointed out in the report that TECO's board of directors operates well and the director's independence meets investors' expectations; TECO's global production sites have all passed ISO 14000 environmental certification and are among the best in the industry."

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow TECO Electric and Machinery (traditional Chinese: 東元電機; simplified Chinese: 东元电机) to pass [Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria]], which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 09:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scars to Prove It (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:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - User:Bastun has nominated nine Remedy Drive albums for deletion, all with the same non-descriptive rationale copy/pasted into each: "Fails WP:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV." (The first nomination has slightly different syntax.) There is no evidence that a WP:BEFORE search, specific to each album, was done before this mass copy/paste operation. Some of the album articles have citations to reliable sources in the Christian music media, though others could be redirected to the band's article. That's already more variable evidence then given in these mass nominations. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Reply - not sure what you mean by "non-descriptive"? It's accurate. The albums have all failed to chart, and do not meet any criteria listed in WP:NALBUM (and I did not nominate articles by the band which had charted). Nor do they satisfy WP:SIGCOV - significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Passing mention in genre music reviews was all I could find when doing WP:BEFORE, and that doesn't qualify. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:JUSTAPOLICY. You should indicate why and how those policies were violated in the original nomination. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:41, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I literally did that? Fails WP:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV is clear, unambiguous and identifies the policies breached. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep seems good enough. Babysharkboss2!! ^{(I spread pro-Weezer propaganda)} 13:50, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This AFD is depressing. Vague nominations combatted by vague stances. Come on, do better. Sergecross73 msg me 20:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. There's a bit more on this one too. As I said on the nomination for Imago Amor, the reviews that are present are the usual weak/blog-esque Christian music sources, but it's an indication there is more coverage out there. Ss112 08:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Imago Amor (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:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC) Add: The albums by Remedy Drive that I have nominated for deletion all failed to chart, and do not meet any criteria listed in WP:NALBUM (and I did not nominate articles by the band which had charted). Nor do they satisfy WP:SIGCOV - significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Passing mention in genre music reviews was all I could find when doing WP:BEFORE, and that doesn't qualify. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. The reviews that are present are the usual weak/blog-esque Christian music sources, but it's an indication there is more coverage out there. Ss112 08:03, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as has multiple reviews in reliable sources already present in the article as determined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music/Sources, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Living Room Anthology, Vol. 1 (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:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC) Add: The albums by Remedy Drive that I have nominated for deletion all failed to chart, and do not meet any criteria listed in WP:NALBUM (and I did not nominate articles by the band which had charted). Nor do they satisfy WP:SIGCOV - significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Passing mention in genre music reviews was all I could find when doing WP:BEFORE, and that doesn't qualify. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Remedy Drive per nomination. Lacks significant coverage and isn't notable, like the majority of the band's albums. There isn't even a Jesus Freak Hideout revie for this one. Ss112 07:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per nomination. Fails WP:NALBUM DonaldD23 talk to me 18:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The North Star (album) (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:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC) Add: The albums by Remedy Drive that I have nominated for deletion all failed to chart, and do not meet any criteria listed in WP:NALBUM (and I did not nominate articles by the band which had charted). Nor do they satisfy WP:SIGCOV - significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Passing mention in genre music reviews was all I could find when doing WP:BEFORE, and that doesn't qualify. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. Similarly to Imago Amor, the reviews that are present are the usual weak/blog-esque Christian music sources, but it's an indication there is more coverage out there. Ss112 12:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - There is sufficient coverage such as ccmmagazine and jesusfreakhideout . Drushrush (talk) 02:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as has multiple reviews in reliable sources already present in the article, as determined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music/Sources, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hope's Not Giving Up (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:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC) Add: The albums by Remedy Drive that I have nominated for deletion all failed to chart, and do not meet any criteria listed in WP:NALBUM (and I did not nominate articles by the band which had charted). Nor do they satisfy WP:SIGCOV - significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Passing mention in genre music reviews was all I could find when doing WP:BEFORE, and that doesn't qualify. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Remedy Drive per nomination. Lacks significant coverage and isn't notable, like the majority of the band's albums. Ss112 07:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Light Makes a Way (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:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC) Add: The albums by Remedy Drive that I have nominated for deletion all failed to chart, and do not meet any criteria listed in WP:NALBUM (and I did not nominate articles by the band which had charted). Nor do they satisfy WP:SIGCOV - significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Passing mention in genre music reviews was all I could find when doing WP:BEFORE, and that doesn't qualify. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Remedy Drive per nomination. Lacks significant coverage and isn't notable, like the majority of the band's albums. A lot of these articles seem to exist under the premise that Christian outlet Jesus Freak Hideout reviewing the release makes it notable—it doesn't. Ss112 07:50, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magnify (Remedy Drive album) (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:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC) Add: The albums by Remedy Drive that I have nominated for deletion all failed to chart, and do not meet any criteria listed in WP:NALBUM (and I did not nominate articles by the band which had charted). Nor do they satisfy WP:SIGCOV - significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Passing mention in genre music reviews was all I could find when doing WP:BEFORE, and that doesn't qualify. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Remedy Drive per nomination. Lacks significant coverage and isn't notable, like the majority of the band's albums. A lot of these articles seem to exist under the premise that Christian outlet Jesus Freak Hideout reviewing the release makes it notable—it doesn't. Ss112 07:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tsestos (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)

Tagged uncited in 2009. I could not find good enough sources to show it to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 14:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance, Greece, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I don't find anything about a dance. This mentions a basket [17]. Tagged for over a decade and no one's worked on it, delete it and be done with it. Oaktree b (talk) 14:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge in Zonaradiko. The dance is a variation of zonaradikos as written in the zonaradiko article and as mentions from sources here and here Cestos: It is known by various names denoting the way the dancers are caught (vivacious), the way they dance it (douzkos = white layered), or cestos (short and quick steps). Duzkos and cestos are danced by men. The Cestu form is also considered a war dance, for the steps of the dance and the formation in a straight line.google translate LefterDalaka (talk) 17:04, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Unsourced for too long to be still an article, probably can be PRODed. Bunnypranav (talk) 16:34, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noah Kudic (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)

Repeatedly created and declined, fails WP:GNG and not sure that being in a youth league is enough for WP:NSPORT. Theroadislong (talk) 14:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Sweden. Theroadislong (talk) 14:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Croatia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:34, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 18:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 19:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The creator has been fairly uncooperative so far, despite several people having tried to explain why this is not a viable Wikipedia article as it stands. Geschichte (talk) 20:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. WP:TOSOON. Can't find any decent coverage. /Julle (talk) 00:42, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not even close to meeting GNG Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Was planning nominate it myself after my CSD request was declined. --Ratekreel (talk) 11:18, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Civilizations in Babylon 5 (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)

AFD to receive wider input if this needs a stand-alone article. In 2020, this civilization article got smerged into List_of_Babylon_5_characters (as part of a larger B5 cleanup move) for WP:INUNIVERSE and general WP:FANCRUFT problems to avoid AFD (the irony!), see original merge proposal. The article got reestablished today, I would nowadays label it as an undue WP:Content fork without established notability. Should it exist and develop from here (assuming sources even exist), or officially redirect back to List_of_Babylon_5_characters until it qualifies for WP:SPINOUT? – sgeureka ^t•c 13:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Lists. – sgeureka ^t•c 13:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. – sgeureka ^t•c 13:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Trim and merge back to the character list. There's sourcing there to support a few sentences about each of the major species but this can be condensed to a short section with the character list article. Most of the content is far more appropriate at a fan wiki. Masem (t) 14:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It already was trimmed & merged. Did I miss something by accident back in 2020? – sgeureka ^t•c 14:06, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    In itscurrent state, the article still heavily relies on in universe info that is unsourced or sourced to the primary work. I am certain that we can better summarize the major sle ies from the show with se ondary sources without excessive in universe detail, hence the trim and merge to keep appropriate content. If there is an article recreation problem, salting can be done on the redirect. Masem (t) 14:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Reading back on the talkpages, it seems that the main reason for reestablishing this civ list lies with Shadow_(Babylon_5), which (understandably) isn't listed in the LoC and thus had no real target. However, 2019's Shadow_(Babylon_5) article doesn't look like it would survive AFD, so I feel that's either a non-issue or issue for WP:RFD. – sgeureka ^t•c 14:06, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment @Sgeureka: So what is the central argument for deletion here? Is it notability? If so, was a WP:BEFORE search done? What were the results?

Or is the main argument a WP:PAGEDECIDE one for a likely notable topic?

The original merge is quite justified in my view, as there were no objections to the proposal then. But I do understand that the lack of treatment of the Shadows is one concern, because I know there are secondary sources talking about them, even though they are neither worked into this article nor the old stand-alone one. I don't have an opinion yet on the merge, but I am against deletion, as I don't see a reason not to at least have the redirect as WP:AtD. I think the old merge discussion should have been continued instead of starting a deletion discussion. Pinging @Anonymous44: as involved editor.

With regard to notability, one first secondary source which has significant treatment on our topic here would be the Babylon 5 chapter of The Essential Science Fiction Television Reader, which discusses the four main "younger races", Shadows and Vorlons. Daranios (talk) 15:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Daranios: I am not arguing for deletion, but I want to ideally make the redirect (a common AFD result per WP:COMMON#Fiction) "stick" officially without tedious back-and-forth discussions with fans. Or get my wrist slapped here in the process. If proper merge discussions can be undone willy-nilly without addressing the original article issues (tagged for 12 years before the merger!), the lesson here will be to do AFD from the outset in the future instead of the softer merge proposal route, which I used to be a fan of. Notability is not the main reason why we are at AFD, but the article sure should be build around establishing it (it currently isn't). – sgeureka ^t•c 21:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sgeureka: Thanks for clarifying! I understand that starting an AfD has a higher chance of getting more opinions and a closure on the question of a stand-alone article as compared to a merge discussion on the talk page. But I also think that there are good reasons the deletion policy explicitely says not to use this process if one wants or suspects merging as an outcome. E.g. as you have put forward this being a WP:Contentfork as a reason for the nomination, deletion policy says "Reasons for deletion include ... 5. Content forks (unless a merger or redirect is appropriate)" (emphasis mine). Maybe to reduce frustration on the process in general I would like to point out that this is a bit of special case: Yes, you had started a merge discussion. Noone objected, so you were completely justified in going forward with the merge. But there were also no further opinions given, so one cannot speak of a consensus formed, which was "undone willy-nilly". Rather, we now have a second, opposing opinion, so at this point there is clearly a no consensus situation, and the provisional restoration of the list in my view is justified as well, based on the WP:Bold, revert, discuss cycle (even though there was a time gap before refert here). I think "tedious back-and-forth discussions with fans", or rather, other Wikipedia editors, are the normal and reasonable, if inconvenient process at this point to reach an informed decision on the best course of action. It would be quite a different case if a solid consensus would have formed. Then there need to be good reasons and significant input to overthrow previous decisions, and there should be no "willy-nilly" "back-and-forth" about it. But this discussion needs to take place first. Now if the merge discussion would remain with only two opinions, which may happen at a talk page discussion even if is somewhat frustrating, I think there were to options: 50/50 opinion looks like no consensus, then things are left as they are for the time being. Or if you think you have the way better arguments, get a neutral third party to decide at Wikipedia:Closure requests, just as we have a neutral party closing a deletion discussion. We don't need the AfD process to achieve that. Daranios (talk) 07:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• So here's the thing... I have plenty of dead-tree resources on Babylon 5, but no time to do anything much except for stave off AfDs:
  • Bassom, D., & Straczynski, J. M. (1997a). Creating Babylon 5: Behind the scenes of Warner Bros. revolutionary deep space TV drama (1st American ed). Ballantine Books.
  • Bassom, D., & Straczynski, J. M. (1997b). The A-Z of Babylon 5: [The complete reference guide to the groundbreaking sci-fi series] created by J. Michael Straczynski. Dell Publishing.
  • Guffey, E. F., & Koontz, K. D. (2017). A dream given form: The unofficial guide to the universe of Babylon 5. ECW Press.
  • Johnson-Smith, J. (2005). American science fiction TV: Star Trek, Stargate, and beyond. Wesleyan University Press.
  • Lancaster, K. (2001). Interacting with Babylon 5: Fan performance in a media universe (1st ed). University of Texas Press.
  • Lane, A. (1997). The Babylon file: The definitive unauthorized guide to J. Michael Straczynski’s TV series, Babylon 5. Virgin.
  • Lane, A. (1999). The Babylon file: The definitive unauthorised guide to J. Michael Straczynski’s TV series Babylon 5. Vol. 2. Virgin.

There is absolutely enough in these books to support notability for an article on each episode of the series, as well as most things like the shadows as a civilization. How we deal with this is really dependent on how we, collectively, view WP:TIND, as I'd be lying if I said I thought I'd have time to work on this in the foreseeable future. Jclemens (talk) 17:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for now. Later we decide if a separate article is necessary. 21 Andromedae (talk) 00:20, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep, echoing 21.Andromedae. With the secondary sources presented, the topic looks notable, and there would be enough material to solve the problems it has through normal editing, so deletion is not the way to go. I have no strong opinion if this is better kept as a stand-alone article or condensed as part of List of Babylon 5 characters for the time being. On the one hand it has been tagged for the problems for a long time, on the other I do think it would be better presented as a separate article in the long run. If it were to be covered in the characters list, some more should be added there. I can take a look at the Shadows in case this is kept. So like Jclemens, it depends on where we stand with regard to WP:TIND. I come out just on the keep side as an AfD outcome, not precluding further discussion on a merge on the talk page. Daranios (talk) 15:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I fail to see how this could become notable even with sources existing. Perhaps a Universe of Babylon 5 article could be made, but that would require a rewrite. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:25, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zxcvbnm: Notability in the Wikipedia sense is intrinsically based on treatment in secondary sources. So I don't quite get how this could become notable even with sources existing. Did you mean something else or would you like to explain in more detail? Daranios (talk) 15:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant was that WP:INDISCRIMINATE is not satisfied. This appears to be a textbook indiscriminate list unless you can demonstrate sources discuss the civilizations of that universe as a whole, and separate from other discussion on the universe. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zxcvbnm: sources discuss the civilizations of that universe as a whole I believe the listed secondary sources do just that. separate from other discussion on the universe I am not quite sure what you mean here. If you mean that there needs to be material directly commenting on civilizations/species of Babylon 5, then I agree and again believe that the provided sources do that. If you mean that there need to be sources which only discuss the civilizations without (separate from?) referring to the fictional universe, that makes little sense to me. They are part of the universe. Both topics are connected. If there should be one article on the civilizations and the universe or two depends on the amount of material in secondary sources. I believe there is enough for two. If they are better presented together, at least until things get too large to read, or separate I have no strong opinion on. It is an editorial question, which is no reason for deletion. Fact is, we have a civilizations article but not a universe one. So if someone thinks things are better presented another way, they can do so, but first deleting everything is not the way to go according to policy. Daranios (talk) 10:14, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As far as establishing notability goes, I'm not really sure that most of those sources listed above should qualify, as they appear to have been written specifically to talk about Babylon 5, versus discussing the series and elements of it within a broader context; two of them were even written in part by the creator of the series. DonIago (talk) 13:02, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete or merge: I think it's possible that there may be something of value here, though I question whether truly independent sources (see my reply to Daranios above) have discussed the civilizations of B5 in any substantive detail. However, the listing in its current state would be more appropriate for a wikia or such, and I'm not sure how much of the current material would survive any real effort to provide sources that demonstrated real-world significance. I've also been on Wikipedia long enough to suspect that if the list is kept then we'll simply be revisiting this discussion in another few years when it hasn't been significantly improved. DonIago (talk) 13:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CitizenLab (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 meet WP:ORG. Has been marked as problematic since 2020. Just summarizes the routine business activities of the company and its main offering. The awards do not contribute to notability as they lack articles themselves. I can't find sources with significant coverage of this company, like its particular influence on citizen engagement. 331dot (talk) 13:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Social science, Computing, Internet, and Belgium. 331dot (talk) 13:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What I suggest you look into and are most welcome to integrate in the page:

• Impact on engagement - all third-party sources where the company had no influence in what was put out:
  • https://www.localdigital.gov.uk/case-studies/developing-powerful-tools-to-improve-local-play-park-planning-engagement-and-efficiency/
  • https://www.newham.gov.uk/news/article/1202/newham-s-people-powered-places-becomes-a-world-leader-in-participatory-democracy
  • https://ircai.org/top100/entry/ai-based-community-engagement-platform-and-analysis-by-citizenlab/
  • https://www.peoplepowered.org/news-content/chile-institute-uses-digital-platform-to-engage-youth
  • https://www.peoplepowered.org/platform-ratings
• Impact on engagement - company's own impact report, reporting on how it empowers the client community: https://impact2023.citizenlab.co/ Sören3300 (talk) 14:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Sören3300 (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]

The first two sources are primary sources- users of your company's offering. The third seems to be a directory listing with a description. The people powered Chile story might be okay, but that's only one. The rating is not as it's not significant coverage. The company's own reports are primary sources as well. 331dot (talk) 14:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot IRCAI = International Research Centre on Artificial Intelligence (IRCAI) under the auspices of UNESCO, not just some directory listing website :) Sören3300 (talk) 14:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but it's still not significant coverage that contributes to notability. Personally I never heard of IRCAI(not that's it's required I have heard of it) 331dot (talk) 14:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• https://wsa-global.org/wsa-awards/winners/#?year=2019&
• https://etion.be/kennis/aline-muylaert-wietse-van-rans-beeck-winnen-etion-leadership-award
• A former Obama administration official Beth Noveck is Chair of the board: https://www.lecho.be/entreprises/media-marketing/citizenlab-se-renforce-avec-une-ancienne-collaboratrice-d-obama/10241348.html

- one of the leading platforms in the space: https://democracy-technologies.org/participation/citizen-lab-platform/ Sören3300 (talk) 14:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The World Summit Awards have an article, so that works towards contributing towards notability(but the other awards listed should just be removed as they don't have articles). The award the founder received is for the founder, not the company itself. That's still two- we usually look for three with in-depth coverage. 331dot (talk) 14:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I didn't examine if they were press-release type articles. They seem to be interviews. 331dot (talk) 14:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Fails WP:NORG. Little in-depth coverage in independent, reliable sources. C F A 💬 14:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Very PROMO. The awards are non-notable, The sources given in the comment above are either primary, mentions only or PR items. I've tried .be websites, still only getting PR and their own web sites. Non-notable entity. Oaktree b (talk) 14:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note, the company rep seems to have elected to vanish rather than engage with us. 331dot (talk) 15:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It wasn't helpful when they keep posting PR links. Oaktree b (talk) 16:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  For interest's sake, the article was created by a different (and undisclosed) paid rep. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - yet another advertisement for a SaaS-based startup. The sources (at least, the ones I can actually get to load or past the paywall) do not indicate this passes WP:GNG. ASUKITE 18:04, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom Cos ^{(X + Z)} 18:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Priyamvad (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)

Doesn't seem to be notable. I'm unable to find any coverage. Fails WP:BIO. --Ratekreel (talk) 13:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Literature, Poetry, and India. --Ratekreel (talk) 13:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ratekreel, When you nominated the article, at that time only two references were there in the article. Now number of references are 10+. All references are from national newspapers or books or authenticated government websites. Author have written many books, all can not be listed in the article. Two stories are base for two different bollywood films. Some work by the author is translated in multiple languages by well known authors and translators. Looking at these things, article should not be deleted. There are some research articles which are clearly comparing author's work with Premchand, which is also like an award for Hindi writers. ☆★Sanjeev Kumar (talk) 09:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - a made up in one day award for a writer who has gotten coverage - but in unreliable sources. The India Times was once a good source, but now it’s deprecated. The added sources are a wall of puffery. Bearian (talk) 15:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nambiar Builders (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 meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP Polygnotus (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Response The subject of this article meets the **General Notability Guideline (WP:GNG)** and **Notability for Companies (WP:NCORP)** based on multiple independent, reliable sources. The following references provide significant coverage beyond trivial mentions:

  1. [It’s raining deals at the Great Times Property Festival](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/its-raining-deals-at-the-great-times-property-festival/articleshow/74076948.cms) – The Times of India

  2. [Enphase India and U-Solar install rooftop PV plants in Bengaluru](https://www.energetica-india.net/news/enphase-india-and-u-solar-install-rooftop-pv-plants-in-bengaluru) – Energetica India

  3. [Koramangala-based web start-up HomeBuy360 hits home run in real estate](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/south/koramangala-based-web-start-up-homebuy360-com-hits-home-run-in-real-estate/articleshow/13642201.cms?from=mdr) – The Economic Times

  4. [Six reasons why you should watch 'Khasaakinte Itihaasam' play in Bengaluru](https://www.thenewsminute.com/features/six-reasons-why-you-should-watch-khasaakinte-itihaasam-play-bengaluru-42360) – The News Minute

  5. [Enphase looks to tap 10% of rooftop market in next 2 years](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/enphase-looks-to-tap-10-of-rooftop-market-in-next-2-years/articleshow/89906198.cms?from=mdr) – The Economic Times

  These sources demonstrate significant independent coverage, meeting the requirements of **WP:GNG** by showing that the subject has received attention from reputable publications. Additionally, since the article is about a business, it aligns with **WP:NCORP** by having multiple third-party sources, not limited to press releases or company announcements.

• I believe the article merits retention based on these references and respectfully request that it not be deleted. Sanyam (talk) 13:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have reformatted the above reply a bit to make further discussion easier. Skynxnex (talk) 15:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 13:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• keep The content appears to be detailed and written in a neutral tone, aligning with Wikipedia’s guidelines for neutrality and verifiability. The article provides substantial information relevant to the topic, and there is no indication of promotional bias. Additionally, the references cited seem appropriate and support the article’s claims. Therefore, I believe the article should be retained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:FF20:817D:C950:BE55:DCAD:14C7 (talk) 20:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC) — 2607:FEA8:FF20:817D:C950:BE55:DCAD:14C7 (talk · contribs) has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and this XFD page. Polygnotus (talk) 04:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retain The article should be retained as it has received link in from prominent celebrities such as K S Chithra,Sharreth and K K Nishad.Relation to such well-known public figures demonstrate the subject’s notability and relevance. These acknowledgments also contribute to the subject's significance and public interest, aligning with Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. --Divyajain85 (talk) 16:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC) — Divyajain85 (talk · contribs) has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and this XFD page. Polygnotus (talk) 16:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Doesn't pass WP:NCORP. The closer should note that the keep voters in the discussion so far (Sanyam, 2607:FEA8:FF20:817D:C950:BE55:DCAD:14C7, and Divyajain85) all appear to be SPAs. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• keep It appears that editors Hemiauchenia and Polygnotus are primarily focused on my (Sanyam's) involvement rather than the content and significance of the page in question. I strongly disagree with their assessment regarding the article's failure to meet the criteria outlined in "WP:NCORP." The page clearly includes all important parameters such as reliable media sources and relevant linkages with notable individuals. Additionally, it is essential to recognize that multiple identities have been created online under the same name, highlighting the necessity for Wikipedia as a critical validation tool to differentiate between fake and legitimate representations.--Sanyam Jain (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 04:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Analysis of sources proves that the page is for WP:PROMO. Poor sources on the page that fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NCORP. None of the sources meets the criteria of WP:NCORP. Sources also fail WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND because of no independent subject matter and it does not have any beneficial contribution and does not warrant significant notability. RangersRus (talk) 17:07, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Both The Economic Times and The News Minute are references that can be relied upon. Additionally, there are other sources that show notability. There are a variety of other references that indicate this passes WP:GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Udtatika (talk • contribs) 15:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC) (This user also appears to be a SPA, see their contribs [18]. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC))[reply]
• Keep Meets WP: GNG AfD nominator seems to be unfamiliar with WP: BEFORE, so follow the sources mentioned above. Sending a new article to AfD is not the best way to go. Meraara (talk) 13:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC) — Meraara (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Delete: Subject does not pass WP:GNG/ WP:SIRS.

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.indywoodexcellenceawards.com/builtinindia-awards		?	Listing	✘ No
https://www.brickworkratings.com/		?	Homepage link	✘ No
https://www.icra.in/Rationale/ShowRationaleReport?Id=91186	?	?	PDF Listing	✘ No
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/its-raining-deals-at-the-great-times-property-festival/articleshow/74076948.cms		~	Trivial mention	✘ No
https://www.energetica-india.net/news/enphase-india-and-u-solar-install-rooftop-pv-plants-in-bengaluru	Interview / Press release	?		✘ No
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/south/koramangala-based-web-start-up-homebuy360-com-hits-home-run-in-real-estate/articleshow/13642201.cms?from=mdr			Trivial mention	✘ No
https://www.thenewsminute.com/features/six-reasons-why-you-should-watch-khasaakinte-itihaasam-play-bengaluru-42360		?	Trivial mention	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:07, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Corvigo (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 doesn't seem to be much coverage of this company outside of trade journals. The NYT article mentions the company a few times but does not address it directly in much if any detail. CNN is one single namedrop. I can't see any way of meeting all four criteria of WP:ORGCRIT with multiple sources, unfortunately. Previously deleted by PROD in 2006. Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and California. Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Internet, and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Tumbleweed Communications. DigitalIceAge (talk) 15:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Just for the record, I am not opposed to redirection as an ATD (and would have WP:BLARed had there not been a previous PROD) but I don't believe there is anything that is appropriate to merge. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mazhanoolkkanavu (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)

PROD removed with statement "Google/English language websearch is not good for Malayalam culture". If that is the case, why is it that Google Malayalam also yields nothing [20]. Changing the year parameter to today yields an unrelated music video of a similar name. Please find a review or two before keeping this. DareshMohan (talk) 06:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• If we can be sure this was released, with a solid source, I might support a redirect to List of Malayalam films of 2003 (or to Augustine's filmography?) because the cast is rather notable. But we have only IMDb and the other Db to prove it. Is that enough? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fails WP:NFILM. Fails significant coverage WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. If anyone can find secondary independent reliable sources with significant coverage and two or more reviews from known critics, let me know and I will reconsider my vote. RangersRus (talk) 13:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. It is impossible to just do a general search to find sources due to the way sources are archived. Best to check the Sify [21], Indiainfo [22], and Keralatalkies [23] reviews. A quick ctrl-f finds nothing. DareshMohan (talk) 05:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:45, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of Malayalam films of 2003: and add another source for verification (https://www.tvguide.com/movies/mazhanoolkkanavu/2030225744/) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]